Delta goes for Scarebus to the tune of $40Bil

Why? If AF447 showed anything it's what an incredible airplane the Airbus is, that plane flew a perfectly controlled falling leaf stall and even recovered a wing drop while so deeply stalled the stall warning didn't believe it was possible. Pretty much every Airbus crash has been pilot induced.
 
Economics. More to the point, long term economics.

Oh, and I'd say the recent events in SFO speak rather highly of Boeing structural integrity, even at the hands of a couple of dorks.
 
Long term economics? What has that got to do with anything? Boeing outsources as well, stock markets are international.
 
Sorry, I can't explain intl econ to you on a web board. If you don't know what it has to do with long term viability that's ok.

Hey, just for giggles, what are the top 10 steel producing plants in the world? Need a hint? They aren't in the US.

Buh bye.
 
It's just an expression, and it's not just about econ. I do prefer Boeing for safety reasons as well.
 
docmirror said:
Sorry, I can't explain intl econ to you on a web board. If you don't know what it has to do with long term viability that's ok.

Hey, just for giggles, what are the top 10 steel producing plants in the world? Need a hint? They aren't in the US.

Buh bye.
Click to expand...

My question is where the difference lies. Nobody does the right thing socio economically. BTW,Bethlehem Steel put themselves out of business with a junk batch of 1983 150# rail, zero quality control and they sold the rail anyway and they had to pay to have it all removed and replaced plus the fines for all the slow orders that existed in the time that took plus the costs of running continuos tests on it and the Maintenance of Way costs to keep the lines limping along until it got replaced.
 
Last edited:
You guys are all missing the important part; 40 new jets, 80 empty pilot seats. Finally a pilot shortage. Let's all go to Flightsafety. Do I need a sarcasm tag?
 
Henning said:
Not really since these aircraft are going to likely mostly be replacements in an aging fleet.
Click to expand...

True, they'll dump the CRJ200's and use these to replace some 757's. But, it will be movement from regional up to mainline
 
ClimbnSink said:
You guys are all missing the important part; 40 new jets, 80 empty pilot seats. Finally a pilot shortage. Let's all go to Flightsafety. Do I need a sarcasm tag?
Click to expand...

There is no pilot shortage. There is a pay shortage.
 
I think the new jets are going to expire some of the MD and Embraer fleet.
 
docmirror said:
I think the new jets are going to expire some of the MD and Embraer fleet.
Click to expand...

The MD80s have been getting phased out for a while and will continue to do so. They're old. I never liked the way the fan was right next to the seats, and I know of at least one incident where a mother and baby died because of that.

The ERJ-135/145 and CRJ-100/200 are also going to get phased out because airlines don't want to fly the smaller planes.

Old planes go all over the world. Africa is a popular destination.
 
At least the Boeing doesn't call the pilot names on landing.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The MD80s have been getting phased out for a while and will continue to do so. They're old. I never liked the way the fan was right next to the seats, and I know of at least one incident where a mother and baby died because of that.

The ERJ-135/145 and CRJ-100/200 are also going to get phased out because airlines don't want to fly the smaller planes.

Old planes go all over the world. Africa is a popular destination.
Click to expand...

Actually I heard yesterday that Delta plans to modernize the MD-90s with glass cockpits and other improvements.
 
Last edited:
Art VanDelay said:
Actually I heard yesterday that Delta plans to modernize the MD-80s with glass cockpits and other improvements.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. I wonder what the fuel per seat run they get? Most carriers are getting newer planes for the seat MPG deal due to the cost of fuel. The MD was a good performer on fuel but that was way back.
 
docmirror said:
That's interesting. I wonder what the fuel per seat run they get? Most carriers are getting newer planes for the seat MPG deal due to the cost of fuel. The MD was a good performer on fuel but that was way back.
Click to expand...

MD90 is deltas most efficient plane...you'll notice they tend to hoard them.
 
Airbus actually has a LOT of US-sourced content and especially engineering "value" from many companies over here. They're building an A320 final production line in AL right now as well. They have a major engineering center here in Wichita, and a major subcontractor (Spirit AeroSystems) with facilities in Wichita, NC, and France. Aircraft production and sourcing is slowly following the worldwide automotive model...
 
Re: Delta goes for Scarebus to the tune of $5.6Bil

taters said:
I wouldn't exactly try to avoid them. After Southwest their mainline service is about as good as it gets for a legacy carrier.
Click to expand...

If Delta's mainline service is "about good as it gets" then that's really speaking bad for the US airline industry.

BTW, the moniker "legacy carrier" is another amusing moniker. The only "legacy" these guys have is pi$$ poor service, bankruptcies and corrupt management.

Compared to the top tier foreign carriers the US "legacy" are in a sad state.

I agree with you, Southwest has far better service.
 
KSMooniac said:
Airbus actually has a LOT of US-sourced content and especially engineering "value" from many companies over here. They're building an A320 final production line in AL right now as well. They have a major engineering center here in Wichita, and a major subcontractor (Spirit AeroSystems) with facilities in Wichita, NC, and France. Aircraft production and sourcing is slowly following the worldwide automotive model...
Click to expand...

42% of the value of a new airbus is sourced in the US. 65% of the value of a 787 is sourced in the US. Yes, there is a difference, but much less than most would anticipate.

The 'scarebus' economic argument is as short sighted as the folks who chose a mexican built Ford over a Alabama built Honda.
 
KSMooniac said:
Airbus actually has a LOT of US-sourced content and especially engineering "value" from many companies over here. They're building an A320 final production line in AL right now as well. They have a major engineering center here in Wichita, and a major subcontractor (Spirit AeroSystems) with facilities in Wichita, NC, and France. Aircraft production and sourcing is slowly following the worldwide automotive model...
Click to expand...

That's good, but what I learned back in biz school still applies. You don't want to be a source of strict labor where the profits of your labor are not contained or controlled. It was a fundamental difference between a first world(like the old US) and a third world(like Thailand) country. When you ship all the profits back to another country to put in their bank, and all we provide is labor and some light materials, it's one of the clear examples of those who control markets, and those who swing at the whim of the market.

This has been played out to devastating effect in the steel and auto industries. The big three are finally coming back in part because THEY are outsourcing, and keeping the profits in our country.

Everyone outsources labor and small asms, look at the 787 battery issues. But, the profits on each plane stay in the US, and are the fuel that funds expansion, engineering, and investment.
 
I'm not disagreeing, but the amount spent on the non-recurring engineering labor is quite significant and a lot of it was spent in the US. A lot of the manufactured components are built here, so there is a recurring economic impact as well. In fact, Airbus couldn't find enough engineers in Europe in the late 90s and couldn't recruit enough US engineers to go over there, and that is what led to the development of their first facility in the US. It is still booming today with ~500 engineers IIRC. The Alabama facility will have more engineers in addition to the A320 production line. Those are very good jobs.

Boeing plays the same game (pretty much every big company does now like GE, Apple, etc) with off-shore outsourcing and various global business entities to dodge convoluted tax system that we have here today. If we could fix the tax code with the FairTax, I'd bet that all of the capital that is hanging out off-shore to avoid the income tax would be rushing back in here nearly overnight. You would almost have to hide in a closet to avoid finding a job. :)

The example of the US-built Honda and the Mexican-built Ford is spot-on too.
 
Re: Delta goes for Scarebus to the tune of $5.6Bil

RotorAndWing said:
If Delta's mainline service is "about good as it gets" then that's really speaking bad for the US airline industry.

BTW, the moniker "legacy carrier" is another amusing moniker. The only "legacy" these guys have is pi$$ poor service, bankruptcies and corrupt management.

Compared to the top tier foreign carriers the US "legacy" are in a sad state.
Click to expand...

If U.S. carriers were subsidized and didn't have to really make a profit I suppose it would be easier to be more like the foreign carriers. But then too here in the U.S. we have that EOE stuff that kind of makes it hard to even run an ad for flight attendants worded like they do overseas.
 
KSMooniac said:
I'm not disagreeing, but the amount spent on the non-recurring engineering labor is quite significant and a lot of it was spent in the US.
Click to expand...

Profits weedhopper, profits. an efficient market lives and dies by profit. It's not a four letter word. 'Significant' is one of those euphemisms for 'we will give you what we give you and you will be happy about it or we will take it back'.
 
Art VanDelay said:
Actually I heard yesterday that Delta plans to modernize the MD-90s with glass cockpits and other improvements.
Click to expand...
Yup. And they've been buying alot of MD-90s the last several years. Some of the ones coming back from China are scary. I'd take a new Airbus over that any day.
 
Re: Delta goes for Scarebus to the tune of $5.6Bil

Art VanDelay said:
If U.S. carriers were subsidized and didn't have to really make a profit I suppose it would be easier to be more like the foreign carriers. But then too here in the U.S. we have that EOE stuff that kind of makes it hard to even run an ad for flight attendants worded like they do overseas.
Click to expand...

Etihad, Qatar, KLM, Luftansa, ANA, EVA Air just to name a few. They realized customer service is key to success.
 
docmirror said:
That's good, but what I learned back in biz school still applies. You don't want to be a source of strict labor where the profits of your labor are not contained or controlled. It was a fundamental difference between a first world(like the old US) and a third world(like Thailand) country. When you ship all the profits back to another country to put in their bank, and all we provide is labor and some light materials, it's one of the clear examples of those who control markets, and those who swing at the whim of the market.
Click to expand...

Your comparison of companies like GE aviation, Pratt&Whitney, Rockwell Collins and Spirit Aerosystems to the low level production economy of Thailand is lacking validity.
 
docmirror said:
That's good, but what I learned back in biz school still applies. You don't want to be a source of strict labor where the profits of your labor are not contained or controlled. It was a fundamental difference between a first world(like the old US) and a third world(like Thailand) country. When you ship all the profits back to another country to put in their bank, and all we provide is labor and some light materials, it's one of the clear examples of those who control markets, and those who swing at the whim of the market.

This has been played out to devastating effect in the steel and auto industries. The big three are finally coming back in part because THEY are outsourcing, and keeping the profits in our country.

Everyone outsources labor and small asms, look at the 787 battery issues. But, the profits on each plane stay in the US, and are the fuel that funds expansion, engineering, and investment.
Click to expand...

What makes you believe the profits stay in the US? Anyone in the world can own Boeing stock, and Boeing can invest profits anywhere in the world, and I'm sure they do.
 
maddog52 said:
Yup. And they've been buying alot of MD-90s the last several years. Some of the ones coming back from China are scary. I'd take a new Airbus over that any day.
Click to expand...

How long to they spend refurbishing them?
 
Art VanDelay said:
Actually I heard yesterday that Delta plans to modernize the MD-90s with glass cockpits and other improvements.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, and certainly different from the norm. Maybe on the routes they have they can make that combination make more sense.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
That's interesting, and certainly different from the norm. Maybe on the routes they have they can make that combination make more sense.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the Delta pilot contract allows the same pilots to crew the MD-90 and the 717? It would be a major savings if they did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top