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 4. Propulsive efficiency April 19, 2024
- Boeing unlikely to meet FAA’s 90-day deadline for new safety program April 18, 2024
- Focus on quality not slowing innovation, says GKN April 18, 2024
- Boeing defends 787, 777 against whistleblower charges April 17, 2024
- Dissecting Boeing CEO’s statement next new airplane will cost $50bn April 15, 2024
Pontifications: Takeaways from the Boeing Investors Day
Nov. 14, 2022, © Leeham News: Here are some takeaways from last week’s Boeing Investors Day.
New “Airplanes”
By Scott Hamilton
When CEO David Calhoun said there won’t be any new airplane this decade, much of the industry went into shock. Consultant Richard Aboulafia, writing in Forbes, said the decision threatens Boeing’s future in commercial aviation. He’s previously predicted delaying a new airplane program launch will see Boeing descend to about a 30% market share.
Kiran Rao, the former chief product strategist for Airbus and now an advisor to airlines and lessors, told LNA that Boeing is now headed to a market share between 20% and 30%.
In the wake of Calhoun’s announcement, some wondered when Boeing would “launch” a new airplane. Would this be in the last part of this decade, with entry into service in the mid-2030 decade? Or did Calhoun mean a program launch next decade?
A Boeing spokesman provided this transcription to clarify:
“And then there’ll be a moment in time where we’ll pull a rabbit out of the hat and introduce a new airplane sometime in the middle of next decade,” Calhoun said. (Emphasis added.)
A normal program launch-to-EIS is about seven years. One could conclude, then, that the program launch could come around 2027 or 2028 if EIS is 2035. (Boeing wants to shrink the timeline to five years from launch to EIS.) CFM is working on an Open Fan engine design for the single-aisle sector (ie, replacing the 737 MAX and A320neo). The EIS target for the engine is 2035. So, Calhoun’s statement seems to fit with his desire for a step-change engine.
Intriguing, to say the least.
737 MAX
Officials said supply chain issues continue to dog steady production and delivery rates of the 737 MAX. Engine deliveries from CFM remain slow. Bringing the production line back from zero to higher rates remains a challenge.
This is what they say. However, this may not be the whole story.
Speaking afterward with aerospace analysts who were there, and others, they point to other problems.
During the pandemic, Boeing encouraged early retirement and offered buyouts to reduce headcounts across the enterprise. On top of normal attrition and scheduled retirements, thousands left the company. Returning to normalcy—a process still underway—required hiring new employees. These employees have a learning curve, which, LNA is told, slows the production of not only the 737s but also the 767-300ERF. (Customers have complained to LNA about quality control on 767s.)
Stan Deal, the CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, said in his investors presentation that there is “occasional quality escape out of our supply chain which our quality management system catches.” The term “quality escape” was new to us, smacking of government-speak, The similar term “quality escapage” was used by multiple sources in describing production problems on the 737 line. One source with knowledge of the situation said there are occasions where “quality escapage” per airplane is in the low three figures.
Deal also said, “The major limiting factor to rate being through the engine manufacturers.” However, LNA is told that CFM has delivered scores of engines to Boeing that are awaiting installation. Additionally, Boeing had 240 MAXes stored at the end of the third quarter, from which engines may be removed for new production. This includes nearly 140 airplanes destined for China for which there are no delivery dates in sight.
Global Services
When Dennis Muilenburg was CEO of the enterprise, he set a revenue target of $50bn for Boeing Global Services. It was a target that few outsiders thought remotely possible. Calhoun stuck a fork in that last week.
Shareholder Value
Calhoun, knowing his investors/analyst audience, spoke the magic words: returning free cash flow to shareholders. He forecast that by 2025-2026, Boeing will have $10bn in free cash flow. He’d like nothing more than to resume paying dividends and stock buybacks then, he said.
Coming on the heels of killing any new airplane program this decade, critics were quick to pounce on Calhoun’s desire. But Wall Street loved it.
Boeing’s stock price closed at $143 per share on Nov. 1, the day before the presentations. The stock closed at $147.41 on Nov. 2, a partial trading day vis-à-vis the presentations. After that, the closing prices were $156.75 on Nov. 3, $160.01 on Friday, Nov. 4, and $169.62 on Tuesday, Nov. 8, a week after the investors day—a gain of 18.3%.
By Boeing’s measure, the investors day was a roaring success.
IAM 751 reaction
The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace union, District 751, is Boeing’s largest union. It assembles the airplanes in Everett and Renton (WA) and has shops elsewhere. Needless to say, the reaction wasn’t favorable.
“It was not great to hear that Boeing is not going to launch new products until the mid-2030s,” said Jon Holden, president of the IAM 751. “I’m not sure the US commercial aerospace industry can remain competitive if that is the case.
“Boeing needs to be pressed on the decisions they make that impact the future of the US commercial aerospace market. The capacity we have in Everett, if underutilized, is something upper management should not get a pass on. Failing to launch their next airplane program, effectively handing over dominant market share in the single-aisle and mid-market aircraft to their main competition, is a situation with dire consequences for the future. If market share tips in favor of Airbus at 60/40 or worse 70/30, it puts pricing pressure on Boeing making it impossible to recover for decades.”
Time to split BA and sell the commercial side to Airbus.
Why would Airbus want to buy it?
for all the govt handouts…
@Bryce @sowerbob My comment was meant ironically. And EADS is not interested in govt handouts. They just refused money from European governments to shrug off the political influence.
From my perspective BA civil business is at the right side of the power curve with no decisive action taken in the cockpit. So investors might wish to take the chute and jump.
Rudi:
Airbus has always taken money from EU governments.
@ TW
BA has received $75B in subsidies from state and federal sources in the US since 1994.
I guess you’re talking about finally giving the Antitrust Division of the Justice Dept. a needed kick in the a*! to WAKE UP! (LOL)
Well, actually it was meant to say in a nice way. BA as we know it is done. For investors it is time to secure their assets they have in the military business and split off the defunct civil side. For sure there is no way in EADS absorbing it but it more polite than to suggest a chapter 11.
“However, LNA is told that CFM has delivered scores of engines to Boeing that are awaiting installation.”
Okay, so it seems that “quality escapage” is the cause of the recent low delivery rates on the 737 line — engines supply isn’t an issue.
Interesting that Stan Deal is trying to deflect from this issue.
************
“One source with knowledge of the situation said there are occasions where “quality escapage” per airplane is in the low three figures.”
Scott, can you clarify what’s meant here?
Are we talking about a “3-*digit* figure”, e.g. 175 or 201?
It’s no wonder that the FAA is retaining sign-off authority per frame.
@Bryce: I don’t have a precise number.
Hamilton
737 MAX deliveries so far in November: only 9 frames, of which only 3 were new-build.
Looks like the quality problems are even worse than one might think.
> 737 MAX deliveries so far in November: only 9 frames, of which only 3 were new-build.
Interesting. We’re halfway through the month.
Thanks for this update, Scott. Two very important questions for you: 1) is the Max 7 to the point of “route proving” with, presumably, Southwest, or is that gonna require “Pokey’s” (FAA’s) cert before it can occur; and 2) if they start RIGHT NOW, they could probably be re-engineering the 767-300ERF with a GENX version for 2028. Does this announcement then preclude that? Kindly, what are your thoughts on these items? Also, as asides: 1) as a retired banker, and importantly for ANY company—“cash flow is life”; 2) what in the heck, hire back some retirees as quality control inspectors/mavens; and 3) focus on getting the 7, 10, the 777X, and 777-8F “Pokey-approved” before anything else-like other new airplanes! My three cents (Reflects “Biden inflation”. Yep, he did that! LOL)
“Pokey’s” big mistake was letting Boeing “self certify” with deadly results. That is over for the foreseeable future.
‘“Pokey’s” big mistake’
No mistake there, reducing FAA control effectiveness was intentional. and not effected by just a narrow interest group either.
Compare the “defanging” of financial control instruments in the run up to the GFC. ~~ same mechanics.
( spreading risk fully and evenly creates a situation where failure causes a catasthrophic complete coverage fault. no longer localized selective damage.)
I’m still amazed that Boeing got off scot-free in their MCAS fraud; just a cost-of-doing-business fine, for them.
“just a couple of rogue employees..” sure, sure.
Boeing is not having an easy time right now. They need to design a new 757 to compete against Airbus A321XLR making it so much better/cheaper than an A322 with composite wing, Al-Li fuselage modified for the next step in robotic build and uprated engines to 35k. Not that easy while busy solving todays problems and generate cash so investors are willing to pump in new $ at the same time not loosing the reminder of its senior engineers. Especially since you normally lose money on the first 200 produced aircrafts of a new design.
Claes:
Clearly Calhoun is only interested in gutting the company and getting what he can before it crashes.
A 757 line would need 40 year old tooling, legacy suppliers, materials, systems, software, tolerances, assembly, maintenance programs, certification. If not, you are building a new aircraft.
You cannot build the old 757, it needs to be a new aircraft with new engines with know technology like carbon wing Al-Li fuselage, 787 style cockpit and cheaper “all electric aircraft” compared to the 787. The quickest way getting a 40k reliable engine is using the GEnX core engine with a new LP system together with a FedEx launch order of 200ea.
Don’t forget that such a project would also need new *funding* — and there’s none of that on the horizon.
The funding might be easier than finding the right engineers to design it with its production system. One can understand that Boeing wants its aircraft production 737, 787, F-15, F-18, 767F, T-7A rolling and cash flowing in to show its investors it is a money generating business still you constantly need new models to match the competition and stay ahead. Like Mercedes usually does with its cars.
@ claes
The funding won’t be easy at all.
$57B in debt means $2.5B in annual interest payments — and that will only increase if debt is rolled over.
For context: $2.5B in interest corresponds to the nominal margin on about 21 new-build MAX-8s PER MONTH. And that’s just interest — the actual debt amount still has to be paid off.
The situation gets even worse if the company gets a rating downgrade, which would trigger penalty clauses in existing bond contracts.
With its current delivery rates, BA is heading for yet another quarterly loss in Q4.
That’s why BA insists others to focus on its usual metrics like FCF which can be manipulated
> You cannot build the old 757, it needs to be a new aircraft with new engines with know technology like carbon wing Al-Li fuselage, 787 style cockpit and cheaper “all electric aircraft” compared to the 787.. <
Better, faster, and cheaper, eh? No prob.
😉
“They need to design a new 757”
MAGA 😉
I doubt anyone here would dismiss the importance of cash/CF/FCF. The debate is more about what’s the best use of the cash when, supposedly, the businesses (civilian and defense/space etc) return to “normal” running. Give them back to shareholders thru’ dividends and share buybacks to push up the stock price or more productive use and invest for the future??
Last but not the least, is the current leadership the best people to execute? How’s their recent record??
The pain is that all those people will be gone and its the short term gain vs any long term future for Boeing.
We saw where the money went before, the issues is does Calhoun sink Boeing so far it can never recover?
Quality Escape
Def: Quality escape means a situation in which a supplier’s internal quality control system fails to identify and contain a nonconforming condition. In gross terms, quality escapes are nothing more than inability to manage the details. Not surprisingly, the root causes of numerous quality escapes are found in the flow and interpretation of technical requirements. These often take the form of ambiguity in the original requirements, failure to adequately evaluate the results of requirements interpretation, or simply
overlooking requirements.
From: The Analysis of Quality Escapes in the Aerospace & Defense Industry
http://www.ren-services.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/The-Analysis-of-Quality-Escapes-in-the-Aerospace-Defense-Industry.pdf
So, fancy language aside, what does this mean for BA in practical terms?
Since they give a number (in the low three figures) I think we can surmise that they are talking about the aircraft sitting in inventory.
Given they have some 400 frames sitting there, we’re talking about at least 25% of them requiring re-work. Not sure if this is part of the fixes to the Max issues and 787 shimming problems, or this is about other issues that have cropped up. I think it’s the latter.
Those aircraft in inventory are going to be a financial drain on the company, until they are all shipped out.
I think you may have misinterpreted the “three figures” text.
My interpretation is that is refers to new-build frames coming off the line, and that the number of defects on any given frame can run into the hundreds. Quote from the article above (emphasis added):
“The similar term “quality escapage” was used by multiple sources in describing production problems on the 737 LINE. One source with knowledge of the situation said there are occasions where “quality escapage” PER AIRPLANE is in the low three figures.”
Imp. to note BA’s current low headline production rate in the 20s
I’m repeating myself: how likely BA has enough order (around 600 order received yearly) to sustain its planned production rate in a couple years
Frank:
The problem is Calhoun and the board of clowns, so called quality issues derives directly from Calhoun and going back 3 CEO focus on cash to the one aspect of Boeing that only wants money back.
As a stockholder, that is my focus, managing Boeing to continue as a company including employees and product is supposed to be job of the Board and CEO/CFO
Boeing cannot succeed with the Board and Management stabbing it in the back.
The real problem at BA is its crippling debt.
No BOD can just make that go away.
China is still roughly 20% of the market, can BA reach say 600 NB production/order a year without China??
From Richard Aboulafia regarding the current admin.:
“The priority is going to be stabilizing the political and military standoff, not commercial relations,”
-> “[R]ival Airbus SE has a lock on China’s lucrative narrow-body jet market for now — and will until Biden can persuade Xi to let Boeing back in.
I agree with your interpretation.
Boeing’s leadership should probably draw inspiration from their own extraordinary leaders of the 1960s who undertook simultaneous development of 3 scratch-up programs to script the future of commercial aviation even while going almost on to the verge of potential bankruptcy. The programs were 737, 747 & the SST(which was ultimately scrapped) which became the backbone of Boeing’s narrow & widebody line-up for the next half century with the 737 still around.
In fact, Boeing could also consider 757’s revenant by bringing the 757-200 back with a new composite wing along with production & aerodynamic improvements and new engines to take on the A321XLR. The CFM LEAP 1A35A engines which are going to power the A321XLR will be rated at 34K lbf while the original 757 had engines rated between 36K to 43K lbf. So, the 1A35A could be easily further uprated to power the 757. Further, 757’s 115T MTOW is an overmatch against A321XLR’s 101T. Also, the original 757-200’s 3900 NM range with 200 pax onboard already matches the A321LR. However, one of the most interesting data point regarding range is that the fuel capacity of the 757 was 43K litres (without any AFTs) while the A321XLR’s is around 46K litres (including all the AFTs). Seemingly, with the better fuel burn of new engines (which are already 15% to 20% better than the PW2000 & BR710) & aerodynamic improvements, the 757 should be able to match the range of the XLR (4700NM) & could go even beyond with the AFTs.
Thus, a re-engined 757 (along with a new composite wing & all aerodynamic & production process improvements) could theoretically be a worthy competitor to the A321XLR without a $15 billion investment on a scratch-up aircraft. Looking forward to a data modeling & comparative analysis on this from Scott & co. for a direct comparison & feasibility analysis. The last time it was done years ago, the cost of development of new engines from scratch (custom rated for 40k thrust) had become the key point of contention as a ready engine derivative was not readily available, unlike now!
Aerobuff:
Its not a lack of knowing what good management looks like, its the gut the company while the gutting is good that drives this and should haves do not address the reality.
Calhoun is like the mosquito that sucks your blood and gives you malaria.
@TW
‘Calhoun is like the mosquito that sucks your blood and gives you malaria.’
So tell us all how you really feel about Dave Calhoun… 🙂
In the subscription section of the blog, Kiran Rao mentions Airbus will forgo a new developement as well since Boeing passes. Is this wise? With Boeing distracted and uncommitted, this could be a moment for Airbus to seize the initiative. If your competitor is busy with internal problems, this is not the moment to relax, but to create a compelling offering which makes every recovery an uphill battle.
The only real developement program on the civilian side atm. is the A350F. A321XLR is in the test phase already. What are all the Airbus developement engineers doing at the moment?
Purchance their “flying wing” concept?? That thought crossed my ind recently.
Airbus has its hydrogen project — which may eventually yield 3 new planes.
It’s also working on a stretch and an LR version of the A220 (see the interesting link in @Frank’s post below).
It will yield pie in the sky stuff but will keep engineers busy
Sorry it is in french!
Safran’s boss is not at all convinced of the future of Hydrogen for commercial planes.
Only short haul planes due to volume and weight of H2 tanks
Impossible cost of cryogenic filling systems in airports
https://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/le-patron-de-safran-reitere-ses-reserves-vis-a-vis-de-l-avion-a-hydrogene-d-airbus.N2065662
Airbus is only working on shorthaul/regional LH2 aircraft.
Bjorn already showed in his recent series that LH2 isn’t a realistic option for longhaul.
Remains the main issue: cost of cryogenic filling systems in lots of regional airports is just unaffordable
Various hydrogen refueling stations — including LH2 — are currently in use and/or in development in a variety of countries, without known issues:
https://www.linde-engineering.com/en/plant-components/hydrogen-refueling-technologies/index.html
Two issues regarding H2 refueling stations:
– Safety: explosion of a station in Baerum (Oslo suburbs)
– Cost: one pump costs between 1 and 4mn$ versus 10 000$ for a standard gasoline pump
– There are 5000 fires every year at regular gas stations — just in the US.
– Seeing as commercial aircraft typically cost of the order of $50-100M per piece, and airports cost (tens of) billions to build, the additional price of LH2 fueling facilities is relatively insignificant.
– There’s a hydrogen refueling station (for buses) just out the road from where I live. It’s been in operation for years — zero problems.
All the airbus development engineers. are busy buffing up their CVs for the Chinese. Action required from US and European governments, whatever it takes.
Grubbie:
Said action would mean that share buy back is banned, program accounting is banned, salary ties to shares is banned, dividends restricted to a fixed % share of profits.
I don’t see any of that happening.
Lock them up!?!
Concepts for H2 powered aircraft are under way at Airbus. Air New Zealand has signed to replace it’s de Havilland aircraft with H2/electric hybrid units. ATR will be the supplier.
They are probably busy designing parts for the A322 that are optimized for robotic build with cost and mass reduction together with a new easy to make folding wingtip carbon wing. Then you have never ending cost and mass reduction on the in production aircrafts while improving reliability and pressing suppliers to reduce price a few % as volume increases.
Airbus has now such a good position in the NB market that with the “Wings of too morrow” program already launched for a new NB composite wing they “safeguard” them from any new BA developement .
Their position on WB market is not so good . If B77X EIS is successfull in 2025 ( it will IMO) , AB will have to launch a derivative such A35K with Ultrafan for instance. So I would favor to put some developement engineers in such areas like :
folding wings ( aspect ratio is often a winner )
hybrid electrical engines configuration
APU replacement by Fuel cell
All above developement might be used for other programs
“If B77X EIS is successfull in 2025”
And if it isn’t successful, AB will offer the highest pax capacity in the longhaul market with its new A350-1000 interior configuration, which can carry more than 400 pax. It will also have an ICAO-compliant freighter in the form of the A350F.
So, there’s a LOT hinging on the 777X.
737-10 cert was recently pushed out more than a year to 2024, so we can probably expect the 777X to be pushed out also — just a matter of time (and money).
According to the FG article linked below:
“Everything else [beside the 737] has little to no contribution to profits. So the 737 programme has to get going,”
OTOH the A350 will be profitable when production becomes more normalized in next couple years.
If all that is true, it’s an interesting change from the days when it was alleged that Boeing cut undercut A320 because they were making handsome profits on all their wide bodies.
777x EIS in 2025+ offers a plane whose tech state is already 6+ years behind the curve.
( planned EIS 2019 )
back when (2015+) analysts stood the existing A350 up against a future 777X . How much improvements will the A350 have seen those 10 years?
Quality Escape is a standard engineering term of art used to describe any defect that gets past your QA process. it is not government speak, it is process engineer speak.
a typo in a string on a GUI display element that makes it into production software is an “escape”, a rivet hole that didn’t get deburred on a delivered aircraft is an “escape”, a turbine blade with an inclusion that detonates an engine at altitude is an “escape”, a missed stitch in the upholstery of a seat cover is an “escape”.
Escapes are not necessarily life threatening, but a good organization root causes every escape and uses that lesson to improve their process. seems Boeing has stopped trying in that respect.
Good article here on the A220 from AW&ST
Airbus Prepares For Much Higher A220 Rates, New Versions
https://aviationweek.com/special-topics/crossover-narrowbody-jets/airbus-prepares-much-higher-a220-rates-new-versions
Yes, that is a very informative article on the A220. Thanks.
So, now that the Democrats appear to have retained control of the US Senate, the outlook has gotten a little less rosy for the much-discussed EICAS waiver for the MAX-7/-10.
What effect will this have on BA’s NB production rates?
Bryce:
I understand of course that your knowledge of US Governing Structure is limited, as is mine for most of the EU though I do follow GB/Germ/France as best I can as well as some other significant players (Finland, Sweden, The Baltic States and Poland)
That said, the waiver opposition for the beloved EICAS was in the House of Representatives not the Senate (two separate bodies with two very separate internals, think of it as the House of Lords in the UK having to pass the identical legislation as the Parliament.
So, in fact two of the Senators are from Washington State and the Democrats want to keep them Democrats of course. 5-10 members of the House are also from Washington State and the Democrat want to increase the number who are Democrats (its easier to pick up Seats in what we call a Blue State (Washington being Democratic by large margins) than it is in Red States (it gets a bit complicated as large cities tend to Blue and the rural to Red (reptilians, err Republicans) and the Suburbs are the only battleground.
Bills passed in either body have to match exactly what was passed in the other body (if its different there is negotiations and give and take)
As it stands the Red side wants to dig into Blue side voters so ensuring Boeing keeps chugging along and getting some of those Blue votes (Washington State) is in their interest and the guy who was against the EICAS waive no long runs the committee (assumes the Red side takes control and it looks like they will by a few members).
That committee in the House in fact had Democrats on it and they wanted EICAS waiver (same calculus, they want to keep Labor votes)
I predict the Waiver gets granted.
I am all for it as stated before, not because it benefits Calhoun but it helps keep Boeing afloat in the hopes of a future change of the Board and Management to people who want to keep Boeing viable not gut it.
this is a good view of the politic involved.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/12/democrat-wins-washington-swing-district-in-major-blow-to-trump-and-gop-00066621
It is one seat out of 436, but like Parliament in the UK, these are the district by district contests that determine no just the present House, but the future as its far easier to keep a seat than take it away (there are only 100 or so contested seats in the House, the rest are in firm Red or Blue districts)
So a previous solid Red District (not one of the 100) is big news as its a pickup that can stay and focus on the 100 (probably closer to 60) seats that are in so called swing district (Suburbs mostly) you can hope to win in the next election.
Educate me is Reuters peddling fake news?? Or rather it’s another lesson you don’t know what you don’t know?
Reuters
U.S. Senate defense bill does not extend Boeing 737 MAX certification -sources
@ Pedro
Thanks for drawing attention to that story.
Here’s a link with more info.
“WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The latest version of the U.S. Senate’s defense bill does not contain an amendment to extend a December deadline for Boeing Co to win regulatory approval for the 737 MAX 7 and MAX 10 jetliners, according to sources and documents seen by Reuters.
“Late last month, Republican Senator Roger Wicker proposed extending until September 2024 the deadline for the U.S. planemaker to win approval for the two new 737 variants.
“Unless it gains an extension from Congress, Boeing must meet new modern cockpit-alerting requirements that could significantly delay the planes’ entry into service. Wicker had sought to attach the measure to the version of the defense bill that was filed on Tuesday.
“Boeing shares, which were trading around $135 a share before Reuters reported the news, fell to $131.57 at the close, down 33 cents from the previous session’s close.
“The requirements were adopted by Congress as part of certification reform passed after two fatal 737 MAX crashes killed 346 people and led to the bestselling plane’s 20-month grounding.
“Wicker, top Republican on the Senate Commerce Committee, did not immediately comment.”
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2022-10-11/boeing-737-max-certification-extension-not-in-current-defense-bill-sources
@Pedro: That Reuters report is weeks old. Don’t think Boeing won’t make another run at this, either in the lame duck Congress or in January.
@ Scott
Of course BA will make multiple attempts at this: after all, they recently hired that well-connected, DC-savvy CCO to lobby day and night. There’s just too much at stake.
No need for the long-winded lecture, TW.
New legislation — from either party — has to pass BOTH houses.
Since the waiver seems to be predominantly a Republican initiative, it won’t be passing the Senate in a hurry.
As Scott said in a recent post: “there isn’t a waiver until there is”.
Bryce:
Clearly there is a , you don’t get what you put out and put it out anyway.
So, do not tell me my politics, I know far more about the US politics than you do. You are in way over your head which is not uncommon.
. Opposition to the waiver was in the House by one guy and no Senator has said anything against it.
So, it stands alone and passes as Senate does not care. You misconstrue it as a Democrats issue and its not, its one persons issue in the House.
No Senator is vested in the one issue on aviation as the House guy was.
If its passed, the FAA has no say, period. Its not a core reg involving joint certification’s with other AHJ.
It may or may not get passed, FAA may waiver now there is no opposition. Stay tuned. The political dynamics are not remotely like you portend nor in your wheel house.
Until there’s a waiver, BA is stuck. The waiver won’t come first thing next year.
BTW it’s a fantasy that there’s no opposition in the Senate, otherwise it wouldn’t have to be attached to a defense bill. Let’s see how many is willing to go if it’s a stand-alone bill
“If its passed, the FAA has no say, period.”
Of course the FAA has a say.
Passing a waiver is facilitory in nature, not mandatory — it doesn’t put any *obligation* on the FAA’s actions.
It’s the difference between “necessary” and “sufficient”: the waiver is a necessary path to certification, but is not of itself sufficient.
Further: *everything* in DC will be a partisan issue for the next 2 years — starting straight away with the debt ceiling.
“Airbus CEO Sees Energy Crisis Weighing on Production Next Spring”
“(Bloomberg) — Airbus SE said production concerns have shifted from a shortage of jet engines to smaller suppliers struggling to cope with spiraling energy costs, with the squeeze expected to become most acute next spring.
“The world’s largest planemaker is working to mitigate the impact of the energy crisis for component makers by being flexible with its aircraft production sequencing and supporting vendors seeking to raise working capital from banks, Chief Executive Officer Guillaume Faury said in an interview Monday.
““We have new issues coming from the energy situation, the prices of gas and electricity that are impacting small suppliers,” Faury said. “That’s a bit of a different nature and this will not impact the production before maybe the second quarter of next year.””
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/airbus-ceo-sees-energy-crisis-weighing-on-production-next-spring-1.1846094
– A new assembly line at Airbus’s headquarters in Toulouse, France, will begin making A320-series planes next year
– The market is also likely to be hit harder by a global recession, with *single-aisle sales more robust*
– Airbus continues to work to raise production and cut costs on its smallest A220 model
– Development of a stretched A220-500 is “not a matter of if, more a matter of when”
Interesting article on Boeing from Herald
https://www.heraldnet.com/news/secret-files-reveal-boeing-doctor-warned-of-toxic-risks-birth-defects/
https://mobile.twitter.com/dominicgates/status/1592666557121204224?cxt=HHwWgMDU7fPypJosAAAA
Sadly I find none of the stuff that Calhoun spews as intriguing. More like he is setting up the Guillotine for Boeing.
He will be gone long before the end of the decade.
The question becomes is there anything to salvage for Boeing but an Douglas, MD and Lockheed type meltdown in the commercial sector.
Open rotor is a BS red hearing. Fig leaf. A magician practices his act so he can pull a rabbit out of the hat, not stop feeding the rabbit so that all is left is a molded carcass, really turns and audience off.
BA is finally giving some openness regarding the much-publicized paint peeling issues in 787 wings / horizontal stabilizers:
“WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Boeing Co said operators of its 787 Dreamliner jetliners have experienced paint peeling issues on wing and horizontal stabilizer surfaces due to ultraviolet radiation exposure, and asked U.S. regulators to approve its plan to address the issue.
“The U.S. planemaker’s interim fix involves repeated use of speed tape over affected areas. The company also wants the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to approve its plan to incorporate a layer of ultraviolet blocking black topcoat between the primer and the white topcoat.
“”Even though the use of speed tape has no effect on the safety of the airplane, the public could perceive an unsafe condition when seeing tape on the wing surfaces,” Boeing (NYSE:BA) told the FAA in a regulatory filing made public on Monday.
“Boeing said the “petition will address a fleet significant maintenance issue that is creating a public perception of an unsafe condition as well as creating the potential for significant airplane downtime.”
“Some passengers have posted photos online of 787 wings with tape and raised concerns.
“An FAA spokesperson said the agency “will carefully review the petition.””
https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/boeing-says-787-operators-experience-wing-paint-peeling-2943621
From the post:
“A normal program launch-to-EIS is about seven years. One could conclude, then, that the program launch could come around 2027 or 2028 if EIS is 2035. (Boeing wants to shrink the timeline to five years from launch to EIS.)”
Are we back to wishful thinking and overcommitments? A new clean sheet design will be 9-10 year. The A321 XLR will be 5 years for a new tank and this is mainly driven by certification. The 777X will hit 12 years. The A350 was 9 year and the 787 was 7 years, but don’t talk about the manufacturing hell as well as the grounding which followed and the fact that together with the 737-max it drove stricter certification requirements.
5 years for a new program is a pipe dream.
Boeing CEO Calhoun, on a new airplane: “I don’t think we’ll even get to the drawing board this decade.”
More body to that amazing quote:
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/32555-boeing-rules-out-new-midmarket-plane-this-decade
> 5 years for a new program is a pipe dream. <
Especially for a company that has not done one for 26 or so years.. (2004- ca 2030?).
dreamland..
(Boeing wants to shrink the timeline to five years from launch to EIS.)
Gee, could they do it without outsourcing the wing, the flight control, lots and lots of software, fuselage components — to China, to India, etc.,..? Could they? No. Not these guys. They are too young. It is not in their DNA. These guys could not do a plane in seven years. Not with all their outsourcing…
“Boeing wants to shrink the timeline to five years from launch to EIS.”
There are only a few certainties in life such as death, taxes and Boeing executives signing up for completely unrealistic goals that run counter to all prior experience.
-> So when I asked my source, “Do you think Artemis III will actually happen?” “My starting point is 2028,” he replied.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1592157414253801472?cxt=HHwWgMDR8fGuvZgsAAAA
I think marketshare, share of sales, backlogs and share of deliveries were used over time to ensure stakeholders, it wasn’t so bad really. And then we had free cash flow, profitability, dividends, history and rosy outlooks to mystify the situation. It seems the market is slowly starting to see what happened over the last 10 years, leading to the current situation.
Bonus structures stimulated CEO’s / executives to downplay competition, overpromise, delay investment, cut costs, boost free cash flow and leave the company with tens of millions cashed. But a further weakened portfolio.
Luckily Airbus won’t launch many new aircraft in the coming 10 years, just derivatives. E.g. A220-500, A320Plus, A322NEO, A350NEO, A350-2000, A339F, A339MRTT. Possibly engine upgrades, new materials, higher BPR’s of PW GTF and LEAP for the A320 series in a few years.
Likely major new programs are RACER and defense programs like FMTC, FCAS, NGRC. For sad reasons budgets have boomed in Europe & Asia.
Boeing’s started deliveries of its new MH-139A Grey Wolf helicopters to the USAF.. It seems endlessly lobbying & modifying old platforms has been happening at BDS too.
Why do you think about A339F?
Is there someone from industry who is optimistic about this?
Flightglobal article on BA:
https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/can-boeing-clear-its-way-to-a-brighter-future/150971.article
Can Boeing clear its way to a brighter future?
“In 2022, Boeing aimed to resume Max shipments to China, bring 737 production to 31 jets monthly, deliver 500 737s, achieve the Max 7’s certification, and resume 787 deliveries, which had been halted owing to quality shortcomings with the type’s composite fuselage.
Analysts also expected that in 2022 Boeing would finally launch a new narrowbody aircraft to counter Airbus’ incredibly successful A321neo.
With the exception of resuming 787 deliveries in August, none of that has yet happened.”
and
“The 737 line has also suffered “quality problems”, BCA CEO Stan Deal said on 2 November. A source within Boeing says the company this year repeatedly stopped 737 wing manufacturing to fix production defects, including miss-drilled holes, partly due to errors made by new staff.”
The future looks “bright”, let’s not forget there’s “a pot of gold” at the end of the rainbow (2025-2026). What’s next?? BA starts selling unicorns? 🙄
More from that thorough Flightglobal piece on the situation at Boeing:
“..Likewise, Merluzeau views Boeing as sacrificing product development “on the alter” [sic] of the Max.
He thinks delays could leave Boeing behind in developing modern manufacturing processes, and says Boeing might eventually wake up without the engineering expertise needed for its next aircraft.
The risk of delaying “is that you lose the expertise, you lose the talent, you lose the knowledge”, Merluzeau says.”
What he said..
“The risk of delaying “is that you lose the expertise, you lose the talent, you lose the knowledge”, Merluzeau says.””
Too late, it seems: recent developments suggest that it’s already lost.
Not only at Boeing but the supply chain. Let’s “assume” the next aircraft is not metallic! Is Boeing waiting for the development of high volume thermoplastic large structures and high level of additive mfg? Who is going to develop this technology from the automation equipment/tooling supply base? Can the key players in the supply chain wait 10 more years for another aircraft launch? Their expertise and R&D expense will be down because they have no current aircraft launch to develop the next generation equipment/tooling.
The two standout statements to me were
Calhoun’s “not even at the drawing board
in this decade”, and this one:
“I want nothing more than to return money to you,” chief financial officer Brian West told investors.”
The US Chamber of Commerce is now getting involved in the EICAS waiver issue:
“U.S. Chamber Urges Congress to Avert Rail Strike, Extend Boeing 737 MAX Deadline”
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2022-11-15/u-s-chamber-urges-congress-to-avert-rail-strike-extend-boeing-737-max-deadline
“Airbus releases commercial aircraft figures for October”
“European airframer Airbus delivered 60 aircraft to 38 customers in October 2022 making the net year-to-date delivery figure 495 aircraft to 72 customers.
“Single-aisle deliveries included 26 A321neo, 21 A320neo, 4 A220-300 and one A220-100. Widebody deliveries consisted of 4 A350-900, 1 A350-1000, 2 A330-900neo and one A330-300.”
https://ukaviation.news/airbus-releases-commercial-aircraft-figures-for-october/
Dave “Cash Flow” Calhoun will develop a new plane as soon as it can be funded without any negative impact on short term cash flow…..which, of course, means never.
Harvesting, streamlining, sharing, rewarding, being disciplined, fully understanding, projecting, forecasting, balancing, being comfortable, proud, returning free cash flow, convincing, looking into, monetizing, pushing out, pulling forward, reviewing, hiding.
Is this a list of proposed terms/phrases for a marathon game of “Bullsh#t Bingo” at BA?
Might be a good way to raise some cash for the company 😉
You forgot this one: “We own safety”
Ironically, Airbus is the one who has come out and said that they want to build a 10 billion Euro war chest for unforeseen events and new program launches.
If they can do that, over the next couple of years, while 1) acquiring the remining 25% of the A220 program 2) keeping their engineering talent engaged and up to date 3) bring along the ‘wings’ program and A220-500…while BA struggles along with their debt load;
Boeing is going to need a catastrophe at Airbus to knock them out of the box.
Another big winner in all of this? Comac.
If BA isn’t innovating, Airbus won’t be forced into taking any risks, Comac can play catch up. China plays the long game. The C919 isn’t a threat to the Big 2’s int’l business – it’ll be the next aircraft in 20 years that’ll be the problem, when they learn how to do it right.
Those who underestimate or pooh-pooh Comac are only fooling themselves. See Goldman Sachs’ recent thoughts on China.
Chinese leadership has decided. China has to have an airframer. China has to be capable of design and manufacture competitive jet engines. And they will, just a matter of time. Those who think the non-white people in the east cannot invent cutting-edge technologies will have ample of denial to enjoy.
Not sure if this was posted before regarding the MAX 7 certification. Not anything new, but I just found it.
Even if a waiver were granted tomorrow, the MAX 7 still won’t be certified anytime soon.
FAA is not just asking BA to submit “missing” documents as previously reported, there’s more.
-> Boeing Co. is getting new questions from US aviation regulators about the Max 7 aircraft, making it more likely the company will be unable to complete the certification process by late December and have to undertake a costly redesign.
The Federal Aviation Administration in an Oct. 12 letter ordered the planemaker to study the impact of pilot performance on a broader range of potential failures than had been agreed to previously. The FAA letter, which was reviewed by Bloomberg, also repeated warnings from last month that Boeing had additional work to perform on safety analyses it submitted to the agency.
“We request Boeing to review all of the catastrophic hazards” to ensure that potential actions by pilots had been taken into account, the letter said.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bnnbloomberg.ca/boeing-737-max-7-s-approval-faces-new-tests-from-us-regulators-1.1833890.amp.html
This looks like FAA has concluded the 737 CAS needs to go, but they can’t say so, because they certified on the -8.. (when Boeing & congress were all over them).
That is an interesting interpretation, and one that seems
to fit the facts pretty well. I’m following the MAX-7 and MAX-10 cert situation as closely as I can, partly as an indirect measure of other things.
It seems that the EASA has similar concerns: the RTS AD says that BA agreed to come with proposals for improvement of the CAS on the MAX.
Reuters:
-> The acting head of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said Thursday he does not expect the agency will certify the Boeing 737 MAX 7 before a key deadline at the end of the year.
-> Nolen said it is his sense the FAA cannot continue any certification work on the airplanes after late December without action from Congress.
🤔
Oops…
Oil? Lots and lots??
https://mobile.twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1593495870250557441?cxt=HHwWgoCxlaSDnp0sAAAA
-> “Isom — rightly — points to airspace as *the* key challenge for the eVTOL and urban air mobility world of the future
https://mobile.twitter.com/ethanklapper/status/1592903100557594624
I think it’s the *business model* that’s the main challenge for eVTOLS. How much can one charge 3.2 persons to fly 40-or-so
km in a craft like that, and at how many trips per day?
I again will not mention the batteries: their expense, need for frequent replacement, non-recyclability (“we’re workin’ on it!”) ..
hopium
Recharge time for batteries might be a challenge, or very large amounts of them around to be swapped, tested before flight, everywhere.
“MTU predicts 1.000 GTF deliveries for the A320neo in 2024”
So, for the PW engines alone (separate to the engines coming from CFM), that corresponds to 41.66 aircraft per month.
The planned Airbus figure of 75 A320/321 per month is looking more and more plausible.
https://airinsight.com/mtu-predicts-1-000-gtf-deliveries-for-the-a320neo-in-2024/
Then they have to turn out another ~14 a month GTF’s for the A220 line, which is planned to hit that number in about the same time frame, or about a year later.
-> Jetblue names Paris as its second European destination. Flights from New York begin next summer, and later from Boston
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1592867083129421825?cxt=HHwWgoC8hYeLgJssAAAA
-> International routes are in the “near future” for Breeze
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1593265957278973961?cxt=HHwWkoCwhcu8tZwsAAAA
🤣🤣🤣
-> Wouldn’t it be great if this @SouthwestAir 737-700 were a -7 already?
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1593284886118416391?cxt=HHwWjoCy8bGKvpwsAAAA
Boeing’s October Deliveries Down Because Of 737 Fuselage Flaw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1xdZOHqtdk
One can only wonder as to the nature of this “fuselage flaw”, seeing as BA isn’t providing details.
The recent ABC article comes to mind, with its catalog of major incidents caused by manufacturing issues.
After a long time of reading your comments I would like to add something here for the first time.
Let me order my thoughts as follows:
– While AB missed the market with the A380, BCA in general did not with the 787
– However, BCA tryed to regain/keep the technological leadersship from AB with the 787 design layout. This ended in large cost and schedule overuns but also in a generally sound product with a lot of theeting problems. The result is that it is very questionable if BCA can make any money out of the 787.
– I think AB learned its A380 lecture and the BCA lecture of the 787 and did a more conservative design approach for the A350 than BCA for the 787. It was more a step improvment based on A380 technology. Of course there have been cost and schedule overuns but the A350 program is paying off.
– Finally, the very cost effective A330NEO program shows that even a step improvment of a 30years old frame could (nearly) meet the performance of the 787 for most of the possible flight envelope. The performance difference might be in the low single digit numbers, but the unit price is not. AB can compete with BCA in this area with 2Bn vs. a 35Bn program
– Together with the comparison of the B737 vs, A220 A320Neo class it is obvious that Boing earns the second place in the market at the moment
– Thus, in my opinion BCA should act like the underdog and push a A321 competitor with the following premises:
– Conservative design approach to save cost and time not looking for the technological leadership
– Good enough to beat the A321 by a couple of percentage points in performance and challenge a possible A322
– Cheap enough to get a unit price not so far beyond the A321/A322
– I bet there would be a lot of orders for this frame just because the airlines want to have competition and Airbus is tight on slots.
– BCA would have a new frame for this very hot market segment with a possibility of a later improvement.
– Long term BCA could regain No. 1
– BCA keeps the talent busy.
Why BCA is not considering this?
Looking forward to your comments.
–
Goerge.
– Good enough to beat the A321 by a couple of percentage points in performance and challenge a possible A322
– Cheap enough to get a unit price not so far beyond the A321/A322
If BA launches a new design, it’ll cost between $15-20 billion, in today’s market. That is money they don’t have, so they’ll need to go further into debt to do it. Doing so will, in all likelihood, downgrade their credit rating (given they already owe over $50 billion) making the old debt more expensive then the ~$2.5 billion in interest they currently pay & adding another $750 million+ to the new debt in interest payments. This will also bump their debt to $70+ billion.
So…
Boeing will have to charge a premium to recoup that investment. That means airlines will have to pay more for that aircraft. If Boeing were to get 2,000 orders for it (which is a fair number) and they spent the lower end of the developmental costs ($15 billion), then airlines would have to pay a $7.5 million premium, over an Airbus aircraft, for Boeing to break even (and this doesn’t include interest payments).
To which I might add;
What’s to stop Airbus from dropping their price a little more, just to offer further incentives for a client to purchase the A321Neo line? They can afford it.
A couple of percentage points isn’t going to cut it.
————————————————————————
Secondly, if you could; what is the estimated size of the market and how many aircraft do you expect BA to sell? How many available orders are there, for customers that haven’t ordered the A321Neo/LR/XLR?
There have been 4,600 orders for that niche. There were only about 1,000 orders for the 757.
It all factors into the equation.
——————————————————————
Slots.
Airbus maybe tight on slots now, but in the five years it takes (best case, aircraft launched today) to get it into service, they will be up to 75 a month, with a bunch of the backlog delivered and new slots available.
I think BA have looked at this and reached the same conclusion.
“…they will be up to 75 a month…”
Even more, according to the exclusive figure disclosed recently by LNA: 83 per month!
One more point: don’t forget the brain drain at BA, and the effect it’s having on the company’s ability to perform adequately.
“Airbus and Boeing Aircraft Delivery Delays Likely to Worsen: Udvar-Hazy”
https://airlineweekly.com/2022/11/airbus-and-boeing-aircraft-delivery-delays-likely-to-worsen-udvar-hazy/
The title should read “Boeing Aircraft Delivery Delays Likely to Worsen: Udvar-Hazy” Seems Airbus is ramping up their production without any major production issues
-> The 737 Max isn’t Boeing’s only issue: Udvar-Hazy does not think the airframer will make any money on the 777X, even though he expects more orders from the large number of current 777 operators.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1593645961246658560?cxt=HHwWgMC-nd2j4p0sAAAA
@Pedro
There is absolutely no way BA can make money on the 777X program. In Q3/2022 they wrote off $6.5 billion. At Q4/2021 BA had this to say about the program:
“In April 2022, we decided to pause production of the 777X-9 during 2022 and 2023. We implemented the production pause during the second quarter of 2022, and it is expected to result in abnormal production costs of approximately $1.5 billion that are being expensed as incurred until 777X-9 production resumes.”
That’s $8 billion, before production resumes & EIS.
They also said this:
“The 777X program has near break-even gross margins at September 30, 2022. The level of profitability on the 777X program will be subject to a
number of factors. These factors include continued market uncertainty, the lingering impacts of COVID-19 on our production system as well as
impacts on our supply chain and customers, customer negotiations, further production rate adjustments for the 777X or other commercial aircraft programs, contraction of the accounting quantity and potential risks associated with the testing program and the timing of aircraft certification. One or more of these factors could result in additional reach-forward losses on the 777X program in future periods.”
So the program is at near break even gross margins at Sept 2022, after writing off $8 billion. The margins they are talking about, is money to cover this (which they didn’t add in the Q3/2022 10Q, but was mentioned in the Q2/2022 report):
“At June 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021, commercial aircraft programs inventory included the following amounts related to the 777X program: deferred production costs of $1,194 and $652 and $3,625 and $3,521 of unamortized tooling and other non-recurring costs.”
So at the end of Q2 there was a deferred production balance of ~$1.2 billion in inventory that they estimate would be covered by the accounting block of 350 aircraft. They also spent ~$3.6 billion on tooling that eventually will get sold/scrapped (like they did with the 757 tooling) and will have some residual value when the line is done, but they won’t get anything near the $3.6 they spent on it.
Moving forward, they expect (maybe) to cover those amounts, but they already spent and lost $8 billion on the program, which would then stand at around $9.2 billion. If they could reasonably believe that they could make enough money on the program, that $8 billion would not have been written off, but would have been included in the Deferred Production Balance (like when the 787 ran up to some $26 billion on it’s DPB).
But that’s a margin of $75 million an aircraft (based on the estimated accounting block) and even the bean counters at BA can’t fudge the numbers to that extent.
I think that the key text in that Udvar-Hazy quote is:
“…even though he expects more orders from the large number of current 777 operators.”
So, even with these fictitious extra orders, he can’t foresee a breakeven for the project.
The man is being very optimistic 😉
“..One area where Udvar-Hazy was not as pessimistic as one would expect was on Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun’s recent comments that the airframer is unlikely to develop a new green-sheet aircraft until the 2030s.
“Why would a company invest $15-20 billion to develop an airplane that is essentially today’s technology with maybe a few percentage points improvement in fuel and environmental economics,” he said. “There’s not a meaningful step-change improvement achievable with the current platforms that are out there today.”
Interesting thoughts from Mr. Udvar-Hazy, though I don’t agree
that because there is not a “step-change” improvement available,
Boeing should not be designing and introducing a new aircraft
at this time. We’ll see how it goes; maybe COMAC will take up
that empty space. 😉
@Bill7
Big u-turn. Air lease has locked up plenty production slots of A320/321?? 😁
And the value of its current NB jets won’t get a hit.
The top business priority of the GE Cash-Flow kings at the top of Boeing is not maximizing profit, it is minimizing costs. Maximizing profit requires planning and investing in the future. Cutting costs can be done now without planning for the future….it boosts the bottom line NOW.
“Families of Boeing Max victims disappointed by Justice Dept. meeting”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/11/18/boeing-max-justice-department/
Looks like there’ll be more litigation coming, to force the Justice Department’s hand…
Forget it, Jake: it’s Chinatown.
Pedro said, on November 19, 2022:
>@Bill7 Big u-turn. Air lease has locked up plenty production slots of A320/321?? 😁 And the value of its current NB jets won’t get a hit. <
I was thinking along similar lines, Pedro: U-H likely talking his book.
Where there’s smoke, there’s ….
-> Postandcourier.com
Boeing’s SC 787 plant calls in West Coast engineers on production fixes
https://mobile.twitter.com/David_Wren_/status/1594089524237246466?cxt=HHwWhICphb_-q58sAAAA
We will have additional reporting on this on Monday.
This story is also in the LNA Twitter feed:
“As Boeing Co. moves toward an eventual ramp-up of 787 production in North Charleston, the aerospace giant is calling in some reinforcements: Engineers from Washington state are descending on the final assembly plant to help fix defects on otherwise completed Dreamliners that are taking up valuable real estate off International Boulevard.
“The planemaker declined to say how many of its West Coast technical employees will make the move or for how long. The company also wouldn’t discuss reports of high turnover at the plant, saying its employment totals are updated annually each January.”
https://www.postandcourier.com/business/boeings-sc-787-plant-calls-in-west-coast-engineers-on-production-fixes/article_ad79fab6-65be-11ed-a4c2-af6ca37fe150.html
It’s 20 November and Planespotters is showing just 2 Dreamliner deliveries so far this month, namely LN 1041 and LN 1109. Both are from inventory, and both are for Qatar. These two frames had better be absolutely perfect, or AAB will throw a tantrum (that having been said, he can’t go anywhere else for his aircraft now, so maybe he’ll restrain himself).
It looks as if the recent Jon Ostrower assertion of “four deliveries, and then a grinding halt” may have been referring to the (non-inventory) production line…
Thanks for those quotes and links.
– rework on each 787 is “actually greater than the assembly hours” it took to build the plane originally
– rework is taking up space in the factory that is limiting the pace of the ramp up of newly built 787s
BA won’t be able to increase production from its current rate of about one or less a month until it substantially clears its 787 inventory rework
So, it looks like Jon Ostrower’s recent assertion was correct…
Boeing ID:
Guidance for 2023 Free Cash Flow: $3 to $5 billion
737: 400 to 450 airplanes 787: *70 to 80 airplanes*
Shoot for the moon? If it misses, would it land among the stars??
Insight: Calhoun’s rabbit could be Embraer
-> Boeing’s President and CEO’s line about pulling a rabbit out of the hat may resonate in unintended ways. It was, on reflection, not the way David Calhoun might have given his message.
Firstly, it was not a signal of strength. It was back to the “moonshot” – akin to buying a lottery ticket. Secondly, don’t be surprised that if and when Boeing’s next airplane emerges, it is nicknamed Rabbit. If Volkswagen could have one, why not Boeing?
On the face of it, the rabbit comment reflects poorly on Boeing. A company with a century of aviation history. The company with an unmatched heritage. After 100 years of leading aviation …
https://airinsight.com/insight-calhouns-rabbit-could-be-embraer/
Aircraft Lessor Sues Insurers For Not Covering Russian Plane Losses
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P9D2UYtt8k
-> Collapse in shipping rates continues to look unreal … cost to ship 40-foot container from Shanghai to Los Angeles has fallen by 83% from peak, by far largest drop on record (bringing level to lowest since June 2020)
https://mobile.twitter.com/LizAnnSonders/status/1593256078560460800?cxt=HHwWgICg7cj9sJwsAAAA
BA is adding to its inventory of parked aircraft: another year (at least) to certification, yet “First Boeing 737 MAX 10 For United Airlines Takes Flight”…
https://simpleflying.com/united-airlines-first-boeing-737-max-10-flight/
How difficult is it for Boeing to get its acts together??
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.freightwaves.com/news/boeing-certification-troubles-in-canada-ground-1st-westjet-freighters/amp
Boeing certification troubles in Canada ground 1st WestJet freighters
-> A delay in getting four 737-800 aircraft, newly converted to freighters by Boeing, certified by the Canadian government has set back WestJet’s plans to expand into freighter operations by nine months. The four cargo jets are sitting idle on the tarmac at Calgary International Airport, WestJet’s home base, while Boeing awaits approval from aviation authorities for the design changing the used passenger aircraft into a dedicated freighter.
-> WestJet officials indicated last spring they expected to have two cargo jets in revenue service by July 1, or sooner. The airline is leasing the 737-800s from BBAM Aircraft Leasing and Management
-> WestJet Cargo, essentially a startup airline within an airline, will be the first in Canada to operate a 737-800 modified under Boeing’s conversion program. The airline had two of the cargo jets in its possession by midsummer, according to an aviation database shared with FreightWaves. WestJet will have lost nine months between the original start date of freighter service in July and next year’s revised schedule.
-> One reason Boeing’s 737-800 conversion may not be fully ready for certification is a new Transport Canada requirement for planes to undergo “cold-soak” testing to demonstrate they will perform in extreme cold temperatures, which likely caught Boeing by surprise. The testing typically involves parking a plane at a northern airport where temperatures reach minus 40 degrees Fahrenheit and operating flaps, doors, systems and gears to make sure nothing sticks or freezes up.
-> If Boeing didn’t realize until the spring it would need to conduct extreme-temperature tests it likely had to wait for winter to come around again.
-> “The delays likely are costing WestJet or BBAM a lot of money, depending on whether WestJet is making lease payments or not for aircraft it can’t use yet. WestJet is also paying to park the planes at Calgary International Airport. BBAM could be subject to penalties for not delivering usable aircraft within an agreed time frame. The lessor in turn could have a claim against Boeing for late delivery. And Boeing is minus cash flow from the deal because it won’t get paid until the planes get certified and can fly, aviation leasing experts say.
A380 Evacuation slides problems coming out of storage
https://simpleflying.com/stored-airbus-a380-evacuation-slides-splitting-seams/
from an article today
“Boeing released a statement days after the insurrection in which it said it “strongly condemns the violence, lawlessness and destruction that took place in the US Capitol”. In the 2022 cycle the Boeing Company Pac contributed $418,000 to support Republican candidates who had been vocal in forwarding lies questioning the validity of the 2020 presidential election.
Boeing declined to comment.”
People should be made aware of facts like this. Corporations’ questionable behavior should be front page news above the fold…
FG: AirAsia X to double A330 fleet by mid-2023
It don’t surprise me. The A330neo is a capable plane at an attractive price (surmising).
Singapore Airlines is also experiencing a huge uptick in demand 👍
Pedro@ Exciting news ..so air Asia x is doubling their fleet from 6 to 13 a330’s
Wowww
Hardly earth shattering !!
At least they won’t have to offload those 330’s sitting in storage for years..
Latest from TAP.!!!
Extremely disappointed with the performance of their Trent 7000’s from current 339 fleet…!!
Surprised AB let that story leak out..!!
And, yet, you got all excited by two recent “orders” for the 777XF 😅
“Surprised AB let that story leak out..!!”
Why? It’s an RR issue, not an AB issue.
Just like the PW engines on the 777-200LR…
No offense ..but ..if I wanted your opinion, I’d ask for it..
Ohh ok ..I get it.. it’s ok for you to defend a friend ..I do the same , you say mind your own business…
Ohh yess forgot to mention FAA issues urgent AD to A220 operators after 2 nearly catastrophic incidents involving inadvertent engagement of the autopilot..
Had to mention ,since neither of you 2 jokers would !!
Careful…calling others “jokers” tends to precipitate reprimands from Scott.
@ DoU did a lot of that recently, and we haven’t heard from him in a while.
How about just behaving yourself, so that Scott can enjoy his Thanksgiving weekend?
@TC
Lol
@Bryce
Yup.
could you be so kind as to give the AD ref that you are referencing?
perchance CF-2022-65 ?
that one is urgent as in “within 36month”
@TC: Cycling old news?? Lol.
May be you better email Delta’s CEO, they are adding their A330 order this year!! Don’t forget Delta has one of largest fleet!!!
They can take some of the soon to be cancelled Garuda 330 n orders or the bogus Iran Air order..
Take your pick.
I doubt you have to worry for DAL, which is well-run, unlike the domestic airframer which can’t pull its (____) together, according to MOL
Oops
*Recycling* old news …
As observable on a regular basis you seem to
have access to privileged information not available to apparently anybody else.
“synthetic” information?
-> (And this is the beauty of the G7 oil price cap: it doesn’t cap Russian oil flows — as the US wants more oil into the market –, and it doesn’t, really, cap the flow of petro-dollars to the Kremlin, either. Everyone can claim victory; other than the Ukrainians, that’s it)
https://mobile.twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1595362904211361792?cxt=HHwWgMDUlfuG76MsAAAA
Sanctions *theatre*, then. 😉
#unsurprised
“ukraine unhappy”
How many MegaTonnes of gas did the Ukrainians pilver from the pipelines ( beyond the “priced for friends” gas and the Xtra gas they got allocated for maintainance work they did not do properly)?
Ms Tymoshenko and her ilk didn’t get rich on doing the Rapunzel thing.
IMU nobody will achieve buying at price cap prices. dysfunctional idea.
>Ms Tymoshenko and her ilk didn’t get rich on doing the Rapunzel thing.
heh.
“United Airlines introduced its Boeing 737 MAX aircraft on a South American route for the first time. The Boeing MAX 8 flew from Newark to Bogota, Colombia” 2477 miles and a little over 5 hour flight time…. Someone should remind UA there are commercial aircraft called widebodies
https://simpleflying.com/united-airlines-flies-a-boeing-737-max-to-south-america-for-the-first-time/
Since I routinely fly between Seattle and NYC or DCA and sometimes Boston with up to 6 hours WB, I don’t see what the big deal about this flight is.
We all don’t fly business class lol
China’s Xiamen Airlines to start A321neo ops in late 1Q23
#Interesting
-> Currently @emirates has 84 active #A380 and 17 in cabin conversion. By 2024 all remaining 115 will fly again President Sir Tim Clark told me in Berlin today. Also revealed EK is looking at an #A350-1000 order
https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaethFlies/status/1595362150301696000
“Also revealed EK is looking at an #A350-1000 order”
No surprise there: the new cabin configuration can carry more than 400 passengers — and it’s already certified and flying.
Presumably Emirates has the option to up-size (part of) its existing A350-900 order (50 frames) to A350-1000s instead, if desired.
I’ve been on 9-abreast A350s and they were very roomy. I’d be very interested to see what the 10-abreast configuration is like — I doubt that it’s any worse than a 9-abreast Dreamliner. Personally, I don’t find 10-abreast 777s to be cramped.
Bloomberg:
-> Emirates is expecting an update on engine issues afflicting Boeing Co.’s long-delayed 777X widebody on Dec. 6.
-> A glitch discovered about a month ago halted testing, with a turbine sent to its manufacturer GE Aviation in Cincinnati for analysis. If the problem is diagnosed as a manufacturing or component issue, tests could resume as early as January
-> Clark said it’s possible Emirates could consider pulling 777X orders if the model, already five years late, suffers further delays.
Testing? The engine is still undergoing “testing”?
Its first ground run was in April 2016, and its first flight was in March 2018.
What’s still being “tested”?
@Frank recently informed us about some sort of (alleged) vortex/instability problem with the engine — perhaps that required a partial re-design.
> Testing? The engine is still undergoing “testing”? <
"We got it now."
oh
five-or-so years’ delay should it. 😉
or maybe the official story is not the true one; I do not know.
“damned stubborn vortexes..”
heh
Makes you wonder, if it’s going on so long, how much of a discount has BA offered airlines to keep their orders intact. At the end of the day, this is business and they’ve got airlines to run.
Appears last flight of N779XX was in August, N779XW in early October
I think airlines like EK, SQ, AF, LH and TK also ordering A350-1000s has become inevitable. Understandably they don’t want to put all their eggs in one basket however, with A being dominant at NB’s already. A is strategically keeping quiet on the topic.
“Understandably they don’t want to put all their eggs in one basket however”
Seeing as B seems to have lost the ability to design certify/aircraft — and also seems to be losing the ability to manufacture them reliably — airlines may, in reality, just have to put up with less choice from now on, whether they like it or not.
W’ll see. I think everybody in the industry sees at least 2 serious competitors in civil aviation is necessary for healthy competition and innovation. The US side sinking away seems unacceptable, curious what Washington will do..
Maybe DC will take a page from the “CHIPS Act of 2022 would revitalize the U.S. semiconductor industry and promote U.S. economic and national security.” and apply it to the US commercial aircraft industry ecosystem (not just Boeing) You can’t rely on the Boeing’s BOD and shareholders to make the right decision for the US commercial aircraft industry value chain
https://www.semiconductors.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Pass-the-CHIPS-Act-of-2022-Fact-Sheet.pdf
That would be hilarious, in view of all the subsidy allegations that BA has flung at AB throughout the years 😅
And BA has already received $75B in state and federal aid since 1994…
1. Incentives ($$) don’t solve the domestic airframer’s execution problem. Throwing good money after bad (777X program cost write-off, 787 program cost overhang) would help?
2. The semi industry has slipped into a severe downturn, how more excess capacity is going to help???
The US has gone over a range of industry protective measures.
Afair none of these worked as intended in the long run.
foreign competition just got better while the locals fell further behind.
The A330neo is like a solid body-shot in boxing: the initial effect is not large, but
cumulatively the effect might be profound. And it didn’t cost much.. didn’t cost much
[cough, 787, cough] didn’t cost much.. a good semi-defensive move from Airbus, in my opinion.
Adding: Boeing still seems to be learning how to build the 787 (I won’t mention Boeing’s continuing QC issues in that as well as their other programs), and if the savvier number guys here are right, that program will not make a profit.
Contrast w/ the other guys’ competing aircraft.. I’m not sure composite fuselages
are a net advance, full lifecycle considered. And if Airbus’s Wing of Tomorrow™ proves to be more than PR, they look to be very well positioned.
[P]assengers in Europe will now be able to connect to 4G or 5G while on a plane.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1596083662830936064
Too bad for them..
😉
The Man who Broke Capitalism
Jack Welch
https://leehamnews.com/2022/08/01/pontifications-two-books-examine-ges-fall-from-grace/
https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/121953-cathay-pacific-in-talks-for-more-narrowbody-jets-freighters
Cathay Pacific Order Shows Boeing Weakness
https://mentourpilot.com/cathay-pacific-order-shows-boeing-weakness/
From that link: “..in much of Asia, “medium-haul” works a bit differently. There are a lot of very high-demand routes, where aircraft the size of the 767 and the A330 have been very appropriate. This region has seen more sales of the A330 than anywhere else in the world. Its replacement in the Airbus lineup is the A330neo. And unlike the larger A350, the A330neo is financially viable even for such shorter, medium-haul routes..”
and
“..Boeing recently reiterated that it is in no hurry to launch something between the largest 737 MAX (737-10) and the smallest 787. It will be interesting to see how this strategy affects Boeing’s sales in this Cathay Pacific order. Boeing has seen other events impact its sales in China. But if it loses sales like this one, it really has nobody else to blame.”
Reuters
MOL: Ryanair will be lucky to receive 40 Boeing 737 MAX aircraft by the end of June from the 51 due for delivery …
Reuters
U.S. lawmakers holding talks on Boeing 737 MAX certification