Odds and Ends: EMB, BBD split AA order; WTO on Airbus subsidies; IAM, Boeing bargaining; KC-46A

EMB, BBD split American order: Embraer took the lion’s share of the long-awaited order from American Airlines for regional jets. EMB won 60 firm orders and 90 options for the E-175 and Bombardier won 30+40 CRJ-900s. Flight Global points out that none seem to be going to American Eagle.

The order is welcome by both OEMs, which had gaps in their respective production lines.

WTO on Airbus subsidies: Bloomberg News reports that the World Trade Organization won’t rule until the end of next year on a US complaint that Airbus failed to comply with WTO findings that it received illegal subsidies. (No link available).

Bloomberg writes, The EU says it had secured repayment of some $2.3 billion in launch-aid loans and terminated the launch-aid loan agreements in question, while also addressing subsidies given in the form of capital contributions, infrastructure support and regional aid.(Emphasis added.)

     The U.S. counters that the largest launch-aid subsidies—for the A380, Airbus’s super jumbo jet—remain in place and that the actions the EU claims to have taken with respect to earlier subsidies “appear to do nothing to withdraw them, or to remove their adverse effects.”

As we’ve written, Boeing is now requesting essentially the same thing in its Request for Proposals for the 777X site selection.

IAM, Boeing bargaining: It’s a relief to see Boeing and the International Association of Machinists District 751 bargaining for a new contract amendment for the 777X site selection, but no deal is imminent. The Seattle Times reports things could move quickly, however.

First KC-46A airframe, wings joined: Aviation Week has this story about the progress of Boeing’s KC-46A tanker program.

7 Comments on “Odds and Ends: EMB, BBD split AA order; WTO on Airbus subsidies; IAM, Boeing bargaining; KC-46A

  1. The recent badly executed 787 and 747-8 programs notwithstanding, it is not a surprise to me that the KC-46 program is on track. By all accounts the CDR earlier this year went very well and Boeing can’t afford to screw up another program. I look forward to seeing another Boeing first flight in 6 months.

    • What level of complexity would you assign to the basic KC-46 airframe?

      Afaics the airframe changes are nothing to talk about. i.e. what Boeing achieved is having another frame come along on the 767 assembly line in its alloted timeslot.

      • “Afaics the airframe changes are nothing to talk about. i.e. what Boeing achieved is having another frame come along on the 767 assembly line in its alloted timeslot.”

        If only it was that simple. Alas, we all have to live in the real world. As is often said; “The devil is in the details.”

        While I agree that the majority of the airframe will not have to be changed, a new set of requirements means that much of design calcs will at least have to be redone, and significant portions of the design will have to be changed. Just look at the differences in design and certification between the 737 and the P-8. So, no, it is not as simple as having another frame roll off the line. It is more akin to rolling out a new derivative, the 767-2C.

        Besides, the track record on recent taker programs is not very good for either A or B.

      • You were not so critical with the problematic and very late A-330MRTT program for Airbus. That said, even I expect few minor ‘hic-ups’ with the KC-46A program, but none should be major.

  2. Good news for both Embraer and BBD indeed although none of the orders are for the revised / new models.

    Very good news to see Boeing talking again to its workforce 😉

  3. Negotiations have broken down again after 751 rejected basically the same deal SPEEA got.

    IAM absolutely need to put this contract to a vote of the members. It removed the problems with the pay restructuring and the dental plan. As much as I’m loath to say it, people are right when they parrot “nobody gets a pension anymore”. This is a good enough deal, they need to take it.

    • But that’s not how the rank and file see it. They say that “it’s in their DNA” and “they’re special” and they “would rather die fighting and give up” their benefits. Once again, I’m appalled how lacking in logic the IAM rank and file are with their benefits. So they don’t like how others keep comparing their benefits to the average in the industry. Cry me a f—– river. That’s the world we live in. Don’t like it? Don’t be a machinist. Plain and simple. But they don’t “get it.” So as much as we like to THINK that cooler heads will prevail, and realize that eliminating pensions are the future … they won’t. They don’t think logically. They think emotionally.

      Contrast that with the SPEEA folks. They realize that their jobs are portable… albeit it not as much as the machinists’ jobs, but still, I guarantee you that many of the jobs the engineers have are transferable and they’d likely find folks after looking hard enough. Anyway, the SPEEA folks are engineers, are on the whole intelligent and in general “get it.” They deserve the pay and benefits consistent with other engineering jobs out there. And they realize they are way ahead of the curve (just look at your average mechanical engineer with automotive firms), so they don’t argue much over the benefits and pay they do get.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.