Airbus' bet for the A380 seems to collapse

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Skybird

A very heavy blow for the French company

Last time I checked it was a French / German company.
We will see how this will pan out but I doubt the 380 will be dropped completely. Too big to fail.

[Skybird]

Airbus was a French foundation, and the French in recent years made sure that key technology and knowledge pools remain under French administration at Airbus. The restructuring of the production locations and where what gets build, also speaks volumes. Many of the most future-potent items get produced in French factories, not German ones.

The Germans were wanted for putting money into it. Different to the French, the Germans were so kind to not understand that certain hightrech branches like nuclear energy and aviation technology are to be prioritized as technological key components in the industrial lineup of a nation that wants to be seen as a major player in global technology. The Germans are quite kind in these regards in principal. Many patents they refused to turn into money, and handed them away for free. And big companies form other countries then made the big money with it. Clever. The most famous, but not the only example, is the MP3 standard, an invention of the German Fraunhofer Institute.

Regarding Airbus, the Germans do not want to see it, but in French eyes they only are the money-waving junior partner. They never took the Germans as equals, and they never forgot that Airbus originally is a French foundation.

I fear sopmethign similiar in role playing if the palnned fusuon of the German and French tank makers becomes reality. The German company is superior in knowhow and experience, and its main product, the Leopard, also is superior to the Leclerk. If the fusion takes place, the French side will absorb the German knowhow, and the German side will get - nothing in return, just this promsie that German politicians made: that the french partners would open new markets for the propducts of the new tank maker. How could that be compensation...? Look at the customer list of the Leclerk, and then see how many Leopards get sold to how many countries, and then tell me that the Germans would benefit from almost non-existing markets for French tanks! Its the Leopard that rules the international market for Western tanks, not the Leclerk.

[vanjast]

Could be a cover up for fracture in the design. Considering the earlier wing stress fractures a year or few ago... an aircraft of this size is likely to have a multitude of stress related problems.. considering the quality control aspect across many manufacturing plants. One LARGE garlic-n-chili overdosed pizza... they don't want to admit they messed it up.. Better to pull out now than face humiliation against Boeing

[Skybird]

Then it would be a co-conspiracy of Airbus and several of its customers. The problem is that one third of orders for the A380 were cancelled, even by their biggest customers in the Gulf, and also they lag behind their profitability timetable whioch would have demanded them to already have I think 200 orders right now in order to have a chance to ever make their immense investments profitable, at least get a return that is equal.

They simply do not sell as many of these big birds as they expected, and the trend is worstening. At the same time, so I read in a German article, the demand for planes with less 300 passnegers, has gone upwards, also there is a trend by passengers to avoid the huge megahubs and find cheaper alternatives in the smaller regional airports.

And these are no-go-land for the A380.

The future-projecting scenario on which the philosophy behind the A380 was founded, collapses currently. And that kills the plane. I think I snapped it up somewhere some months ago that the new, longer 747 also has problems to get sold, and is about to be given up, or not? Too big. But the new 747 was not as expensive, since it was not a completely new design. It will not pose a real threat to Boeing not to sell this thing. The loss of the A380 can pose such a threat to Airbus.

Guess who will pay for that. Right: taxpayers (protection money) and workers (jobs). From France, and from Germany. And in the very end, more money form Germany than from France, if you look at the paper money armaggeddon.

[ikalugin]

Leclerc is actually better technology wise than the Leopard-2 (in comparable variants).

[Skybird]

Some people I know who would slightly disagree with you. Its armour is lighter, the firepower seems to be weaker (the French ammo seems to not hold up with the standards set by the German conventional and US uran-ammunition), it consumes almost twice as much fuel as the Leopard (A Norwegian or Swedish field evaluation against the Leopard showed that), is slightly slower in terrain, has lesser acceleration, and there are quite some design decisions on how systems are arranged and where, that are not generally liked - lets put it this way. It'S lighter than the Leopard, and France managed to sell it to just one other country (UAE). It has an auto-loader and so a crew of just 3. Also, it is a design that is completely unproven under combat conditions. Several Western nations tested it, the Swedes for example, and dismissed it in favour of the Leopard 2. The tactical multiple targets-firefight control system is stgate of the art - on paper. In practice it is said to be extremely complex and prone to provoking human error.

But sure, KWM needs Nexter to win UAE as a customer. If German laws would even allow to deliver into that region any shooting stuff.

Leopard 2s are operated in 19 countries. Abrams has 6 user countries, Challenger 2 is used only by Britain and Oman.

[Oberon]

Challenger 2 has tea making facilities, your argument is invalid.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Some people I know who would slightly disagree with you. Its armour is lighter, the firepower seems to be weaker (the French ammo seems to not hold up with the standards set by the German conventional and US uran-ammunition), it consumes almost twice as much fuel as the Leopard (A Norwegian or Swedish field evaluation against the Leopard showed that), is slightly slower in terrain, has lesser acceleration, and there are quite some design decisions on how systems are arranged and where, that are not generally liked - lets put it this way. It'S lighter than the Leopard, and France managed to sell it to just one other country (UAE). It has an auto-loader and so a crew of just 3. Also, it is a design that is completely unproven under combat conditions. Several Western nations tested it, the Swedes for example, and dismissed it in favour of the Leopard 2. The tactical multiple targets-firefight control system is stgate of the art - on paper. In practice it is said to be extremely complex and prone to provoking human error.

But sure, KWM needs Nexter to win UAE as a customer. If German laws would even allow to deliver into that region any shooting stuff.

Leopard 2s are operated in 19 countries. Abrams has 6 user countries, Challenger 2 is used only by Britain and Oman.

Armor protection is around the same for the smaller mass (due to the smaller armoured volume, which is the result of the autolader usage). Leclerc has superior survivability (neither tank was actually combat proven and no, what they do in Afghanistan does not count as real combat) due to the ammo placement.

The only reason why anyone would buy Leopard II is the price - if I remember it right most of the Leopards IIs exported were the used ones. That said most of the arms sales are politicised anyway, so if the item has superior quality/price doesn't really matter, as far as if that country is who you want to be friend - especially true when talking about US weapons sales.