Airbus A400M getting counted for technical K.O.

[Skybird]

Several news inputs:

http://www.google.de/search?as_q=a400m&hl=de&num=10&btnG=Google-Suche&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=lang_en&cr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=w&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=images

Britain reassesses wether abandoning the project now maybe would be the more clever option. germany threatens to cancel all orders end of March 2009.

the project obviously is in complete disarray, with the head of the miliutary Airbus branch just having been exchanged. The project is said to be 5 years behind schedule due to lacking synchronicity of airb us and it's subconstractors producing the engines.

IMO it is a good example of how even a good brew by it's promising start could be screwed by too many cooks hanging around in the kitchen.

It'S a shame that this transporter most likely will crash at the floor of its hangar. If it would have turned into a real thing, it would have represented a massive progress for aircraft of this kind.

It's becoming a habit that aircraft companies fumble the ball that they planned to play the safe way. Airbus with the A380, Boeing with the Dreamliner, now airbus again with the A400M. Bad und unrealistic time planning and mismanagement in the name of "efficiency" seem to have become a rule today. Since Boeing does not behave so crazy to scatter production across many nations, it is a bit surprising that they show the same symptoms like Airbus. But there seem to be more to it than just too many nations participating in production, obviously.

[Lurchi]

Since Boeing does not behave so crazy to scatter production across many nations, it is a bit surprising that they show the same symptoms like Airbus. Boeing does a similar thing with the 787: Parts of the plane come from Italy, Turkey and so on.

A400 M - well, i always found it logical to buy this sort of plane from the specialists: Antonow. The Ukraine buys stuff from us so why not give them back and get some of their obviously good Transport planes which the Army used anyway (through leasing). The Antonow 70 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-70 is a quite obvious choice.

[Schroeder]

A400 M - well, i always found it logical to buy this sort of plane from the specialists: Antonow. The Ukraine buys stuff from us so why not give them back and get some of their obviously good Transport planes which the Army used anyway (through leasing). The Antonow 70 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-70 is a quite obvious choice.
I guess it's the same why the MiG 29 were given away err, I meant sold.
If you want to be militarily active then you can't afford to have unstable sources for military equipment.
Besides a Airbus keeps jobs in Germany/France, a Antonow in Ukraine.

[Skybird]

Boeing does a similar thing with the 787: Parts of the plane come from Italy, Turkey and so on.


Oh, I stand corrected. I did not know that.

[Bewolf]

Airbus also has the problem of national rivalry. Especially the french and their "France leading the EU, EU leading the world" attitude polititians like to see Airbus as an all french product and regulary try to gain the upper hand in the company, much to the expense of it's other partners, in which Germany alone holds the same shares as France. Given that in France politics and the economy are practically the same and composed of the same people, at least in the upper levels, the conspiracies and intrueges must be extreme from all what is coming to light here and there. Then when the sh*t hits the fan, the blame game starts. It is no wonder finding standarts and delivery on schedule is such a problem, when different national sections of the company are standing in direct competition for parts to work on and lack any sense of beeing an "all" european endeavor.

[Skybird]

Airbus has been initiated by the Frnech, and different to the Germans the French are not szhy to go for their advantages. for example, Germany is underrepresented and accepts to get driven into corners when it comes to establishing German office holder at key posts of the EU institutions, while others, namely France an d Poland, but others as well, have far less scruples to behave "like just the bad ol' Germans again". Space and aircraft technology has been identified by french politicians to be a key item of most vital natio nal interest for France. In Germany, one is too dump to set such priorities. That'S why the last cornerstone of German nuclear knowhow for building powerplants has just been sold from Siemens to French corporations - when that happend two weeks ago, the german government already was in a position of helplessness. But the developement leading to this helplessness has taken place in the years before, and german politicies should have corrected these - in the years before. When the funeral took place two weeks ago, keeping it under the carpet and not loosing a word about this drama in public was the only option left for the Germans.

Germany needs France in order to not get accused of being the same bad old player going for continental dominance again. It'S a thing of reputation and legitimation (that for Poland , for example, does not make a difference anyway, while others like Britain just hope that the Germans would just stop to cry over their past and "would learn to kill again", as being said with regard to Afghanistan). France needs germany for without Germany it cannot be anywhere close to it's claim to be strong and a leading power in Europe. It's a thing of a lack in factual economic power and a certain strategic-economic inferiority that Sarkozy ovbviously has made a top priority to correct, to make France less dependant from Germany. In the end, France needs Germany de facto more than Germany needs France. A circumstance that any other nation in europe would make use of - but not the shy Germans, still wearing sackclothes and ashes due to the sins of their father's fathers.

Oh Angie-Baby, sees nothing, hears nothing does nothing, but dreams on peacefully, meaning it all so very well. She had her five minutes of fame with Hieligendamm, but beyond the symbolism of that her governing lacks substance and effective results, seing many projects being crippled by this unlucky event of a great coalition and the CDU losing her traditional profile of a conservative party. I think the Merkel government all in all are extremely weka, and her proibably being the most unimpressive chancellor in German history, in no way living up to the expectations at her start.

Since the SPD is unvotable, and the CDU most likely will nominate her as top candidate for elections this year, I already have chalked off the next four years, too. We have too few good people in Germany, damn it. But we have plenty of opportunistic, meaningless manager-types, and now we also have the hyperideologic Die Linke: causing both the CDU and the SPD to move even further to the left, too.

It's election year. Bet they will bury billions in Opel...!? What great names on my mind: Holzmann... Max-Hütte... Landesbanken... Sooner or later the method just has to work, if only you try often enough, eh?

[Tribesman]

A400 M - well, i always found it logical to buy this sort of plane from the specialists: Antonow. The Ukraine buys stuff from us so why not give them back and get some of their obviously good Transport planes which the Army used anyway (through leasing).
The current leasing deal for Ukranian transports runs out at the end of the month , any news on if they are taking the extension to the deal ?

[Lurchi]

Boeing does a similar thing with the 787: Parts of the plane come from Italy, Turkey and so on.
Oh, I stand corrected. I did not know that.
I was surprised to read that too. But this is excusable as this is the first time Boeing does that to such an extent.

One can agree with the argument that it is better to produce equipment in you own country. A transporter however is no front-line combat plane with much less sensitive technology. In this case it would have made perfect sense to choose the An-70 as it has almost the same characteristics as the planned A400M - no, it is even better in many respects such as range and load capacity.

Airbus had no experience in Transport Planes - if they terminate the program then all the money put into its development is lost and there is still no transport plane available ... and Airbus will ask for a bailout soon too :damn:.

[Tribesman]

Airbus had no experience in Transport Planes
Leaving aside that Airbus is part of EADS which makes military transports , but doesn't Airbus make the Beluga which has mainly replaced the Super Guppy which was a development of a military transport .

[Skybird]

Airbus had no experience in Transport Planes - if they terminate the program then all the money put into its development is lost and there is still no transport plane available ... and Airbus will ask for a bailout soon too :damn:.

They already need to pay 1.7 billion in penalties, if I understood that part correctly.

I am sure the managers will allow themselves some boni after the shock. It's is necessary to keep up the mood with your most valuable staff at the top. The bill, as usual, will be payed by the workers, and the national tax-payers.

We really need laws that allow to hold managers responsible even with their private wealth. That they are safe from that so far I always considered to be a major violation of the spirit of the law's intention for justice. they are not dealt equal with when John Average will be held accountable for any mistake he makes at the same time.

This A400M really turned into a nightmare scenario. Two years ago I was very optimistic for it. You even cannot make the general global crisis responsible for it.

[bookworm_020]

Boeing does a similar thing with the 787: Parts of the plane come from Italy, Turkey and so on.


Boeing also got caught out with problems with it's regular suppliers (fasteners for bolting it together) and an industrial dispute that threw a big spanner in the works!