The Zhuhai Air Show, underway this week, comes against the backdrop of rising concerns–and large orders announced in recent weeks–of an over-ordered Asian market.
We’ve expressed concern about the large number of orders at Lion Air and AirAsia Group and AirAsia X–these two airlines alone have about 1,000 orders of various Airbus and Boeing types–and the proliferation of low cost airlines for which a shake out is inevitable. We also have expressed concern about India.
Two reports were issued in recent weeks, one arguing Asia is not over-ordered and the other taking a much deeper dive into the entire Asian market.
Lessor CIT Aerospace concludes not only is Asia not over-ordered but China is vastly under-ordered.
The Centre for Asia-Pacific Aviation (CAPA) issued a 72 page study that examines Southeast Asia, India and China. CAPA concludes the LCC market is only in its infancy in China, India continues to be a financial disaster and Asian airlines are struggling for profitability.
The 10th Chinese airshow at Zhuhai opened today. It was a day with fewer announcements than expected from the usual suspects (Airbus, Boeing…) but the Chinese industry did not disappoint. China is now showing more and more of its coming might as a player on the aeronautics arena.
The most prominent displays at this show were on the military side, where China has two stealth aircraft projects flying (the large Chengdu canard J-20 and the smaller Shenyang J-31) while their canard Chengdu J-10 was flying the display circuits overhead (Figure 1).
All aircraft are of latest structural and aerodynamic design if not in engines and systems. This is a big difference to previous shows where the Russian Sukhoi and MIG aircraft and their local copies did the flying display until 2008. Since then everything has changed and now China and USA are the only countries in the world with two different stealth designs flying. USA has one in operation (F-22) and one close to (F-35) whereas China still has many years to go until they have their new aircraft operational. But it is significant that the old aeronautical behemoths Europe and Russia have none respective one (PAK-50) stealth fighter in flight test.
The Zhuhai Air Show begins next Tuesday and a visit by President Obama to Beijing for a regional summit starts on the last day of the show, Nov. 16. Accordingly, we expect at least some orders to be announced during the show by Airbus, Boeing and perhaps the other airframe OEMs, including the home-grown COMAC, developer of the C919 and parent of AVIC, the developer of the ARJ21.
The Zhuhai Air Show has evolved into China’s premier show. While not on the international reputation and prestige of the long-established Farnborough, Paris and Singapore air shows, it’s become an important must-attend for OEMs and others wanting to do business in China.
Here is our forecast for next weeks’ event.
Odds and Ends: C919 EIS in 2020, says consultant; Qantas goes on diet; BBD tables Russia; Swiss not Cseries launch operator
C919/ARJ21: Aviation Week reports that the COMAC C919 might fly be the end of next year and that EIS may be in 2018.
However, Michel Merluzeau, of G2 Solutions in Kirkland (WA), predicts the EIS won’t happen until 2020. Speaking last week before the British American Business Council-Pacific Northwest unit conference in Seattle, Merluzeau said that after a recent trip to Shanghai, where COMAC is, he now sees EIS in 2020, some four years late and 12 years after the program was launched. The C919 competes with the Airbus A320/321 and the Boeing 737-800/8 and 737-900ER/9.
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%.
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.
First of two parts.
Earlier this year, Airbus officials said they will concentrate on improving existing airplanes once the A350 enters service.
Boeing followed by saying it would not take any “moonshots” and develop new airplanes, at least for some indeterminate time.
The sentiment on the part of both companies is understandable if not disappointing for aviation purists who want to see new and innovative airplane models rather than made-over sub-types.
This is one of those cases where both schools of thought are right. (Text continues below photo.)
New airplanes are, to state the obvious, very expensive to develop and in this increasingly technological age and demand for “smarter” airplanes that are more fuel efficient and which try to improve passenger experience while cramming as many revenue-paying passengers into the airplane as possible, becoming more and more challenging. Where it once was possible to bring an airplane to market within four years of launch, today airframers routinely look at seven years and even eight. Even derivative airplanes are now taking six or seven years to enter service from launch.
Major orders last week for Bombardier and Mitsubishi and the release of the Airbus Global Market Forecast provide an opportunity to look at market segments that don’t get a lot of attention in the shadow of the greater focus on the A320/737 and medium-twin aisle sectors.
These over-shadowed sectors are the 70-99 seat regional jet; the 100-149 seat single-aisle market; and the Very Large Aircraft.
Due to the scope and length of each examination, we will detail these sectors in three parts.
• Embraer and Mitsubishi will dominate the 70-99 seat sector;
• Embraer and Bombardier will dominate the 100-149 seat sector;
• Airbus and Boeing have largely withdrawn from the 100-149 seat sector;
• Airbus clings to unrealistic 20-year forecast in the VLA sector, but Boeing is a non-player today and in the future.
Part 1: 70-99 Seat Sector
This is a shrinking market for the regional jet as increasing fuel prices make it more and more difficult for regional jets to be economical. Nonetheless, there are several established and new entrant players in the market:
• Bombardier, with the CRJ-700, CRJ-900 and CRJ-1000
• Embraer, with the in-production E-170/175 and E-190/195
• COMAC/AVIC, with the ARJ-21 70 and 90-seat models
• Mitsubishi, with the MRJ-70 and MRJ-90
• Suhkoi, with the SSJ-100
Air France-KLM trims cargo fleet: Steve Wilhelm of The Puget Sound Business Journal reports that Air France-KLM group is sharply trimming its cargo fleet, with the company declaring the capacity continues to shift to the belly capacity of passenger airplanes. This further validates what we have been writing for some time and, in our view, further bolsters our argument that the demand for new-build, dedicated freighters continues to fall. This in turn means Airbus won’t see recovery for the A330-200F nor will Boeing see recovery in demand for the 747-8F or 777-200LRF.
ExIm Bank Countdown: September 30 is the date the US ExIm Bank runs out of money. Although there is talk of a short-term extension of a few months (conveniently taking it past the election and perhaps defusing some of the Tea Party angst over the agency), Emirates Airlines said it will still buy Boeing airplanes even if ExIm isn’t renewed.
This can’t help Boeing’s argument that ExIm should be retained.
Left unsaid in Emirates’ statement, however, is something we heard in the market: Boeing’s deal for the 150 777Xs with Emirates nearly fell apart over the ambiguity over the Bank. We’re also told Boeing agreed to backstop the Emirates deal.
Neither Boeing nor Emirates comment on financing support.
Bombardier vs Embraer: Here is an interesting thought piece on the financial returns of Bombardier vs Embraer. One obvious error in the article: Malmo Aviation didn’t cancel its order for the CS100; it just decided not to be the launch operator.
Neither do you: Flight Global writes this about the end of plans between COMAC and Bombardier to have a common cockpit between the C919 and the CSeries:
“Basically in the development of the C919, Bombardier is not involved,” says [CAAC}. “They have experience in building regional jets, but not so much in narrowbodies.”
We can’t help but think the Chinese learned what they wanted to learn and moved on.
787 safety: This is one of those stories for which we have skepticism but which is already getting enough press that we don’t feel we can ignore it. Al Jazeera America has a special Wednesday night about the safety of the Boeing 787. AJM previously did an investigation of the safety of the Boeing 737. The Seattle Times has an early review. We’ll hold our opinion until after watching the program.
Ryanair finally orders 737 MAX: Once Boeing announced the launch of the 200-seat 737-8 MAX at the Farnborough Air Show, an order from Ireland’s Ryanair was only a matter of time. It became official today: Ryanair ordered 100+100 of the new version, the 737 MAX 200.
Two news items popped up today on emerging aircraft.
MC-21 subsidy: Government subsidies for commercial aircraft development have been a sore point between the US and Europe (i.e., Boeing and Airbus) for decades. Although the US and Europe went through years of international disputes at the World Trade Organization on behalf of Boeing and Airbus, with adverse decisions now under appeal by both sides, and even though Canada and Brazil previously won cases over illegal subsidies to Embraer and Bombardier, nothing has come of the decisions–and nothing has been done about government subsidies by Japan and China to their aerospace industries. No complaints to the WTO have been filed against either country, which are members of the WTO.
This article updates some information about Russian aid to Irkut, which is developing a competitor to the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737 families. The MC-21 and China’s COMAC C919 are directly sized against the best-selling single-aisle airplanes. Russia is not a member of the WTO, so there is no legal basis (that we know of) to file a complaint.
Long-time readers know we disdain the entire WTO process anyway as more political than practical. The WTO has no enforcement powers and sanctions that might be authorized by the WTO against offenders don’t have to be implemented (as in the case of Canada and Brazil) or even applied against the offender’s products–another industry altogether may be sanctioned, a silly and unfair prospect.
C919 assessment: This article provides an assessment of the prospects for the COMAC C919. What’s especially interesting in this article is what we aviation geeks have known all along, and that is China uses Western technology to develop its airplanes (and trains, the article points out). Airbus and Boeing identify China as the next viable competitor in the airliner field, albeit perhaps a generation in the future. But the technology is coming from Airbus, Boeing, Embraer, Bombardier, the engine makers and the supply chain. They are creating their own future competitors.
While China’s industrial espionage contributes to its understanding and acquisition of Western technology, most of it comes from joint ventures between Chinese companies and the Western OEMs and suppliers.
ExIm countdown: The authorization for the US Export-Import Bank expires next month, and Boeing is pulling out all stops to get a recalcitrant Republican Party to agree to extend the life of the bank, reports The Hill, one of the specialty publications that covers the US Congress.
Killing ExIm will put Boeing at a disadvantage to Airbus, which uses and will continue to use European Credit Agencies (ECAs) to support sales of its aircraft. Boeing will have to fall back on its internal Boeing Capital Corp. or attempt to help customers find private financing if ExIm tanks.