Someone
16-01-2009, 16:14
I Airbus sine 2009 estimater tar de saftig selvkritikk angående A400M og kaller dagens oppsett: "A recipe for disaster"
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28671077
CEO Tom Enders called the current setup "a recipe for disaster" and said it would be "irresponsible to continue." Besides delays to the A400M program
Meanwhile, Airbus is struggling to manage delays to the A400M program, which have already cost the planemaker euro1.7 billion ($1.84 billion) in penalties and other charges and led to a public spat with engine suppliers.
There is debate over whether parent company EADS should pay new penalties to governments, but for the moment the defense group is refusing to speculate on the financial impact.
Airbus Military and parent company European Aeronautic Defence & Space say they underestimated the technical complexity of the program and are unable to meet their commitments to customers. The commercial contracts were not suited for military orders, Enders said.
They have proposed a "new approach" to the seven European NATO countries that ordered the plane in 2003 through procurement agency OCCAR. They want to discuss the program schedule and changes on items such as technical characteristics.
"We want to continue the program but we want to continue in a way that ensures success," Enders said. "Within the current contractual and organizational setup we will not get there."
He said Airbus was "stupid" to accept this contract in the first place, and if it were proposed to Boeing Co.'s military division "they would run away crying."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28671077
CEO Tom Enders called the current setup "a recipe for disaster" and said it would be "irresponsible to continue." Besides delays to the A400M program
Meanwhile, Airbus is struggling to manage delays to the A400M program, which have already cost the planemaker euro1.7 billion ($1.84 billion) in penalties and other charges and led to a public spat with engine suppliers.
There is debate over whether parent company EADS should pay new penalties to governments, but for the moment the defense group is refusing to speculate on the financial impact.
Airbus Military and parent company European Aeronautic Defence & Space say they underestimated the technical complexity of the program and are unable to meet their commitments to customers. The commercial contracts were not suited for military orders, Enders said.
They have proposed a "new approach" to the seven European NATO countries that ordered the plane in 2003 through procurement agency OCCAR. They want to discuss the program schedule and changes on items such as technical characteristics.
"We want to continue the program but we want to continue in a way that ensures success," Enders said. "Within the current contractual and organizational setup we will not get there."
He said Airbus was "stupid" to accept this contract in the first place, and if it were proposed to Boeing Co.'s military division "they would run away crying."