Jump to content

Competition between Airbus and Boeing: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Jleipold (talk | contribs)
194 edits
Jleipold (talk | contribs)
194 edits
Line 573: Line 573:
! style="height:90%;" | 707
! style="height:90%;" | 707
| || || || 1010
| || || || 1010
⚫
|-
⚫
! style="height:90%;" | 717
⚫
| || || || 155
|-
|-
! style="height:90%;" | 727
! style="height:90%;" | 727
Line 582: Line 585:
! style="height:90%;" | 757
! style="height:90%;" | 757
| || || || 1049
| || || || 1049
⚫
|-
⚫
! style="height:90%;" | 717
⚫
| || || || 155
|-
|-
! rowspan="4" | Wide-body
! rowspan="4" | Wide-body

Revision as of 12:24, 22 September 2017

A Lufthansa Airbus A380 in the air about to land. In the foreground, a Lufthansa Boeing 747-8, is on the ground taxiing on a taxiway.
A Lufthansa Airbus A380 and Boeing 747-8 at Frankfurt Airport

The competition between Airbus and Boeing has been characterised as a duopoly in the large jet airliner market since the 1990s.[1] This resulted from a series of mergers within the global aerospace industry, with Airbus beginning as a European consortium while the American Boeing absorbed its former arch-rival, McDonnell Douglas, in a 1997 merger. Other manufacturers, such as Lockheed Martin, Convair and Fairchild Aircraft in the United States, and British Aerospace and Fokker in Europe, were no longer in a position to compete effectively and withdrew from this market.

In the 10 years from 2007 to 2016, Airbus has received 9,985 orders while delivering 5,644, and Boeing has received 8,978 orders while delivering 5,718. In the midst of their intense competition, each company regularly accuses the other of receiving unfair state aid from their respective governments.

Competing products

Passenger capacity and range comparison

Airbus and Boeing have wide product ranges including single-aisle and wide-body aircraft covering a variety of combinations of capacity and range.

Narrowbodies passenger capacity and range comparison

Single aisle : A320,[2] 737[3]
Type length span MTOW pax range list price (USD)[4][5]
A319neo 33.84 m 35.8 m 75.5 t 140 3750 nm $99.5M
737 MAX-7 35.6 m 35.9 m 80.3 t 138 3825 nm $92.2M
A320neo 37.57 m 35.8 m 79 t 165 3500 nm $112.4M
737 MAX-8 39.5 m 35.9 m 82.19 t 162 3515 nm $110M
737 MAX-9 42.11 m 35.9 m 88.31 t 180 3515 nm $119.2M
737 MAX-10 43.8 m 35.9 m TBA 188 3215 nm $125.0M
A321neo 44.51 m 35.8 m 97 t 206 4000 nm $127.0M

Flight Global fleet forecasts 26,860 single aisle deliveries for a $1,360 Bn value at a compound annual growth rate of 5% for the 2016-2035 period, with a 45% market share for Airbus (12090), 43% for Boeing (11550), 5% for Bombardier Aerospace (1340), 4% for COMAC (1070) and 3% for Irkut Corporation (810) ; Airbus predicts 23,531 and Boeing 28,140.[6] Single aisles generates a vast majority of profits for both, followed by legacy twin aisles like the A330 and B777: Kevin Michaels of AeroDynamic Advisory estimates the 737 have a 30% profit margin and the 777 classic 20%.[7]

See also: Middle of the market

Widebodies passenger capacity and range comparison

Twin aisle : A330, A350,[2] 787,[8] 777X[9]
Type length span MTOW pax range list price (USD)[4][5]
787-8 56.69 m 60.17 m 227.93 t 242 7355 nm $229.5M
A330neo-800 58.82 m 64 m 242 t 257 7500 nm $254.8M
A350-800 60.45 m 64.75 m 259 t 280 8200 nm $275.1M
787-9 63 m 60.17 m 254 t 290 7635 nm $270.4M
A330neo-900 63.66 m 64 m 242 t 287 6550 nm $290.6M
A350-900 66.80 m 64.75 m 280 t 325 8100 nm $311.2M
787-10 68.27 m 60.17 m 254 t 330 6430 nm $312.8M
777X-8 69.8 m 71.8 m 351.5 t 350-375 8700 nm $379.2M
A350-1000 73.79 m 64.75 m 308 t 366 7950 nm $359.3M
777X-9 76.7 m 71.8 m 351.5 t 414 7600 nm $408.8M
Double deck
Type length span MTOW pax range list price (USD)
A380[2] 72.72 m 79.75 m 575 t 544 8200 nm $436.9M[4]
747-8[10] 76.3 m 68.4 m 447.7 t 410 7730 nm $386.8M[5]

Flight Global fleet forecasts 7,960 twin aisle deliveries for a $1,284 Bn value for the 2016-2035 period.[11] The B787 should lead with 31% of the market share, followed by the A350 with 27% and the 777 with 21%, then the A330 with 7% as the A380.[12] In June 2017, The orderbook was for 1038 Airbus (41%) and 1,514 Boeings (59%).[13]

Capacity
Market North Atlantic[14] Trans-pacific[15]
type 1H2006 1H2016 2005 2015
A310/DC10/MD11 3% 1% 3% -
A320/B737 1% 1% - -
A330 16% 26% 3% 10%
A340 10% 6% 11% 1%
A380 - 3% - 4%
B747 15% 9% 49% 10%
B757 6% 9% - -
B767 28% 19% 7% 7%
B777 21% 20% 27% 55%
B787 - 6% - 13%

Cargo capacity and range comparison

Type length span MTOW capacity range list price (USD)
A320P2F[16] 37.57 m 35.8 m 78.0 t 21.0 t 2100 nm converted
737-800BCF[17] 39.5 m 35.8 m 79.0 t 22.7 t 2000 nm converted
A321P2F[16] 44.51 m 35.8 m 93.5 t 27.0 t 1900 nm converted
767-300BCF[17] 54.94 m 50.9 m 186.9 t 51.7 t 3300 nm converted
767-300F[17] 54.94 m 47.57 m 186.9 t 52.5 t 3260 nm $203.7M
A330-200P2F[18] 58.82 m 60.3 m 233.0 t 59.0 t 4000 nm converted
A330-200F[2] 58.82 m 60.3 m 233.0 t 70.0 t 4000 nm $237.0M
A330-300P2F[18] 63.67 m 60.3 m 233.0 t 61.0 t 3600 nm converted
777F[17] 63.73 m 64.80 m 347.8 t 102.0 t 4970 nm $325.7M
747-8F[17] 76.3 m 68.4 m 447.7 t 137.7 t 4120 nm $387.5M

Airbus A320 vs Boeing 737

United Airlines Airbus A320 and Boeing 737-900 on final approach

In terms of sales, while the Boeing 737 Next Generation outsold the Airbus A320 family since its introduction in 1988, it is still lagging overall with 7,033 orders against 7,940 in January 2016. Airbus received 4,471 orders since the A320neo family launch in December 2010, while the 737 MAX got 3,072 from August 2011 till January 2016. In the same timeframe, the neo had 3,355 orders.[19] Through August, Airbus have a 59.4% market share of the re-engined single aisle market, while Boeing had 40.6%; Boeing has doubts on over-ordered A320 neos by new operators and expects to narrow the gap with replacements not already ordered.[20] In July 2017, Airbus still had sold 1,350 more A320neos than Boeing had sold 737 MAXs.[21]

In terms of deliveries, Boeing has shipped 9,522 aircraft of the 737 family since late 1967,[22] with 8,016 of those deliveries since March 1, 1988,[23] and has a further 4,430 on firm order as of May 2017.[22] In comparison, Airbus has delivered 7,610 A320 series aircraft since their certification/first delivery in early 1988, with another 5,501 on firm order (as of May 2017).[24]

  •   Airbus A320 family deliveries[24][25]
  •   Boeing 737 series deliveries[26]

Airbus A380 vs Boeing 747

Cross-section comparison of the Airbus A380 (full length double deck) and the front section of Boeing 747-400 (only the front section has double deck)

During the 1990s both companies researched the feasibility of a passenger aircraft larger than the Boeing 747, which was then the largest airliner in operation. Airbus subsequently launched a full-length double-deck aircraft, the A380, a decade later while Boeing decided the project would not be commercially viable and developed the third generation 747, Boeing 747-8,instead.[27] The Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747-8 are therefore placed in direct competition on long-haul routes.

Rival performance claims by Airbus and Boeing appear to be contradictory, their methodologies unclear and neither are validated by a third party source.[citation needed] Boeing claims the 747-8I to be over 10% lighter per seat and have 11% less fuel consumption per passenger, with a trip-cost reduction of 21% and a seat-mile cost reduction of more than 6%, compared to the A380. The 747-8F's empty weight is expected to be 80 tonnes (88 tons) lighter and 24% lower fuel burnt per ton with 21% lower trip costs and 23% lower ton-mile costs than the A380F.[28] On the other hand, Airbus claims the A380 to have 8% less fuel consumption per passenger than the 747-8I and in 2007 Singapore Airlines CEO Chew Choong Seng stated the A380 was performing better than both the airline and Airbus had anticipated, burning 20% less fuel per passenger than the airline's 747-400 fleet.[29] Emirates' Tim Clark also claims that the A380 is more fuel economic at Mach 0.86 than at 0.83.[30] One independent, industry analysis shows fuel consumption in litres per seat per 100 kilometres flown (L/seat/100 km) as 3.27 for the A380 and 3.35 for the B747-8I, or a fuel cost per seat mile of $0.055 and $0.057 respectively.[dubious – discuss] A possible, as yet uncommitted, re-engined A380neo is expected to achieve 2.82 or 2.65 L/seat/100 km depending on the options taken.[31]

Airbus emphasises the longer range of the A380 while using up to 17% shorter runways.[32] The A380-800 has 478 square metres (5,145.1 sq ft) of cabin floor space, 49% more than the 747-8, while commentators noted the "downright eerie" lack of engine noise, with the A380 being 50% quieter than a 747-400 on takeoff.[33] Airbus delivered the 100th A380 on 14 March 2013.[34] From 2012, Airbus will offer, as an option, a variant with improved maximum take-off weight allowing for better payload/range performance. The precise increase in maximum take-off weight is still unknown. British Airways and Emirates will be the first customers to take this offer.[35]

As of December 2015, Airbus has 319 orders[36] for the passenger version of the A380 and is not currently offering the A380-800 freighter. Production of the A380F has been suspended until the A380 production lines have settled with no firm availability date.[37] A number of original A380F orders were cancelled following delays to the A380 program in October 2006, notably FedEx and the United Parcel Service. Some A380 launch customers converted their A380F orders to the passenger version or switched to the 747-8F or 777F aircraft.[38][39]

At Farnborough in July 2016, Airbus announced that in a "prudent, proactive step," starting in 2018 it expects to deliver 12 A380 aircraft per year, down from 27 deliveries in 2015. The firm also warned production might slip back into red ink on each aircraft produced at that time, though it anticipates production will remain in the black for 2016 and 2017. The firm expects that healthy demand for its other aircraft would allow it to avoid job losses from the cuts.[40][41]

As of June 2014, Boeing has 51 orders for the 747-8I passenger version and 69 for the 747-8F freighter.[42]

EADS/Northrop Grumman KC-45A vs Boeing KC-767

Main article: KC-X

The announcement in March 2008 that Boeing had lost a US$40 billion refuelling aircraft contract to Northrop Grumman and Airbus for the EADS/Northrop Grumman KC-45 with the United States Air Force drew angry protests in the United States Congress.[43] Upon review of Boeing's protest, the Government Accountability Office ruled in favour of Boeing and ordered the USAF to recompete the contract. Later, the entire call for aircraft was rescheduled, then cancelled, with a new call decided upon in March 2010 as a fixed-price contract.

Boeing later won the contest against Airbus (Northrop having withdrawn) and US Aerospace/Antonov (disqualified), with a lower price, on February 24, 2011.[44] The price was so low some in the media believe Boeing would take a loss on the deal; they also speculated that the company could perhaps break even with maintenance and spare parts contracts.[45] In July 2011, it was revealed that projected development costs rose $1.4bn and will exceed the $4.9bn contract cap by $300m. For the first $1bn increase (from the award price to the cap), the U.S. government would be responsible for $600m under a 60/40 government/Boeing split. With Boeing being wholly responsible for the additional $300m ceiling breach, Boeing would be responsible for a total of $700m of the additional cost.[46][47][48][clarification needed]

Modes of competition

Outsourcing

Because many of the world's airlines are wholly or partially government owned, aircraft procurement decisions are often taken according to political criteria in addition to commercial ones. Boeing and Airbus seek to exploit this by subcontracting production of aircraft components or assemblies to manufacturers in countries of strategic importance in order to gain a competitive advantage overall.

For example, Boeing has maintained longstanding relationships since 1974 with Japanese suppliers including Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries by which these companies have had increasing involvement on successive Boeing jet programs, a process which has helped Boeing achieve almost total dominance of the Japanese market for commercial jets. Outsourcing was extended on the 787 to the extent that Boeing's own involvement was reduced to little more than project management, design, assembly and test operation, outsourcing most of the actual manufacturing all around the world. Boeing has since stated that it "outsourced too much" and that future airplane projects will depend far more on its own engineering and production personnel.[49]

Partly because of its origins as a consortium of European companies, Airbus has had fewer opportunities to outsource significant parts of its production beyond its own European plants. However, in 2009 Airbus opened an assembly plant in Tianjin, China for production of its A320 series airliners.[50]

Technology

Airbus sought to compete with the well-established Boeing in the 1970s through its introduction of advanced technology. For example, the A300 made the most extensive use of composite materials yet seen in an aircraft of that era, and by automating the flight engineer's functions, was the first widebody jet to have a two-man flight crew. In the 1980s Airbus was the first to introduce digital fly-by-wire controls into an airliner (the A320).

With Airbus now an established competitor to Boeing, both companies use advanced technology to seek performance advantages in their products. Many of these improvements are about weight reduction and fuel efficiency. For example, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is the first large airliner to use 50% composites for its construction. The Airbus A350 XWB features 53% composites.[51]

Provision of engine choices

The competitive strength in the market of any airliner is considerably influenced by the choice of engine available. In general, airlines prefer to have a choice of at least two engines from the major manufacturers General Electric, Rolls-Royce and Pratt & Whitney. However, engine manufacturers prefer to be single source, and often succeed in striking commercial deals with Boeing and Airbus to achieve this.

Several notable aircraft have only provided a single engine offering: the Boeing 737-300 series onwards (CFM56), the Airbus A340-500 & 600 (Rolls-Royce Trent 500), the Airbus A350 XWB (Rolls-Royce Trent XWB), the Boeing 747-8 (GEnx-2B67), and the Boeing 777-300ER/200LR/F (General Electric GE90).[52] However, the Airbus A380 has a choice of either the Engine Alliance GP7000 or the Rolls-Royce Trent 900, while the Boeing 787 Dreamliner can be fitted with the General Electric GEnx or the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000.

As of the late 2000s, there appears to be a polarizing of both the engine suppliers as well as the airline manufacturers, such as Boeing and General Electric partnering for the upcoming Boeing 777X, and Airbus working closely with Rolls Royce for the Airbus A350-1000.[53][54]

Currency and exchange rates

Boeing's production costs are mostly in United States dollars, whereas Airbus' production costs are mostly in Euro. When the dollar appreciates against the euro the cost of producing a Boeing aircraft rises relatively to the cost of producing an Airbus aircraft, and conversely when the dollar falls relative to the euro it is an advantage for Boeing. There are also possible currency risks and benefits involved in the way aircraft are sold. Boeing typically prices its aircraft only in dollars, while Airbus, although pricing most aircraft sales in dollars, has been known to be more flexible and has priced some aircraft sales in Asia and the Middle East in multiple currencies. Depending on currency fluctuations between the acceptance of the order and the delivery of the aircraft this can result in an extra profit or extra expense—or, if Airbus has purchased insurance against such fluctuations, an additional cost regardless.[55]

Safety and quality

Both aircraft manufacturers have good safety records on recently manufactured aircraft and generally, both firms have a positive reputation of delivering well-engineered and high-quality products.[56][57] By convention, both companies tend to avoid safety comparisons when selling their aircraft to airlines or comparisons on product quality. Most aircraft dominating the companies' current sales, the Boeing 737-NG and Airbus A320 families and both companies' wide-body offerings, have good safety records. Older model aircraft such as the Boeing 707, Boeing 727, Boeing 737-100/-200, Boeing 747-100/SP/200/300, Airbus A300, and Airbus A310, which were respectively first flown during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, have had higher rates of fatal accidents.[58] According to Airbus' John Leahy, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner battery problems will not cause customers to switch airplane suppliers.[59]

Aircraft prices

Airbus and Boeing publish list prices for their aircraft but the actual prices charged to airlines vary; they can be difficult to determine and tend to be much lower than the list prices. Both manufacturers are engaged in a price competition to defend their market share.[60]

However, the actual transaction prices may be as much as 50% less than the list prices, as reported in 2012 in the Wall Street Journal, giving some examples from the Flight International subsidiary Ascend:[61]

Model List price 2012, US$M Market price % Discount
Boeing 737-800 84 41 51%
Boeing 737-900ER 90 45 50%
Boeing 777-300ER 298 149 50%
Airbus A319 81 30 63%
Airbus A320 88 40 55%
Airbus A330-200 209 84 60%

In May 2013, Forbes magazine reported that the Boeing 787 offered at $225 million was selling at an average of $116m, a 48% discount.[62]

Those discounts were presented again in Le Nouvel Observateur's Challenges.fr again with Ascend valuations in 2013:[63]

Model List price 2013 Market price Discount
Boeing 747-8 351.4 145.0 59%
Airbus A320-200 91.5 38.75 58%
Airbus A330-200 239.4 99.5 58%
Boeing 737-800 89.1 41.8 53%
Boeing 777-300ER 315.0 152.5 52%
Airbus A380 403.9 193.0 52%
Airbus A320neo 100.2 49.2 51%
Boeing 737 MAX-8 100.5 51.4 49%
Boeing 787-8 206.8 107.0 48%
Airbus A350-900 287.7 152.0 47%

In 2014, Airways news indicated discounted list prices for long haul liners :[64]

Model List price 2014 Market price Discount
Airbus A330-900neo 275.6 124.0 55%
Airbus A350-900 295.2 159.4 46%
Boeing 777-200LR 296.0 118.4 60%
Boeing 787-9 249.5 134.7 46%

On 24 December 2014, Transasia Airways announced a commitment to four A330-800neos, list price $241.7m, for $480m or $120m each.[65] At the end of 2015, the sale and leaseback of new Airbus A350-900 from GECAS to Finnair value them at €132.5M ($144M)[66]

In order to close the production gap between the B777 classic and the new 777X, Boeing is challenged by a $120m market price for the -300ERs. Competitive pressure from the Bombardier CSeries and E-Jet E2 lead Boeing to pursue the development of the 737 MAX-7 despite low sales,[67] and to sell the Boeing 737-700 at $22m to United Airlines, 27% of the 2015 list price and well below what Embraer or Bombardier could offer for their aircraft.[68]

Moody’s Investors Service estimates Delta Air Lines paid $40 million each for its 37 A321ceo order on 29 April 2016, an "end-of-the-line model pricing" of 35% of the $114.9 million list price.[69] Likewise, Air Caraïbes subsidiary French Blue received its A330-300 for $100 million in September 2016.[70]

May 2016 market prices[71]
Aircraft List ($m) Mkt Value ($m) Discount Seats Mkt/Seat
A380 432.6 236.5 45% 544 434743
B777-300ER 339.6 154.8 54% 368 420652
A350-900 308.1 150.0 51% 325 461538
B787-9 264.6 142.8 46% 290 492414
B787-8 224.6 117.1 48% 242 483884
A330-300 256.4 109.5 57% 277 395307
A330-200 231.5 86.6 63% 247 350607
A321 114.9 52.5 54% 185 283784
A320neo 107.3 48.5 55% 165 293939
B737-900ER 101.9 48.1 53% 174 276437
B737-800 96.0 46.5 52% 160 290625
A320 98.0 44.4 55% 150 296000
A319 89.6 37.3 58% 124 300806
B737-700 80.6 35.3 56% 128 275781

Effect of competition on product plans

The A320 has been selected by 222 operators (Dec. 2008), among these several low-cost operators, gaining ground against the previously well established 737 in this sector; it has also been selected as a replacement for 727s and aging 737s by many full-service airlines such as Star Alliance members United Airlines, Air Canada and Lufthansa. After dominating the very large aircraft market for four decades, the Boeing 747 now faces a challenge from the A380. In response, Boeing now offer the stretched and updated 747-8, with greater capacity, fuel efficiency, and longer range. Frequent delays to the Airbus A380 program caused several customers to consider cancelling their orders in favour of the refreshed 747-8.[72] However, all orders for the A380F freight variant have been cancelled. To date, Boeing has secured orders for 78 747-8F and 51 747-8I aircraft with first deliveries originally scheduled for 2011 and 2012 as the 747-8I is only in service with Lufthansa, while Airbus has orders for 318 A380s, the first of which entered service in 2007 and has delivered a total of 152 to customers (as of December 31, 2014).

Several Boeing projects were pursued and then cancelled, for example the Sonic Cruiser. Boeing's current platform for fleet rejuvenation is the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which uses technology from the Sonic Cruiser concept.

Boeing initially ruled out producing a re-engined version of its 737 to compete with the Airbus A320neo family launch planned for 2015, believing airlines would be looking towards the Boeing Y1 and a 30% fuel saving, instead of paying 10% more for fuel efficiency gains of only a few percent. Industry sources believe that the 737's design makes re-engining considerably more expensive for Boeing than it was for the Airbus A320. However, there did prove to be considerable demand. Southwest Airlines, who use the 737 for their entire fleet (680 in service or on order), said they were not prepared to wait 20 years or more for a new 737 model and threatened to convert to Airbus.[73] Boeing eventually bowed to airline pressure and in 2011 approved the 737 MAX project, scheduled for first delivery in 2017.

Orders and deliveries

It took Boeing 42 years and 1 month to deliver its 10,000 7series aircraft (October 1958-November 2000) and, 42 years and 5 months for Airbus to achieve the same milestone (May 1974-October 2016).[74] Boeing deliveries considerably exceeded that of Airbus throughout the 1980s. In the 1990s this lead narrowed significantly but Boeing remained ahead of Airbus. In the 2000s Airbus assumed the lead in narrow-body aircraft. By 2010 little difference remained between Airbus and Boeing in both the wide-body or narrow-body categories or the range on offer.

Orders[75][76]
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989
Airbus 264 731 1080 1456 1503 833 1419 574 271 777 1341 790 1055 370 284 300 375 520 476 556 460 326 106 125 38 136 101 404 421
Boeing 426 668 768 1432 1355 1203 805 530 142 662 1413 1044 1002 272 239 251 314 588 355 606 532 664 379 112 220 230 240 456 563
Sources:
Airbus Orders & deliveries until August 31, 2017
Boeing orders until August 31, 2017
Deliveries
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989
Airbus 399 688 635 629 626 588 534 510 498 483 453 434 378 320 305 303 325 311 294 229 182 126 124 123 138 157 163 95 105
Boeing 476 748 762 723 648 601 477 462 481 375 441 398 290 285 281 381 527 491 620 563 346 219 207 272 330 446 435 385 491
Sources:
Airbus Orders & deliveries until August 31, 2017
Boeing deliveries until August 31, 2017

The former McDonnell Douglas MD-80, the MD-90 and the MD-11 are included in Boeing deliveries since MD's August 1997 merger with Boeing.

Orders for and deliveries of Airbus and Boeing aircraft

  Airbus orders
  Airbus deliveries
  Boeing orders
  Boeing deliveries
Annual net orders and aircraft deliveries by Airbus and Boeing Commercial Airplanes, respectively, since 1989.[77][78] Y-axis is limited at -200. Actual net cancellation of Boeing in 2020 was 1026.


Orders and Deliveries by Product
Manufacturer Class Product 2016 Historical Deliveries *
Orders Deliveries Backlog
Airbus [79] Narrow-body A320 607 545 5645 7421
Wide-body A300 561
A310 255
330 83 66 363 1323
A340 377
A350 41 49 754 64
A380 28 112 207
Total 731 688 6874 10208
Boeing [80] Narrow-body 707 1010
717 155
727 1831
737 550 490 4452 9335
757 1049
Wide-body 747 17 9 28 1528
767 26 13 93 1096
777 17 99 442 1460
787 158 137 700 500
Total 668 748 5715 17964
* Historical deliveries are all jet airliners from Boeing since 1958 and Airbus since 1974 until 31 December 2016
Deliveries by year and product (through August 31, 2017)
707 717 727 737 747 757 767 777 787 Boeing[81] A300 A310 A320 A330 A340 A350 A380 Airbus
1974 21 91 55 22 189 4 4
1975 7 91 51 21 170 8 8
1976 9 61 41 27 138 13 13
1977 8 67 25 20 120 15 15
1978 13 118 40 32 203 15 15
1979 6 136 77 67 286 26 26
1980 3 131 92 73 299 39 39
1981 2 94 108 53 257 38 38
1982 8 26 95 26 2 20 177 46 46
1983 8 11 82 22 25 55 203 19 17 36
1984 8 8 67 16 18 29 146 19 29 48
1985 3 115 24 36 25 203 16 26 42
1986 4 141 35 35 27 242 10 19 29
1987 9 161 23 40 37 270 11 21 32
1988 165 24 48 53 290 17 28 16 61
1989 5 146 45 51 37 284 24 23 58 105
1990 4 174 70 77 60 385 19 18 58 95
1991 14 215 64 80 62 435 25 19 119 163
1992 5 218 61 99 63 446 22 24 111 157
1993 152 56 71 51 330 22 22 71 1 22 138
1994 1 121 40 69 41 272 23 2 64 9 25 123
1995 89 25 43 37 13 207 17 2 56 30 19 124
1996 76 26 42 43 32 219 14 2 72 10 28 126
1997 135 39 46 42 59 321 6 2 127 14 33 182
1998 282 53 54 47 74 510 13 1 168 23 24 229
1999 12 320 47 67 44 83 573 8 222 44 20 294
2000 32 282 25 45 44 55 483 8 241 43 19 311
2001 49 299 31 45 40 61 525 11 257 35 22 325
2002 20 223 27 29 35 47 381 9 236 42 16 303
2003 12 173 19 14 24 39 281 8 233 31 33 305
2004 12 202 15 11 9 36 285 12 233 47 28 320
2005 13 212 13 2 10 40 290 9 289 56 24 378
2006 5 302 14 12 65 398 9 339 62 24 434
2007 330 16 12 83 441 6 367 68 11 1 453
2008 290 14 10 61 375 386 72 13 12 483
2009 372 8 13 88 481 402 76 10 10 498
2010 376 12 74 462 401 87 4 18 510
2011 372 9 20 73 3 477 421 87 26 534
2012 415 31 26 83 46 601 455 101 2 30 588
2013 440 24 21 98 65 648 493 108 25 626
2014 485 19 6 99 114 723 490 108 1 30 629
2015 495 18 16 98 135 762 491 103 14 27 635
2016 490 9 13 99 137 748 545 66 49 28 688
2017 324 5 6 52 89 476 310 38 43 8 399
Total
(All-time) 		1010 155 1831 9656 1533 1049 1102 1512 589 18440 561 255 7731 1361 377 107 215 10607
707 717 727 737 747 757 767 777 787 A300 A310 A320 A330 A340 A350 A380
Deliveries by Continent and fuselage type (through December 31, 2016)
Airliner Europe North America Latin America & Caribbean Asia Pacific Middle East Africa Leasing Companies VIP-Gov-Others Total
Narrow-body Wide-body Narrow-body Wide-body Narrow-body Wide-body Narrow-body Wide-body Narrow-body Wide-body Narrow-body Wide-body Narrow-body Wide-body Narrow-body Wide-body
707 139 582 21 73 37 31 127 1010
717 9 125 10 11 155
727 210 1301 89 106 36 54 25 10 1831
737 Original 284 455 60 138 44 94 34 35 1144
737 Classic 457 691 18 276 27 513 6 1988
737NG 1163 1609 213 1404 88 143 1301 282 6203
737 MAX
A320ceo 1639 1029 521 1734 207 103 2004 116 7353
A320neo 18 4 4 24 18 68
757 172 634 83 10 7 137 6 1049
767 115 447 60 264 28 19 149 14 1096
A300 101 179 9 187 32 28 22 3 561
A310 114 39 4 48 27 13 7 3 255
777 194 211 12 538 246 30 207 22 1460
777X
A330ceo 203 90 41 458 114 38 339 40 1323
A330neo
A340 179 10 4 80 35 22 33 14 377
787 67 72 31 198 48 29 50 5 500
A350 8 7 24 13 12 64
747 366 280 13 637 63 31 14 14 1418
747-8 43 10 47 10 110
A380 36 64 107 207
Total 4091 1426 6430 1338 926 181 3848 2545 422 713 459 210 4043 833 582 125 28172

Boeing [82] Airbus [83]

Deliveries by decade and fuselage type (through Dec 31, 2016)
Narrow-body Wide-body Boeing[81] Narrow-body Wide-body Airbus Ratio B:A
1980s 1747 624 2371 74 402 476 4.98:1
1990s 2466 1232 3698 1068 563 1631 2.27:1
2000s 2974 966 3940 2983 827 3810 1.03:1
2010s 3073 1348 4421 3296 914 4210 1.05:1
Total 13380 4584 17964 7421 2787 10208
Commercial airliners still in operation
707 717 727 737 747 757 767 777 787 Boeing[81] A300 A310 A320 A330 A340 A350 A380 Airbus Ratio B:A
2006 68 155 620 4328 989 996 862 575 8593 408 199 2761 418 306 4092 2.09:1
2007 63 155 561 4583 985 1000 880 640 8867 392 193 3095 481 330 4491 1.97:1
2008 61 154 500 4761 955 980 873 714 8998 387 194 3395 533 330 4 4843 1.86:1
2009 58 142 442 4928 947 970 864 780 9131 376 188 3737 607 345 16 5269 1.73:1
2010 39 147 398 5153 915 945 863 858 9318 348 160 4092 675 342 30 5647 1.65:1
2011 10 130 250 5177 736 898 837 924 8962 296 121 4392 766 332 50 5957 1.50:1
2012 2 143 169 5357 690 860 838 1017 15 9091 262 102 4803 848 312 76 6403 1.42:1
2013 148 109 5458 627 855 821 1094 68 9180 234 84 5170 927 298 106 6819 1.35:1
2014 154 87 5782 585 812 795 1188 163 9564 216 71 5632 1020 266 136 7341 1.30:1
2015 136 69 6135 571 738 765 1265 286 9965 207 62 6050 1095 227 5 167 7813 1.28:1
2016 154 64 6512 515 688 742 1324 423 10422 210 47 6510 1154 196 29 193 8339 1.25:1
707 717 727 737 747 757 767 777 787 A300 A310 A320 A330 A340 A350 A380
World Airliner Census 2006 [84] 2007 [85] 2008 [86] 2009 [87] 2010 [88][89] 2011 [90] 2012 [91] 2013 [92] 2014 [93][94] 2015 [95] 2016[96][97]

Controversies

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner (above) will compete with the Airbus A330 and the Airbus A350 in the medium to long range market.

Subsidies

Boeing has continually protested over launch aid in the form of credits to Airbus, while Airbus has argued that Boeing receives illegal subsidies through military and research contracts and tax breaks.[98]

In July 2004, Harry Stonecipher (then CEO of Boeing) accused Airbus of abusing a 1992 bilateral EU-US agreement regarding large civil aircraft support from governments. Airbus is given reimbursable launch investment (RLI, called "launch aid" by the US) from European governments with the money being paid back with interest, plus indefinite royalties if the aircraft is a commercial success.[99] Airbus contends that this system is fully compliant with the 1992 agreement and WTO rules. The agreement allows up to 33 per cent of the program cost to be met through government loans which are to be fully repaid within 17 years with interest and royalties. These loans are held at a minimum interest rate equal to the cost of government borrowing plus 0.25%, which would be below market rates available to Airbus without government support.[100] Airbus claims that since the signing of the EU-U.S. agreement in 1992, it has repaid European governments more than U.S.$6.7 billion and that this is 40% more than it has received.

Airbus argues that pork barrel military contracts awarded to Boeing (the second largest U.S. defence contractor) are in effect a form of subsidy (see the Boeing KC-767 vs EADS (Airbus) KC-45 military contracting controversy). The U.S. government support of technology development via NASA also provides support to Boeing. In its recent products such as the 787, Boeing has also received support from local and state governments.[101] Airbus' parent, EADS, itself is a military contractor, and is paid to develop and build projects such as the Airbus A400M transport and various other military aircraft.[102]

In January 2005, European Union and United States trade representatives Peter Mandelson and Robert Zoellick agreed to talks aimed at resolving the increasing tensions. These talks were not successful, with the dispute becoming more acrimonious rather than approaching a settlement.

World Trade Organization litigation

"We remain united in our determination that this dispute shall not affect our cooperation on wider bilateral and multilateral trade issues. We have worked together well so far, and intend to continue to do so."

Joint EU-US statement[103]

On 31 May 2005 the United States filed a case against the European Union for providing allegedly illegal subsidies to Airbus. Twenty-four hours later the European Union filed a complaint against the United States protesting support for Boeing.[104]

Increased tensions, due to the support for the Airbus A380, escalated toward a potential trade war as the launch of the Airbus A350 neared. Airbus preferred the A350 program to be launched with the help of state loans covering a third of the development costs, although it stated it will launch without these loans if required. The A350 will compete with Boeing's most successful project in recent years, the 787 Dreamliner. EU trade officials questioned the nature of the funding provided by NASA, the Department of Defense, and in particular the form of R&D contracts that benefit Boeing; as well as funding from US states such as Washington, Kansas, and Illinois, for the development and launch of Boeing aircraft, in particular the 787.[105] An interim report of the WTO investigation into the claims made by both sides was made in September 2009.[106]

In September 2009, the New York Times and Wall Street Journal reported that the World Trade Organization would likely rule against Airbus on most, but not all, of Boeing's complaints; the practical effect of this ruling would likely be blunted by the large number of international partners engaged by both plane makers, as well as the expected delay of several years of appeals. For example, 35% of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is manufactured in Japan. Thus, some experts are advocating a negotiated settlement.[107] In addition, the heavy government subsidies offered to automobile manufacturers in the United States have changed the political environment; the subsidies offered to Chrysler and General Motors dwarf the amounts involved in the Airbus-Boeing dispute.[108]

In March 2010, the WTO ruled that European governments unfairly financed Airbus.[109] In September 2010, a preliminary report of the WTO found unfair Boeing payments broke WTO rules and should be withdrawn.[110] In two separate findings issued in May 2011, the WTO found, firstly, that the US defence budget and NASA research grants could not be used as vehicles to subsidise the civilian aerospace industry and that Boeing must repay $5.3 billion of illegal subsidies.[111] Secondly, the WTO Appellate Body partly overturned an earlier ruling that European Government launch aid constituted unfair subsidy, agreeing with the point of principle that the support was not aimed at boosting exports and some forms of public-private partnership could continue. Part of the $18bn in low interest loans received would have to be repaid eventually; however, there was no immediate need for it to be repaid and the exact value to be repaid would be set at a future date.[112] Both parties claimed victory in what was the world's largest trade dispute.[113][114][115]

On 1 December 2011 Airbus reported that it had fulfilled its obligations under the WTO findings and called upon Boeing to do likewise in the coming year.[116] The United States did not agree and had already begun complaint procedures prior to December, stating the EU had failed to comply with the DSB's recommendations and rulings, and requesting authorisation by the DSB to take countermeasures under Article 22 of the DSU and Article 7.9 of the SCM Agreement. The European Union requested the matter be referred to arbitration under Article 22.6 of the DSU. The DSB agreed that the matter raised by the European Union in its statement at that meeting be referred to arbitration as required by Article 22.6 of the DSU however on 19 January 2012 the US and EU jointly agreed to withdraw their request for arbitration.[117]

On 12 March 2012 the appellate body of the WTO released its findings confirming the illegality of subsidies to Boeing whilst confirming the legality of repayable loans made to Airbus. The WTO stated that Boeing had received at least $5.3 billion in illegal cash subsidies at an estimated cost to Airbus of $45 billion. A further $2 billion in state and local subsidies that Boeing is set to receive have also been declared illegal. Boeing and the US government were given six months to change the way government support for Boeing is handled.[118] At the DSB meeting on 13 April 2012, the United States informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB recommendations and rulings in a manner that respects its WTO obligations and within the time-frame established in Article 7.9 of the SCM Agreement. The European Union welcomed the US intention and noted that the 6-month period stipulated in Article 7.9 of the SCM Agreement would expire on 23 September 2012. On 24 April 2012, the European Union and the United States informed the DSB of Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU and Article 7 of the SCM Agreement.[119]

On 25 September 2012 the EU requested discussions with the USA, because of the alleged non compliance of the US and Boeing with the WTO ruling of 12 March 2012. On 27 September 2012 the EU requested the WTO to approve EU countermeasures against USA's subsidy of Boeing. The WTO approved creating a panel to rule on the disputed compliance this was initially to rule in 2014 but is not now expected to complete its work before 2016 due to the complexity of the case. The EU wants permission to place trade sanctions of up to 12 billion US$ annually against the USA. The EU believes this amount represents the damage the illegal subsidies of Boeing cause to the EU.[120][121]

On 19 December 2014 the EU requested WTO mediated consultations with the US over the tax incentives given by the state of Washington to large civil aircraft manufacturers which they believed violated the earlier WTO ruling, on 22 April 2015 at the request of the EU a WTO panel was set up to rule on the complaint.[122] The tax incentives given by the state of Washington and believed to be the largest in US history[123] surpassing the previous record of $5.6bn over 30 years awarded by the state of New York to the aluminum producer Alcoa in 2007. The $8.7bn over 40 years incentive to Boeing to manufacture the 777X in the state includes $4.2bn from a 40% reduction in business taxes, £3.5bn in tax credits for the firm, a $562m tax credit on property and buildings belonging to Boeing, a $242m sales tax exemption for buying computers and $8m to train 1000 workers,[124] Airbus alleges this is larger than the budgeted cost of Boeing's 777X development program and the EU argues amounts to an entire publicly funded free aircraft program for Boeing, the legislation was an extension of the duration of a tax break program given to Boeing for Dreamliner development that had already been ruled illegal by the WTO in 2012.[125] Boeing defends the allegation by arguing the subsidies are available to anyone however for an aircraft to qualify for the tax breaks a company must manufacture aircraft wings and perform all final assembly for an aircraft model or variant exclusively in the state.[126]

See also

Notes

References

  1. ^ Airlines Industry Profile: United States, Datamonitor, November 2008, pp. 13–14
  2. ^ a b c d "Family figures" (PDF). Airbus. March 2016.
  3. ^ "737 MAX". Boeing.
  4. ^ a b c "Aircraft list prices". Airbus. 2017.
  5. ^ a b c "Commercial Airplanes prices". Boeing.
  6. ^ "Flight Fleet Forecast's single-aisle outlook 2016-2035". Flight Global. 16 August 2016.
  7. ^ "Pontifications: Boeing's long-term message doesn't resonate". Leeham Co. Feb 20, 2017.
  8. ^ "787 Dreamliner". Boeing.
  9. ^ "777X". Boeing.
  10. ^ "747-8". Boeing.
  11. ^ "Flight Fleet Forecast Summary". Flight Global. 2016.
  12. ^ "Ascend widebody fleet forecast". Flight Global. 13 October 2016.
  13. ^ "wide boys". Flight Global. June 2017.
  14. ^ "747-400 fleet profile: Air France, Cathay Pacific and Saudia retire passenger 747 fleets in 2016". CAPA - Centre for Aviation. 18 January 2016.
  15. ^ "Singapore Airlines to resume non-stop US services with A350-900ULR: a strategic imperative". CAPA - Centre for Aviation. 15 October 2015.
  16. ^ a b "EFW, ST Aerospace and Airbus to launch A320/A321P2F freighter conversion programme". Airbus. 17 June 2015. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
  17. ^ a b c d e "Freighters". Boeing. Retrieved 13 May 2017.
  18. ^ a b "A330P2F Passenger to Freighter". Airbus. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
  19. ^ "ANALYSIS: A320neo vs. 737 MAX: Airbus is Leading (Slightly) – Part I". Airways News. January 27, 2016.
  20. ^ "Boeing positioned to narrow market share gap". Leeham Co. Sep 22, 2016.
  21. ^ Addison Schonland (July 10, 2017). "The Big Duopoly Race". Airinsight.
  22. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference 737_O_D_summ was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  23. ^ "Orders and Deliveries search page". Boeing. May 31, 2017. Retrieved June 14, 2017.
  24. ^ a b "Orders & deliveries viewer". Airbus. Retrieved May 6, 2017.
  25. ^ "Historical Orders and Deliveries 1974–2009". Airbus S.A.S. January 2010. Archived from the original (Microsoft Excel) on December 23, 2010. Retrieved 10 December 2012.
  26. ^ "Historical Deliveries". Boeing. December 2015. Retrieved February 5, 2016.
  27. ^ "Boeing, partners expected to scrap Super-Jet study". Los Angeles Times. 10 July 1995. Retrieved 30 December 2011.
  28. ^ "Boeing 747-8 Family background". boeing.com. 2005-11-14. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  29. ^ "SIA's Chew: A380 pleases, Virgin Atlantic disappoints". ATW Online. 13 December 2007. Archived from the original on 15 December 2007. Retrieved 13 December 2007. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  30. ^ Flottau, Jens (21 November 2012). "Emirates A350-1000 Order 'In Limbo'". Aviation Week. Retrieved 22 November 2012. Clark points out that "the faster you fly [the A380], the more fuel-efficient she gets; when you fly at [Mach] 0.86 she is better than at 0.83."
  31. ^ "Updating the A380: the prospect of a neo version and what's involved". 2014-02-03. Retrieved 2014-06-29.
  32. ^ "A380 family presskit". 2012-01-01. Retrieved 2012-02-08.
  33. ^ Saporito, Bill (23 November 2009). "Can the A380 Bring the Party Back to the Skies?". TIME magazine. Archived from the original on 19 September 2010. Retrieved 21 September 2010. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  34. ^ "The A380 global fleet spreads its wings as deliveries hit the 'century mark'". Airbus, 14 March 2013.
  35. ^ "British Airways and Emirates will be first for new longer-range A380". flightglobal.com. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  36. ^ "Orders & Deliveries". Airbus.com. Retrieved 22 November 2015.
  37. ^ Quentin Wilber, Dell (8 November 2006). "Airbus bust, Boeing boost". The Washington Post. Retrieved 30 December 2011.
  38. ^ Robertson, David. "Airbus will lose €4.8bn because of A380 delays", Time, 3 October 2006.
  39. ^ Schwartz, Nelson D. "Big plane, big problems", CNN, 1 March 2007.
  40. ^ NY Times: Airbus Cuts Delivery Goal for A380 Jumbo Jets
  41. ^ WSJ: Airbus Cuts A380 Production Plans
  42. ^ "747 model summary". boeing.com. Retrieved 3 August 2014.
  43. ^ "Air tanker deal provokes US row, BBC, 1 March 2008". BBC News. 2008-03-01. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  44. ^ "The USAF's KC-X Aerial Tanker RFP: Canceled". Defense Industry Daily. 13 March 2011.
  45. ^ Leeham News and Comment: How will Boeing profit from tanker contract?, 12-7-2011, visited: 3-2-2012
  46. ^ Broken link: missing 3-2-2012
  47. ^ A1 Blog: Mc Cain blasts Boeing overruns
  48. ^ Defensenews.com: Boeing Lowers KC-46 Cost Estimate, 27-7-2011, visited: 3-2-2012
  49. ^ Gates, Dominic (March 1, 2010). "Albaugh: Boeing's 'first preference' is to build planes in Puget Sound region". The Seattle Times. Retrieved 2010-06-16.
  50. ^ "Airbus' China gamble". Flight International. October 28, 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-15.
  51. ^ "Qatar Airways A350 XWB factsheet". Airbus. Airbus. Retrieved 28 September 2016.
  52. ^ Thomas, Geoffrey (April 4, 2008). "Engines the thrust of the Boeing-Airbus battle". The Australian. Retrieved 2008-11-08.
  53. ^ "ANALYSIS: Rolls and Airbus – how the latecomer excelled". Flightglobal.com.
  54. ^ "GE In, Rolls Out As Boeing Seeks 777X Approval". aviationweek.com.
  55. ^ "Strong Euro Weighs on Airbus, Suppliers". Wall Street Journal: B3. October 30, 2009.
  56. ^ Muellerleile, Christopher M (2009). "Financialization takes off at Boeing". Journal of Economic Geography. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbp025. Boeing's engineers [...] tended to be first and foremost concerned with safety and quality. This contributed to Boeing's solid reputation
  57. ^ Gray, Edmund R.; Balmer, John MT (1998). "Managing corporate image and corporate reputation". Long Range Planning. 31.5. doi:10.1016/S0024-6301(98)00074-0. Airbus [...] enjoys a high-profile image and positive reputation
  58. ^ "Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Accidents - Worldwide Operations - 1959–2015" (PDF). Boeing. July 2016.
  59. ^ Robert Wall & Andrea Rothman (17 January 2013). "Airbus Says A350 Design Is 'Lower Risk' Than Troubled 787". Bloomberg. Retrieved 17 January 2013. I don't believe that anyone's going to switch from one airplane type to another because there's a maintenance issue," Leahy said. "Boeing will get this sorted out.
  60. ^ TIM HEPHER (9 July 2012). "How plane giants descended into global 'price war'". Reuters.
  61. ^ DANIEL MICHAELS (9 July 2012). "The Secret Price of a Jet Airliner". Wall Street Journal.
  62. ^ Agustino Fontevecchia (21 May 2013). "Boeing Bleeding Cash As 787 Dreamliners Cost $200M But Sell For $116m, But Productivity Is Improving". Forbes.
  63. ^ Vincent Lamigeon (13 June 2013). "Le vrai prix des avions d'Airbus et de Boeing" (in French). Challenges.fr.
  64. ^ Vinay Bhaskara (November 25, 2014). "UPDATED ANALYSIS: Delta Order for A350; A330neo Hinged on Pricing, Availability". Airways News.
  65. ^ DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW (24 December 2014). "TransAsia to take four A330-800neo jets". Flight Global.
  66. ^ "Finnair has entered into a memorandum of understanding on the sale and leaseback of two A350 aircraft" (Press release). Finnair. 2015-12-23.
  67. ^ "In strategy shift, Boeing backs 7 MAX: sources". Leeham news and comment. 22 February 2016.
  68. ^ "Boeing Gives United A Smoking Deal On 737s To Block Bombardier From Gaining Traction". Forbes. 8 March 2016.
  69. ^ "ANALYSIS: Delta sees long upgauge runway ahead with A321s". Flightglobal. 2 May 2016.
  70. ^ "Premier vol français (et vendéen) low-cost long courrier" (in French). Ouest France. 13 September 2016.
  71. ^ "Aircraft Pricing - List vs. market". Airinsight. May 16, 2016.
  72. ^ Robertson, David (October 4, 2006). "Airbus will lose €4.8bn because of A380 delays". London: The Times Business News.
  73. ^ Associated, The (2011-01-20). "Southwest waiting to hear Boeing's plan for 737". BusinessWeek. Retrieved 2013-02-16.
  74. ^ "How Airbus went from zero to 10,000". Flight Global. 14 October 2016.
  75. ^ Sources 2015: Airbus net orders until December 31, 2015
  76. ^ update on 2015 Airbus net orders
  77. ^ "Orders and deliveries". Airbus. January 2024. Retrieved 18 January 2024.
  78. ^ "Commercial". Boeing. January 2024. Retrieved 18 January 2024.
  79. ^ "Orders & deliveries". Airbus.com. 2016-01-16. Retrieved 2016-01-16.
  80. ^ "The Boeing Company". Active.boeing.com. Retrieved 2014-02-06.
  81. ^ a b c Time Period Reports. boeing.com
  82. ^ "Boeing". boeing.com.
  83. ^ "Orders & deliveries". airbus.
  84. ^ http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14954
  85. ^ http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=18906
  86. ^ http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?ItemID=24736
  87. ^ https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/World_Airliner_Census_2009.pdf
  88. ^ https://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=35827
  89. ^ "Airliner Census 2010 – fleet growth marginal and idle jets at record high". Flight Global. 2010-08-23. Retrieved 2014-02-06.
  90. ^ https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/World_Airliner_Census_2011.pdf
  91. ^ https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/World_Airliner_Census_2012.pdf
  92. ^ https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/WorldAirlinerCensus2013.pdf
  93. ^ "ANALYSIS: The changing size and shape of the world airliner fleet". Flightglobal.com.
  94. ^ https://d1fmezig7cekam.cloudfront.net/VPP/Global/WorldAirlinerCensus2014.pdf
  95. ^ https://d1fmezig7cekam.cloudfront.net/VPP/Global/Flight/fint-archive/feature-images/AirlinerCensus2015.pdf
  96. ^ https://www.flightglobal.com/asset/12798
  97. ^ https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-flightglobal-airliner-census-reveals-fleet-428019/
  98. ^ "Don't Let Boeing Close The Door On Competition" (PDF). Retrieved 2011-01-09.
  99. ^ O'Connell, Dominic; Porter, Andrew (29 May 2005). "Trade war threatened over £379m subsidy for Airbus". The Times. London. Archived from the original on 14 January 2006. Retrieved 22 October 2014. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  100. ^ "Q&A: Boeing and Airbus". BBC News. 7 October 2004. Retrieved 22 October 2014.
  101. ^ "See you in court". The Economist. 23 March 2005.
  102. ^ "EADS Military Air Systems Website, retrieved September 3, 2009". eads.net. 2011-05-13. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  103. ^ "EU, US face off at WTO in aircraft spat". Defense Aerospace. 31 May 2005.
  104. ^ "Flare-up in EU-US air trade row". BBC News. 31 May 2005. Retrieved 2010-01-02.
  105. ^ Milmo, Dan (14 August 2009). "US accuse Britain of stoking trade row with £340m Airbus loan". London: The Guardian.
  106. ^ "US refuses to disclose WTO ruling on Boeing-Airbus row". EU Business. 5 September 2009.
  107. ^ Clark, Nicola (2009-09-03). "W.T.O. to Weigh In on E.U. Subsidies for Airbus, New York Times, September 3, 2009, retrieved September 3, 2009". Europe;United States: nytimes.com. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  108. ^ Boeing Set for Victory Over Airbus in Illegal Subsidy Case, Wall Street Journal, September 3, 2009, p.A1
  109. ^ "WTO says Europe subsidises Airbus, Boeing's rival, unfairly". USA Today. 3 March 2010. Retrieved 2010-06-16.
  110. ^ "EU claims victory in WTO case versus Boeing". Paris: Reuters. 15 September 2010.
  111. ^ Freedman, Jennifer M. "WTO Says U.S. Gave at Least $5.3 Billion Illegal Aid to Boeing". Bloomberg. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  112. ^ "BBC News: WTO Airbus ruling leaves both sides claiming victory". bbc.co.uk. 2011-04-19. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  113. ^ Lewis, Barbara (2011-05-19). "WTO gives mixed verdict on Airbus appeal". Reuters. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  114. ^ "WTO final ruling: Decisive victory for Europe". LogisticsWeek. 2011-03-25. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  115. ^ Khimm, Suzy (2011-05-17). "U.S. claims victory in Airbus-Boeing case". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2011-05-21.
  116. ^ "Airbus satisfy WTO obligations".
  117. ^ "European Communities — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft".
  118. ^ "Sweeping Loss for Boeing in WTO Appeal". Airbus.com. 2014-01-16. Retrieved 2014-02-06.
  119. ^ "United States — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft — Second Complaint".
  120. ^ "WTO Boeing case: EU requests to impose countermeasures against the US". European Commission. 2012-09-27. Retrieved 2012-09-28.
  121. ^ "Next chapter in eight year old WTO conflict: Boeing's WTO Default Prompts $ 12 Bn in Annual Sanctions". Airbus. 2012-09-27. Retrieved 2012-09-28.
  122. ^ https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds487_e.htm
  123. ^ Reid Wilson (12 November 2013). "Washington just awarded the largest state tax subsidy in U.S. history". Washington Post.
  124. ^ Jon Ostrower (10 December 2013). "Boeing Holds Bake-Off for Biggest Tax Breaks". WSJ.
  125. ^ "Exclusive: EU may challenge $8.7 billion U.S. tax breaks in Boeing-Airbus trade dispute - sources". Reuters UK.
  126. ^ "Washington state's Boeing tax breaks are illegal, Europe charges". mcclatchydc.
Bibliography
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Competition_between_Airbus_and_Boeing&oldid=801868573"