Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (
More info?)
interesting...... well if thi was even to be 20% valid, then let us hope
that boeing would not be forced to cut corners with the 787
"Gregory Abbey" <gabbey.maps@bkwds.dynanet.com> wrote in message
news:gfdh21d3t12jl8433efpjgs0rn5b36929b@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:37:46 -0500, Bill Leaming <n4gix@comcast.net>
> brought the following to our attention:
>
> >New (fake) "newsreel" on the A380:
> >
> >http://home.exetel.com.au/pamuva/MOVIES!/A380Video.wmv
> >
> >Bill
>
>
>
> Hear anything about two dedicated A-380 terminals being sabotaged?
> ANd what about the Concorde mishap? any relation? is this stuff true
> or just theory [fake]? content that follows by J. Vialls.. for amuse!
>
>
>
> * * * * *
>
>
>
> The Boeing 747's design and manufacturing techniques date back
> to the fifties and the 'good old days' of the Cold War. Despite
> new engines and flashy flight deck instruments, nothing else has
> changed. This aircraft is essentially as old and out-of-date as
> the Boeing B-47.
>
> After successfully sabotaging Concorde 4590... [bankers] went on
> to deliberately sabotage the dedicated A-380 airport terminals
> in Dubai and Paris. The subliminal message was obvious, i.e.
> hinting strongly that anything aeronautical designed or built by
> Europe was intrinsically unsafe, and thus "certain to crash".
>
>
> France was the principal driving force behind both Concorde and
> the Airbus A-380. Jaque Chirac is justifiably proud of "Old
> Europe's" stunning technological achievement.
>
>
> Nineteen sixty-six (1966) seems a very long time ago, but it was
> on March 11 that year that French President Charles de Gaulle
> stunned the western world by sending an aide-mémoire to France's
> 14 partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), in
> which he announced that all French forces would be withdrawn
> from the Alliance integrated command. De Gaulle also stated that
> all French NATO bases and HQ's would be closed within a year.
>
> General de Gaulle was a gentleman, and he kept his word. At the
> diplomatic level, the reason appeared to be that Charles de Gaulle
> could not and would not trust America to 'protect' France if Russia
> attacked Europe, but the real reasons behind his decision were
> infinitely more profound.
>
>
>
> He continued, "For since a man and a country can only die once,
> deterrence exists once one has the means to inflict mortal
> damage on a possible aggressor, the determination to use them
> and the confidence in one's ultimate decision."
>
>
>
>
> Somehow, Europe as a whole had to find a way of freeing itself
> from the stranglehold of worthless US Federal Reserve notes,
> which would had to be replaced with revenue derived from the
> sale of tangible [real] products, such as cars, aircraft, farm
> products and so on. This was finally achieved in January 2005,
> when Germany alone (just one of 25 EU member states), published
> its export/import figures for the financial year 2004.
>
>
>
> During 2004, Germany exported products worth US$ 950 billion,
> while importing products valued at only US$ 748 billion, meaning
> that Germany made a gross profit for the year of US$
> 222,000,000,000. During the same time frame, America's total
> exports were two hundred billion less than Germany, with
> American imports completely off the clock. If anyone out there
> ever wanted hard proof that America is now totally bankrupt,
> Germany just provided that proof in the form of properly audited
> balance sheets.
>
>
>
>
>
> Though few people would consider the luxurious Airbus A-380 as a
> warplane, its very existence will have strategic impact on future
> wars..
>
>
> For nearly a hundred years, the.... [bankers] and their
> forbears have held the world to ransom, using blackmail and
> sheer force of arms to extract real goods in exchange for
> useless 'fiat' currency notes, junk bonds, and political bribes.
>
> It was never going to last for ever, and the launch of the A-380
> on January 18 marked the official beginning of the end, at least
> from a European perspective. Though it is one of the main
> instruments designed to undermine Boeing Aircraft Corporation
> and thus the entire American defense industry, the A-380 Super
> Jumbo is still a stunning aircraft in its own right, and will
> doubtlessly attract vast numbers of passengers on its merits.
>
>
>
> Though in standard three-class configuration the A-380 will carry
> around 560 passengers, rather than a possible 810 maximum
> in 'cattle truck' mode, it will do so 27% cheaper per passenger-
> mile than the Boeing 747, with part of this made possible by the
> engines burning about 20% less fuel.
>
> Curiously, Boeing's counter propaganda about the giant aircraft
> seems to have fallen flat on its face. The A-380 is not noisier
> than the Boeing 747, but many decibels quieter, even at maximum
> takeoff power. The A-380 does not require a special runway, and
> in fact has a shorter takeoff and landing run that the Boeing
> 747. The only airport alterations required are special departure
> and arrival gates, which were originally designed to handle a
> throughput of around 350 passengers, and will be hard pressed to
> handle 550 in their current configurations. They could still do
> the job of course, but the delays would be unacceptable.
>
>
> Perhaps most irksome of all for the Wall Street moneylenders, is
> that the giant European aerospace corporation that own Airbus,
> has not borrowed a single American fiat cent in order to
> complete this or any other Airbus project, meaning that Wall
> Street cannot pull the financial plug and make Airbus Industries
> simply disappear.
>
>
> Unable to stop the A-380 by direct means, or by indirect acts of
> sabotage on Concorde and the A-380 terminals, the money lenders
> sent Boeing off on a different and quite ridiculous tack, made
> necessary by the fact that America no longer has enough spare
> cash to build new aircraft or new production lines.
>
> Armed only with a cheap artist's impression, Boeing salesmen set
> off around the world in an attempt to achieve the impossible, to
> wit selling the concept of a middle weight airliner dubbed the
> Boeing 7E7 "Dreamliner", but without first building a prototype
> of even a full scale mockup.
>
>
> This was to be an exercise in gathering sufficient cash to start
> building a mockup - which is an incredible way of trying to sell
> aeroplanes, because it tells everyone instantly that you are so
> broke you can't afford to show them the real thing.
>
> This is not the first time Boeing has tried this bizarre approach.
> Within twelve months of the sabotage of Concorde 4590,
> the corporation suddenly released an artist's impression of the
> "Sonic Cruiser", a hybrid space-age transonic jet they seemed
> sure would replace the Concorde, once orchestrated American
> media pressure had managed to have the Mach 2 Concorde
> permanently grounded, which, curiously enough, is exactly what
> happened. Unfortunately for Boeing, no one wanted to buy their
> 'Sonic Cruiser" painting, so the project eventually folded and
> died.
>
>
> But the 7E7 was going to be different, and during the Spring of
> 2003, All Nippon Airways of Japan placed a firm order for 50 of
> these unproven aircraft at a fixed price of US$115 million for
> each airplane. Alas though, All Nippon was not prepared to hand
> over any ready cash in advance, meaning the full scale mockup
> and production line could not be started.
>
>
> "Dreamliner" is a very appropriate name, because this aircraft
> only exists in the fertile imaginations of Boeing's sales
> personnel. There is no prototype and no pre-production aircraft,
> although Boeing does have a few hundred spare copies of this
> artist's impression. Time dragged slowly by, and then on Friday
> January 28, 2005, Boeing got the big break it had been looking
> for. The Boeing Company and officials from the Peoples' Republic
> of China signed an agreement for the purchase of 70 Boeing 7E7
> Dreamliners by Chinese airlines. The agreement mentions a fixed
> price of US$110 million per airplane. The salesmen had pulled it
> off, and managed to sell more than 100 aircraft based only on an
> artist's impression! Not bad, but there was to be a very nasty
> sting in the tail.
>
>
> The very next day at Davos in Switzerland, Fan Gang, director of
> the National Economic Research Institute at the China Reform
> Foundation, boldly stated [on behalf of the Chinese Government],
> "The U.S. dollar is no longer, in our opinion is no longer seen
> as a stable currency, and is devaluating all the time, and
> that's putting troubles all the time," he said in impeccable
> English.
>
> Fan Gang continued, "So the real issue is how to change the
> regime from a US dollar pegging to a more manageable - pause -
> reference - pause - say Euros, yen, those kind of more
> diversified systems. If you do this, in the beginning you have
> some kind of initial shock; you have to deal with some
> devaluation pressures."
>
>
> China is a very powerful economic force nowadays, and the man
> from China had just put his boot into the US Dollar, a point
> well noted by all present. Naturally this means the US Dollar
> will continue to fall like a stone, going into final free fall
> when Russia and OPEC decide to start trading their oil stocks in
> Euros instead of dollars.
>
>
> So, Boeing has talked itself into the fixed-price delivery in
> 2008 of more than a hundred 7E7s [now the 787s], with that price
> fixed in US Dollars. Oh dear, now how much will the US Dollar be
> worth in four years time, when the Euro has become the world's
> only viable reserve currency? Let us take 25% of its current
> value against the Yuan and Yen, which means that Boeing will be
> contractually obliged to deliver brand-new 787 aircraft to China
> and Japan for today's equivalent price of a second-hand Boeing
> 737, or declare bankruptcy.
>
>
>
>
> It is no exaggeration to say that Boeing is the 'flagship' of the
> American defense industry, and if Boeing goes to the wall..
> [then??]
>
>
>
>
did all those cattle have RFID
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram