Thomas Enders CEO from Airbus says: "Airbus will rethink investments in the Uk

[C130]

Yep, France has probably sunk as technologically the weakest out of P5 nations.

- Its Barracuda class SSN isn't deployed yet, while China has already deployed several 9000 tons class Type 093B SSNs, it is better than the 688i and probably closer to the earliest block of the Virginia class.

- It doesn't have the core jet engine technology that equivalent to the F-110/AL-31/WS-10.

- Its M51 SLBM was not as successful as it touted to be, and now it is going back to the test stage in a water pool.

France is fine. they are pretty advance from what I can tell


SSBN Barracuda is on schedule for 2017 trials and induction in late 2017, and from I read it's actually better the Virginia Class sub in technology and performance

French are fine with the Snecma M88 and could build a engine in the class of the F-110/AL-31 if it needed too

M51 is fine...it had 5 successful launches and 1 failure then went back tosuccessful launches, compare that to RSM-55 Bulava

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

We invented the turbojet engine itself. It was invented by frank Whittle an engineer with the RAF. His jet engines were developed some years earlier than those of Germany's Hans von Ohain who was the designer of the first jet engine to be used to actually power an aircraft. We invented so many things that is used in the modern world today including modern capitalism itself.

Frank Whittle and Hans von Ohain developed their jet engines independently, so both are now considered inventors.
They actually met, and compared notes and agreed on this.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm

 

[Echo_419]

They dont need to. The german MTU, french Snecma and others can of course build any form of engines. Infact they even developed the GP7200 build from Engine Alliance and used for the A380.

Your point is?

P.s.: i dont even know why i debate this with a guy who understands as much about airplane engines as a Britney Spears fan about music.

that was uncalled for

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

France is fine. they are pretty advance from what I can tell


SSBN Barracuda is on schedule for 2017 trials and induction in late 2017, and from I read it's actually better the Virginia Class sub in technology and performance

French are fine with the Snecma M88 and could build a engine in the class of the F-110/AL-31 if it needed too

M51 is fine...it had 5 successful launches and 1 failure then went back tosuccessful launches, compare that to RSM-55 Bulava

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava

- Barracuda has smallest tonnage among the modern SSNs, and it cannot pack a load of ammunition, then that's the problem.

- Yet they didn't build anything close to that benchmark.

- Compared to the 160/160 benchmark of the D5, the M51 is by far the least experienced SLBM.

Let's hope you are nothing like the other third worlder that whose intellect considers bamboo-sticks as technologically sophisticated weapons for his villages made of bamboo.

The most impressive French products to the world are the merchandizes like L'Oréal and Lancôme.

And you should aim to win a second world cup instead of touting yourself as a technological powerhouse.

 

[C130]

- Barracuda has smallest tonnage among the modern SSNs, and it cannot pack a load of ammunition, then that's the problem.

- Yet they didn't build anything close to the benchmark.

- Compared to the 160/160 benchmark of the D5, the M51 is by far the least experienced SLBM.

Virgina load of ammo=27
Barracuda load of ammo-20

so 35% less ammo, that's not a deal breaker.

I like how you are doubting a missile that has the range and destructive capability to wipe out any country in the world including China.


a single Triumphant Class with M51 is all it will take, and let's even assume 1 out of 5 missile are duds, that's still 12 M51 each with 6 to 10 warhead, and each of those have 100 times the destructive power of Hiroshima

so yeah I think the missile will get the job done just fine. don't think anyone will be saying well that missile could have been more reliable or had an extra 1,000KM range

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Virgina load of ammo=27
Barracuda load of ammo-20

so 35% less ammo, that's not a deal breaker.

I like how you are doubting a missile that has the range and destructive capability to wipe out any country in the world including China.


a single Triumphant Class with M51 is all it will take, and let's even assume 1 out of 5 missile are duds, that's still 12 M51 each with 6 to 10 warhead, and each of those have 100 times the destructive power of Hiroshima

so yeah I think the missile will get the job done just fine. don't think anyone will be saying well that missile could have been more reliable or had an extra 1,000KM range

- All the mainstream SSNs are no less than 7000 tons submerged. And I just don't get the idea why France prefers those mini SSNs over the one with more firepower.

- SSN carries mostly the tactical missiles, not the strategic one.

- The M51 can carry 6-10 100KT warheads, and the M51.2 can carry 6-10 150KT warheads which is roughly 10 times the yield of the little boy on Hiroshima.

PS, M51 is currently unreliable, some of these missiles would get intercepted, while some could get self-destructed, so a handful leftover would cause the damage, which is still insignificant compared to the larger nuclear nations.

 

[Echo_419]

First of all.......The logic in this thread quite honestly, sucked........

He claim Airbus will not consider using RR engine anymore, then he go on and say Airbus is not an Airline and care the shit out of whichever engine they (The airline) use on their aircraft. Then he go on and claim it does not matter..........

What is the point to say airbus "PUNISH" UK or RR and then proceed to say both Airbus and RR care less about who get what engine??

Look, RR is bound to lose some business after leaving EU, EU Member will probably need to pay tax or other fee to use RR Engine, they can out of spike and go for GE or CMF or whatever that make those engine, but that is independent between Airbus, RR, Airlines and other Engine Manufacturer.

Both RR and Airbus don't really care what aircraft use which engine, because both RR and Airbus have more than one choice than the other. Hence it actually balance out the act.

Bear in mind, UK leaving EU will have economic impact, but talking about Airbus and RR is simply not the way to go.

By the way, my brother just got back from the UK and train under RR for the new Trend 1000 series engine,. FI that count anything?

You dare use logic

 

[MarkusS]

So you claim to be a Airbus expert then?

The A330neo will only use the Rolls Royce Trent 7000 engine.

But then again, you are an Italian and not can be expected from someone who comes from a country that will go down in history as the first economy in modern history that will go from rich to medium income status.



Dude, do you think I care to waste my time with this?

Just google how important Rolls Royce is to the world civilian airliner engine market.

The A330neo uses no engine. Again, its sold without engines. The airline makes the contract with the engine producer. I think your head is incapable to understand this, right?

So if british Airways orders an A330 you say R&R will not make a deal with british Airways?

One a sidenote, R&R is a private corporation. It answers its shareholders, not the UK. Thats anotehr thing you dont get. If Airbus leaves the Uk it has nothing to do with R&R

On a sidenote. italias economy is growing.

WTF are you people on about ?
U.K has ZERO influence in the world compared to France and other E.U countries ? The tiny U.K (never mind that we are economically bigger than any country in Europe bar Germany) produces nothing ?
Old boyyyyy......... i would have seen it all on PDF

I can see our brexit is making many of our European brothers very emotional.

As for your point about Britain not producing any luxury cars, you have definitely not been in a Bentley, Rolls Royce or Aston Martin.
Plus if you think we will no longer be a world leader in finance and our currency will collapse into oblivion then you are even more funnier than i thought, another project fear all over again. Lol . As i said before have you ever wondered why we are world leaders in finance now for over a century ? Think its because of the E U ? Lol. Then why is Paris or Frankfurt or Madrid not the capital of world finance ? Lol
As for the engine part, i wont even waste my time there sunce its a useless futile debate to educate some if you about our engine tech, capabilities, and world reach. Carry on with your France is the world leader in engine tech and everything else. Lol

You people should calm down and stop talking nonesense just because you are pissed we left. Its not the end of the world, plus we are still part of Europe and NATO , nothing much will change except that we will have more control of our borders,laws and foreign policy. Nothing bad about that. So chill.



Its just emotion bro. Dont mind some of our European brothers here. The E.U has only itself to blame as its bureaucrats dont want any reforms at all, they are too complacent and dont give a shit about member countries complaints, our exit will be a wake up call for them, which is good for Europe.


We invented the turbojet engine itself. It was invented by frank Whittle an engineer with the RAF. His jet engines were developed some years earlier than those of Germany's Hans von Ohain who was the designer of the first jet engine to be used to actually power an aircraft. We invented so many things that is used in the modern world today including modern capitalism itself.

Granted our German anglo saxon brothers also contributed to many science and engineering projects in the world.



Only a fool will think Airbus will leave the U.K. if they would have left, then they would have done so already what are they waiting for ? Why are they 'rethinking' its either you leave or stay, not hard to decide. Lol. RETHINKING.
They are here in the first place for a reason. Lol As i said before business is business, nobody is doing anyone any favours. Its win-win.

considering the news its highly possible you wont leave at all. I think it will end as always. Big fuss over nothing and this Brexit bullshit ignored. Your leaders dont look like tehy want it and the Uk looks rather chaotic right now.

 

[C130]

- All the mainstream SSNs are no less than 7000 tons submerged. And I just don't get the idea why France prefers those mini SSN over the one with more firepower.

- SSN carries mostly the tactical missiles, not the strategic one.

- The M51 can carry 6-10 100KT warheads, and the M51.2 can carry 6-10 150KT warheads which is roughly 10 times the yield of the little boy on Hiroshima.

PS, M51 is currently unreliable, some of these missiles would get intercepted, while some got self-destructed, so a handful leftover would cause the damage, which is still insignificant compared to the larger nuclear nations.

how is the M51 unreliable? it had one failure.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

how is the M51 unreliable? it had one failure.

It is pretty obvious, they have only tested 5 out of 6 so far, which is too premature to be deployed. No wonder they immediately got a setback in May 2013, then restarted everything from scratch by September 2015.

- USA has tested the D5 missile 160 out of 160.

- Russia has tested Bulava more than 20 times so far.

- China has tested the JL-2 missile 20 times alone in the Golf class sub, yet not counting those tests on the Type 094 SSBNs and the new Type 032.

 

[UKBengali]

The A330neo uses no engine. Again, its sold without engines. The airline makes the contract with the engine producer. I think your head is incapable to understand this, right?

So if british Airways orders an A330 you say R&R will not make a deal with british Airways?

One a sidenote, R&R is a private corporation. It answers its shareholders, not the UK. Thats anotehr thing you dont get. If Airbus leaves the Uk it has nothing to do with R&R

On a sidenote. italias economy is growing.

You need to know that A330Neo has been designed to work EXCLUSIVELY with Rolls Royce engine:

http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/spotlight-on-a330neo/

Airlines will have no choice but to use Rolls Royce engines. Rolls Royce may be a private corporation but the UK government can order it to stop selling to Airbus if it wanted to- not that is likely to happen but do bear in mind that the A330Neo can be grounded if the UK government wishes.

As for the future of the Italian economy:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/10/italys-in-terminal-decline-and-no-one-has-the-guts-to-stop-it/

Like I say i am not sure if you really are Italian but no Italian can ever offend me.

 

[SMS Derfflinger]

It is pretty obvious, they have only tested 5 out of 6 so far, which is too premature to be deployed. No wonder they immediately got a setback in May 2013, then restarted everything from scratch by September 2015.

- USA has tested the D5 missile 160 out of 160.

- Russia has tested Bulava more than 20 times so far.

- China has tested the JL-2 missile 20 times alone in the Golf class sub, yet not counting those tests on the Type 094 SSBNs.

You know, that you are comparing at the highest level? The most countries on this world doesn`t even know how to start such a project.

 

[MarkusS]

You need to know that A330Neo has been designed to work EXCLUSIVELY with Rolls Royce engine:

http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/spotlight-on-a330neo/

Airlines will have no choice but to use Rolls Royce engines. Rolls Royce may be a private corporation but the UK government can order it to stop selling to Airbus if it wanted to- not that is likely to happen but do bear in mind that the A330Neo can be grounded if the UK government wishes.

As for the future of the Italian economy:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/10/italys-in-terminal-decline-and-no-one-has-the-guts-to-stop-it/

Like I say i am not sure if you really are Italian but no Italian can ever offend me.

You still dont get it do you?

Airbus sells no engines. Airlines orders an airplane Airbus makes contract for airplane. Seperate contract with engine producer. Its last time i explain you.

You say now R&R will denie to make a contract with British Airways when they ordered a A330?

Yes or no?

Im true italian and with all due respect. You know what i think about your heritage. There is no further need to debate this.

As for your bullshit article:

https://next.ft.com/content/7815f214-0453-11e5-95ad-00144feabdc0

But why do i discuss this even with someone like you.

 

[UKBengali]

You still dont get it do you?

Airbus sells no engines. Airlines orders an airplane Airbus makes contract for airplane. Seperate contract with engine producer. Its last time i explain you.

You say now R&R will denie to make a contract with British Airways when they ordered a A330?

Yes or no?

Im true italian and with all due respect. You know what i think about your heritage. There is no further need to debate this.

I thought there was some hope for you but there is none as you cannot comprehend basic language.

 

[MarkusS]

I thought there was some hope for you but there is none as you cannot comprehend basic language.

Do you make clothes for TAKKo and KiK or Primark? Just asking.