I’m not saying Airbus is better than Boeing, I don’t have an opinion towards which one is better.
Airbus was created 54 years after Boeing, 28 years after Bombardier, and 1 year after Embraer.
In 46 years Airbus became Boeings top competitor, and that is real success.
How do you think Airbus did this all in 46 years.
Why did Bombardier & Embraer, fail to do this?
Bombardier and Embraer don’t make wide bodies… maybe thats it? They only make regional aircraft to my knowledge.
C Series, not regional, medium haul.
Although aircraft is not Bombardiers only focus.
Competitor to the A320 and B737?
They don’t have wider range of aircraft to deliver maybe. As @Giacomo_Lawrance said, they don’t have wide bodies
Bombardier is lacking orders on the C Series, Bombardier stepped up from regional aircraft to short-medium haul aircraft.
I know that. in my opinion that is why they don’t have as many orders as Airbus
Here’s an interesting article I read this morning.
According to Airbus the next 10,000 planes will be made within 10 years. If that is true that will be quite an achievement
What do Bombardier & Embraer have in competition to the 787, A380, 777, A350? @Giacomo_Lawrance completely right, it’s about the widebodies and Bombardier & Embraer don’t have them, Airbus and Boeing do
Because many of their aircraft have revolutionised the industry. The A300 and A310 introduced the twin-engined widebody to the world; the A320 pioneered it’s impressive array of technology including fly-by-wire and sidestick controls and the A380 showed off it’s massive structure. Boeing achieved similar success against Douglas/McDonnell Douglas first through it’s 707, which ushered the world into the jet age; then with the bestselling 737, the famous 747, the superb 777 and the pioneering 787, just to name a few. By contrast, McDonnell Douglas really had no breakthrough designs after the DC-10, and was running solely on sales of it’s technologically inferior MD-80/90 and MD-11 by the time it collapsed. Embraer and Bombardier, although their aircraft are superb aircraft, were late to the party, so to speak. Why would an airline buy a new Embraer/Bombardier aircraft in favour of the A320/737 it has been operating for decades?
Anyway, my point is, Boeing and Airbus are the major players in the aircraft manufacturing industry because of the breakthrough aircraft they have produced - aircraft that have thoroughly changed the industry - and are still churning out new, revolutionary designs.
Edit: sorry for the long(ish) rant…
Ilyushin and Tupolev would’ve been successful but half the world ignored them because they were Russian.
The joint country effort for airbus I think is what helped launch them to where they are today.
In all fairness it might not just be because they’re Russian, the published safety records for both are not as accident free as the rest. For example the Boeing 757 has one accident per 14 million flight hours compared to the Ilyushin’s one crash in 560,000 flight hours. Tupolev published one per one million being slightly better.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.