Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- Bjorn’s Corner: New engine development. Part 5. Turbofan design problems April 26, 2024
- Airbus 1Q2024 results: Airbus CEO: “A350 in-service experience drives positive reputation and orders” April 25, 2024
- A350-1000 or 777-9? Part 3 April 25, 2024
- Boeing CEO promises company is turning around…again April 24, 2024
- Solid start for stand-alone GE Aerospace despite cuts to LEAP output April 23, 2024
Pontifications: death knell for the E175-E2 as Delta ALPA nixes Scope change
By Scott Hamilton
July 4, 2022, © Leeham News: Any hope that the Delta Air Lines ALPA pilots union will agree to a slightly relaxed Scope Clause in its next contract are just wishful thinking.
Few thought DALPA, as the chapter at the airline is known, would up the weight of airplanes allowed under Scope. This is needed to permit regional airline partners to operate the Embraer E175-E2. The E2 is more environmentally friendly and economical than the E175-E1, a 1990s design with engines (the CF34) that date to 1982 when it first ran on the test stand. The CF34’s design is based on the military TF34 developed in the 1960s.
EMB’s E175-E2 was supposed to enter service in 2021. It’s been rescheduled three times. The current EIS is now targeted for 2027. Few believe Scope will be relaxed by then. There is a growing belief that the E175-E2 is dead. (Embraer says no.) DALPA is often an industry-leading union. Its refusal to relax the weight limit all but assures the E175-E2 is dead.
For the US market
The future of the Embraer E175-E2 has probably been dealt a fatal blow.
The 175 “E1” was specifically designed around the Scope Clause at AA, UAL, and DAL. While the airframe is capable of higher MTOWs but is type certificate limited to 86000 lbs. When Embraer re-engined the E-jets series, it expected that Scope at US Network carriers would retain the 76-seat limit but would likely permit a higher MTOW.
“This was a gamble and had Embraer reached out to the respective pilot groups, it would have been able to design a Scope-compatible aircraft for their largest market,” one ALPA official told LNA on background. “With a better understanding that [for example] 85% of the Delta Connection flying must be below 900SM, and an analysis of the stage lengths operated by the in-service EMB fleet, a completely different 175 E2 would have emerged.”
Ironically, Mitsubishi realized this with its M90. Mitsubishi drew up a redesign in the M100 that traded range for a lower 86000 lbs. MTOW. By the time Mitsubishi’s parent company killed the program in 2020, Memorandums of Understanding for nearly 500 orders from US and European carriers had been signed. Delta was close to signing but hadn’t when Mitsubishi Heavy Industries pulled the plug on the program.
Tighter restrictions
United allowed more weight for the CRJ550 (the CRJ700 reconfigured for 50 passengers). But doing so was entirely out of self-interest.
“We added weight to the CRJ-550, provided the range remains 900 nm. Our pax and jump seating pilots were being left behind due to the 550 weight restriction, especially in the winter. This change fixes that without extending the mission/range of the 550. Our goal of protecting mainline jobs from outsourcing was met as this contract does not allow any more RJs or any more seats at Express,” United’s ALPA unit told LNA.
But:
- No changes to the number of permitted Regional Jet aircraft or seats;
- No changes to the international Scope;
- Allow a CRJ 550 variant with a maximum weight of 69,750 (from 65,000);
- UA pilots cannot be denied jumpseat on the higher max weight CRJ 550 variant due to weight/balance;
- The CRJ 550 variant range is limited to 900 miles (ensures newly added weight is not used to extend range); and
- CRJ 550 variant counts towards 50-seat RJ limits.
“You can be assured there will be no change in the Delta contract,” a DALPA official told LNA. “If anything, unlike the United Tentative Agreement (CRJ 550 MTOW exception), the next Delta contract will further tighten restrictions on some Regional flying. It is likely the fate of the 175-E2 is sealed.”
No demand outside the US
The E175-E2’s market is essentially only the US market. No E175-E2 has been sold outside the US. The pilot unions at United and American airlines negotiated new contracts this year that did not relax the weight limit. DALPA has been in negotiations since 2019 and in mediation since January 2020. LNA is told that the Scope section has been agreed in principle, with no relaxations.
But a ray of hope may exist for Embraer. Killing the E175-E2 doesn’t mean the fate of the larger E2 derivatives (the E190/195) is also sealed in the US, an ALPA official tells LNA. “The current Fee for Departure business model is broken. There is also a big gap between 76 and 110 seats, a nearly 50% increase in capacity. It is likely that the first Mainline Network carrier to integrate a wholly-owned FFD carrier is likely also the first carrier to bring the E2 onboard.”
In the meantime
In the meantime, Embraer continues to sell the E175-E1 to US airlines flying for the Big Three and Alaska Airlines. Embraer says the E175-E1 complies with 2027 IACO emissions and noise standards which will prohibit non-compliant new airplane production from 2028. Member governments of ICAO adopt the 2027 standards—it’s not ICAO’s call—and the US Federal Aviation Administration recently signaled its intent to do so.
It’s hard to see how the old-technology CF34 is compliant with the standards, but I’m not qualified to dispute the claim by Embraer. But I can guess that if the E175-E1 isn’t compliant and there isn’t Scope relaxation or a new airplane that complies, the US would probably exempt the E1. (If a Republican is elected in 2024 to the presidency, coal-fired airplanes will be allowed….)
In the mean, it’s RIP for the E175-E2. And it’s a blow to the environment and even to the bottom line.
A one-for-one replacement of the E2 for the E1, allowing a much “greener” airplane is good for the environment and the improved fuel economy is better for the airline’s bottom line as well—which, in theory, helps protect jobs. There are simply routes that do not support mainline jets. Switching to greener airplanes also reduces the ability of the Greta Thunbergs of the world to pressure commercial aviation to the detriment of jobs.
Just wondering if Boeing had a good look at the E2 line, when considering the tie-up with Embraer and reached the same conclusion;
The E2-175 was not going to be added to feeder airlines because of scope and the E2-190/195 just can’t cut it, when competing with the other products on offer, hence the order book for ~200 aircraft.
The entry level product for carriers is the A220-100, and it’s selling poorly.
A220-300/737Max 7/A319Neo; SWA taking the Max 7 is the only bright spot for BA, the A319Neo is pretty much dead and the only aircraft going anywhere is the A220-300.
The established narrative is that BA was predominantly (or solely) acquiring Embraer so as to gain “ready-to-use” access to a large pool of relatively young (and, yet, experienced) engineers. The production facilities in (relatively cheap) Brazil would also have been a plus.
The existing Embraer programs would probably have been partly/largely axed.
The 2 hugely undervalued portions of the Embraer tie up rarely spoken of are the vast system of aircraft manufacturing process specifications and perhaps even more valuable, a stand alone EASA recognized aircraft certification organisation that deals with EASA as the primary cert org…..
I am shocked to see Scott comment on a Republican wold allow coal power aircraft.
Not that its not true but it is so political.
I don’t know that I could get away with that but now that Scott has opened that door, the tune Waltzing Matilda comes to mind (shades of the wholly depressing On the Beach)
Say what you will about Biden but he is a man of his word (at least in this respect) which is a rare thing for any politician. He said he would end the fossil fuel industry and gosh darn it – he is succeeding: https://youtu.be/Slszva6kk90
…destroying industry and entire economies that are dependent on such fuel is well, worth it? Let’s have a vote on that shall we, say in 2024?
-Here are some sobering statistics:
1 Only 1.8% of the worlds energy comes from renewables. (Imagine that wealthiest 25% of nations get 25% of their electricity which is 28% of their total emissions from renewables). It’s essentially nothing at the moment.
2 Investment by the oil and gas industry in exploration and exploitation of known reserves is down to 33%. The fracking industry is not investing in particular. Without new wells shortages will develop even worse. We’re going to see another 50% increase in oil prices.
Oil and Gas is a highly discouraged industry: and its not investing and we are going to pay for it with inflation, stagflation, loss of productivity and poverty. In terms of aviation, we know what happened last time.
-This has been mishandled, we should have seen a gentle phasing in of higher prices and Putin’s war is only a tiny fraction of the increases.
-It’s not just the Biden Administration. This is a roughshod process happening in the EU (where oil and gas is suppressed) and many western nations. It’s simply to radical.
Action is needed to give the oil and gas more confidence in the next 10 years.
In this case, politics is relevant. That’s the difference.
Hamilton
LOL, I don’t comment on this site any longer in general as it became so political, but it is funny given how the left has run the economy into the ground to see lamentations about what a Republican might do for aviation in general as somehow a doomsday/horrible thing, even using coal as a metaphor in air travel, while it is…the leftist unions that are preventing a more efficient aircraft from being adopted.
Biden voters owe the rest of us reparations. $7 trillion in debt since January 2021. 15% inflation. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Maybe the NBA is closer than we think. Calhoun said if the MAX-10 doesn’t get approval by the FAA by the end of the year, it could be axed. With almost 700 on order, one would think something new would have to replace it.
SamW appears to be a bright person….
And Calhoun is not.
Frankly (sorry Sam) I don’t see it. The amount of hate and discontent over a -10 never to be alone would be huge.
And that does not account for Calhoun and kick the new aircraft down the road until prosperity reigns and the share buy back and dividends have returned in all their glory.
More likely is a deal to extend the MAX-10. Keep in mind the house will probably flip this upcoming election. One of the key anti extension people is a democrat.
An Aviation Week story picked up by Reuters does comment that Calhoun may be trying to tweak the politicians to let the MAX-10 go through. But the quote by Calhoun does talk about a possible cancelation. 700 orders translates into 70 billion in possible sales. That’s some rough math. Give or take 10 billion that is nothing to ignore. They could just find a way to do this if push comes to shove. It could be a blessing in disguise if it becomes the first plane of the NSA.
Interesting point regarding the MAX-10 @Scott …
If the MAX-10 is dropped, what happens to the changes that EASA required in order to certify the MAX-8 and -9 in Europe … the changes that were to be made to the -10 and then retro fitted to the rest of the MAX range … the synthetic AoA sensor?
With no -10, would EASA still insist that the synthetic AoA sensor is fitted to existing, flying MAX aircraft, would they just roll over, or would they stick to their guns and threaten to ground them in their jurisdiction?
Making this site political takes away from the neutral tone. There is a portion of the audience turned off by such comments and thus no longer want any links from sites that bring in politics. Scott’s right, but it means the majority of those that I know who work in aerospace wouldn’t want this otherwise interesting link. Cest la vie
Frank:
That was the part of the Embraer deal that had me baffled as it made no sense as you note, none of the Embraer products lined up to be more than an A220-100 and that is not selling .
But the flip was supposedly getting ahold of Embraer engineering talent.
You have to ask yourself of course, if you are not going to do a new aircrat and your moving the goal post down the way 2 years (ergo never) then?????>
But as I learned in my long and illustrious career in dealing with Corporations , they are like a dinosaur with no brain(s), just big lumbering behemoths wandering the world plowing through on brute force not brain power .
Once you get big enough you don’t have to be smart.
Of course the Dino went extinct but it had a long run of it.
There is a once in a lifetime opportunity for Embraer to raise some real capital, spark up those computers with the design studies for the cutting edge mainline airliner they have already completed and grasp that opportunity with both hands. It’s now or never for them.
They may find a very interested partner for that in the Chinese…
Yep, kind of like Hong Kong, seize the moment.
@TW
If you want to to go down that road, don’t forget to include the US annexation of Hawaii in 1893…
The US has massively invested in Hong Kong too ( not just Ukraine ) to create as much irritation as possible for the CCP.
My guess is the “Freedom Leaders” in HK are without exception synthetic.
And then we have this:
https://www.google.com/search?q=127e+special+operations
has unleashed fully uncontrolled armed global interventions under the guise of AntiTerror ops.
The CF34-10 as used in the Embraer is hardly anything in common with its other CF-34 cousins which do date to 1980s
the -10 is really a mini CFM56 version as it shares the same architecture
CF34-10 is 1 Fan (53 in)-3LP and 9HP compressor then 1 HP and 4LP turbine stages, exactly as the CFM model
Even the first CFM56 for 737 was only 60 in fan diameter
This will also explain how the -10 engine can become compliant with 2027 standards
But the E175E1 uses the CF34-8, not the -10.
Duke:
None of the engines used now are really common with their so called cousins.
They have been of a constancy upgraded.
But then the IACO regs are just nonsense anyway and why anyone takes this seriously is beyond me. As one person noted, paper straws, really, that is going to solve the plastic problem?
She then voted for he who shall not be named. This stuff can drive even a good progressive to extremes. Not that I would do that but I can understand the reaction.
An example is the PW4000 engine that was basically as much a failure as the Trent 1000, which was fixed and eventually became a good reliable engine. It power the KC-46A fleet.
@Trans
‘As one person noted, paper straws, really, that is going to solve the plastic problem?’
Where I live we have had paper straws for awhile now, the fast food joints all use them. We also have no plastic bags at the grocery stores – you either use paper bags or like mostly everyone else, you have your own shopping bags which you bring in and reuse. This has been in effect for years. Also, our milk in either in 2L cartons or a 4L (a 3 bagger) in plastic bags – which you then put into a container purposefully made to hold the bag, snip a corner and pour away. People then cut the top of the bag, rinse it out and put it in the recycling ‘blue bin’. We’ve done away with the hard gallon jug for decades, now. When you buy drinks in plastic, glass or aluminum (beer, coke or pepsi), you put down a deposit ranging from 5 to 20 cents – and when you return a case of 24 beers, for instance, you get your $2.40 back.
If there were sweeping changes to outlaw plastics – what would happen?
There would be a huge uproar (especially on the right, IMO) about people claiming that their ‘rights’ have been trampled, we’re turning communist and have lost our ‘freedom’.
You know, kinda like the hand wringing they’re doing over plastic straws. Poor things. Such hardships they have to endure.
We have similar initiatives here in Europe.
Where I live, people pre-separate out their trash into plastisc, garden/kitchen waste, chemical waste, glass, paper/cardboard, textiles, and residual trash — and there are separate collection facilities for each category. The garden/kitchen waste is composted in centralized facilities, and re-distributed for use as high-grade mulch. It really is no trouble at all, and it has a huge effect on trash processing.
Of course, it’s much more “butch” to just burn all your trash out in the yard so as to ward off bears 😏
@TW, et al: How are straws relevant to commercial aviation and this post?
Hamilton
Scott:
It is a ref to ICAO and its regs and the nonsense they are in that they do not solve anything.
Like the Triangle 5 on a plastic item, no recycle path for it.
Feel good teddy bear sort of stuff that does not get to the core of the problem (pun intended) which we saw in the EU with the diesel regs and the ways that were legally allowed to violate it.
767 is in theory done for but nothing said or done about all the 767 conversions that will be done let alone all the KC-46A built with those same era engines.
@Scott
I think he’s trying to make the point that since going to paper straws instead of plastic, all by themselves, aren’t going to save the world – then we should throw out ICAO regs concerning 2027 emissions. It’s a natural, logical step – dontcha think?
(I know when you go out into the great outdoors, the fresh air and nature tires you out rather quickly and you sleep like a baby at night, but this is ridiculous.)
My reply was to illustrate the point that it’s all a matter of will,
incremental changes and desire to do ones part.
I think Bryce was trying to support the point that elsewhere in the world, they follow that same principle.
Who knew people could get so attached to plastic straws? If it goes through, I wonder if they’re going to hold a memorial service?
Perhaps there will now be a black market operation for the production and distribution of plastic straws. They can be made in South America, brought up through the Caribbean, trucked through Mexico and chucked over the wall into the US. You can then start the “War on Straws”, come up with catchy slogans and another government entity will be born; the SEA.
We can then have HBO & Netflix make a series on the ‘StrawLords’ and the ‘Cartel Straw Wars’. 20/20 will do an episode on how children’s toys are brought into the country, melted down and re-processed into plastic straws to feed the straw habits of the junkies.
See what happens when you take away peoples God given right to pollute the planet as they see fit?
Scott, do you want to get caught on the side with those of us tree-huggers who support the outlawing of plastic straws, ICAO emissions…essentially the removal of freedoms?
They be calling you a radical, you know…
I married a tree hugger. It’s how we met.
@Scott
“I married a tree hugger. It’s how we met.”
Hugging trees – you? I had no idea.
I guess all we can do is play you a song…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=low6Coqrw9Y
When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful
A miracle, oh, it was beautiful, magical
And all the birds in the trees, well they’d be singing so happily
Oh, joyfully, oh, playfully watching me
But then they sent me away to teach me how to be sensible
Logical, oh, responsible, practical
Then they showed me a world where I could be so dependable
Oh, clinical, oh, intellectual, cynical
There are times when all the world’s asleep
The questions run too deep
For such a simple man
Won’t you please, please tell me what we’ve learned?
I know it sounds absurd
Please tell me who I am
I said, now, watch what you say, they’ll be calling you a radical
A liberal, oh, fanatical, criminal
Ex-Sierra Club member until it became too radical.
Scott:
Now that as to be a story, meeting while hugging trees!
I met my wife somewhat more normal on an arrangement from a friend.
Neither one of us was an environmentalist at the time but we shared a need to respect the land.
As a mechanic/technician/engineer I found you could not treat somethi9gn as a stand alone entity. A fan, pump, boiler or AC unit was part of a system.
One part could break down and you could fix it but if the system was not working the one part fixed did not make it work right.
Certainly a dilemma on small fixes that don’t work when it has to be a system of fixes.
And do we have the time for small fixes to add up (or get set back and torn down, aka the Coal Fueled Republicans) – in a fit of humor the South West pilot on his rant (SFO?) was a hoot. I belive he was from Texas.
Up here we are seeing the changes, the Weather Service is calling it Flash Droughts. Overall our moisture levels are normal, but last 3 summers we hit into the high 70s and up to 90 deg regularly though July.
Its not that we did not see that in the past, its just the length and how regular its getting to be. Winters are colder than normal but not the deep dives, just the average.
Never dreamed I would see that when I was younger.
I sued King County (Seattle’s home county) over development near where I lived. I won. I was asked by the head of the local Sierra Club chapter to come with my lead expert to explain the issues and how I won. That head is who became my wife. To add to the story, the executive (the CEO) of King County was also an ordained minister. He was the one who married us. He also was running for governor at the time….
Scott: Thank you, that is a great story.
I wish I had as good a one. Basically my wife insisted on our meeting to get her friend off her back.
So I knock on the door and a goddess (going with the tree huger theme) appears and I am standing there with my mouth open (yes me, speechless).
Not one for subtlety my future wife asked me, are you going to come in or just stand there?
She said that a voice in her head said, yep, this is the one. Me? She is talking to me, wow. Keeping in mind she was almost 6 ft and I was 5′ 8.5″. I had realized I liked taller women who were brunettes so………………… not that she does not regret it all from time to time.
Frank:
Yes, it needs to be comprehensive or its a failure. ICAO is a failure.
And someone noted I was wrong on Coal Plant emissions. Failed to get back to that. Yes I know its not 95% direct.
But you got to dig the coal and the environmental impact of that, you have to transport the coal and the cost of that and you have to store the coal and the mess it makes in the region.
And once burned you have fly ash and that is put in sludge ponds that never go away and full of heavy metals and pure poison
We had a containment break and dumped a number of those so called holding ponds into a river.
Even if you have to ship your gas in, its a hole in the ground, the ship can burn the gas boil off and the mess is tiny.
I see the EU has decided gas can be pure again. Funny how that works.
“I see the EU has decided gas can be pure again. Funny how that works.”
“nucular” too.
( which imho makes more sense. Continuing with nuclear power does not really add to the waste management issue. It still needs a workable solution anyway. Next : go deeper into a transmutation solution. )
LNG from fracking gas probably has the same or higher overall environmental impact that lignite burning has. 20% losses just from liquefaction.
It seems only Embraer would be able to deliver a fully ALPA compliant aircraft. But they need to redo a lot of things, together with an Engine OE.
I would like to see Delta ALPA leadership and membership also take up accountability for finding solutions that help the(ir) environment and broader responsibilities.
Only finger pointing & hiding behind old paperwork isn’t good enough for me. Grow up.
I find it stunning that Embraer did not talk to ALPA.
You can see why Airbus has failed in the US, its not the same as bribes to work in China.
You can see why Airbus has failed in the US
“Yes. As TW has said, Airbus has most definitely failed in the US. Excuse us now, as we have to go take delivery of our A220’s, A320Neo family & A350 jets. Thanks”
signed
Delta, United, American, Jetblue, Spirit, Breeze, Frontier, Allegiant
Don’t forget the UH-72 helicopters in use by the US Army and Navy — more than 460 of them 😏
He really is on some sort of “sugar high” since last week’s big Chinese order for AB.
But they keep trying to sell them thar tankers and going on their lips!
Considering the giving of the tech to China to do business there, good thing!
@TW
‘Considering the giving of the tech to China to do business there, good thing!’
Yah – we hear that being bandied about so much. So many different questions and angles I could ask you about, but I’ll keep it simple;
It seems like every corporation on the planet (including Boeing) works with China. Yet here you are, going on about Airbus.
Why are you so afraid of China? What have they done that has raised your hackles up so much? You keep going on with this Chinese world domination bit – when’s the last time they invaded a country? Korea, I would think, right? In Nam, they sent aid and some troops to fight the insurgents.
Let’s compare and contrast;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations#1950%E2%80%931959
If you asked the question, based on this history “Who is the most aggressive, and nation most likely – to overthrow another government or invade another country”
What would the answer be? China – or the ones pointing the finger at China?
Frank:
Going off topic, best I can express it by my own example. The US bought Alaska from the Russians when said area (Canada and the US had to sort out what area latter on) was inhabited by Native Americans (or more accurately, Alaska Natives)
I was hauled up here kicking and screaming age 2 by my folks. Long before the history of Native Americans was given any insight let alone Alaska Natives (two brothers are Native Alaskans, aka born up here)
My folks had nothing to do with the past, they were just looking to raise their family in the best place on Earth (they opinion and it still is as far as I am concerned)
So, yes I am deeply familiar with the Manifest Destiny and what my country did in the lower 48, Hawaii, Philippines and Cuba and its actions in the Caribbean in support of US Corporations.
But post WWII, the US let the Philippines go in a fit of realization and reality that we were going to have a guerilla war on our hands.
And yes, Geo Political aspects of Guam and other areas continue and all I can say is, its not a pretty world and like AK, is Guam better off under the US than China? Same with AK, what would have happened if the US did not occupy it (Soviets still, others?) Who.
In that regard I can only do what I can going forward in respecting the Alaskan Natives (my wife has engendered a great deal of respects in that community as in many ways she is of that spirit)
China? Yea they scare the willies out of me. Agreed the US has had insane hubris at times (breaking open Japan, stunning and what right?)
And yes, the Western power both dominated and horribly abused China (US less than the UK but clearly not covered in any decency)
What I can say here and now the US is no longer an Imperialistic Power and claiming parts of the world and has throttled that back and in fact is going to free up Puerto Rico if they want it.
China has been a dictatorship for a very long time ad its Imperialistic Ambitions are doing nothing but growing. Tibet, Hong Kong and no one in history has claimed an entire sea let alone based on a bogus map drawn in 1949.
The atrocity against the Uighurs exceeds (my opinion) all the ones the US ever committed. Closest analog for the US would be WII and Japanese so called Internment Camps.
With Zi claiming power not seen since Mao (and the Red Revolution days) – yes its beyond troubling. Ukraine is a result of that (and yes I get Iraq and I had not control over that, I did my best but a bunch of White Guys wrote the US constitution and I can’t change that or the history of it)
China is also pushing into hither too neutral areas on the Indian border and took a chunk in an outright attack a long time ago.
I see China as having no limits and 2nd, third Island chains and we sailed past it 1000 years ago and it belongs to us (Indonesia, Malaysia , Ceylon, India, East Africa.
So yes, China was horribly abused and in turn, now its a power, unlimited claims of the world like the UK had 100 years ago.
Ironically if the Chinese just sat back they would be powerful influence if not control of the world in 20 years, much like the Soviets could have been before they invaded Ukraine (20 years from now EU totally dependent on Soviet Gas and Oil and their economy.
What I see it as, if China had held off the Western Powers (and they came closer than most know) they would have been as bad or worse than the Western Powers, not a matter of right or wrong but who is on top and can do what to whom.
The got a bloody nose when they tried to invade Vietnam not so long ago. Yes Vietnam was stupid for us, but like Iraq and Afghanistan , we did get out.
And yes I know all the issues and ills of the US and I can only do the best I can by being a good citizen and vote as best I can for what is better than the other side though in too many sad ways its not a good choice, its better than a really dictatorship choice that we may yet wind up with.
” … the US is no longer an Imperialistic Power and claiming parts of the world … ”
For how many times more I have to bring this up??
US and UK worked together to recolonise the Chagos Islands and evict Chagossians
https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/how-the-us-and-uk-worked-together-to-recolonise-the-chagos-islands-and-evict-chagossians-177636
Gosh, what @TW writes about China also applies to a staunch US ally in the Middle East.
It seems that indignation can be very selective…
From what I understand is, in order to fly heavier/bigger aircraft, the pilots get a better salary and conditions.
How big is the difference between fuel savings from the E2 to the E1 compared to the higher cost for the crew? Or at what fuel price would it change?
I’m somewhat surprised that the big carriers don’t find some incentives to throw into the negotiations to have the pilots agree to flying new tech and more modern aircraft. At least I would assume it could also be a huge marketing argument to say compared to the others, we fly the latest and greatest (or cleanest).
“At least I would assume it could also be a huge marketing argument to say compared to the others, we fly the latest and greatest (or cleanest).”
That’s what’s happening in Europe.
Carriers such as Easyjet, Wizz and Condor are actively advertising their new, fuel-efficient aircraft, and emphasizing their reduced environmental footprint.
Matth:
First a commercial pilots licenses let alone ATR is hugely expensive. That is why you see new flying schools being formed and a path to a regional and then up to commercial cockpits.
The reality is the Pilots have the Airlines over a barrel and sadly in dealing with Corporate America, if you achiever that you never ever want to let go. The Machinist would be well served to take advantage of that with Boeing so weak.
That said, once a term is in a Bargaining Agreement, you can’t take it away unless the other party agrees and its always a bargaining chip to get something you want.
But the scope clause is like a Trump card, not one you would trade anything for, its too powerful to loose.
One of the issues of lower pay for smaller aircraft is you then make a decision that the fewer people there are the less value their lives are.
Its a tough dilemma as basic it amounts to moving up and out as you gain experience in an area that people will die in (and if anyone thinks that is not true look at Alaska and the so called flight seeing flights and the large number of accidents (smaller number of deaths as they are 6-9 pax)
You can’t pay people with the skills and training though you have to factor in the flight operations that are fly by night as well.
An example would be that I saw when I was in Ketchikan a few years back. A float plane does a turn right in front of another float plane and when he did it, the plane coming on was clearly in sight. Why? He beat the other guy in so he could make another trip. And nothing is done about it as no one reports it.
As has been discusses, hours is not experience. Qualtiy of the time in the air or better yet in a Simulator is far better as you can hammer people hard and force them to deal with a crisis and no crash.
Its the one area of Aviation that has no good answer other than change the regs and stop low time and poorly trained pilots from flying commercial ops.
They will still kill themselves and at times their families but that is a big dive into a free society that allows people to do what they want. Of course Auto wrecks and bad and impaired drivers far exceeds aviation but we are talking aviation.
With no new design aircraft in sight, what is the prospect for the E2-190/195 on lower volume routes flown by mainline pilots? Would this work economically, or do the payscales at WN, AA, UA, and DL make this unfeasible?
Personally, I always choose a flight with 2-2 seating and less passengers over 3-3 given the choice.
Its a cost vs size and Delta is the rare US operator that operates lower size LCA in that slot.
So no, its not going to happen before let alone with pilot shortage.
The majors all have regional carriers that they use and its all due to cost aspects.
So we see fewer and fewer flight operations in towns and cities as the cost for those operation keeps going up (though its far safer than it was at one time as well).
Europe has trains, we don’t so people drive to the nearest regional hub. A lot of parts of the US are far less density population wise and trains don’t make a lot of sense West of the Mississippi.
No answer I see
@Trans
“So we see fewer and fewer flight operations in towns and cities as the cost for those operation keeps going up (though its far safer than it was at one time as well).”
Well, capitalism dictates that is someone wants a service, where the demand isn’t high and costs can’t be spread over a large number of customers, then a smaller number will have to pay more. Otherwise providers will not enter the market.
You don’t see cities running water all the way out to the boonies, just because people live there, do you? If you want to live that far away and have a larger piece of land – for whatever reason, there’s a price to pay for that. You can’t get all the benefits that people who live in closer proximity to each other receive.
As it is now, urban areas subsidize those who live in the suburbs.
Suburbia is Subsidized: Here’s the Math
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI
To that point:
The US funds air service to smaller places by paying airlines to go there. They take taxpayer money, from the pool of taxes collected – and give it to companies to provide you cheaper service, allocating resources for the benefit of people in remote locations.
How very socialist of them. Shouldn’t the US follow the policies that state that is a service is required, like healthcare, medication, etc – we allow the marketplace to set the price?
If some airline charges $1000 a ticket, for a short flight from Fairbanks to Anchorage – and someone else can enter the market and do it cheaper, so be it. If no one else can, you gotta pay what it costs.
Frank:
That gets into a deeply complex situation. The US Air Industry was founded on Air Mail Contracts after all.
Is Air Service a basic requirement like phones, sewer, water, medical?
And are there alternatives.
And in part an area financial prosperity depends on air service.
Granted AK is a bit unique but for a large majority of the Native American population up here, they are born out in the villages that have no links other than air in many cases and some cases its a one time a year barge.
Have to do some sleuthing but I believe that air service setup stateside has been cut back a lot if not eliminated.
Hah.
-> Is Air Service a basic requirement like phones, sewer, water, medical?
Is it in the Constitution?? I believe your answer is there.
Medical service as a basic human right? How socialist are you? Can’t believe my eyes! 😂
Pedro:
You would be more than surprised how Progressive I am on social issues.
I long ago realized that one side speaks fiscal conservative with forked tongue .
I detest unrestrained Capitalism and that is what we have right now.
No I don’t have any answers other than doing the best I can.
-> You would be more than surprised how Progressive I am on social issues.
But not environment …
On the subject of regional aircraft, COMAC has re-commenced deliveries of the ARJ21 after the recent Chinese lockdowns. The total number delivered now stands at 68. The current order backlog is 359 units.
Yipee, the DC-9 lives on!
The number of ARJ-21s flying in China exceeds the number of MAXs flying in China, doesn’t it? 😏
And the DC-9 wasn’t FBW, was it? Whereas the ARJ-21 is.
Oops.
In the world of alt-reality, every jet in production today including the Mad MAX is FBW. 😅
…Honeywell FBW control units
…Rockwell Collins 10in x 8in high-resolution liquid crystal adaptive flight displays
…avionics suite is based on the Rockwell Collins Pro Line 21 system
….Rockwell Collins FMS 4200 flight management system provides multiple wavepoint vertical navigation, flight time and fuel planning and prediction, standard instrument departures and standard terminal arrival routes and approaches (SIDs and STARS).
….Kaiser Electroprecision throttle control module interfaces with the Collins autopilot, autothrottle and the engine’s FADEC. The avionics suite also includes a fully integrated engine indication and crew alerting system (EICAS)
…navigation systems include Rockwell Collins solid-state weather radar, a Rockwell Collins AHS-3000 attitude heading reference system, a traffic alert and collision avoidance system
Its a wonderful achievement from AVIC taking the existing airframe plus Antonov wing redesign and CF34 engines …. and putting their name on it
After all, aircraft manufacturers are system integrators, no? Is Boeing (Airbus, Embraer, Gulfstream, Bombardier) doing anything different? They all take systems developped by specialist companies and integrate them into a flying machine.
You believe it’s nothing. Looking at all the others and their struggles to get aircraft produced I have to say, they at least have made it so far. Is it perfect? Certainly not. Have they done it all by themselves? Neither, but they are eager to learn and certainly will make progress over time.
Belittling others achievements is always easy and shows more about you then the one having made an effort.
They design a new aircraft from scratch dont they .
Which one of those ‘system integrators’ has taken existing airframe from another country , then upgrades from others and put their name on it .
Anyway I did say it was an ‘achievement’ for AVIC , some less kind might merely say its reverse engineering, but not me.
” … a wonderful achievement from AVIC …”
The mad MAX continues to go down the same path of its ancestor from the 60s … without FBW.
Waiting to see what happens to the MAX 10.
Don’t forget the great system integrator from U.S. rolled out the half-baked MCAS and killed almost 400.
@ Matth
You make great points, but you’re wasting your time with the “look down on China” lobby here.
Just because something is bought off-the-shelf today doesn’t mean that it can’t be self-made tomorrow.
One need only look at the progress that China has made with aircraft carriers: from mediocre to cutting edge in just 3 ships.
Same with semiconductor lithography machines — in just 10 years, they mastered a technology that the US never managed to master.
Give it a few years and see how large and innovative COMAC will become.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/chinese-microchip-exec-spying-stealing-trade-secrets
As you say it’s quite an achievement in 10 years
@ DoU
The allegedly stolen technology in that article relates to mask design — more specifically, use of diffraction correction features.
My comment above relates to lithography scanners — the actual machines in which a mask is used to print IC patterns.
The US never managed to get further than a relatively primitive stepper machine — they never got as far as scanners, which are much more technologically challenging.
“Its a wonderful achievement from AVIC.”
Boeing just rebadged the DC-9, didn’t they?
B717
Im glad you raised lithography scanners themselves, which I of course know nothing about but you have a close knowledge
“15 years ago ASML came with the most advanced lithography scanner of that time. It was copied in China to the last screw, but the device simply didn’t work, because they lacked intricate knowledge on its actual operation.”
That’s was a quote from the CEO of ASML
I can’t possibly comment as I don’t even have a basic knowledge , but I do know that digging the hole deeper ..
@ DoU
Lithography scanner technology was mastered by ASML more than 25 years ago. Patents expire after 20 years, at which point everyone is free to “copy” whatever is wanted from a particular technology. In fact, a patent application is legally required to contain enough information to enable a skilled person to put the invention into practice without undue burden — it’s the whole basis of the patent system, which aims to share knowledge in return for a short-term monopoly.
Pity you didn’t post a link to that ASML quote, so that we could put it into context.
@DoU
Here’s an informative link for you.
Not only has SMEE in China mastered basic scanner technology, but it has even evolved to dual-stage scanners. Moreover, it has migrated from DUV to ArF light sources, and is moving from dry to immersion scanners.
https://www.equalocean.com/analysis/2021062316392
“ Belittling others achievements is always easy and shows more about you then the one having made an effort.”
LOL
Accusing someone of that on these comment boards is the height of hypocrisy!
Uwe:
Keeping things accurate, the then MD corporation upgraded the DC-9 to the MD series
China took it back to a DC-9 (my opinion of course)
Technically they copied the MD they built in China at the time
But then they copied the A320 they are building in China ergo the 919
@TW: your endless allegations of 1:1 copycating
are broken record tiring.
Einstein: make your model as simple as possible but not simpler.
You are doing kindergarten drawings. “primitive” oversimple.
“The number of ARJ-21s flying in China exceeds the number of MAXs flying in China, doesn’t it?”
How about the number flying in the WORLD?🙄
Fail.
OK, lets do Quartets then:
ARJ-21, MAX
who has more of the production lot in use in “%”
🙂
I think there are more productive ways to argue
and you should leverage that.
How about the number that have crashed in the WORLD?🙄
Fail for the MAX.
How about the number of whitetails that are sitting on the ground, unwanted?
Fail for the MAX.
How about the number that meet modern EICAS and FBW standards?
Fail for the MAX.
Lars:
I like the comments. Thanks for jumping in!
Your welcome TW, sometimes the hypocrisy gets to be too thick in here! LOL
-> Pity you didn’t post a link to that ASML quote, so that we could put it into context.
That’s a pattern, isn’t it? Link(s) that fail(s) to support what the poster stated.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19703909
Not hard to find was it ?
The CEO presentation was in dutch but others picked up on it
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/11/chinese-spies-stole-secrets-from-chip-equipment-maker-asmldutch-paper.html
being a commercial spying operation not ‘state’ is hardly relevant as its a leninist-capitalist system where the party is involved in all aspects of commercial and political life.
A wider summary here but focused on the very high end machines, there are simpler ones of course
https://www.brookings.edu/techstream/the-chip-making-machine-at-the-center-of-chinese-dual-use-concerns/
Im sure China can make a top end scanner themselves ( Brookings says no chance ) , but like the ARJ21 it will be western origin and systems with their name on it.
Its a reasonable assumption the same has happened with the C919. After all look at the ‘newest’ PLAAF heavy airlifter Xian Y-20 , its just an improved IL-76 with almost all copied right down to the unusual rear side petal doors as well as normal ramp- door system
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45184/chinas-y-20-cargo-jet-has-an-upper-passenger-deck-that-can-be-installed-in-its-hold
ASML’s issue is the that US is leaning on them to not sell to China.
This is a downer for ASML and pressures China to selfsupply.
you have to look under the lid of your adrenalinic outrage.
@ DoU
The CNBC article contains virtually no information, but it relates to the mask design issue that I elucidated above — it doesn’t relate to lithography machines.
The Brookings article relates to EUV scanners: the discussion above is about DUV and ArF scanners, which the Chinese have mastered.
@Bryce
We have poster who conflates and deflects.
Your reference to United is what is proposed in their new TA. According to most social media the TA has no chance of passing the membership vote and even their Union has suspended all roadshows. I wouldn’t bet on a change to the 550 MTOW. I’d be shocked if any major Union gave an inch on scope in today’s environment.
After having Airlines slash the pilots pay and benefits when they could you sure can’t blame them.
They figured it out, once you get something don’t ever let it go, Corporate will take it away from you in a heartbeat.
Boeing does the same with employees, dump them, downsize and worry about the future latter so you can do stock buy backs and pay dividends going into a crisis.
I quit construction to take a low level job as any job that paid all year round and had benefits was better than the boom and bust. I was able to work that into a skilled position.
I was offered a job on the Exon Valdez spill cleanup, short term job, big bucks and then you get laid off.
The wings for last week’s huge Chinese Airbus order will be predominantly manufactured in Tianjin, China, rather than in the UK.
Good to see AB diversifying its wing manufacture, which is currently far too concentrated in the UK. It should diversity further, by starting full wing manufacture in Bremen, Germany (for example).
Yes A320 wings have been made in China, amazingly enough in the very same factory that makes the wings for the C919.
Don’t know why Bremen offers anything new as part of final assembly does happen there and they make flaps and such but they have become space technology centre for Airbus. Wings must seem pedestrian.
But sections of the A350 wing come from Spirit in US now
https://www.aero-mag.com/airbus-a350-xwb-wings/
Yes, A320 wings have been made in China to date — but not in the numbers associated with the new order.
Bremen does final assembly — but it also needs to evolve into doing the basic wing manufacturing presently done in the UK. Always a good idea to spread eggs among several baskets.
@DoU
AB has subcontractors around the world, including both the U.S. and China. What’s new here?? 🙄
tell that to Bryce , hes was raising the issue of where Airbus or its contractors make airframe assemblies and major parts
Bryce was pointing out — for those who can read — that, where wing manufacture is concerned, there’s still an unsatisfactory concentration of activities in the UK. With the big order from China, that’s now going to undergo a significant shift in the direction of Tianjin — but there’s more diversification needed, e.g. by upgrading Bremen to do more manufacturing rather than just assembly.
The retort from @DoU related to wing *parts*.
The old technology metal wings production were dual sourced out of UK some time back as the production for A320 series ramped out.
Its a commercial business and as Airbus owns the Broughton plant why move things for the sake of it. Likely the A330 is low rate and the A350 has major investment for its wing ‘assembly/production’ that would be wasted and pointless.
The China recent lockdowns have shown the wisdom of not moving all wing structures there
Aren’t you aware Brexit and the continual regulatory disputes have shown the wisdom of not single-source vital parts?!?
An example of the mess that can be caused by unions:
“Carrier SAS files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in US”
“Anko van der Werff, CEO of SAS, said that ”the strike has accelerated it,” adding “I think we have been very clear that this could happen.”
“The pilots reacted strongly to the news. Roger Klokset, head of the SAS pilots union, said the group “had stretched negotiations and mediation from November last year until the day before the application, without ever having the intention of entering into an agreement with the SAS pilots.”
“The pilots announced their strike on Monday, citing inadequate pay and working conditions and expressing dissatisfaction with the decision by the carrier to hire new pilots to fill vacancies at its subsidiary airlines, SAS Link and SAS Connect, rather than re-hire former company pilots laid off due to the pandemic.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/carrier-sas-files-for-chapter-11-bankruptcy-protection-in-us/ar-AAZcIZ0?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds&cvid=bdef2e6ac1234901a813b73fc11f96a8
It’s interesting to note that the average pilot salary at SAS is $114,000 p/a.
https://www.thelocal.se/20160613/how-much-are-sas-pilots-actually-paid/
This one is going to be interesting. I have seen a number of companies from all over the world applying for US Chapter 11 restructuring, and that makes sense if most of the debts are in the US to US entities, but I have not seen a large EU company where one of the main problems is staffing going this route.
I have the feeling this is going to be a legal mess, heavily contested in EU courts by local unions.
Would a filing in a US bankruptcy court for an airline based in Sweden have any effect on the legal processes in the Scandinavian countries.
Protection from lessors who might have US courts as their venue for disputes is one thing . It seems quite fanciful the pilots employed under agreements in Europe will take any notice
Haha.
How many leasing contracts opt for U.S. court as venue of arbitration?? Another fantasy dreamed up overnight/during the day??
And what do airlines have debt related to – aircraft purchases and leases
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/scandinavia-s-largest-airline-files-for-bankruptcy-to-cut-debt
Continue dreaming up fantasies!
From Bloomberg
-> SAS chose the US over other jurisdictions because it allows operations to continue while the company is restructuring, and the fleet stays under control of the company, according to the CEO.
Not a word about leasing contracts in any news report about the bankruptcy but hey, in a world of alt-reality, facts are irrelevant.
PS: Scott How many leasing contracts for European airlines pick U.S. court as venue of arbitration??
‘The Chapter 11 filing will help tackle a crippling debt burden’
A finance lease is a ‘debt’
happy to help improving your knowledge and understanding . Still a long way to go
Who would take the words of one who has no idea when sales is recognized or the difference between customer deposits and sales seriously about finance and debt??
> and expressing dissatisfaction with the decision by the carrier to hire new pilots to fill vacancies at its subsidiary airlines, SAS Link and SAS Connect, rather than re-hire former company pilots laid off due to the pandemic.” <
The telling part of that quote..
Without Unions it's every man for himself, against organized concentrations of Power (i.e. Corporations- much worse in the US)
which historically has never worked out well
for the Many.
Maybe we should just ask said
Corporations to benevolently Be Nice to us.. yeah, that'll work. 😉
Union- Yes.
Hello Bill 7,
Re: “and expressing dissatisfaction with the decision by the carrier to hire new pilots to fill vacancies at its subsidiary airlines, SAS Link and SAS Connect, rather than re-hire former company pilots laid off due to the pandemic.”
According to the excerpt below from a 11-30-21 Aviacionline article, SAS Link operates E195’s on regional flights. It sounds to me like the SAS pilots made the mistake of not negotiating a good strong scope clause that would prohibit any entity associated with SAS from flying regional flights with E195’s, and also place restrictions on SAS routes being flown by non SAS pilots.
” SAS Link, in turn, will operate six Embraer 195s, to be delivered in the first half of 2022, and will handle the group’s regional flights within the Northern European region. ”
https://www.aviacionline.com/2021/11/sas-to-launch-two-low-cost-airlines/
@Bill7
Quote:
-> “Viewfromthewing.com was the first of how I heard about this today.
=> “Star Alliance member Scandinavian Airlines, commonly known as SAS, is launching two new airlines-within-an-airline (Danish). They will both operate under the SAS brand, and won’t be marketed differently to consumers. However they’ll be separate companies with separate operating certificates.
SAS Connect is simply a renaming of SAS Ireland. No longer needing to exclusively base there, they’ll open a base in Copenhagen. This will be a lower cost carrier focused on competitive leisure routes using Airbus A320neo aircraft.
SAS Link is new and will operate Embraer E-195 jets beginning mid-2022. This will be their feeder carrier.
…….
As Danish travel site Final Call Travel notes, *the use of separate subsidiaries creates conflict with employees*”
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/sas-eurobonus/2053940-scandinavian-fleet-split-into-3-link-connect.html
PS: SAS Link is taking over more-than-a-decade-old ex-flybe E195s
I have never understood why the scope clause isn’t purely seats/range/#of airframes
the additional factor is a restriction to nobody’s benefit (either mainline or regional). the airlines are not going to swap in mainline pilots & planes because their math says frequency is more important to their bottom line than fuel. crew salaries are probably nearly the same for 2 regional flights vs 1 mainline and the fuel costs must be sufficiently in the noise when factored against the advantage of frequency.
just restrict all 50 seaters to 900 miles and 74 seaters to 1000 and cap the total numbers of each.
The reason for the scope clauses was the airlines were swapping out mainline pilots and the larger jets for the lower paid pilots and smaller jets.
Of course the era , 30 years back, was when DC-9s, Fokker 100s and 737-200s were still in widespread use.
But even then there was a scope gap between the common 50 seater RJ and smallest mainliners ,90 -110 seats
Yes , 75 seats is the current sweet spot ( and generally the biggest) for RJ but I would think that airlines arent going to be just offering s small weight increase for the new generation 75 seaters but likely want to go to 85 seats/ weight class
I understand why scope clauses exist, but the weight limit is of no benefit to either pilots or airlines.
a strict range and capacity limit is all that is needed to protect the pilots while allowing the airlines to select the most economical and environmentally capable solution.
I suppose you could make the argument that going forwards it will force 74 seat RJs out of the fleet as they won’t be able to meet the environmental regs and fuel costs metrics without exceeding the weight clause or requiring the use of extensive carbon fiber and driving up the aircraft purchase cost (forcing a switch to mainline aircraft and pilots)
overall one would think the ALPA would be better served unionizing RJ pilots and forcing contract parity across the enterprise.
MTOW is there to restrict range.
“Airbus delivered 58 commercial jetliners in June”
“PARIS (Reuters) – Europe’s Airbus delivered some 58 jetliners in June, bringing first-half deliveries to around 295 – fractionally below the mid-way performance last year, industry sources said.
“Airbus declined to comment on any figures ahead of a monthly update due on Friday.
“Airbus is targeting 720 full-year deliveries. In the first half of last year, it delivered 297 jets.
“Since then, the planemaker says it has increased production in line with an announced trajectory, but analysts say its progress has been hampered by supply chain problems.”
https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/airbus-delivered-58-commercial-jetliners-in-june-sources-2844092
And another a350 cancelation with the ongoing fued with Qatar airways..
Obviously,the relationship between the 2 is permanently tarnished .
Cancel the remaining backlog, find new homes or delivery slots and move on!!
Tit for tat , he said ,she said…is getting a bit dated by now!!
I’m sure everyone here is siding with Airbus with the ongoing saga, ..
That’s fine!!!
Losing a valued customer like Qatar airways isn’t something that can’t be downplayed or brushed aside..
Qatar Airways is certainly a lucrative customer.
However, its CEO — AAB — also makes it an insufferable customer. Apart from exhibiting oversized hubris and a dysfunctional meticulousness, he seems to be extremely fickle of late: one day, he’s publicly hoping for an amicable settlement, and the next day he’s lambasting Airbus again. With customers like that, who needs enemies?
Boeing may be looking forward to getting some dollars from him, but it better brace for a bumpy ride: AAB is already unhappy with the 787 build quality from Charleston, and there are big question marks hanging over the viability of his 777X and MAX-10 orders.
ABB is certainly is a special situation, he’s used to getting what he wants, being born with a golden spoon in his mouth, in a not so democratic environment.
Now he can choose between taking initiatives to make peace with the guys he’s been fighting with for over 2 years (and who, god forbid, cancelled His Royal orders), or commit to a producer with Quality Issues all over.
Good flight Akbar Al Baker. Be smarter and less authoritarian next time.
AB’s “loss” is BA’s “gain”. GL.
Will see what happens next ….
AAB wont change spots though.
Mesh AAB ( overbearing customer )
with
BA ( can’t deliver anything on time and to spec )
and
watch a FUBAR situation growing ready for textbook insertion. 🙂
So AAB has Max 10’s on order.
If…it doesn’t get the extension, wtf does he do? Go back to AB with hat in hands? lol
Or screaming “I’m the customer!!!”
> Mesh AAB ( overbearing customer )
with BA ( can’t deliver anything on time and to spec ) and
watch a FUBAR situation growing ready for textbook insertion. <
Yes, talk about a clusterf**k in waiting..
Can’t QCAA rubber stamp the MAX 10?
TC:
Tarnished (good pun) is more like non existent, totally shot!
-> “US monthly oil production continues to flat-line (despite gains in New Mexico and Texas, home of the Permian) due to a big drop in the Bakken. April monthly data comes at 11.628m b/d, down from March (and down ~250k b/d from what the weekly data suggested)”
https://mobile.twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1544334653095641088?cxt=HHwWgIC8wemLyu4qAAAA
and oil has fallen below $100 a barrel…
…only because of recession fears and a resurgence of CoViD in China.
If And and Butts were Candy and Nuts we would have a merry christmas
If mechanics were engineers, we’d have much less rambling.
Bryce:
Actually without us you would be using an outhouse and carrying water like I have often had to do, you would not have running water nor a car.
Some of us behind the scenes are what keeps the world working, including your nice comfy house and office.
It can be a publicly thankless job but we do it because we love working with our hands and minds doing something positive.
And of course you would have no aircraft to comment on. Hmmm, trade offs
@ TW
Fascinating to hear that you’re working hard to keep peoples’ toilets running ☺
Bloomberg
WTI Oil Drops Below $100 as Recession Fears Overwhelm Markets
CNBC
Oil tumbles as much as 10%, breaks below $100 as recession fears …
-> US oil demand was at 19.957mbpd in April, +498kbpd or 2.6% y/y
https://mobile.twitter.com/staunovo/status/1544337737024667651?cxt=HHwWhoCwyaq_y-4qAAAA
-> Big price increases from Saudi Aramco, lifting its official selling prices for its flagship Arab Light crude to Asia to near a record high. Two other grades (Extra Light and Super Light) see their OSP lifted to an all-time high premia. Tighter and tightening
https://mobile.twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1544227284646875136?cxt=HHwWgMC-nZSime4qAAAA
-> Physical markets are no looser than April with still no sustainable pathway to address supply challenges on either crude or products. Gonna need a LOT of (sticky) demand losses to validate this leg down.
https://mobile.twitter.com/karim__fawaz/status/1544694747675205632?cxt=HHwWgIC9mYvs7e8qAAAA
-> In the Bakken, oil output is around 1.2 million barrels per day (bpd), below its 1.52 million bpd late 2019 peak. In the Eagle Ford shale of South Texas, oil is averaging 1.1 million bpd, off the peak 1.7 million bpd in early 2015. U.S. producers have been adding three rigs per week, but they would need to add 11 rigs per week to hold production at current levels, according to Mizuho analysts.
Ron Ness, head of trade group North Dakota Petroleum Council, said supply chain challenges could limit production gains this year, as could investors demanding higher returns.
“Unless $100 plus oil changes the investment mindset toward growth, I’m not sure we will see 1.5 million barrels per day again” in the Bakken, he said.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-nears-100-barrel-us-drillers-get-busy-costly-shale-basins-2022-02-08/
https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2021/bakken-oil-production-lagging-despite-higher-prices
May 2022
Drilling for Shale Oil Is Getting More Expensive at the Worst Possible Time – Bloomberg
Sept 2021
Oil Drillers in U.S. Hit by Record Costs as Shale Output Growth Slows – Bloomberg
Yes. North Dakota (11%) is 2nd behind Texas in US oil production. New Mexico is 3rd at 9% .
Texas being the grand daddy at 43%
Alaska was once 20% but is now 6th at 4%
sigh
because the economic cost of extraction in the Bakken was over $85/barrel 5 years ago, and I imagine it is close to $100/bbl now.
when the price dips, they turn off the wells so they can both force the market price higher and save the resource for when it will be profitable.
yay capitalism!
Simple solution:
Start a crowdfunding drive, collectively purchase a few wells with the proceeds, and then see if you can operate those wells viably at lower oil prices.
point is it has nothing to do with any government policies “preventing drilling”, it is pure capitalism.
there are hundreds and perhaps thousands of idle wells in the USA that are idle not because of Biden’s policies or the Woke Pronoun crowd, but because, and only because, it is not profitable to pump oil from them below a certain $$/bbl rate.
That’s open to debate:
“Biden Accused of ‘Sabotage’ of Oil and Gas Leases by Louisiana SG”
https://www.newsweek.com/louisiana-api-gulf-mexico-oil-gas-leases-biden-climate-change-sabotage-1674300
I have to laugh that Biden is responsible for all the issues that have driven the prices where they are.
In reality it is Europe that has caused this for getting dependent on Soviet Gas and Oil and standing back when a fellow country is invaded (2014) and the cost of appeasement is the same as it was back in 1939.
As was said, those who refuse to learn from their history repeat it.
And once again the US is stepping up to deal with it.
@TW
Have a look at oil price charts and notice the price hike that started once Mr. Biden announced his self-sanctioning of Russian Oil, which upset 3 million bpd of market supply.
Next up: explain to us how you perceive the US to be “stepping up to deal with it”. The US can’t refine its own oil, and it can’t find enough ships to export its own LNG.
@Bryce
On the Louisiana SG;
Liz most recently served as the Louisiana Department of Justice’s Director of Administration and, before that, Director of the Civil Division. She previously served former Governor Bobby Jindal as Executive Counsel and was Executive Counsel to the Commissioner of Administration.
Governor Bobby Jindal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Jindal
‘Piyush “Bobby” Jindal (born June 10, 1971)[1] is an American politician who served as the 55th Governor of Louisiana from 2008 to 2016 .On June 24, 2015, Jindal announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination in the 2016 presidential election.[6] He suspended his campaign in November 2015,’
Wow – who would have thought; a conservative bashing a Dem president’s policies. I’ve never seen that happen before…
(BTW – oil still under $100 a barrel today)
@ Frank
The main oil producing states in the US happen to be red states; that doesn’t mean that everything that those states have to say on oil should be automatically disqualified.
Brent spent most of today around $105, but is now at $100. Most OPEC blends are still well above $100.
While it’s sad to see a variant flop, if it lets Embraer move on to developing the new prop faster then it is probably a good thing.
The fuel economy of the new 76 seat prop vs. the E175-E1 will be night and day, and the pax ex vastly improved with the latest cabins and identical fuselage. I would also assume it’s a given it fits in the scope clause.
The American preference for jets feels antiquated and easily surmountable through a great onboard product and marketing – surely this is the aircraft the regionals and Embraer need to focus on?
Seb:
People in the US do not like prop job and you should note, one of the last big adherents to props, aka Horizon which is some kind of division of Ak Airlines is terminating their use and replacing them with E-175.
In theory the Anchorage AK to Fairbanks AK flight (350 miles roughly) is ideal Turbo Prop route. As it commonly was flown FAI to ANC and then on, they used jets on that route.
Then they decided to mostly put the Dash 8 on that route for the frequent flying part though I think there was a few 737 flights
After huge uproar and complaints, AK Airlines brought in the E175, because it was a jet and that made people happy again.
And that is in the aviation happy/nuthouse of the world where there are thousands of single engine prop jobs and a fair number of twins props (4-8 seats). Many bush ops fly props. Props are part of the DNA of the state.
If a Turbo Prop is not a go on the ANC to FAI routes its not going to fly anywhere.
It does not matter how efficient it is. Embraer made a huge mistake betting on the scope clause and they are making another one. ATR will eat their lunch as its lower cost for what routes people want that aircraft.
The Dash 8 is gone despite its ability to run slower and very close to the ATR economy or almost jet like speeds and certainly over shorter distances.
Bloomberg
Airbus Ahead of Boeing in $10 Billion Malaysia Order Race
They have 50 Max’s on order. You think they’ll drop ’em for the A321Neo?
Oh, it’s for either the A330Neo or the 787.
What a blow to BA if they lose this
They’re replacing A330s, so the A330neo is a more obvious candidate…
Re: “When Embraer re-engined the E-jets series, it expected that Scope at US Network carriers would retain the 76-seat limit but would likely permit a higher MTOW.
“This was a gamble and had Embraer reached out to the respective pilot groups, it would have been able to design a Scope-compatible aircraft for their largest market,” one ALPA official told LNA on background. “With a better understanding that [for example] 85% of the Delta Connection flying must be below 900SM, and an analysis of the stage lengths operated by the in-service EMB fleet, a completely different 175 E2 would have emerged.”
I suspect that at the time Embraer launched the E2’s it was well aware of the typical stage lengths being flown by in service E jets and CRJ’s, and that it knew that pilot ‘s unions were against relaxing scope clauses. Did Embraer go against the advice or potential E2 customers in pursuing a design that would not be compliant with existing scope clauses, or did potential customers tell Embraer that they were confident that scope clauses would be relaxed a little, and not to worry about a little extra weight. As a manufacturer, if the airlines who order airplanes are wanting one thing, and the pilots unions who will have to agree to allow them to fly are wanting something else, do you design the airplane the airlines are asking for, or tell the airlines they can’t have it because assuming that scope clauses will be relaxed is too big of a risk to take. Mitsubishi made the same decision to assume that scope clauses would be relaxed, and Bombardier decided that they would rather compete with Airbus and Boeing in the mainline market than update the CRJ, with the result that there is no up to date scope compliant aircraft available for flying the 200 to 600 mile routes that regional jets typically most frequently fly in the US. Skywest once had 100 E175-E2’s and 100 MRJ’s on order. Did Skywest protest to Embraer and Mitsubishi that their designs were not scope compliant, or were the manufacturers’s giving Skywest and its US Big 3 customers exactly what they were asking for?
Below is an excerpt from a 1-11-12 AINonline article.
“Mitsubishi Aircraft received a huge dose of credibility at the Farnborough International airshow yesterday by announcing a 100-aircraft commitment for MRJ90s from the largest regional airline holding company in the world–SkyWest Airlines. The agreement in principle, signed just this week, potentially raises the MRJ regional jet family backlog to 170 airplanes and gives Mitsubishi its second major U.S. customer.
“This is the market we’ve been targeting all along,” Mitsubishi Aircraft vice president of sales Hank Iwasa told AIN. Restrictions in U.S. major airline union contracts that limit the size of airplanes that regional airlines may operate have long hindered the company’s efforts to break into the U.S. market, but Iwasa expressed confidence that one or more of SkyWest’s major airline partners would negotiate less restrictive scope clauses by the time the first MRJ gets delivered.
The MRJ90 holds 92 seats in a single-class configuration, but SkyWest could opt for a dual-class cabin that would likely hold closer to 80 seats, said Iwasa. U.S. scope clauses typically limit the size of regional jets to 76 seats.”
As we all now know, Mitsubishi’s “confidence that one or more of SkyWest’s major airline partners would negotiate less restrictive scope clauses by the time the first MRJ gets delivered” turns out to have been a very expensive mistake.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aerospace/2012-07-11/mrj-resuscitated-100-aircraft-deal-skywest
AP:
You talk to both sides and clearly we see what the cost of failure to do so has been.
I believe it was Greenspan that called it Excessive Exuberance.
Considering its the airlines who order planes , Im not surprised Embraer and Mitsubishi tailored their designs to what the customers want.
That the pilots might think differently is the reason the older E-175 remains in production and Mitsubishi adapted its design to create Spacejet M-100 to stay under the weights . Of course design development may have been frozen for the original planes a decade back
“Biden taps Denver airport chief Phil Washington to head the FAA”
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/06/biden-taps-denver-airport-chief-phil-washington-to-head-the-faa-.html
“Airbus in ‘close contact’ with Chinese airlines over A220, days after major deals”
“Days after Airbus signed major deals with Chinese airlines, disappointing its American rival, Boeing, the European plane manufacturer is seeking to further increase its footprint in the Chinese market, with an event on Monday aiming to promote the A220 for short-haul flights and vowing to tap the market potential in Western China.”
“A total of 15 Chinese suppliers have contributed to the manufacture of the A220, and the procurement value of A220s in the future is expected to account for about 40 percent of the total procurement value of Airbus in China, said Yang Xiaoyu, Airbus’ head of flyable procurement in China and East Asia.”
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1269921.shtml
I’m now wondering when they’ll launch the 220-500, and also wonder if that recent article
about their Mobile expansion is telling us something imp’t.
Any new-news on the Boeing 737; especially, the MAX-7 and MAX-10?
Time for BA to fly its 777X again to wow the crowd!
Or if BA is able to pre-announce its coming NMA-F (coming soon but arrival time is uncertain)??
> Or if BA is able to pre-announce its coming NMA-F <
"pre-announce" is quite good!, and would fit Boeing to a T, these days.
"Now taking pre-pre-orders for 2047 deliveries.. don't get left behind, order now!"
jamokes
Bill7:
I don’t see a -500 soon as Airbus looks to be trying to stabilize production and lower costs if it can.
I think its the ideal time to do so as A320 customers could take it up and you could then shift production to the higher profit A321.
I don’t think we will see anything on the -10 until November when the maneuvering begins. Its likely the house will flip so that (no to pardon a pun) will be up in the Air.
I would think the -7 will make it but that is an opinion.
Today’s news is that BA is now threatening to cancel the 10 if a formal waiver is not granted removing requirement for modern crew alerting systems. Tacky, tacky…
Perhaps related is Qatar formally stating in London court that their MOU regarding the purchase of 10s in lieu of 321s is no longer valid…
Of course they’ll cancel it:
(1) They don’t have the money to modify it to include EICAS.
(2) A modified -10 would lose its commonality with other MAX models, which would be unattractive to airlines.
BA should be ashamed: even the ARJ-21 has EICAS!
Here’s link regarding the expired Qatar MOU:
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/qatar-airways-boeing-737-deal-has-lapsed-uk-court-told
The coffers are bare, the cupboard is empty.
How soon will BA vow to increase the MAX production rate again??
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1545013683826327555?cxt=HHwWhoCw2c7w_vAqAAAA
Airline CEOs cap in hands march down to Capitol hill? Or email Airbus sales??
> Today’s news is that BA is now threatening to cancel the 10 if a formal waiver is not granted removing requirement for modern crew alerting systems. <
Very "classy" from Boeing! There'a name for when corporations dictate actions to gov'ts:
Fascism, I think it's called.
-> The optics* of pressuring a regulator to rush approval of an aircraft that had well-documented lethal safety problems, made by a company with an equally well-documented history of hiding them, are astounding*.
*not my first word choices, but this is a family program.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thatjohn/status/1545032394885005312?cxt=HHwWgIC8-d6xh_EqAAAA
United expects its MAX 10 to arrive from 2023. If it is canceled, when would NMA arrive???
NMA EIS ~2030
Scott has now given us two comments regarding the NMA.
Particularly, his reply to @SamW may suggest that Scott knows that something is brewing.
Perhaps BA is going to announce an NMA at Farnborough…?
2023 or 2024. not FIA
United Max 10s were mostly a free upgrade by Boeing on their Max 9s – as compensation.
I would think that Max 9 + Max 10 orders be combined as one to compare with A321.
Roughly 280 + 720 gives 1000
Speaking of marriages made in heaven!
https://simpleflying.com/russia-considers-cr929-project-withdrawal/
And some follow up
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3170400/ukraine-war-provides-new-motivation-china-seek-technological
https://mentourpilot.com/cr929-can-russia-and-china-still-develop-it-together/
United 737 Max computer examined after ‘blanking’ precedes wrong-runway landing
https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/united-737-max-computer-examined-after-blanking-precedes-wrong-runway-landing/149287.article
‘US investigators are examining a United Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9’s flight-management computer after an incident in which the system’s displays apparently blanked before the aircraft inadvertently landed on the wrong runway at Pittsburgh.’
And in further MAX news — an emergency landing in Pakistan due to a faulty fuel gauge:
“SpiceJet’s Delhi-Dubai Flight Lands In Pakistan’s Karachi After Pilots Suspect Unusual Fuel Reduction”
“The Boeing 737 Max aircraft — which was heading from Delhi to Dubai — started showing unusual fuel quantity reduction from its left tank when it was mid-air, they said.”
https://www.outlookindia.com/national/spicejet-s-delhi-dubai-flight-lands-in-pakistan-s-karachi-after-pilots-suspect-unusual-fuel-reduction-news-206886
Of course, the BA “Back Office” will now jump in to tell us that such malfunctions are perfectly normal… failing to appreciate that, in the context of the DOT review announced last week, such new incidents are a PR fiasco.
Yep, happens all the time.
The blanking is far more interesting and how they managed to crash the computer(s). While that is a Windows feature, certainly not a NG or MAX feature.
They were also jumping around mode selects as well.
They landed quite nicely! As us pilots say, any landing you (and or your passengers) can walk away from is a good one!
90% sure it was all pilot error or leaky tank ( a maintenance issue) Case closed but the result is never published
Friend Duke said: “90% sure it was all pilot error or leaky tank ( a maintenance issue) Case closed but the result is never published”
Who is it that’s “90% sure”, and who exactly has decided “case closed” regarding an event that very recently happened? Can Friend Duke provide sources for those assertions, or is he just pulling them out of his backside (again)?
I’m starting to think a new meme is in order: I’m provisionally calling it the ‘Boeing Bullsh!t Bluff’, though refinements to that name are most welcome.
Pages 176-179 of Scott H’s book ‘Air Wars’ provides some truly eye-glazing examples of all the bullsh!t, misdirecting, look-over-there! acronyms Boeing has put forth in recent years. It took me three mornings (with good coffee in hand) to get through those four pages..
Marketing and financialization over manufacturing- it works for a little while.
😉
Duke having some experience in this area has a valid point and its common.
No big issue.
The computer crash is more so, its always a good thing when you break something and survive as it can then be fixed.
I hope that is covered in the future
https://airinsight.com/indias-spicejet-receives-show-cause-notice-for-frequent-aircraft-issues/
‘ After eight malfunction incidents in the past eighteen days, the regulator has sent them a show-cause notice, granting them three weeks to explain why action should not be taken against them.
Maybe DGCA is better informed than the usual naysayers
‘SpiceJet has failed to establish safe, efficient and reliable air services ‘
Ouch
apparently they are running their maintenance as a ‘cash and carry ‘ operation
Double ouch
@ DoU
More reading difficulties.
Spicejet has three weeks in which to explain the events; if the incident is not due to maintenance laxness, then the ball goes back to Boeing.
And what about the United 737 MAX? Are we to assume that that was also due to maintenance laxness?
Indian officials consider Spice Jet to be the cause of the problems with below standard maintenance.
‘Show cause’ is bureaucratise for ‘we are coming for you’
-> As us pilots say …
Interesting! 🙄
Paper planes??
Pedro:
You are funny. The issue with aircraft is they fly in 3 dimensions and as they say, its not the fall its when you hit the ground things get iffy.
Who’s “us”??
@Frank @Bryce
We are all familiar with the MAX’s “exemplary” safety record. Any bad news about the MAX would only be considered “cherry picked” by Boeing “self-defense” force. 😜
Aviation Herald can show similar Airbus issues when I cherry pick them.
But all it shows is these are complex mechanical systems which require constant maintenance
Off you go, then, and find them: give us a list, and put your money where your mouth is.
I did . Provided a ‘hit list’ of faults on Airbus from Aviation Herald – it just covered a month. In last weeks pontifications
Do try to keep up, since you are forever raising this issue -(you’re wounded pride no doubt ?)
@DoU
Your short “hit list” wasn’t tailored to serious in-flight issues, including emergencies. No mention of groundings, either. And no link to production issues.
Go back, now, and do the job properly.
@ Frank, @ Pedro
The two, recent MAX incidents referred to above fit into the pattern of electrical faults alluded to in the recent ABC article — which describes how a large sub-fleet of MAXs were grounded (after re-cert) so as to address electrical issues.
The DOT will be beginning its audit this month.
Dukeofurl said, on June 29, 2022:
“Greater minds than mine will working on the falsehoods in [ABC’s 737 MAX ongoing safety incidents] story and will be added to the so so long ABC retractions list
https://www.abc.net.au/news/corrections/
Watch this space as Ill [sic] of course keep you/them updated <
I'm wondering if Duke has anything to add yet to his
comment above RE: the Boeing 737MAX's ongoing safety issues?
In particular, I'm wondering about the "retractions" he said were forthcoming. I have been "watching this space" for Duke's updates, but have not seen them..
TIA- and Yours Always in Pursuit of Truth,
I Remain,
Bill7.
Bill7:
As it was a list of one retraction after another and classic sensationalizing, not worth the bother from my side (I would not speak for Duke of course)
Like fuel tank probes (or the famous A330 failing Pito Units) its common (well they knew about the A330 Pito problem and the solution was to only have a couple bad ones per plane). Of course when two out of your 3 go bad, or all 3 go bad, then its Katy Bar the door on Alternative laws.
Nothing says the FBW system could not just put the aircraft into a backup cruise configuration. That is why I call it the Almond Joy of aviation, sometimes it feels like a nut (protection) and sometimes it don’t .
And yes there were numerous failures of the same type and common failure to follow the backup procedure just like MCAS for Ethiopian (the had been warned). Not that MCAS 1.0 should have seen the light of day, but then I don’t think the Airbus Pitot failure response should either.
EASA had all the data on it as well as Airbus. Much like putting two bad engines on a 787, they allowed it until it killed people.
Why are you commenting, then? The question was not addressed to Trans, but to another commenter, who said “stay tuned” for retractions of the ABC article- of which there have been, um, none.
Not sure what the Trans’s last four paras above have to do with the topic at hand, other than (typical, for him) rambling misdirection- though I’m likely giving him too much credit.
You do realise that all pitots getting iced up on A330 simply means computer saying ‘you fly it, good luck!’ and not a suicidal dive like in MCAS case, right? Pretending they are in any way comparable is dishonest. If you believe that A330 without some of protections is inherently unsafe, then we need to immediately ground all 737s worldwide since they have no protections at all.
Also what exactly is ‘backup cruise configuration’ ? If FBW cannot trust its data, the only sane thing is to stop and give full control to pilots. Or you get MCAS situation where automation does something insane based on bad data.
JS:
I do and their clearly is a difference between a 737 more or less manual (though with a surprising amount of computer tuning on the Elevator) and an Airbus FBW.
In the case of an Airbus system, it reverts to alternative law in the case of the Frozen Piots and its, ok, its your, good luck, I know you have not flown one of these by hand ever but …….
The pilots have no more information than the computer has.
The response be it a pilot or a computer is 85% thrust and 5 deg nose up. That puts it in a safe area.
So, it you are going to have protections, why would you give those same protections up (its yours) when the computer(s) know its in cruise, its at 35k (roughly ) and its over an open ocean?
In the case of the A330, all or close to all the pilots reacted wrong to the loss of Pitot. They pulled up (stall where there no longer is stall protection) or they pushed the hose down.
As a pilot, I look at both as insane. But Airbus knew that was what pilots did.
And Airbus also knew that the speed if it returned did not show (cut in and out) below 60 knots as I recall. Ok, we are at 35k, stalled, shove the nose down. Nope.
There is no question that was horrid pilot training. I could have done better and would have. I was trained better. The first thing they beat into you is evaluate, not knee jerk reaction and if you suddenly loose speed (taken away from me on numerous occasions) you simply maintain altitude with the Artificial horizon and keep an eye on the VSI.
I was required to do a safe takeoff at night with no speed and did so. Part of the drill.
So yes I have issues with Airbus and their so called wondrous system.
Reality is that both Boeing and Airbus have similar crash rates for different reasons.
And to be clear, Boeing and the FLCH Trap should not be there either. Airbus has a far better auto throttle setup.
Dukeofurl said, on June 29, 2022: “Greater minds than mine will working on the falsehoods in [ABC’s 737 MAX ongoing safety incidents] story and will be added to the so so long ABC retractions list..”
Maybe one or the other commenter from the Back Office can point out said “falsehoods”,
and shed light on when said “retractions” will occur- so we can all be the wiser:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-27/boeing-737-max-in-mid-air-emergencies-as-us-set-to-launch-probe/101175214
On a different matter I raised a complaint about an error on ABC some months back. It took roughly 4 months and 2 goes before my request for the correction to a false claim was published.
As I said greater minds than mine will pull the wings of that amateur report
> On a different matter I raised a complaint about an error on ABC some months back. >> without pointing to any particulars <<< which others might examine for their
truthfulness, or lack of that quality? Again- please provide particulars, for *everyone's examination*, and not just generalized smears. Thank You.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/corrections/
They said it wouldnt be published till later and it was under embargo in the meantime
Gee my rent free situation has improved !
> On a different matter <
Why is Duke bringing up a "different matter"? That commenter said that the recent ABC reporting on the Boeing 737MAX's ongoing safety issues was the work of "dummys" [sic];
contained "falsehoods"; and that "retractions" would be forthcoming as a result.
No specifics were provided by that commenter regarding any of his vague allegations against the ABC, and the ABC's reporting on the Boeing 737MAX's ongoing safety issues still stands as written.
Help us out with some *specifics*, Friend Duke: what "falsehoods" are contained in the ABC piece ? For now, Duke's words against reporting he *simply doesn't like* (for whatever reason; heh) look like humdrum smears.
> As I said greater minds than mine will pull the wings of [sic] that amateur [sic] report
OK- we’ll wait some more. I know that you’ll provide that info just as soon as it’s available.
Its for you to chase rabbits down the proverbial…but make sure to check every day , those ABC corrections mount up quickly . It could be any one
Translation: there isn’t any evidence to back up your assertion, and now you’re just trying to bluff your way out of a corner.
Im talking about my correction, on an unrelated topic many months back, coming through
But Im sure your friends at ABC Investigations will give you tip offs over the Max ‘investigation’ corrections
A prediction: Friend Duke’s evidence about claimed falsities in the ABC’s reporting of the Boeing 737MAX’s ongoing safety issues will show up about the same time a New Boeing Aircraft does.
😉
Its better news that Im inside your brain without paying rent
Another evidence-free comment from Friend Duke, despite his repaeated (if gramatically challenged) claims that evidence of falsities
in the ABC’s reporting of the Boeing 737’s ongoing safety issues would be forthcoming from him- “stay tuned” were his words, I think.
His ilk’s playbook:
1) Stonewall
2) Smear
3) Gaslight
4) Minimize
5) Ridicule
6) “that’s old news.”
7) Ignore as if it never happened (Trans and Dukie specialize in this one)
rinse and repeat.. (if you’re them)
They’re the Energizer Bunnies of trolls (and most likely Sponsored Content- would you write that tripe for Boeing for free? Heh!)
I’m almost starting to miss R.O.B.- at least he could write.
Me thinks you protest too much on the Duke and not enough on some others.
Anyone that knows anything about Aviation can see the smear job in the ABC thingy.
Too much shade throwing and not enough factual well reasoned discussion.
“Too much shade throwing and not enough factual well reasoned discussion.”
Thanks for that self-reference.
> Anyone that knows anything about Aviation can see the smear job in the ABC thingy. <
Can you provide some *specifics*, Trans? Otherwise, your comment is just your usual hand-waving.
Bill7:
You are the very thing you accuse others of.
None are so blind as those who will not see and numerous examples have been cited and if you have not seen or bothered to read or follow Aviation, you are going to discount it anyway.
Why bother?
@ TW
More hot air.
@DoU listed a small number of *generic* aviation issues in his “comparative” post last week.
It was pointed out to him that, to be statistically equivalent to the incidents described in the ABC article, he’d need to identify 180 serious in-flight incidents, including 18 emergencies, in the A320 neo family in a period of 18 months, and that there’d need to be a link between these incidents and production issues.
There’d also need to be a grounding of a large sub-fleet.
At that point, @DoU indulged himself in radio silence.
Perhaps you’d like to take the task upon yourself and provide us with said list?
If not, do us all a favor and stop the waffling.
I wasnt saying theres problems with Airbus above the ordinary for very complex machinery that needs constant maintenance.
I was just doing what ABC did ( well they did nothing it was a beat up flogged around various media first) and cherry pick out of incident reporting anything with Airbus name on it.
Maybe I could get a job with ABC as an ‘investigative reporter’ and do a story on AMSL and its technology being stolen ?
@ DoU
More waffling.
We’re still waiting for the evidence to show that the incidents in the ABC report are just typical aviation glitches, as you have continually asserted. In order to show that, common logic dictates that you’ll have to show that other OEMs experienced similar problems in that timeframe. So, once again, you’ll need to give us a list of:
** 180 serious in-flight incidents, including 18 emergencies, in the A320 neo family in a period of 18 months, with a link between these incidents and production issues.
There’ll also need to be a grounding of a large sub-fleet. **
It’s been more than a week since this ABC exposé was published — surely, in that time, you’ve been able to find the required incidents in Av Herald?
Airbus plans to raise monthly A350 output from 5 to 6 early 2023
A330neo to go 2 to 3 per month end of this year.
That’s interesting.
Spirit AeroSystems told us last month that the 787 production rate wouldn’t be going above 2 p/m for the near future.
The Airbus hikes may have something to do with impending (possible) big orders from Emirates, Malaysia and JAL. Tim Clark told us last month that he was in a hurry to receive his A350s, and that he may be ordering more.
-> “RISE will be available for Boeing and Airbus at the same time. Will [Boeing] use an old engine five years before we use RISE? Who would do this?” Faury asks.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jonostrower/status/1544753312259403776?cxt=HHwWgMCjrf-8iPAqAAAA
Boeing has 100 and some odd 787 to deliver so 2 a month makes sense.
An aspect of delivering aircraft is the staffing and setup to do so.
While its Boeing own shot in the foot the reality is that their delivery operation can only move so fast. Its hard to hire people that can do that work and then you fire them again and anyone who works that areas knows it (or why would I hire on…..)
While the paperwork guys from a MAX delivery group could shift over the other experts are not there nor would want to hire back on (like me, they have quit entirely or moved onto other careers)
“Will [Boeing] use an old engine five years before we use RISE? Who would do this?” Faury asks.”
Anyone that understands a Turbo Prop is a no go.
But then Faury has his product line locked in doesn’t he!
RISE is nothing but a delaying tactic while GE and Safram use the funds to develop a new core and gear box.
@TW still doesn’t understand the differences between an unducted fan and a turboprop…
That is truly a hoot. The rest is for others of course.
Its got a gearbox, its got blades, its a Turbo Prop. They are even saying you can put it on the wings now.
It got variable blade thingies on it.
If you actually watched the evolution, its morphed repeatedly because the ducted fan does not work in the real world and this will not either.
@TW
“Its got a gearbox, its got blades, its a Turbo Prop”
A helicopter also has a gearbox and blades.
So does the screw drive on a marine ship.
Is that the best you can do?
It’s a shot across the bow for any talk of new NB jet from youknowwho.
It happens “all the time”?!?
-> First painted 737-8 VH-UJT (tbc) for Australian LCC startup Bonza retuned from VCV paint shop today as BOE977. It’s actually their second one by LN *but BOE381 (LN 7591) needs to be reworked* before receiving the full paint.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bfi_watch_ca350/status/1544806437896933377?cxt=HHwWgsCqmajRoPAqAAAA
Here’s a (paywall-free) link to the story posted above by @ Doubting Thomas:
“Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 MAX 10 -Aviation Week”
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/boeing-ceo-says-planemaker-could-be-forced-to-cancel-737-max-10-aviation-week
Thanks for that link.
The BA “Back Office” will probably proclaim that a waiver from Congress is a done deal — but, if that’s the case, then why not just get the waiver passed through Congress right now? Why wait until the last minute? After all, the FAA has told us that it’s virtually certain that BA is going to miss the December deadline — might as well put an end to the company’s worrying right now and comfort it with a gift-wrapped waiver…right?
And, yet, that’s not happening…and BA probably suspects that it’s not going to happen with a Dem majority in the House — and maybe not even with a Rep majority. After all, what’s at stake here is the reputation and standing of the US (such as it is) vs. saving a few dollars for a trainwreck of a company.
Summer break coming up and they have a busy schedule.
It will likely be a clause inserted into a omnibus bill in last 3 months of the year and with bi partisan support
Whos your source that it wont happen and the forces determined to stop it ?
Not to mention this is an election year so the work in DC is going to be pretty thin after summer break.
All the better for Boeings request to be slipped in by the ‘old congress’ sitting and voting before Dec
‘ Airbus ahead of Boeing in RM44bil Malaysia order race’:
> SINGAPORE: Airbus SE is leading a race against Boeing Co over the potential sale of about 30 wide-body aircraft to Malaysia Airlines (MAS) as the carrier, seeking more fuel-efficient jets amid a travel rebound, focuses on cost.
Airbus is offering its A330neo range of aircraft while Boeing is pushing its 787 Dreamliners, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified because the discussions are private. A decision may be announced as soon as later this month at the upcoming Farnborough International Airshow, the people said. <
https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2022/07/07/airbus-ahead-of-boeing-in-rm44bil-malaysia-order-race
Curious that Qatar has allowed its MOU for MAX-10s to expire: the MOU was signed in January, and AAB said last month that he intended to firm it up. Maybe the whole thing was just a bluff from the outset.
Perhaps Qatar intends to lease A321 neos instead.
https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/companies/transport-and-tourism/2022-07-07-qatar-airways-deal-with-boeing-no-longer-valid-uk-court-hears/
Trans said: “..numerous examples have been cited..”
Where are they? You claimed the ABC piece detailing the Boeing 737MAX’s ongoing safety issues is a “smear job” but -as is typical for you- provided *no evidence* to support that extraordinary assertion. The article was posted on 26 June, and you and your buddy said “retractions” from it would be forthcoming. The article stands..
Where’s your *evidence*, Friend? Please point it out. Thanks in Advance.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-27/boeing-737-max-in-mid-air-emergencies-as-us-set-to-launch-probe/101175214
kaching…. another weeks free rent… but I not so sure about the neighbourhood some fixated single issue people wandering around the streets . Just hoping they get all the help they need
Translation: You’ve been caught with your pants down, and you’re trying to deflect.
“…fixated single issue people wandering around the streets…”
We’ll take this as a reference to your obsessive and repetitive need to try to deflect attention/scrutiny from BA’s continuing screw-ups 😉
What’s AMSL??
Reheat a three year old news report = news?? No wonder there’s no offer for you.
“Insight: Playing Poker with Congress”
“Boeing’s CEO David Calhoun is playing poker with the US Congress. He spoke yesterday about the potential certification issues with the MAX10 and for the first time indicated that Boeing might walk away from that program should Congress not provide the company a time extension for certification. That is essentially playing poker with Congress, and unfortunately, Boeing holds a very weak hand. While he can cite potential job losses and the international balance of trade, the blame for those losses rests directly on his shoulders as the leader of a company that cannot complete tasks on time and on budget. Boeing’s wounds are self-inflicted, and he may find little sympathy on Capitol hill, particularly with the families of the 346 MAX crash victims.”
https://airinsight.com/insight-playing-poker-with-congress/
Calhoun told Aviation Week: “I think our case is persuasive enough. … This is a risk I’m willing to take. If I lose the fight, I lose the fight.”
C’mon Bryce – the guy sounds really contrite and wants to work with regulators to turn out the safest aircraft possible. It’s those darn lawmakers that are the problem…
Boeing’s brazenness regarding the MAX-10
is really a sight to behold, given the MAX’s colorful
history, and Boeing’s long record of QC
issues (among other problems there).
You should make it a day job to cherry pick 737 Max issues and beat the bongo drums about it.
oh thats right , it seems that IS what you do
You should make it a day job to suppress 737 Max issues and muffle the bongo drums about it.
oh that’s right, it seems that IS what you do
Who really thinks that Congress isn’t going to cave to Boeing?
Boeing has had plenty of time to get this done, have they even started work on crew-alerting?
I wonder if they always planned to just wait until time ran out and then push for an extension or an exception?
Are they trying to make the case for no changes to the flight deck crew-alerting?
Regardless of the merits or not of the changes required, the bigger picture is just how much Boeing can dictate to the FAA / Congress what safety rules they’ll follow.
Who is really in charge, Boeing or Congress / FAA?
All good questions, JakDak, esp this one:
“I wonder if they always planned to just wait until time ran out and then push for an extension or an exception?”
“Impunity” seems an apt word.
Thats incorrect.
The 2 year window was just a number plucked out of thin air and was never intended to catch the 737 variants then in the final stages of development.
Even for Congress to get into the weeds on a timeline at all was highly unusual and it was done in a massive 5500 page omnibus Bill ( full of what used to be known as earmarks, small changes done as favours for various congress heavyweights)
What goes in that way can come out the same way
https://theaircurrent.com/aircraft-development/convoluted-politics-certifying-737-max-10/
“The 2 year window was just a number plucked out of thin air and was never intended to catch the 737 variants then in the final stages of development.”
How do you know that?
Were you a House member at the time? Perhaps a secretary present during deliberations?
Fantasy presented as reality.
@Bryce
May be we have a poster which is a “fly”!
With regard to the possible MAX-10 cancellation, @SamW said above:
“But the quote by Calhoun does talk about a possible cancelation. 700 orders translates into 70 billion in possible sales. That’s some rough math. Give or take 10 billion that is nothing to ignore.”
Importantly: if these orders are canceled by customers — as opposed to being converted into MAX-9s (for example) — then BA will have to re-pay the order deposits to the customers concerned. Assuming a ballpark figure of about $10M per plane, that translates to $7B in repayments — which will virtually deplete BA’s currently available cash in one go.
$100 million an aircraft? For a Max 10? That’s a little steep…
“As the competing A321neo attracts more orders, the sale value of a 737-9 is the same as a 2018 737-8 at $53 million.”
https://www.aircraftvaluenews.com/b737-9-easa-certification-does-nothing-for-values/
The Max 9 lists at $129 million. The Max 10 lists at $135. Max 8 is $122.
No way BA is getting $100 million for a Max 10, $60 million is a number that is generous.
700 jets will get them $42 billion in revenue.
I agree with the $7 billion figure. Perhaps even a little bit more…
Bloomberg Intelligence estimates $52 million per jet [MAX 10] recently.
$100 million is nonetheless seriously off the mark.
What if there’s no MAX 10??
-> You’ve got a nightmare scenario where if they don’t get the Max 10 certification, they’re abandoning the middle of the market, possibly forever,” said Richard Aboulafia, a managing director with AeroDynamic Advisory.
On the line are hundreds of jet sales Boeing is working to close in the next few months, including Max 10 orders for Delta Air Lines Inc. and International Consolidated Airlines Group SA, the corporate parent of British Airways [IAG announced its order], according to people familiar with the matter. Delta has been pressing Boeing on its backup plans if the certification isn’t completed by the deadline, said three of the people, who asked not to be identified as the talks are private.
-> Alaska Airlines has warned that any major changes to the Max 10’s cockpit or training would cause it to “reassess” its order.
-> Its *debt leverage is likely to climb close to 10 times earnings this year*, according to Bloomberg Intelligence, and Calhoun is under pressure to maintain an investment grade credit rating.
-> Now the beleaguered titan’s market share could shrink to 30% if the Max 10 is hung up in regulatory limbo and executives don’t address its mid-market gap, AeroDynamic Advisory’s Aboulafia said.
No its not abandoning middle of the market
remember the Max 8 in basic configuration has more seating than standard A320 ( most observers forget this)
‘The 737 MAX 8 is 1.5m (5 feet) longer than A320 with a 2.5m (8.2 feet) longer cabin. This brings a 12 seat higher capacity, everything else being equal. ‘ note the proviso
https://leehamnews.com/2014/11/09/boeing-737-max-8-as-a-long-and-thin-aircraft-and-how-does-it-fare-in-general-versus-airbus-a320neo/
The Max 9 is more again. The difference up to the Max 10 is only 2 seat rows or 12 pass.
Boeing really has too many variants and the original Max 9 should have been upsized the 1 -2 rows from the -900ER model and the Max 10 not exist
@Duke
Is the Max 10 going for fly (assuming they get it certified) across the Atlantic?
No.
The A321LR is doing that, right now – for some airlines, with it’s 4000NM range. Carriers who order those aircraft (along with the XLR) are going to have a leg up on the competition, who cannot fly those routes with a NB.
The LR matches the 757 in range and pax.
The XLR will do what no Boeing narrowbody has ever done. Carriers can look at the map to and from the eastern seaboard and project all the way into central Europe, with a NB aircraft – when they can’t fill a WB and make money.
LCC’s & ULCC’s are all about fleet commonality. You don’t think easyJet is looking at flipping into some XLR’s and flying them down to Florida (a huge destination for Brits), with the same pilots they fly the A320Neo’s with? It’s 3800NM – even against the winter winds, the XLR is good to go at 4700NM. 200 pax, 4 stews, small crew rest area; JetBlue is going to do it, the other way. Ryanair can do nothing about it. Price is the number one consideration of pax.
The Max 10 (along with the Max 8 & 9) will compete against the A220 & the A320/321Neo for the workhorse narrowbody fleet.
6500km, 6500km, 6100km. (3550, 3550, 3300NM)
Ranges on the 8, 9 & 10.
210, 220 & 230.
Max pax on each one.
Airbus has models all over the segments.
@ Frank
Don’t forget Wizz’s plans to use its LRs/XLRs to expand into India, central Asia and southeast Asia from its new hub in Dubai — effectively starting an LCC mini-version of Emirates. Ryanair has nothing to compete with that.
And you can be sure that AirAsia X is looking at similar routes in Asia-Pacific.
p.s. @DoU has told us before that he doesn’t believe the range figures for the A321 neo/LR/XLR — he thinks they’re just marketing hype. Mind you, he failed to look at MTOWs for the types, and the fuel load that they can carry relative to the MAXs.
@Bryce
Disbelieve at your own risk, Boeing. It only matters what the customer believes and what the customer gets.
I can’t imagine that airlines don’t have clauses in their contracts detailing exactly what the aircraft is supposed to do, without penalty.
If I was in legal, that’s exactly what I’d tell my planners…
The range figures for A321 neo/XL etc are achieved by putting extra fuel tanks in the hold . They dont compare like with like say Max 8 +1 ACT with A320 +1 ACT do they ?
Nothing wrong with but its not ‘standard range’ where the Max is ahead ( as its newer wing contains more fuel than the old design A320 series one) A special 737 with extra tanks used to fly daily under SAS banner from Houston to Stavanger Norway
https://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2014/03/31/sas-to-add-boeing-737-flights-between-houston-and-norway/7121261/
Our friends at LNA have explained that before and the posters are advised to check the archives and use the LNA search function to improve their very limited knowledge
@ DoU
Why, then, doesn’t BA just install extra tanks in the MAX so as to level the playing field and regain market share?
” achieved by putting extra fuel tanks in the hold ”
obvious.
But can you do the same on 737 without cutting prohibitively into payload and baggage space?
You are unproductively caugtht in your own contrivances. debate club effective but not reality effective 🙂
Why would you rely solely on info almost a decade old?? Aren’t you aware AB was able to pack more seats by introducing a “new” interior design?
pack in more seats isnt using the ‘like for like criteria’
Less legroom and ‘slimline toilets’ are only gong to be used by the lowest of low price LCC
But Boeing has its Max 8-200 to cover that angle. But its one or two carriers ?
Srsly?? May be you have to be better informed.
There’s the AB “new” interior with a smaller rear galley but without mini washrooms that still adds the *same number* of seats. Airlines are following LCC to charge most passengers for food.
-> Less legroom and ‘slimline toilets’ are only gong to be used by the lowest of low price LCC
Time to open you eyes!
AAL, UAL and SWA all have slimline toilets in their MAX! (According to one airline exe. that’s what BA would only offer.) Are they all LCC??
Sigh. Look at the order book. Orders have migrated to larger variant while our poster laser focused at the wrong end of the segment!
With regard to the possible MAX-10 cancellation, @JakDak posted above:
“If the MAX-10 is dropped, what happens to the changes that EASA required in order to certify the MAX-8 and -9 in Europe … the changes that were to be made to the -10 and then retro fitted to the rest of the MAX range … the synthetic AoA sensor?
“With no -10, would EASA still insist that the synthetic AoA sensor is fitted to existing, flying MAX aircraft, would they just roll over, or would they stick to their guns and threaten to ground them in their jurisdiction?”
******
Very good questions.
I would imagine that EASA will stick to its guns.
@TW proudly told us last week that BA has fitted a synthetic AOA prototype to a MAX-10 test aircraft; if it works on that test bed (or a MAX 8/9 test bed), then EASA can mandate that it be used on the other MAX models.
Not a European problem only
-> Soaring natural gas and electricity prices are starting to hit US factories and plants
https://mobile.twitter.com/jamesattwood/status/1545115445879005185?cxt=HHwWgoCzifmTrfEqAAAA
@Bryce, Pedro & Scott
You know what – there might be (and this is just a ‘what if’ thing) something we’re missing here, in regards to the Max 10. What if, NOT making the Max 10 is something Boeing wants? Hear me out…
Let’s look at it first from the numbers side:
They have 700 orders. Airbus is 5X that. There’s no way it can match what they offer, now or in the near future. It’s a losing battle, why not avoid the fight?
What does 700 aircraft get them?
Per Pedro, Bloomberg has said $52 million a pop. Call it $37 billion.
Now in BA’s best year ever, they made a margin of 13% at BCA – which includes wide and narrow bodies. WB’s make more of a margin, so let’s say that they can make 10% on every Max 10 (who knows maybe less).
That’s $3.7 billion. Even if they sell 1000 units, they make $5.2 billion.
This is the important part: For the next 20/25 years, in the segment dominated by the A321Neo, LR & XLR – the 757 replacement. That’s the product they have to offer airlines…
Let’s say Scott is right – they’re going to launch the Mom/MMA/797 for EIS in 2030. 767ish replacement, which has a model that dips down into the upper edge of the A321XLR segment. Someplace that Airbus has no competing aircraft.
What happens with those 700 on order?
Well, Bryce – you mentioned that some carriers will migrate to the Max 8 & 9. BA will give them some discounts, but they don’t have to mess around with suppliers to start making a Max 10, so they save there. Also, no more money is spent on getting a Max 10 certified.
They’ve got a ready made excuse to hand the airlines: It was the government and we weren’t going to spend another $10 billion on EICAS for 1000 orders. Sorry.
For those other airlines (hello Delta) they can upgrade into the 797 and get a modern clean sheet aircraft. Yes, they will lose some customers, but the A321Neo line is pretty full, so wait a few more years and get our clean sheet or get a cheapie Max 8 or 9.
A few years down the road and perhaps there’s a step change in technology. Boeing can now revamp their NB line and launch a modern 737 replacement aircraft. Maybe they do 2, an A321Neo/LR & XLR type 757 replacement, that is built from scratch and not a stretch – and a NB to compete with the lower end of the market in the A220 space.
They focus on getting the Max 7 done – because SWA needs it and you can’t mess them up., unless you give them 8’s at the same price. That might work as well.
Focus on making Max 8’s & 9’s. Blame the government. Launch the 797. Pay off debts from the 737/787 revenues.
Boeing needs to change the game in a big way.
Is this the strategic plan from BA for the future?
I wouldn’t be surprised at all by such a plan.
I also wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a similar plan for the 777X: dump it and concentrate on the HGW 787. Blame the EASA / FAA (and Emirates, maybe)
Frank:
You miss out the lack of a product line and if you have nothing A321 size, then Airlines will look at it and, ok, we are moving to A321 size anyway (50% of the A320 series built are now A321) and its, why not go all the way and go all A320 series.
Now clearly the -10 is not an A321, but at 700 orders it is selling far better than I expected. Ergo, its more the A321 pax carry than its range.
And Boeing has a lot invested in the -10.
As its a near certainty the house flips, the pressure go implemented what was not intended for the -10 goes away.
And you get into the dicey agreement with EASA for a synthetic AOA that gets retrofitted to the -7/8/9
I just don’t see it nor the 777X demise. In that area I think TC is right, there is still a place for a big aircraft, its just not as big as say a 777-300 size. And the 777-8F is going to be important.
If you look at Emirates they are getting more 777F and converting 777-300 to full on F as well. The 777-8F is the logical successor to that group (or supplement).
Of course those 777-300F will be non ICAO compliant!
“As its a near certainty the house flips, the pressure go implemented what was not intended for the -10 goes away.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Osr7wj0DUGQ
SHOCK: Dems Suddenly Winning Every 2022 Poll
@Trans
Here’s the really bad news;
If Boeing doesn’t do something – for the next 20 years they have lost that segment at a rate of 5 to 1.
It’s pretty much a dead heat in the A320Neo/Max 8 & 9 segment.
They’re almost down 3 to 1 in the A220/Max 7 race and that is only going to get worse for them, as SWA is the only real airline who will order it.
The A220 has as many orders as the Max 10.
From a financial standpoint, all of the development/certification costs for it’s NB aircraft (save the A321XLR) are all baked in. Once the XLR has it’s fuel tank lined with insulation, all they have to worry about is production.
Boeing (and it’s suppliers) have to worry about the Max 7 & 10 certification process AND having to deal in the future with regulators wanting retrofitted stuff that BA promised to do, as part of getting the Max back into service.
At some point in time, Boeing will have to bite the bullet and take it’s medicine. Calhoun had the opportunity (as Richard Abou pointed out) to get in there, be the bad guy, clear the decks and set the company up on the right course.
Instead he signed up for a bonus, stayed on the gravy train and is limping along on a wounded animal.
Excellent Bloomberg article on the new regime at BA:
“Boeing CEO’s Hands-Off Style Has Doubters as 787 Comeback Nears”
http://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/boeing-ceo-s-hands-off-style-has-doubters-as-787-comeback-nears-1.1789393
Bryce:
Nice contribution. I would call it interesting.
The issue is not an exact leadership style. Its how its meant and done and what the reality behind it is.
You can delegate down (the divisions should be accountable to their Boss) but if you throw people under the buss then decentralized is no better than micro managed.
And Calhoun has been a board member for all of the issues and then comes up with, I did not know what was going on.
And the Government bid programs that were deliberately low balled and now he says, we won’t do that again.
And the extension to his job came before it was clear that all the programs were affected and how bad it was going to be (the worst at this point is the 777X but the -10 issue looms as well).
At heart Calhoun is a bean counter and clearly slash and burn of Walsh school.
And its clear that Boeing has lost so much talent that at best they can execute one program at a time when you have at least 6 major ones.
Some like well established are doing good (F-15EX, Chinook, AH-64, V-22).
Boeing is looking at losses for the next 10 years. Time to give Calhoun the boot and get someone in with vision and management per Mullaly.
The Bloomberg article gives me warm fuzzy feelings when it notes that all these guys sprouted out of GE. GE stock is making a concerted effort to touch new lows. And in referring to linked articles, The Air Current story seemed to think the present US administration would rather see Boeing get going on the NSA.
That being said, the money put down on MAX-10s would in many cases see the Boeing sales people flipping those airline purchases to the NBA. Now some might argue: That’s quite a wait in time for entry into service. But keep in mind the A321NEO/LR/XLR is not a perfect plane. As been noted repeatedly but not as of late, Airbus would need to put a new wing on it. And as with the 777X, new wings aren’t a simple upgrade. Boeing, although wounded, does still hold a few cards. The question being, do they have the right Gamblers to play them?
BTW: 52 million for the -10. Wow, weak guess on my part.
I think there is nonsequitur or two in your argument: if I’m understanding you correctly, Airbus “would need to”
rewing the 320-series.. to compete with a Boeing aircraft
that.. does not exist? One with a possible EIS (at very best; most optimistically) of 2030?
My guess is that the folks at Airbus are not asleep to various possibilities, and their cash and debt positions
look quite good to me. Also, relations with their
workforce and suppliers seem favorable.
Adding: I do think Airbus will likely re-wing that series anyway, as a next sensible step. We’ll see.
I believe the A322 with a new wing quite possibly can arrive a year or two ahead of BA’s new jet.
Furthermore it won’t require a separate type certificate, unlike BA’s.
Don’t be so sure.
Why would Airbus do a new wing for the A321NEO? Because they can?
Other priorities would prevail I think. An E.g. A220-500, a 200 seat 32ONEO Plus or 100t A322NEO.
SW, Delta, all of them love frequency. The problems in the airline business today can be solved with bigger narrow body planes. Pilots are human beings that need training and compensation; gates are at a premium; air traffic control is archaic. If Boeing builds the NSA in the 757-200-300 sizes it will leapfrog the Airbus 321NEO-LR-XLR. They will have to re-wing it. The only reason they didn’t bother to re-wing it yet was because the geniuses at Boeing got snookered in to building the MAX. It’s in the book. They can’t wait for the ultra fan. The A220 Technology can apply to the Six across seat NSA. Airbus wasn’t joyful about the C-Series.
Well the pilots would have a much easier life to migrate from say an A321 to A330 than pilots from a 60s design 737 MAX/NG to NMA/NBA etc The differences in the cockpit between A320 and A330 are minimal.
@Sam
“If Boeing builds the NSA in the 757-200-300 sizes it will leapfrog the Airbus 321NEO-LR-XLR.”
Historically, if you look at the 757 market – how many orders were there? About 1000. Carriers liked using it on TATL routes.
There are about 700 – A321LR/XLR orders in total.
The A321Neo isn’t a TATL aircraft. It’s the upsizing workhorse from the Max8/A320Neo in the 3500NM range.
If Boeing were to spend the $15 billion required to launch a 757Max (let’s call it that), that cost would have to be passed onto airlines who could turn to an already capex paid for design – i.e. cheaper. I’m sure every airline has a formula at how much extra they have to pay, where it doesn’t become profitable to buy a new design. Is it a 10% reduction in costs? 15%? 20%?
Besides, that 757 market is pretty much gone.
All the talk I have heard – is that the next BA jet is a WB, replacing the 767, more or less. Boeing wants to go, where Airbus isn’t. They can’t go where they are, because Airbus has all it’s capex spent on their designs and can drop their prices to the point where airlines won’t buy it.
There is no step change in technology (yet) that offsets the higher cost.
-> “Don’t be so sure.”
What’s the implications for the B777X?? Doesn’t it also have a “new” wing?
Interesting: we have a mystery buyer of (seven) A350Fs:
“Qantas Airways has firmed its order for a dozen Airbus A350-1000s while the airframer has also secured an agreement for another seven A350 freighters, from an undisclosed customer.”
https://www.flightglobal.com/qantas-a350-1000s-and-undisclosed-a350f-customer-lift-airbuss-widebody-orders/149332.article
The A350F continues to pick up a nice number and spread of Cargo ops orders.
Its impressive from the standpoint of having to move to new cans (or pancakes) to use what it will offer.
That was an ongoing debate around FedEx and the 767 not fitting the MD-11F or the 777F can structure. They got over it though few came through Anchorage (UPS runs around 33% of 767 through Anchorage). The first can stops for the 767 had the wrong dimensions on the plans, so those had to be re-done. and then they rarely had one come through, hmmm.
Oddly it took FedEx years to get the taller cans you can put in a 777F vs the MD-11F. The facility had only a few OHD that allowed those to be brought in.
They had to build a Steel Stop rack to ensure tug drivers did not loose their minds and take them under one all too low conveyor system.
-> [Fedex] spending reductions may come mostly from new airplanes … potentially giving up some of the Boeing Co. aircraft that are pending delivery.
The Max7 also has no approval and will not be able to do this by the end of the year. Then what does Southwest do?
I agree with this opinion — I suspect that the coming DOT audit is going to slow things even further.
Southwest will probably switch to MAX-8s offered at stunning discounts.
Yup. They got almost half a billion cash from Boeing because of the Max grounding. They’re getting their aircraft in the mid-$30’s. You know they have BA over a barrel on the Max 7.
What SWA does, they do it well.
Now this is a statement right out of Boeing Playbook. If it weren’t for all the problems it wold be fine, fine I say, fine.
https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/07/08/rolls-royce-hldg-trent
Rolls Royce is far from being or behaving like Boeing. Yes they’ve had major problems with their Trent 1000 series of engines for the B787 but they have spent the past 4 years actually solving that problem and the other attend problems that came with it and the pandemic. Note however that at this moment no B787 is grounded due to RR Trent1000 engine issue. Airlines affected in the past have also all been compensated by RR.
RR management has restructured the company cutting costs, raised cash through asset sales, equity and debt issues. They have also quietly adjusted their revenue models going forward and with the rapid increase in long distance travel they are seeing their old revenue streams picking up once again
Finally note that RR in the commercial aero engine space has more products that have remained problem free (Trent 7000, XWB, AE and RB series). Note also the ~600 engine sale to the USAF for the B52 engine change and others. I think it’s time you got off the RR bashing. That company’s management unlike Boeing did not spend their profits on enriching themselves but saved it for use on a “rainy day.”
https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/ideas/2021/10/21/less-debt-more-lift-at-rolls-royce/
-> Rolls-Royce is the sole engine supplier for Airbus A350s … [RR] Civil Aerospace President Chris Cholerton said he sees scope for A350 production rates to go higher faster.
So Airbus had sold a bunch of A220’s to Air Lease Corp, some of which were going to Azimuth Airlines, of Russia.
55168 just had it’s first flight up in Mirabel, and it looks like ALC is going to take the aircraft as a white tail.
https://aibfamily.flights/Airbus-A220
Azimuth has 6 on order with ALC. Not a huge number, but I was wondering what Airbus was going to do….now we know.
AB is getting rid of its whitetails very efficiently.
Aer Lingus took 2 A320 neos that were bound for Russia.
It seems that Qatar’s 4 canceled A350s are slated for Air India.
I guess it’s all about having a product in demand. There’s talk that China is looking to place a large A220 order soon. Farnborough?
I wonder if Malaysia will choose 787s or 330neos? My guess (too) is the latter, and likely also at Farnborough.
Imagine 10 years ago, thinking that a 330 could still be in competition with a 787 in ten years time.
At that time I seem to remember that general opinion was that 330 was dead in the water, and only getting orders because of delivery positions or fleet commonality
Neo , wing changes and the increase in gross weight made a big difference and just as importantly they knew what their target was when the 787 became centred around the larger 787-9
Airbus also moved its own goalposts by dropping the A350-800 to make ‘space’ for the improved A330
A350-800
I have a theory that it was a decoy.
Keep talk up that the A350 is a tenth iteration
sample of trying to compete with the 787.
At that time it was obvious ( for anyone reasonably objective ) that the 787 would not come to market in the announced window and would bring less advantage ( less than the engine gains ) to the competition. A330 slog on!
someone remember Leahy?
“just a Chinese A330 copy in plastics” :-)))
More on the recent MAX incident at Pittsburgh, which is being investigated by the NTSB:
“According to the captain, approximately 2 miles from SUPPR, on an intercept heading and while descending, “the screen was black, both FMC’s blanked” except for the aircraft communications, addressing and reporting system (ACARS) prompt and no FMC prompt.”
https://www.airlive.net/report-united-boeing-737-max-9-erroneously-landed-on-rwy-28l-instead-of-28c-at-pittsburgh-airport-following-a-visual-approach/
Can’t wait for the BA “back office” to “explain” to us how such serious incidents are “perfectly normal”.
> “According to the captain, approximately 2 miles from SUPPR, on an intercept heading and while descending, “the screen was black, both FMC’s blanked” except for the aircraft communications, addressing and reporting system (ACARS) prompt and no FMC prompt.” <
Trans already informed us thaat the above was no big deal: "all's well that ends well!" was his informed take.
What happens when it doesn't end well, though? BCA will not be doing themselves any favors by arm-twisting 737MAX™10
certification, I think.
Another crash?? Just another day for BA.
It’s perfectly normal for metal tube heavier than air to fall from sky, then they will point us to the 99.99% that arrive safely.
You mean like this
‘The crew said they were bombarded by a stream of warning messages before cockpit screens turned grey and then went blank.’
yes , electrical fault on A321
https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-433616.html
Complex mechanical systems that require a lot of maintenance. tell us something new.
Electrical, mechanical, hydraulic and engine issues are just part of normal airline life. have a poor maintenance culture or not pay the parts supplier ( hello Spice jet) it gets worse
‘ The crew reported avionics issues causing the autopilot and autothrust to disconnect. ‘
Incident: British Airways A319 near London on Aug 6th 2021, avionics issues
https://avherald.com/h?article=4ec4f3fa&opt=0
Good on you at playing at being a maintenance engineer. Are you going for your certification next or is just a keyboard maintenance warrior thing?
Incident # 1 was 12 years ago — got anything more recent?
Incident # 2 was caused during takeoff, by a large bump on the runway. Not mid-flight, and it didn’t cause the crew to land on a closed runway.
Surely you can do better than that?
> Why would Airbus do a new wing for the A321NEO? Because they can? 100t A322NEO. <
That’s weird- most of my comment disappeared (again). Trying again:
> Why would Airbus do a new wing for the A321NEO? Because they can? <
Mostly- but not entirely- for optimization of the larger variants, like the one mentioned:
"100t A322NEO."
They are already doing the 100t “A322neo”, but it has another name
A321XLR
I thought the wing replacement was highly likely , especially using a developed version of the same span A220 carbon fibre wing ( new flaps , profile etc) but it seems the pilot conversion process isnt just a Boeing thing
The A322 is a proposed stretch of the A321, with room for 40 extra passengers…definitely not an A321 XLR.
https://internationalfinance.com/airbus-upgrade-next-generation-aircraft/
Its 100 T already for the XLR. I presume it would need an engine upgrade too
Leeham says theres more movement around A320.5 which extends the life of the A320 model with around 12 extra seats when the rumoured A220-500 eats its lunch
https://leehamnews.com/2021/05/31/pontifications-the-wing-of-tomorrow-and-airbus-future/
@Duke
Only after:
1) Airbus owns the whole program outright
2) A big chunk of the A320Neo backlog has been delivered
Then it’s
A220-100, A220-300, A220-500
A321Neo, A321LR, A321XLR
To write off the A320NEo would be premature. Look at orders / backlog.
Apart from that a A320NEO is significntly more capable than a A200-500 could be and has cargo container capability and it has full commonality with well, the A320 series.
RobertPhoenix said, on July 9, 2022:
“Imagine 10 years ago, thinking that a 330 could still be in competition with a 787 in ten years time..”
It is interesting. Too bad a straight-up comparison
of those too aircraft is problematic; but then, that’s
why I want to see what Malaysia and others actually choose, when faced with those imperfect
choices.
“two”, not “too”. Ah, for the lack of an edit function..
Arent you the ‘maintenance issues ‘ go to guy?
Maybe some time in the manuals will restore your edit function ( yes its there). No , not going to help there.
There are only two commenters here (you’re one of them) who are trying to pass off the serious design/production issues on the MAX as “maintenance issues”.
p.s. Any retraction yet from ABC? Has the DOT announced a cancellation of its audit?
At Farnborough, BA will be showcasing two planes that may never be certified: the 777-9 and the MAX -10.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/boeing-to-showcase-newest-jets-and-advances-in-sustainable-and-autonomous-aviation-at-farnborough-airshow-301583393.html
Nasdaq: “Airbus Keeps Trouncing Boeing on Jet Orders”
“Additionally, Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun recently warned that the company may scrap the 737 MAX 10 if Congress doesn’t push back a year-end deadline to certify the model in its current design. While Calhoun may be posturing to put pressure on U.S. lawmakers, the resulting uncertainty could also make customers wary of ordering the 737 MAX 10.”
“Higher order activity and the resumption of 787 Dreamliner deliveries could soon help Boeing stock start to recover from a 40% plunge over the past year. However, investors looking to bet on the aerospace industry should probably choose Airbus instead. Despite having a clear product advantage and a dramatically larger commercial jet backlog than Boeing, Airbus has a lower market cap than its U.S. competitor. That makes it a much more attractive investment opportunity.”
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/airbus-keeps-trouncing-boeing-on-jet-orders
I thought that NASDAQ article was pretty thorough and reality-based, FWTW. The use of the word
“could” early in the second paragraph made me smile a little, too.
Who knows? Maybe geopolitical arm-twisting will work for a little bit longer.
Russian Airlines Ask To Return Planes To Lessors
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E00ddAIPTo
2 Max’s from S7
Volga Dneiper wants to return 14 – 747’s. Fourteen!
Slowly, slowly…
S7 is returning the MAXs because the plane is unlikely to ever receive type certification in Russia.
Volga-Dnepr is attempting to circumvent sanctions by using Etihad Cargo as a “front” to continue using the 14 747s.
I think the idea that Boeing are going to somehow “leapfrog” over Airbus in the narrowbody segment is not supported by evidence. And gain, I’ll point to those two companies’ present
financial conditions; their recent records re: engineeering; and their respective relations
with their suppliers and workforces. I won’t flesh out Boeing’s various MAX, 777X, and KC-46A
morasses at this time..
BA’s Q2 results will be published on July 27. It will be interesting to see what “one-off” costs they’ll be booking this time, and what the available cash has whittled down to. Regardless of what Congress does, BA simply may not have the money to put any further resources into the MAX-10.
The Boeing 737MAX-10 situation should provide a good measurement, I think. It’s a little odd
that that company somehow couldn’t / didn’t get it certified in the time allotted. Then there’s the contingent MAX-7 / Southwest situation, but I’ll leave that be, for now.
“Since last June, the CRJ program is fully owned by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. The Japanese conglomerate acquired the short-haul aircraft family from Bombardier in order to get its service network. The program, however, is being scrapped in favor of the company’s own regional aircraft Spacejet. In future, Mitsubishi will only produce spare parts for CRJ series aircraft and will maintain service and maintenance.”
https://www.aerotelegraph.com/en/construction-of-the-last-crj-jet-has-begun
Maybe the CRJ line was ended slightly premature. A low risk affordable CRJ900NEO would certainly have found buyers in the US.