The Boeing Thread

[r16]

737 keeps living on due to Goverment Fiat that limits Boeing's new things . As added in the edited part .

 

[Farm Boy]

please ı edited in a part .

Doesn't change my assessment.

I think I'd have to care about the nationality of "financial types" or whatever, when really, I don't so much. They're a class unto themselves, often as not. The globally mobile.

 

[r16]

meant for Marla Singer who likes 380 .

 

[Farm Boy]

Gotcha!

 

[Marla_Singer]

for the part you wouldn't have understand in my post it says the EU demanded Airbus domination in return for accepting F-35 destroying their military prospects . 380 to replace 747 which Boeing was forced to accept but "betrayed" the deal by the publicity o the Sonic Cruiser which was then handily replaced by the 787 , which happily crushed the 380 or something . Ths world is not all Gulf Arabian statelets with a lot of sand , so that you can build bigger and bigger airports .

I don't know if it really happened that way but there are definitely tensions in this regard within Europe.

The pre-Ukraine war situation was pretty simple. Most of Europe, with Germany in the forefront, was ready to make big concessions to the US in order to make it sure the country would continue protecting them. Buying F-35s and other US defence stuff was done with enthusiasm if that would convince the US to stay in Europe, despite the pivot to Asia that was announced by Obama in 2009.

On the other hand, France was isolated in the old continent with its proposal to develop a European autonomic strategy based on a homegrown defence industry. Germany hated that, saying that even suggesting the idea was enough to convince the US that they could reasonably retreat from Europe. With the rise of China, it appears more and more that the Western bloc in general (NATO+Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan...) cannot be supported by the US all alone and that Europe will need to ramp up its military, despite Germany's reluctance to do so. The war in Ukraine, and the recent blocking of the vote in Congress on US military aid, made that even clearer.

As such, it seems that different opinions are now converging. Europeans are now ready to invest in their military as long as that is done with the US approval. Germany is firmly committed to remaining the undisputed industrial leader of Europe, including in the defence sector, but the country still remains very uncomfortable with the idea of taking its geostrategic responsibilities. On the other hand, France is ready to handle that role, but the country's economy rely excessively on a debt that is essentially guaranteed by Germany. As such, France lacks the financial capacity to really meet up with its strategic ambitions. The end result is that the European effort remains too weak and too slow.

 

[warpus]

Boeing has gone down the crapper. In an attempt to maximize profits, they have over time cut corners to such a degree that they have sacrificed a commitment to engineering excellence and a focus on safety.

We have seen this exact same thing happen with other American and global brands - They get taken over by those hoping to "optimize" and "streamline" the company in an order to squeeze out as much in terms of profits as possible, which leads to a decrease of quality. These people take over a company that has built up a reputable brand and drive it into the ground by removing the focus on quality that has made them reputable in the first place. All in the name of immediate profits for their shareholders.

How many brands used to be your go-to for quality, something that would work well and last a long time.. that have now had a more than noticeable drop in quality, while still costing an arm and a leg? Companies that produce household appliances, clothing, cars, even restaurants.. No brand is safe from this madness.

When I was booking my flight to Portugal, I actively avoided any flights that flew Boeing planes. I don't trust them at all.

 

[Cutlass]

What surprises me is how ahead is the US when it goes about military aviation and how late it is when it goes about civil aviation. That new B-21 raider thing is super impressive.

Now okay we can guess that the US military is so ahead thanks to their incredible fundings ($400 billion for the F35 program, $200 billion for the B-21 program), but then the question is how aren't the US able to bail out Boeing knowing how important is civil aviation economically? That seems to be more a matter of choice rather than a matter of capacity.

All in all, Airbus has already launched its program to replace its own narrowbody champion, the A320, by 2035/2040 (probably with a hydrogen-powered plane) and there's nothing yet announced by Boeing to replace the 737. That does feel weird.

Boeing dominated the industry globally for something like 60 years. And that included when the USSR was funding their industry as a matter of national prestige. Fact is, if it were not for the support of national governments for Airbus, Boeing would be the only maker of large airliners left in the world.

Nobody really knew how deep of a hole Boeing had dug for themselves. It was hidden behind the company's success.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Boeing dominated the industry globally for something like 60 years. And that included when the USSR was funding their industry as a matter of national prestige. Fact is, if it were not for the support of national governments for Airbus, Boeing would be the only maker of large airliners left in the world.

Nobody really knew how deep of a hole Boeing had dug for themselves. It was hidden behind the company's success.

Boeing really dominated only from the 1960's to the 1990's (it was rather Douglas before that), and that was at a time when the US civil aviation market represented a gigantic share of the global market.

Yet from an engineering point of view, Europeans never really lagged behind when it goes about civil aviation. The British-made de Havilland Comet was the first jetliner (1949). It had some flaws but those were corrected with the French-made Caravelle (1955). The first US jet airliners (Douglas DC-8 and Boeing 707) will only come later, but they will dwaf Europeans thanks to the huge US market. The US did have good engineers in civil aviation at the time, don't misinterpret me. The 747 was particularly impressive. Yet Europeans were still able to release the Concorde and later the Airbus A300, the first twin-engine widebody aircraft. Even if they didn't have the same commercial success as Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas, they were still there.

The same cannot be said at all when it goes about military aviation: the US clearly dominate the Europeans both technologically and commercially since world war 2. Europe still has the Eurofighter and the Rafale, but they are really far behind.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The

Boeing dominated the industry globally for something like 60 years. And that included when the USSR was funding their industry as a matter of national prestige. Fact is, if it were not for the support of national governments for Airbus, Boeing would be the only maker of large airliners left in the world.

Nobody really knew how deep of a hole Boeing had dug for themselves. It was hidden behind the company's success.

60 years? mmm, no. I would say Boeing dominated 30-35 years from 1965 to 1995 basically. The first 5 years in the 60s there were other contenders that were there first, (de Havilland mostly), and before 1960 Boeing didn't even exist in the jet airliner industry. After 1995 Boeing was still leading but with Airbus closing distances, and since the early 2000s Airbus has been beating Boeing regularly.

Boeing current problems are not because they are too successful but because they have serious difficulties competing with Airbus products, probably trading price by quality and making questionable design decisions to improve fuel efficiency. In fact currently there are quite more Airbuses flying around the world than Boeings and the trend seems to point to an increment of this difference pretty fast, unless Boeing does something spectacular and quickly.

About subsidies, I don't think Boeing and its trillonaries defense contracts with US government is totally innocent either, to the point that Boeing wouldn't probably exist without US military. In fact the Boeing 707, the aircraft that gave Boeing access to the jet airliner industry in the 60s, was before all a militar aircraft made for refuelling USAF fighters, motorized with engines made for USAF bombers.

 

[Crezth]

Boeing really dominated only from the 1960's to the 1990's (it was rather Douglas before that), and that was at a time when the US civil aviation market represented a gigantic share of the global market.

Yet from an engineering point of view, Europeans never really lagged behind when it goes about civil aviation. The British-made de Havilland Comet was the first jetliner (1949). It had some flaws but those were corrected with the French-made Caravelle (1955). The first US jet airliners (Douglas DC-8 and Boeing 707) will only come later, but they will dwaf Europeans thanks to the huge US market. The US did have good engineers in civil aviation at the time, don't misinterpret me. The 747 was particularly impressive. Yet Europeans were still able to release the Concorde and later the Airbus A300, the first twin-engine widebody aircraft. Even if they didn't have the same commercial success as Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas, they were still there.

The same cannot be said at all when it goes about military aviation: the US clearly dominate the Europeans both technologically and commercially since world war 2. Europe still has the Eurofighter and the Rafale, but they are really far behind.

Good post, no other summaries on this need to be read by people using this thread.

 

[Cutlass]

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The 1960s was the golden decade for Boeing. They quickly went from building basically bombers and being far behind in the airliner market to being head and shoulders over competition designing one revolutionary aircraft after other and setting the standard for future airliners with the 707 and with the 727-derived 737, and short after building never dreamt things as the 747.