who owns what?

[GEaston]

Back then they lasted about 3 years. Longer than your Dreamliner aircraft.

[Boeing Guy]

I really do hope that is good natured banter, not a personal dig.....
Right for the record, I fly the Boeing 737 300 Series to 900 Series.
The aircraft has been in production from the late 1960's and is the worlds most popular passenger Jet Aircraft not to mention the worlds safest.

The 787 uses British made landing gear and the Rolls Royce trent engine, which is a derivative of the world class RB211 (Made in Barnoldswick, hence the B).
Give it chance, it will be a world beater and game changer, Boeing are world beaters at this, shame it was not De havilland but there you go.

Personally I do not like the slowbus, it is not a Pilots Aircraft, just a systems operators.

Anyway I digress, this discussion was started regarding once Nationised industy, whist I do not wish to see a return to those days, it is sad that the 'powers that be' allowed foeign investors to take the silverware. Just as Gordon brown sold off the Gold.

[GEaston]

Isn't that predominantly an American built aircraft? Rolls Royce Engines is a good point for the thread because they are building the most enormous manufacturing plant here in Singapore. Another good example for Stan of the Brits buying up Johnny Foreigners turf.....

Foreign investors bought the silverware and paid for it. Gordon Brown squandered it.

I see Sky news running the most misleading story I've seen in years. It's on this topic about Thames Water paying no tax on their £140m profit. What they don't say till the end is that they invested £1bn in infrastructure during the year so obviously the get tax breaks for that. Hey Stan, a privately owned corporation investing !

[walkinman221]

Thames water owned by Kemble Water (Australian). Privatised in 1989 probably not invested much in the system since then hence the £1 bn needed now perhaps.

[DtheP47]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

(Made in Barnoldswick, hence the B).
Give it chance, it will be a world beater and game changer, Boeing are world beaters at this, shame it was not De havilland but there you go.

.

The troubled 787 dontcha mean BG Lithium-Ion batteries and all. Boeing were world beaters at this supported by a raft of home grown suppliers mom and pop shops included. Now with risk and revenue partners from Korea, Japan, Australia and Italy to name but 4 countries I can't agree with your axiom BG.

[cmonstanley]

Originally Posted by GEaston

Isn't that predominantly an American built aircraft? Rolls Royce Engines is a good point for the thread because they are building the most enormous manufacturing plant here in Singapore. Another good example for Stan of the Brits buying up Johnny Foreigners turf.....

Foreign investors bought the silverware and paid for it. Gordon Brown squandered it.

I see Sky news running the most misleading story I've seen in years. It's on this topic about Thames Water paying no tax on their £140m profit. What they don't say till the end is that they invested £1bn in infrastructure during the year so obviously the get tax breaks for that. Hey Stan, a privately owned corporation investing !

they made a profit of £546 million thats after they pay their shareholder dividend they say they are spending £1 billion on infrastructure.who is checking they really are

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by cmonstanley

they made a profit of £546 million thats after they pay their shareholder dividend they say they are spending £1 billion on infrastructure.who is checking they really are

You've got a thing about shareholders, me thinks you suffer from that age old socialist nay Communist disease of Envy if I haven't got it why should they, sad really

[smobile]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

I really do hope that is good natured banter, not a personal dig.....
Right for the record, I fly the Boeing 737 300 Series to 900 Series.
The aircraft has been in production from the late 1960's and is the worlds most popular passenger Jet Aircraft not to mention the worlds safest.

The 787 uses British made landing gear and the Rolls Royce trent engine, which is a derivative of the world class RB211 (Made in Barnoldswick, hence the B).
Give it chance, it will be a world beater and game changer, Boeing are world beaters at this, shame it was not De havilland but there you go.

.

We also build the entire fuel system for the B787 down here in Devon

[GEaston]

Fuel lines, didn't know that. I hope you don't have shareholders benefiting from that, or Stanley will get most upset !

Airbus wings are made in Britain, and they are bigger so Airbus is still better

[Boeing Guy]

Originally Posted by GEaston

Airbus wings are made in Britain, and they are bigger so Airbus is still better

Speaking as a simple Aviator, I am not as knowledgeable as any passenger or armchair pilot.

Boeing's and all American built aircraft are built with the following principals.
1. The automation is there to aid the pilot, it is he/she who is in control
2. The aircraft are built for the ham fisted redneck pilot who will have no finesse when landing, in fact Boeing's are built to be 'banged in', a gentle landing is not recommended.

Airbus have a different view.
1. There aircraft is flown by its computers, the pilot is there to assist this.
2. They are designed to be handled and land with some finesse, they are not designed to be 'banged in'.


The key is in the Automation, who controls what. Personally I much prefer to have absolute authority rather than ask the very famous question 'What the h@ll is it doing now' (More frequent than you might think or want.)

The A380 may be bigger than the 747, but it is not a game changer.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

Speaking as a simple Aviator, I am not as knowledgeable as any passenger or armchair pilot.

Boeing's and all American built aircraft are built with the following principals.
1. The automation is there to aid the pilot, it is he/she who is in control
2. The aircraft are built for the ham fisted redneck pilot who will have no finesse when landing, in fact Boeing's are built to be 'banged in', a gentle landing is not recommended.

Airbus have a different view.
1. There aircraft is flown by its computers, the pilot is there to assist this.
2. They are designed to be handled and land with some finesse, they are not designed to be 'banged in'.


The key is in the Automation, who controls what. Personally I much prefer to have absolute authority rather than ask the very famous question 'What the h@ll is it doing now' (More frequent than you might think or want.)

The A380 may be bigger than the 747, but it is not a game changer.

Don't think anyone can argue with a guy who flies these things for a living, after all its his arse on the line every time a plane leaves the tarmac, guess you know best Siso I'm not arguing with ya

[DtheP47]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

Speaking as a simple Aviator, I am not as knowledgeable as any passenger or armchair pilot.

Boeing's and all American built aircraft are built with the following principals.
1. The automation is there to aid the pilot, it is he/she who is in control
2. The aircraft are built for the ham fisted redneck pilot who will have no finesse when landing, in fact Boeing's are built to be 'banged in', a gentle landing is not recommended.

Airbus have a different view.
1. There aircraft is flown by its computers, the pilot is there to assist this.
2. They are designed to be handled and land with some finesse, they are not designed to be 'banged in'.


The key is in the Automation, who controls what. Personally I much prefer to have absolute authority rather than ask the very famous question 'What the h@ll is it doing now' (More frequent than you might think or want.)

The A380 may be bigger than the 747, but it is not a game changer.

With 40 odd years in the aerospace industry BG I am not sure the term "banged in" is a stress/design criteria It's not one I have come across anyway.

Have a look at this archive link the pics don't do it justice but read the script and the comments aimed at that little ole US airplane maker.

787 - Problems Joining Fuselage Sections - Fuselage Gaps at Flightstory.net - Aviation Blog

[Boeing Guy]

I could not agree more. Boeing say the aircraft should have 'a positive landing' according to the FCTM.
Speaking as a pilot, I was trying to explain in simple laymans terms, as others not in the industry may not understand the term.
Lots of pilots use the term banged in to describe a firm not hard landing, fly Ryanair and you will see

Boeing are trying something new, it is bound to have teething problems, just as the A380 has had.
Thr world needs more than one huge aircraft maker, it promotes competition.

[DtheP47]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

Lots of pilots use the term banged in to describe a firm not hard landing, fly Ryanair and you will see

Thr world needs more than one huge aircraft maker, it promotes competition.

Miles off thread we are BG... I have the dubious pleasure of flying to Skavsta with Mr O'Leary's mob quite frequently...don't get me started about the trumpet fanfares

[GEaston]

The A380 is by far the quietest plane I've ever been in. I seek it out long haul from here and is better than the alternative 777s. I'll be retired before the 787 gets to this route. I think I'm right in saying that more of the A380 is built in the UK than the Boeing but defer to greater knowledge on that subject.

Anyway we were pointing out to Stan that the economy has in fact grown since 1970, and that shareholder ownership is on balance a good thing, not a curse. Just a pity that the custodians of our countries wealth for 12 years got a credit card and overspent...