By Bjorn Fehrm
Part 3 of 3
In Part 2 of our three-part 757 Replacement analysis, we took a close look at Airbus’ new 97 tonne take-off weight A321neo, revealed in a world exclusive by Leeham News and Comment October 21. We analyzed the A321neoLR’s capabilities and limitations when compared to Boeing 757-200W and we saw that it could do the international flights that the 757-200 does with about 25% better efficiency. In this final Part 3, we will now compare the 757 and A321neoLR against what can be Boeing’s reaction, a clean sheet New Single Aisle, NSA, or New Light Twin Aisle, (NLT). First the conclusions from Part 2:
- When using the United Airlines-configured 757-200W international as benchmark, we came within seven seats of the 757 capacity for an A321neoLR. It covered the same range and had trip fuel costs that were 25% lower.
- The per seat fuel costs gave a 22% higher efficiency, which was within 2% of Airbus own figures.
- 737 MAX9 is not suitable for stretch to an international version, not because the wing is not good enough but because the MAX9 cannot bring the wing to an angle at take-off where it can work efficiently; the landing gear is too short.
For Part 3 we can summarize:
- A New Single Aisle (NSA) or New Light Twin (NLT) which would enter the market in 2025 would be sized at around 200 passengers with subsequent variants covering the 175-225 seat market, all numbers with OEM standard two-class seating. Figure 1 shows the fuselage cross sections we have used in our modelling of NSA and NLT to cover this market segment.
- In order to cover the market segment of the 737, A320 and 757 it would have a range in excess of 4,100nm. We will use 4100nm for our modeling to maximize the comparative efficiency information.
- Its efficiency would be higher than an A321neoLR, primarily due to better engines and a more modern wing.
- The New Light Twin (NLT) wins on comfort and ground turn-around time but pays with a larger fuselage cross section due to the extra aisle. This causes more drag and structural weight, net effect is a reduction in efficiency of around 2.5%.
As Brazil’s budget airline GOL reportedly evaluates whether to acquire 20 Boeing 737-7s or Embraer E-195 E2s, the principal of the “CASM Paradigm” is a concept worth examining.
This head-to-head evaluation of the E-195 E2 and the 737-7 MAX is a rarity. Typically the head-to-head involves the Bombardier CS300 and the Airbus A319neo. All three have the same seating capacities. The E-195 E2 has slightly fewer passengers than the 737-7 with similar seat pitch.
The competition is also what might be seen as a contrary competition. Airframers agree: the airline industry is upgauging. Capacity discipline, long elusive until after the global financial collapse of 2008, has been driving load factors higher. But lowering unit costs, or the Cost per Available Seat Miles (CASM) has long been the principal measure by which airlines, OEMs and aerospace analysts measure efficiency.
Although Trip Costs of aircraft operating over a route is important, the trend toward upgauging at all levels clearly is the driving force.
Embraer takes a different view, arguing that trip costs and a smaller airplane should trump the CASM obsession. A smaller airplane will mean higher yields, EMB says. A larger airplane provides lower trip costs but drives yield lower.
We visited Embraer’s headquarters earlier this month and received a full briefing on what EMB calls the CASM Paradigm. In our report today, we detail the presentation and discuss other considerations beside CASM vs Trip Costs that drive the size of the aircraft acquired.
- The CASM Paradigm becomes a vicious, circular cycle, driving airlines to larger aircraft but lower yields.
- Extra seats on larger aircraft mean lower unit costs but at the cost of profits.
- Scope Clauses remain an issue in the US.
- Connecting traffic, pay scales also are issues.
- We analyze the operating costs of the E-195 E2 vs the 737-7.
- We discuss the GOL competition.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Part 2 of 3
In Part 2 of our three-part 757 Replacement analysis, we take a close look at Airbus’ new 97 tonnes take off weight A321neo, revealed by Leeham News and Comment October 21. We call the 97t airplane the A321neoLR (Long Range); Airbus has yet to name the aircraft, which it began showing to airlines last week.
We analyze the A321neoLR’s capabilities and limitations when compared to the aircraft it intends to replace, the Boeing 757-200W. We have chosen to do so using a real airline configuration as opposed to an OEM’s typical seating layout. By comparing the 757-200W and the A321neoLR over the route structure that United Airlines is using the 757 today, we can better see the characteristics of the A321neoLR and what operational consequences the differences between the types would mean for the airlines. Before we start, a short recap of Part 1 about the 757 and its replacement candidates. Here is what we found:
- the seating capacity of the A321 is within 10 seats of the 757-200 in a standard configuration; the 737 MAX9 is trailing with about 20 fewer seats.
- the myth about the strong engines of the 757 is just that, a myth.
- the good field performance of the 757 is coming from its wing more than any advantage on the engine side
- the A321neo and 737 MAX9 were hindered in their capability to replace the 757 for long and thin international routes by characteristics that can be changed. For the A321neo, this may be accomplished with rather modest changes to Max Take Off Weight (MTOW) and tankage. For the 737 MAX9, more elaborate changes to the wing and engines are required, both hard to do.
Summary, Part 2
- We will now look in detail on the changes Airbus is doing on the A321neoLR, what each change brings and any restrictions that remain.
- We will also detail why we think it will be harder for Boeing to match the A321neoLR with a 737 MAX9 development.
- We detail prime, present 757W long-thin routes.
- We present 757W international, A321neoLR and 737 MAX9 “long range” configurations.
- We provide economic comparisons such as Payload-Range charts and Fuel consumption per trip and per seat diagrams.
In the final Part 3, will look at Boeing’s alternative to an A321neoLR, a clean sheet New Single Aisle (NSA) and a prospective Small Twin Aisle (STA) design and how much such an approach would surpass the A321neoLR on medium and long haul networks and when it could be available.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Part 1 of 3
The Boeing 757 was developed in the late 1970s as a replacement for Boeing’s popular 727 mid-range single aisle aircraft. Starting from the smaller 727, it ultimately grew to 180 to 230 seat capacity and US transcontinental range. With initial orders from Eastern Airlines and British Airways, the aircraft nonetheless had poor sales through most of the 1980s, picking up with a surge of orders in 1988-1990 when major deals were announced from American, Delta and United airlines.
Following the 1991 Persian Gulf War and recession, orders plunged until the mid-decade with a respectable resurgence. After 9/11, sales dried up and Boeing terminated the program.
- The 757 program had slow sales in its first decade, robust sales for a few years then declining sales through most of the 1990s.
- Sales were respectable in the late 1990s but dried up after 9/11.
- Boeing efforts to boost sales with the 757-300 were a failure–only 55 were sold. 757F sales were a moderate success.
- The 757-200 had strong engines for its time (especially the Rolls Royce equipped models), we dissect if this is still true.
- With the 757 being the only narrow-body with trans-Atlantic range, what is missing from today’s Airbus A321 and Boeing 737 MAX9 to make the cut? What can be done with small changes will be answered in part 2.
- How will a future clean sheet NSA perform compared to these three? How much of a game-changer will a clean sheet design be if it enters service 2025? We look at the answers in part 3.
Leeham News and Comment (LNC) today launched a Premium subscription plan as a companion to free content.
LNC has provided news and commentary since February 2008, providing industry-leading information and insightful analysis, principally focuses on Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier and Embraer but also including emerging challengers to the Big Four OEMs, the leading engine manufacturers, suppliers and airline news.
LNC has been a leading resource of news and comment throughout the commercial aviation industry and its professional followers in the aerospace supply chain, investment analysts and the media.
Since the first of this year, LNC increasingly provided more and more technically-based content. This content is valuable and supplements the industry-leading news and reporting that has been provided since 2008. We are pleased to announce the addition to our staff, Bjorn Fehrm, who focuses on technical evaluation and complements the strategic expertise of Scott Hamilton, the founder of LNC and Leeham Co. consultancy.
Odds and Ends: AA swapping A319s for A321s; Cancelled orders; CSeries; CFM LEAP enters flight testing
American swaps A319s for A321s: This is what Flight Global reports. AA placed a large order to the Airbus A319ceo in 2011 but, having since merged with US Airways which has a large number of the small Airbus that can be redeployed on AA routes, the combined carrier will instead upgauge to the A321, Flight reports.
AA will take 28 A319ceos instead of the anticipated 65.
Cancelled orders: Aviation Week has a blog item listing a bunch of orders placed by airlines that were cancelled before delivery. AvWeek acknowledges the list is hardly all-inclusive. So, Readers, how about adding to the list? Let’s go all the way back to 1945, and this can be globally. We’ll start with American Airlines and Pan Am canceling the Republic Rainbow.
CSeries: Bombardier posted a video update of the CSeries FTV 4 tour to customer Republic Airways Holdings here.
Odds and Ends: Comparing Airbus, Boeing 20-year forecasts; A320neo first flight; 787 battery probe fizzles; Mythbusting
Airbus v Boeing forecasts: The Blog by Javier takes its annual look at and comparison of the Airbus and Boeing 20-year forecasts. Airbus issued its new forecast this week; Boeing’s annual update was issued last summer.
Separately, the A320neo with Pratt & Whitney engines made its first flight today. The CFM LEAP neo is supposed to follow by six months. Showing class, Boeing Tweeted a congratulations for a milestone for the industry.
787 battery probe: The US National Transportation Safety Board hasn’t been able to find the root cause of the lithium ion battery failure in the Japan Air Lines and ANA Boeing 787 incidents. Now, the Japanese investigation has also failed to find the root cause of the ANA battery meltdown.
It’s rare but not unknown for investigators to not find root causes of problems, sometimes for years. A Northwest Airlines Boeing 747-400 split rudder hard over during a flight from Anchorage to Tokyo is one example; it took four years to determine the cause. The root cause of Boeing 737 rudder hard-overs, two of which caused fatal accidents, went unsolved for years.
Boarding airplanes: The reality show Mythbusters, an often entertaining look at myths, conventional wisdom, fact and fiction, takes a deep dive into airplane boarding. The article, with an insert to the episode, is here.
The Southwest Airlines style of boarding, with no seat assignments and derisively called cattle-call boarding, is the fastest and the most annoying, according to Mythbusters. Back-to-front is the longest. The Window-Middle-Aisle works best (but for those of us who like the aisle seat, the overhead bins are usually stuffed by then).
Airbus and Boeing squared off once again Monday, this time at the ISTAT Europe conference in Istanbul, once again pretty much over the entire product lines.
Boeing’s VP Marketing Randy Tinseth began with two focal points, the 737 with its latest developments and Boeing’s “superior” Twin Aisle line-up. Tinseth claimed Boeing has caught up to the A320neo with the 737 MAX.
After an A320neo head start of a year, Tinseth says Boeing has kept the same sales rate per year for the 737 MAX. The backlog of 737 MAX now stands at 2,300 aircraft and he described why Boeing thinks it is well positioned in this market segment.
UBS on wide-bodies: Investment bank UBS sees the Airbus A330ceo deliveries dropping from the current production 10/mo to 5/mo by 2017, in advance of the introduction of the A330neo late that year. As Airbus transitions from the ceo to the neo, beginning in earnest in 2018, UBS sees deliveries dipping to just 40. The forecast doesn’t yet go beyond 2018.
Likewise, analysis David Strauss sees the Boeing 777 Classic deliveries declining from the current production rate of 8.3/mo to 5/mo by 2017, well in advance of the 2020 entry-into-service of the 777X replacement. He sees Classic deliveries holding at 60/yr in 2018.
Strauss sees 12 Boeing 747 deliveries per year beginning in 2016 through the forecast period in 2018, implying a rate reduction from 1.5/mo to 1/mo.
CFM on GTF: The head of CFM International’s technology told a conference that CFM looked at Geared Turbo Fan technology when evaluating proceeding with what became the LEAP engine and decided to take a pass.
Speaking at the Morgan Stanley conference, Reuters reports that chief technology officer Mark Little said CFM shied away from the GTF over weight and reliability concerns. But he didn’t rule out using a GTF for some future engine, according to Reuters.
We’ve previously reported that we now have the CSeries EIS slipping into 1Q2016.
Bombardier continues to press ahead for a 2H2015 EIS (which, at best, we believe is 4Q2015)
Expedia on LCCs: Airline booking company Expedia conducted a survey on Low Cost Carriers and among the results: legroom is important.
Considering the recent news items about legroom and recline wars, and Ryanair’s order for the Boeing 737 MAX 200, the survey results are worth a look.
Engine After-market: Safran, which owns 50% of CFM International with GE Aviation owning the other half, is positioned in the “sweet spot” of the engine after-market, according to a recent report by Bernstein Research.
The report further supports our own analysis posted August 25 and the growing importance of MRO support in winning engine orders.
According to Bernstein, Safran “has the best positioning in the aircraft engine after-market” in the investment bank’s coverage. This position is “driven by two engine families with strong growth ahead and low exposure to older engines that are at risk of early retirement.”
Bernstein notes that more than 95% of Safran’s after-market sales are derived from the CFM56, which powers 75% of the narrow-bodied aircraft, and the GE90, which powers the Boeing 777-200LR/LRF and 777-300ER.
Future programs include the CFM LEAP, GEnx and GP7200. Past programs, in decline, are the first generation CFM56 and the CF6 on earlier wide-bodies.
ExIm and Airbus: In a statement surely to inflame those opposed to renew ExIm Bank authority, the president of the bank said it’s possible it could back funding of the Airbus A320 family built in Mobile (AL).
Paine Field future: It’s a little parochial but The Everett Herald has an article looking at the future of Paine Field, where Boeing’s wide-body airplanes are assembled. The article necessarily looks at the future of the Boeing 747, 767 and 777 Classic production.
Congress is now talking about a nine month extension of ExIm.