Odds and Ends: Boeing firms 52/mo for 737; Product strategy; Aircraft demand and production rates

Boeing firms 52/mo for 737: Boeing this morning announced what we reported in June 2013: that it will go to a production rate of 52/mo for the 737 in 2018. This will not be the last rate increase for the 737.

Airbus previously notified suppliers to be prepared for a rate of 54/mo in 2018 for the A320, which we reported some time ago.

Product strategy: In the continuing tit-for-tat in product strategy debate between Airbus and Boeing, often show slides representing their view of how their products line up vs The Other Guy. We’ve often criticized Boeing for taking liberties with how it views Airbus seat; for example, Boeing assigned fewer than 350 seats to the A350-1000, while Airbus now promotes the airplane as having 369 seats in a J/Y class configuration. Boeing assigns 467 seats to its 747-8I while Airbus to now viewed the 747-8 at 405 seats, a figure we generally use in our analysis to represent typical airline configuration.

Airbus recently showed the following slide presenting its current view of the product line up.

Airbus slide, modified by Leeham Co., depicting the Airbus view of product strategy. It shows the A350 family with more than 400 seats and the 747-8I with fewer than 400 seats. We disagree with these representations.

Airbus slide, modified by Leeham Co., depicting the Airbus view of product strategy. It shows the A350 family with more than 400 seats and the 747-8I with fewer than 400 seats. We disagree with these representations.

It’s certainly true that Lufthansa and Air China, the only two passenger airlines to receive and operate the 747-8, configure their airplanes with fewer than 400 seats and perhaps this is the basis for the Airbus representation.Airbus represents the 777X as carrying more passengers than the 748, and this certainly would not be the case in the event of normalized configuration. (But is does show how the 777-9X is killing the 748.)

However, we don’t understand how Airbus represents the A350 family as having more than 400 seats if the same configuration assumptions are used–and it is obvious to us that they are not.

The other airplane representations are reasonable.

Aircraft demand: Aviation Week has a detailed story about aircraft demand in the near-term, providing another take and a topic we’ve written about many times. (Continued below the photo.)

Later this month, we will unveil a new, updated Leeham News and Comment with a combination of paid and free content. Watch this space for more information.

Later this month, we will unveil a new, updated Leeham News and Comment with a combination of paid and free content. Watch this space for more information.

Aviation Week reports that some aerospace analysts believe the production rate of the Boeing 777 Classic should be reduced to as few as four per month.  We see a decline in the rate inevitable, but we don’t see rates declining to this extent; we believe the rates will come down incrementally beginning in 2017 leading to the 2020 EIS of the 777X.

Some analysts also believe Airbus needs to reduce the rate of the A380 to one per month, according to the article. Airbus needs to deliver 30 A380s a year to achieve break even (a goal set for next year), which means Airbus will be delivering below its book-to-bill rate.

 

 

12 Comments on “Odds and Ends: Boeing firms 52/mo for 737; Product strategy; Aircraft demand and production rates

  1. “However, we don’t understand how Airbus represents the A350 family as having more than 400 seats if the same configuration assumptions are used–and it is obvious to us that they are not.”

    What about an A350-1100? Could that have 400 or more seats?

  2. I think the graphic purports to show the seat counts that are actually to be used by airlines, rather than normalized seating for comparison. So for example the A350 might spread from an Cathay Paific A350-900 in a generous 290 seat layout to an Air Caraibes A350-1000 with 400 knee capping seats.

    I don’t how they know the seat configurations for Boeing aircraft, which should be proprietary.

    Air Canada hasn’t ordered the 777-9X yet, so seat counts are still reasonable on that plane.

  3. Its cumulative. A350 family has (currenlty ) two member and add the 900 and 1000 up an you have over 400 seats.

    the 747-8I only has one member and its stuck with Lufthansa seat count.

    all very easy when you go about it right!.

  4. Does anyone with the responsibility to sign a order for LCA’s get his information from such sources? I hope not
    Then why do both A and B keep pestering each other and their fanboys with these meaningless claims. What is their angle, how do they benefit ?

  5. Combine Airbus going towards (even more) realistic numbers in datasheets and while seemingly going “overboard” in presentations.
    Satirizing Boeing or badgering them into some unbecoming bluster ?

  6. Re: overstated/understated:

    the original graphic explicitly states
    {blue} ~= PRIMARY MARKET SPREAD
    imu seating arrangements found in the wild excepting niche users ( like forex Air Austral’s projected seating plan )
    looks like the numbers haven’t been extracted from some deranged Marketroid 😉

  7. So not “Airbus view of product line up” but seatcounts as they fly or are foreseen by the operators. A kind of new approach.

  8. Quite smart by Airbus: there is a mainline carrier having 407 seats on its A380, and I guess there are airlines looking at 400 seats for their A350-1000 (which, by the way, wouldn’t require knee-capping, actually, it would still retain a quite up-to-date economy north of the standards enjoyed in most new build B777s today).

    Still, the assertion that a A350-1000 is larger than a B777-9X is probably wrong. Only if one limits it to 9-abreast economy.

    Anyways: who is supposed to be convinced with those charts? Potential airlines can afford a customized layout and will know their seat count exactly.

    • What airlines have decided on to be a viable configuration should have some value, shouldn’t it?
      Obviously this new presentation style obscures some other worthwile factors.
      But is it less fair than some bespoke arrangement that lets “your” product look exceptionally good and/or the competitions setup exceptionally bad ?

  9. OPINION: Why Airbus still has a widebody race to run (Flightglobal)

    “Prior to the success of the A320 it was a European wannabe. Toulouse would like to think it is Boeing now that has it all to lose, but in reality it is the European company that still has the convincing to do when it comes to widebody credibility.”

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/opinion-why-airbus-still-has-a-widebody-race-to-run-404470/

    I’m not sure Toulouse wants to be Boeing, but I could be wrong of course. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *