Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- 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
- Bjorn’s Corner: New engine development. Part 3. Propulsive efficiency April 12, 2024
Airbus and Boeing 2022 orders and deliveries
By Bjorn Fehrm
January 10, 2023, © Leeham News: Airbus and Boeing released their 2022 delivery and order data today. With a delivery of 661 airliners, Airbus is a 38% larger supplier than Boeing at 480 aircraft.
Airbus had a target of 700 deliveries but came short due to supplier constraints in a year of COVID recovery, raising energy prices due to the war in Ukraine and labor shortages. Boeing is not out of a tunnel caused by 737 Max crashes and 787 quality problems.
On the order side, Airbus booked 820 net orders versus Boeing’s 774. The Airbus backlog is 33% larger at 7,239 aircraft versus Boeing’s 5,430 jets.
Airbus’ 2022
Airbus hosted a question and answer with CEO Guillame Faury and Chief Commercial Officer Christian Scherer after the publication of the data. It also publicized an infographic that puts the 2022 figures in perspective, Figure 1.
Figure 1. Airbus’s visualization of orders, deliveries, and backlog over the last years. Click to enlarge. Source: Airbus.
The orders were 62% higher than in 2021, and Scherer said that single aisle orders are now delivery slot limited with the first free slot in 2029.
Widebody orders have picked up, which is less visible as the year includes large widebody cancellations from AirAsia (a reset of its inflated A330-900 order) and A350-1000 cancellations from Qatar Airways, as seen in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Changes in orders for Airbus A330-900 and A350-1000. Source: Leeham Co.
The modest Airbus delivery increase of 8% from 611 in 2021 to 661 aircraft for 2022 was partly due to the more complex A321 now out-delivering the A320 for the first time (264 versus 246), but also because the A220 doesn’t increase more than three units (53 versus 50). The supply chain is the limiting factor for these product lines, as Airbus had hoped to deliver more aircraft.
The 661 deliveries shall be compared with 863 before COVID. Airbus high single-aisle sales put pressure on deliveries, and Faury said the delivery rate increase is still 65 per month by 2024, up from last year’s 43 per month. By “the mid-decade,” Airbus wants to be at 75 A321/A320 per month.
The A330 line has seen a 78% increase in deliveries at 2.7 per month instead of 1.5 per month in 2021. According to Scherer, the sales are healthy, masked by AirAsia resetting its old order for 78 A330-900 to 15.
A350 was produced at rate five during 2022 with 60 deliveries compared with 55 during 2021. The 60 includes a reduction of two Aeroflot machines that were recorded as delivered 2021, but where the actual fly-out to Russia could not be done due to sanctions.
Boeing’s 2022
Boeing has net orders of 774 jets and delivered 480 commercial aircraft during 2022, an increase in sales of 62% from 479 orders in 2021 and an increase in deliveries of 41% compared with 340 in 2021.
The different programs ran as follows:
- 737 had 561 orders versus 749 in 2021 and deliveries of 387 versus 263 the year before.
- 767 had 31 orders versus 38 in 2021. Boeing delivered 33 767s versus 32 during 2022
- For 777, the numbers were 68 (53) and an even 24 deliveries for both years
- The 787 had 114 orders in 2022 versus 21 2021. Deliveries reached 31 versus 14 for 2021
- Finally, 747 had no order in 2022 versus five 2021 and five deliveries versus seven.
The numbers show how Boeing is still suffering from its MAX debacle, where the delivery rate during 2022 only reached 32 per month for the 737 despite a large stock of produced aircraft.
The 787 manufacturing problems are halfway resolved, with a doubling of deliveries to 31 in 2022, despite a late restart of deliveries in 3Q2022.
It’s real good to see this post, which should provide for some lively discussion.
Not really, you can only say, ‘Boeing sucks” so many ways before it gets stale
Many cheerleaders here. I can easily point out a few.
You can be supportive of Boeing as a company while understanding its management is worthless. While I wish the worst on Calhoun, I wish the best for Boeing.
Equally few in the US like State Formed Companies. I can admire Airbus as a rare success and as we have seen, its success came as it moved away from the original model of lots of national interference to very independent.
I would bet my bottom dollar the rank and file and even a lot of managers with both companies would happily sit down and have a beer with each other.
The issues are wide-spread.
Emails that mocked FAA and “clowns” who designed the 737 MAX; letting mechanics to inspect their own work in order to speed up production; manager pulled a part from a scrap bin to put into an aircraft; FOD has been a persistent problem for so long, there’re issues from the top to *the bottom*.
It’s well-documented @TW no need turn a blind eye and ignore.
The numbers also show us how airbus’ wide body backlog continues to weaken as Boeings strengthens. It’s okay to say that too
It’s just such a pity for BA that that backlog won’t do much to shore up its balance sheet — low-to-zero margins, reach-forward losses, etc.
There’s not much point in selling stuff if you can’t make a profit from it.
Not much point having a bigger WB backlog if you continue to make operating losses building and delivering them.
They are “turning” the corner or so they say …. the BA C-suite boys have been propagating for the last couple of years in order to pump the stock higher.
I just had an insight into the doom and gloom mindset.
What they really want is for Boeing to pull the fire alarm, evacuates Everett, Renton and Charleston and then dynamite the plants
For those of us who wish Boeing company well (and detest Calhoun) its good to see some silver lining.
Everett gets to stay busy fixing 787s (there has to be a lot of satisfaction in Everett even though its going to end in a couple of years)
737 production is stabilizing and good orders on the 777-8F.
As Everett will be down to the 777 and 767 production, that is good news for them. The KC-46A should get extended soon and that is all good news long term. Well and lots of elbow room.
Clearly there are huge issues, but its better to have a base and hope than nothing and the ship has just hit an ice berg and is sinking fast.
Almost five billion dollar charge for customer concessions and additional cost in production and inspection/rework.
Cheerleaders cheering the more water gushing into a sinking ship, the merrier!
I re-read a LNA blog, notice all those posters who jumped in and defended BA.
https://leehamnews.com/2014/09/10/al-jazeera-slams-787-boeing-punches-back-our-scathing-review/
It begs the question, did they help to doom BA?
Thanks Transworld. This comment section is funny. It’s like they live for Boeing bad news, they need it to breathe, almost as if it pays their bills but who knows, who cares.
This same comment section telling me about making no money on production and delivery but will jump to the ceiling when Airbus sells an A220. Meanwhile they’re selling each plane at a loss and no change of that in sight as this blog has revealed
The rhetoric is stale, offers zero credible insight and the worst part? It’s the same people over and over and over again. And there will always be something.
I want Boeing to do well, I think they build excellent aircraft and have for many years and I think they have great products. Doesn’t take anything away from airbus. They have excellent products too but they have weaknesses just as Boeing too has weaknesses but it’s so easy and quite frankly unoriginal to cling unto Boeing weaknesses and when you point out an airbus weakness you have a pack of cronies come for you. But I was just stating facts at the end of day
@ Naeto
“The rhetoric is stale, offers zero credible insight and the worst part? It’s the same people over and over and over again. And there will always be something.”
Thanks for that: it’s a perfect synopsis of the bottomless pit at BA, and the PR hot air that’s attempting to mask it.
*********
“I think they have great products”
Sure they do — if one is prepared to ignore recurrent crashes, historic groundings, FOD and other QC issues, huge compensation payments, lengthy certification delays, public scuffling with regulators, public exasperation from customers, Congressional inquiries, multiple lawsuits, etc. — which, of course, is all just irrelevant noise in the margins 😉
@Bryce
As the repeated claim that AB “cooked the books” and the fantasy that an airframer could claim wing join up as their “delivery” now clarified and went up in smoke, no wonder some can be upset here: their home team is losing, irrefutably, again.
The problem is the possible long-term decline as long as BA stays on the current path, which some prefer to turn a blind eye and look away.
@Naeto:
“But I was just stating facts at the end of day”
Ah!, You’ll do a separate post for the “facts”?
( Haven’t seen any yet. bag of allegations … )
What I do on occasion like to see is “Karma condense over time”
I think Airbus deliveries are up 8% to 92, and lines filled out for years. While for the A350 the competition (777-9, 787-10) seems constrained.
Boeing deliverd a lot of 767s, tankers and cargo.And 777 freighters. Widebodies, good for them.
An area I am interesting facts wise is the 737 production vs the stored group.
Deliveries not being the same as production in that case.
Equally for Airbus what the true totals are as per Av Week the production vs deliveries being determined at the wing join station (for the A320 series)
And curious as well of the slots Airbus has for single aisle as both Boeing and Airbus overbook. Airbus says 2029 before any slots are available but somehow both Airbus or Boeing manage to find slots for customers.
Congratulation are in order to Airbus for getting as close as they did to the 700 regardless. Well done in rough supply chain times.
> Equally for Airbus what the true totals are as per Av Week the production vs deliveries being determined at the wing join station (for the A320 series) <
I'm having trouble understanding this sentence, as written.
Can you clarify? Thanks.
@Bill7
Don’t forget our poster has been repeating this report from years ago to reinforce their unmovable faith. Otherwise their whole social construct would collapse in face of reality.
Bill7: Nicely asked.
Av Week wrote that Airbus considered an A320 series a delivery at the wing join (ie, the guy with the counter adds one when wing join occurs)
Airbus has long cooked the books order wise. Clearly that dates back to when they were behind but it seems some things get institutionalized.
In today’s shortages then you can have aircraft sitting on the ramp with no engines or other parts that are not delivered.
And no I am not saying Boeing does not do things like all hands on deck to get deliveries (10 x 787 in December) but a delivery to0 Boeing is when the buying airlines takes possession of the aircraft.
Alt-fact is rampant. Is it in the water or the air??
Pedro:
Its in Av Week if you dare to read it. Of course that might disturb your world view.
@ TW
And let us guess: you can’t/won’t provide a link to this supposed Av Week article — right?
Gosh, one can only wonder why.
Then again, it’s hard to link something that doesn’t actually exist.
@Bryce
It’s pure fantasy that a major airframer can claim delivery at wing join up. It won’t be allowed in any accounting practice. It proves clearly that our poster has a poor understanding of what happens.
As noted elsewhere a number of times now, I was wrong on delivery vs production.
Using the wing join for the rate calculation makes no sense either, but that is what Av week stated Airbus used.
Normally an aircraft rolls out the door for Airbus or Boeing and that is what counts for monthly rate.
Right now Boeing has its stored 737s and or the engines from them mixed with the actual production. Boeing is not at rate 31 either.
Airbus also has supply shortages and at times engine holdups so while they have rolled an A320 type out the door its not delivered.
Makes for some interesting mental gymnastics as the difference in rate and deliveries are more upended.
In Normal times once it rolled out the door it was delivered in short period of time.
“”Production rate” vs “delivery rate””
beyond partisan “numeromagics” this is a fully moot point during steady state production.
The year end rush to close the books touches on “watched” delivery rate per month ( peak in Dezember ).
IMU best place to see changes in _production rate_ is watching the interval at wing join. ( kind of a nexus in production pass through.
Actually a range of repeatedly brought up attention points are nothing but partisan distraction. Usually it is a “too” on some quality “vector” while completely loosing sight of the “quantity” vector.
That is simply incorrect. A delivery is not counted at wing join up. The build rate is. The deliveries are audited externally every year and are T oT ( transfer of title).
Thank you for that correct information, Tintin.
” delivery at the wing join”
so they go in a rush of tacking wings to fuselages in the last two weeks of the years?
How faint!
you mixed up production count with delivery count?
Now how do you explain the repeat every year under the assumptions its cooked?
Does Airbus have an Alice in Wonderland handbag to displace the overhang of frames into irreality?
@Transworld – Any chance of a link to this AV Week article? I ask because either they’ve got something very wrong, or you’ve wilfully misinterpreted what they’ve said.
Airbus O&D spreadsheet for the year lists an A321 delivery to VietJet Air on 30th December. VN-A526 departed Finkenwerder on 31st December to Hanoi via Dubai. Flight VJ1043 can easily be found on your favourite flight-tracking service. Here it is on FR24: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/vn-a526#2eb31cb9
The same spreadsheet shows American Airlines taking delivery of an A321 on 29th December. N465AN departed Mobile on 29th December to San Antonio as AA9822. This flight can also be found on flight tracking sites like FR24: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n465an#2eb09408
Please feel free to provide any evidence that Airbus counts deliveries any differently to Boeing. What Av Week or you are suggesting as to when Airbus counts a plane as delivered is complete nonsense. You must think Airbus operates in a regulatory vacuum if you believe they ‘cook the books’.
As noted below, Scott C caught the illogical part and was correct in monthly production rate vs deliveries and I sit corrected.
Even though you now accept that wing-join is not counting towards delivery, I’m really not understanding why you think it’s an issue to use that milestone to count production.
As long as Airbus is consistent and counts all A32X production the same way across all their production lines, what’s the issue? The reality is, there isn’t an issue, but you seem determined to make it one in an effort to justify your unfounded “cooking the books” claim.
“I’m having trouble understanding this sentence, as written.”
Have you read that: “Frankly as I was writing it made sense logic wise.”??
Eyes opening 🤭
I’m guessing delivery slots are like “interruptible power” at an aluminum smelter.
Pay more and get guaranteed slots.
Pay less and get slots that are “flexible” to some degree or another.
Yes. It seems the Ryanair is like that. Its slots are conditional on an actual vacant slot.
They are like a standby customer for an airline….dont call us well call you
They sound like a grumpy customer stuck in departure lounge hell too
https://www.airlineratings.com/news/ryanair-boss-slams-boeing-executives-737-max-deliveries
I remember Southwest, United and American suffered from delivery delay of the MAX, they are *all* standby?? 😲
Ryanair:
-> “We’re *contracted* to get 51 aircraft from Boeing before the end of April.”
“Airbus says 2029 before any slots are available ..”
My guess is that earlier slots are done via “pretty please” addressed to customers with earlier slots that have an interest in a deferral.
Airbus is said to be rather good with that kind of Tetris game.
It will be interesting to see what January deliveries are for the 787. 10 were delivered in December and the usual is a rush to get out the door followed by a collapsed work force.
We do have clarity on Airbus A320 series delivers at 43 a month no matter how they account for them. As they are ramping up that is a moving figure of course and supply chain impacts are going to continue for some time.
661 seems like more than 448 to me
Damn that new-fangled euromaths!
Bill M:
I did not say otherwise. Airbus did a very good job under the conditions.
What I fail to understand is why they kept stating 700, that diminishes your credibility. The best accolade I ever got was being told that they did not like what I told them but they never had to doubt the information presented.
Airbus stated that they planned to deliver “around 700”
aircraft for 2022. I’ve provided that quote and link here.
661 / 700 = .944 purty good work from Airbus.
How’d Boing do with their claim of delivering
500 737MAXs in 2022?
Don’t ask, don’t tell?? 🤭
Edit
“How’d Boing do with their claim of delivering
500 737MAXs in 2022?”
Don’t ask, don’t tell?? 🤭
Kudos to Christian Scherer in sales at Airbus for besting Boeing once again.
Boeing needs to overhaul its whole sales effort in my humble opinion. The whole approach is old and stale.
Boeing did BETTER in sales last year . Just its ‘net’ numbers are lower because they have a stricter accounting standard that Airbus doesnt use
935 gross orders for 2022 for Boeing
The US airframer recorded 935 gross orders last year, but including cancelations and so-called ASC 606 Adjustments, the net score ended at 808. This is up from 580 last year
https://airinsight.com/boeing-2022-808-orders-480-deliveries/
Airbus Gross orders for 2022 was 1078 before cancellations. so Airbus did better in sales last year.
Thanks for *reality* check and point out alt-fact.
The trick is to sell at a sustainable price — i.e. one that’s sufficient to adequately cover costs 😏
Airbus had 1078 gross orders in 2022.
https://www.airbus.com/en/products-services/commercial-aircraft/market/orders-and-deliveries
GAAP ( Boeing ) ASC 606 ~= IFRS ( Airbus ) 15
realisation of revenue ( adjusted .. )
It’s not “so called ASC 606”, it’s actual ASC 606. If those orders were solid, Boeing wouldn’t have to highlight them.
Airbus also had more gross sales than Boeing.
ASC 606 is more or less irrelevant in the alt-fact world
I always did love those delusional orders from Air Asia for A330CEO, A350 and then A330NEO and then, oh forget it.
I refer to it as kicking the airplane down the runway. Very good verbiage me thinks.
Good year to take them off the books though.
If contracts were signed, there were “delusional” orders?? Doesn’t make sense “logic wise”. 😬
I would like to point out (per Seattle Times): “Some of the year’s gross orders were renegotiations of prior contracts for which deliveries had been delayed. As a result, the net order tally was *reduced by just over 200 cancellations*”.
BA
-> 2022 year-end firm backlog stands at 5,430 orders (reduces 4,578 when adjusted for ASC 606)
-> 2022 full-year net orders (net of canx/conversions) = 774
https://mobile.twitter.com/MaxK_J/status/1612845002836566016
Thats like giving dimensions in football fields.
ASC 606 just like the IFRS complement is a probability of achieving revenue.
Transforming this into frames “lost” is a move to hide the absolute numbers in expectable revenue lost.
In scope of cooking the books rather “elegant”.
( other detail: frames sold at cost up front don’t create a loss of revenue if the sale founders.)
Overhaul Boeing sales? Some of you are funny. That’s literally the only part of the business that is working. The way they’ve been able to sell the Max after the crash? The way they’ve sold 787s just this year alone, meanwhile it wasn’t even delivering for half the year. They’ve sold 777Xs, 777X freighters and given the current state, it’s not easy to sell that.
Cargolux went for the 777X at farnborough when scherer threw a hissy fit about why he had no sales about farnborough when no one was really asking given how well airbus sells anyway.
Boeing sales deserve a raise
Selling aircraft at a loss – is the only part that’s working. Exactly, thanks for pointing that out!
It seems like Airbus’s lead is inevitable and bound to grow as they have 3 manufacturing facilities, France, Mobile, AL, and China, while Boeing has Renton, Everett, and South Carolina.
But only Renton makes narrow bodies and Covid has to have saved Boeing from choking on itself had they been able to meet the production ramp-up they were planning.
South Carolina is limited to just the 787 and would take a herculean effort to make 737’s there, given that Burlington Northern has spent untold money and time making it possible to get fuselages from Spirit AeroSystems in Wichita and isn’t likely to be inclined to want to send fuselages to both places.
So unless Boeing repeats the folly of having a manufacturing facility at some distance from its components supplier and wants to have the whole thing depend on a handful of funky 747’s, it will have to set up an additional 737 line in Wichita in order to not fall increasingly behind Airbus in narrowbodies.
Airbus has more than 3 airliner final assembly locations, you forgot Hamburg
‘Manufacturing’ occurs at many many additional sites , just like Boeings manufacturing includes multiple sites in Italy Japan etc as well as US. Smaller parts are made in China, Australia, Malaysia , Britain, India Korea etc
Airbus plants also make parts for the 737 ( control surfaces)
Airbus also largely own the A220 assembly line in Mirabel.
Goforride:
Boeing has lots of space in Everett.
Frankly it would make sense to move the Renton operation there and sell off the Renton property.
I don’t follow rail routes so not sure how it could work getting to Everett vs Renton.
Goforrride
BA has production facilities in Renton, Everett, San Antonio, Charleston, St Louis and Ridley Park. Those are all final assembly locations, there are many many more subassy sites… Everett is maybe 50% occupied. Lots of space for new work…
Renton has 3 lines to build the 737 and 1 ITAR compliant line building only P8s. The P8 line will transition out of production and can be reclaimed for 737s and the program end isn’t that far away. This gets Renton from 60 ish with 3 lines up to to something around 78 aircraft a month at max facility usage. They have a lot of room before they need to think about assembly line room, I can see stall count being the first constraint to building the airplane.
“BA has production facilities in Renton, Everett, San Antonio, Charleston, St Louis and Ridley Park. Those are all final assembly locations”
I believe not all of the above assemble commercial aircraft.
Yes. Renton and Everett, plus Charleston are the only Boeing airliner final assembly plants where completed planes are rolled out.
Fuselage sections can be prefitted out before moving to the FAL.
Scott Correa :
The P-8 is going to slow down but they continue to get sales for it as its the only true Sub Hunter in the world.
A bit ironic that the 737NG lives on.
Boeing has assembly facilities in St. Louis. Currently only used for military aircraft, but there is room and workforce if they needed to expand quickly. Very unlikely since the St. Louis workforce is unionized, but it could be done if needed.
If the first free slot is in 2029 for a A320 then to all intents and purposes airbus has taken itself out of the market, certainly for a prospective startup.
Boeing is all but the same given their inability to actually manufacture B737’s. Would a credit committee approve allocations to variants of that aircraft that may or may not be certified?
Where do ambitious startups turn to for lift?
This industry is hopelessly broken and ripe for new entrants.
Ambitious startups can lease or buy secondhand frames while they’re waiting for deliveries of new frames.
Regarding slots:
One OEM admits that it has no slots.
The other pretends that it does have slots, but ultimately delivers late anyway (low line rates, quality issues,…).
Take your pick.
I have taken my pick. I chose not to invest any more of my time and money in this this industry.
You think no free slots until 2029 means no sales in 2023? Would you be willing to put money on it?
Hopelessly broken? Ha ha ha. Which new entrants are going to be able to present a real challenge to Airbus or Boeing?
Fastship:
Funny to base the view on unbelievable speculation.
Boeing will get the -7/10 certified.
I hope so.
But even before Boeing moved the 7MAX and 10MAX EIS below the event horizon interest for both (sub)types was “acceptable” but not really overwhelming.
7MAX Mk2 is now a plain shrink and thus moves even nearer the “same cost for less seats” metric that demoted the 700NG and A319 vs the next larger frame.
10MAX attracts many 9MAX buyers (swaps) and does not raise a major new/additional segment for Boeing.
No sales to an ambitious startup.
Incumbents of course, like this situation. They can strategically block new entrants with orders of their own.
The duopoly can be challenged. I’m sure of it.
Boeing is manufacturing B737 at at a rate around 30 *per month*
Plus there could be 150 built 737 that are no longer wanted by China that are for sale
Duke:
The data I see says 40% of the 737s delivered were from the stockpile.
That shifts as time goes on and the older aircraft take more work to get ready for delivery and the production line adds more each month.
Real 737 production for 2022 was more like 20 a month.
Just like real A320 was 43 a month (of course you have to determine if that is delivered or at the wing join stage)
Both are moving averages regardless as the Airbus ramp up probably will increase (depends on parts of course) and Boeing has that varied mix.
Per AW:
“Boeing’s current *notional* 737 production rate is 31 per month.”
Analysts believe actual roll-outs have not kept pace, due to various issues.
MAX-family deliveries totaled 267 through September, or about 29 per month, *including aircraft from stored inventory*.
-> “The company’s 2023 delivery projections suggest this will not change soon, meaning actual roll-outs will likely be somewhere in the mid-20s every month, with aircraft coming from storage pushing delivery hand-overs up into the 30s.”
To be clear, per below, Scott C caught me out on the difference between rate and delivery, good on him. Great logic and catch.
As Boeing is delivering stored aircraft that the original buyers did not want, yes the 31 a month is notional as per Seattle times, 40% of last years deliveries were from the stash.
Stolen? Really? Abandoned (sort of).
I assume in Europe that when you fail to pay for your car and the dealer takes it back they are stealing?
Keep in mind some of the 737 production is P-8 though I think none in December.
TransWorld said just a few hours ago, on January 11, 2023:
” Pedro: Its in Av Week if you dare to read it. Of course that might disturb your world view. ”
Hmm.. TW has been running that false “AB counts wing/fuselage join as a delivered aircraft!” trope for *how long* now- despite all evidence?
I recall Seattle Times reported there are “more than 250 MAXs still in storage”, does it make sense “logic wise” that 40% of the MAX deliveries came from inventory??
BTW it also reported that there was **”larger than normal discount” in BA”s sales last year. 🤔
In hindsight, it would have been better for Airbus to not reduce the A320 line as much as they did in 2020. 50/months probably would have been better. Of course no one was able to say for sure how bad the COVID situation will become. A few lost sales in the “best case” scenario are nothing compared to liquidity problems in a “bad, not even worst case” scenario.
Walter:
In hindsight I should have held onto my Honeywell stock until after Allied Signal bought them out! Sigh.
Boeing did “relatively better” on the order from compared to the previous years due to the fact that they can sell “nearby deliveries” whereas Airbus is fully booked for the next 6 years for the A320/21.
So the situation for Boeing is worse that it seems. If customers could choose freely without having to worry about delivery dates, there would be more Airbus A320/21 sales and less 737MAX sales.
Carl D:
That is one take or the other would be if Boeing hadn’t mucked up the MAX they would still have close to 50/50 market share.
Clearly its better to be 50/50 but the flip is they can provide larger numbers sooner than Airbus.
Pedro.
The other poster was saying AB was in a better place than BA as they had more production lines. I just took a second to list FA locations. Agreed, not all of them build commercial aircraft, but that wasn’t my point. My point is that there’s a ton of facilities inside BA suitable for future endeavors and that the 737 won’t need a second location as he hypothesized. The unspoken downside to BAs wealth of FA square footage is how much it costs to have Everett running at 50% (optimistically) capacity and the serious drag that is on BCAs ability to make money. As much as I loved working there, BA is merely a shell of its former self, and I seriously doubt it can bounce back soon, if at all unless drastic changes occur…….. I really hope the changes are made and while everybody screams about replacing the board nobody is saying who those replacements need to be. There are opportunities in front of them that require money and talent to exploit. The lack of people caused the development pause and the focus on stabilizing production. BA currently lacks the talent to do more than that….
I think that is a very spot on assessment.
The KC-46A issues had a lot to do with not having an A team to put on the project.
Sorting out the MAX, then the 787 and then the 777 should all gone in parallel (not that those issues should have occurred in the first place)
TW.
Be nice, that was my last program before I got hurt. There were some great people in the trenches, but not enough of us to get things to where they needed to be. The program was terrifically mismanaged because there weren’t enough Airplane Guys left that could bring it home. We fought mission creep every day, and lost…….
Pedro
“Many cheerleaders here. I can easily point out a few”…
—-
Don’t get excited, as expected 2022 is better than 2021, that’s what has been strongly narrated by me personally. Bad news, 2023 will be better than 2022 and 2024 better than 2023. It’s a recovery process that for me has been predictable…
(!) I’m sure it will be your last personal attack that does not respect the rules here.
Bryce
“It’s just such a pity for BA that that backlog won’t do much to shore up its balance sheet — low-to-zero margins, reach-forward losses, etc.
There’s not much point in selling stuff if you can’t make a profit from it…”
—-
You continue in 2022 still with your assertions without proof. It is not by repeating like a mantra that this is a truth
3 different sources listed and discussed after the recent UA order.
You’re not paying attention 😉
Bryce
What are its 3 sources? I remember you had an argument that SW had bought some 737MAX on sale.
I argued that it was not a generality when we saw CEO Ryan Air fail to get 737MAX 10 discounts from Boeing.
So please where are your sources?
Really?? Who said “Ryan Air” fail to get “737MAX10” discounts?
You believe UA and DL are paying listed price? Wow 😱
-> Ryanair and Boeing have often clashed behind the scenes as Europe’s pioneering low-cost carrier insisted on the *lowest possible prices*
Is it in the air or the water??
Ergh:
Talk about a logic bust. Airbus and Boeing of course give discounts which is well documented.
The assertion that Boeing is selling at a loss?
The only data point I have seen was Airbus incensed that Boeing did not make as much margin on the 787 orders for Hawaiian Airlines, which was a hoot.
How dare they not do what we say they should.
Haven’t you read here (and elsewhere) that BA repeatedly charged off program cost that’s not recoverable?? Jeezy.
Hard roof that BA was selling at a loss.
@TW *still* doesn’t get it:
Unit margin = unit sales price minus unit costs.
BA has higher unit costs than AB, so BA needs to sell at a higher unit sales price in order to make a profit.
@Checklist
You’re still not paying attention: we’re discussing widebody orders now, whereas the SW order was for narrowbodies.
I’ve done some searching using multiple search services and cannot find
an Aviation Week article that says Airbus calls their A320s “delivered”
at the time the wing and fuselage are joined. Perhaps the commenter
who has repeatedly made that claim will provide a solid source, so we can all be the wiser.
Bill7:
Per below Scott C nails it.
I’m still awaiting the link to this funny report from AW that was mentioned so frequently by our poster. I wonder if there’s any link ever existed??
May be it were only “logic wise” existed in one’s head.
Respectfully,
In my time I the industry, the claim that Airbus counts deliveries at their wing join position was never mentioned until it was posted here. They may use that position to describe Rate because there is some logic to that, but I can’t believe AB would use such a nonsensical process as described. They are a lot smarter than that
Scott C:
I believe that be correct. I sit correcte4d. Frankly as I was writing it made sense logic wise.
I may have wisdom but the memory is not as good as it was.
Ah, so we finally have an admission that the whole “wing join” intermezzo was just a figment of imagination.
Commenters should use links more often, because they’re a handy way of checking if something is fantasy or reality.
Also, some of us like to read exact quotations,
to keep “shading” to a minimum.
I speak of my observation and there’s nothing “personal”. The term by itself is neutral IMO. Baffles me why one would take it as a negative or as an “attack”. 🤔
Simply talking truth and reality pops the alt-fact world??
Thank you Pedro, we’ve heard.
………………..I am trying to put this in a way Mr. Hamilton does not consider this a personal attack…………………………………Hmmm……………I can’t.
So let me just state I really really disagree with your “nothing personal” statement.
What’s “personal”?
a) of, affecting, or belonging to *a particular person rather than to anyone else*.
b) of or concerning one’s private life, relationships, and emotions rather than matters connected with one’s public or professional career.
Did I miss something here?? 🤔
I think we can all be happy to see that Boeing is delivering aircraft again in numbers (480) after the 737, KC46, 787 and 777x drama’s in recent years. The are up from 157 and 340 in previous years.
Taking a better look at the context, details of the deliveries lots of perspective shows up, but still it’s deliveries, cash flow. And their are many businesses, incomes, families dependent on it.
It’s only positive cash flow if revenue exceeds costs.
Negative cashflow isn’t desirable — particularly when you’re swamped in debt.
Neither is cashflow from incidentals, such tax refunds and “advantageous timing of receipts” (as in Q3).
BA continues to have a problem generating meaningful, operational earnings.
Even with 112 deliveries in Q3, BCA still had an operational loss of $640M.
How many quarterly deliveries will be necessary to hit breakeven?
And hitting breakeven isn’t enough to allow debt to be repaid at a meaningful pace.
Pedro
“Is it in the air or the water??”…
—-
In the water …
In 2021, the CEO of Rayanair was refused an offer of 737MAX10 because Boeing did not grant him a discount. He then insulted Boeing executives in the media over the 737MAX.
He was obnoxiously outraged at Boeing’s ability to handle his problems.
That’s what makes all the difference that getting the kickbacks and the supposed lack of profit that you repeat like a mantra is wrong, and you have (as always) no proof of what you’re saying.
So stop it!…
“Boeing did not grant him a discount”
BA certainly did offer Ryanair a discount: any large airline is essentially guaranteed a discount of 50% at least.
But Ryanair didn’t get the discount that it was looking for. Maybe it was looking for 70%? Who knows?
O’Leary evidently wasn’t satisfied with the 65% discount that others got.
Pedro
“Simply talking truth and reality pops the alt-fact world??…”
—
No truth in what you say.
you have no proof
Change disk…
Hard to respond to one who failed to grasp basic fact.
Ryanair is a bottom feeder, only makes a purchase at absolutely the lowest possible price (or maximum discounts). This is widely known (and also well publicized), except for one poster here.
I don’t get the moral inuendo.
Isn’t what you describe the core metric of the greed universe the US exists in?
Let’s not forget the new kid on the block:
COMAC has now delivered (more than) 100 ARJ21s — including 12 units in December.
Also now delivered to its first airline outside China.
Best of all: it has FBW and EICAS/ECAM — despite being a “copy” of the archaic MD-80 — and it’s also certified to fly in China!
Today’s quiz: can anyone name an in-production commercial aircraft from another OEM that doesn’t tick any of these boxes?
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202212/1282926.shtml
From today’s new LNA article:
“China and COMAC have made significant progress in 2022 and will gradually build a viable airliner industry from 2023 onwards with a regional and single-aisle offering.”
https://mobile.twitter.com/paul_scharre/status/1609214132212875266
TransWorld
It does not mention any discounts that Airbus and Boeing may be required to establish for customers.
He specifies without (evidence and redundancy) “sacrificial rebates” in the hope that Boeing customers can obtain “these by-products” according to him, on the pretext that the 737MAX and Boeing’s debt are falsely coerced into doing so…
We swim in a sea of absurdity without evidence, to assert an old pious by theories coming from anti Boeing hardened as it is, by claiming behind that a so-called truth always without foundation.
This one doesn’t fly very high…
Pedro
…”Hard to respond to one who failed to grasp basic fact….’
—–
It’s a joke. You don’t seem to know the story or you don’t understand it.
Ryanair not only did not obtain the rebate it wanted, but it did not come to an agreement with Boeing and consequently there was no order for the 737MAX10 it wanted.
Then you ignore the story. So stop disrespecting those who are right or who disagree with you and bring hard facts rather than intimidating them
Don’t kid yourself more than that
https://corporate.ryanair.com/news/ryanair-negotiations-for-a-boeing-max10-order-end-without-agreement/
Bryce
…”BA certainly did offer Ryanair a discount: any large airline is essentially guaranteed a discount of 50% at least.
But Ryanair didn’t get the discount that it was looking for. Maybe it was looking for 70%? Who knows?
O’Leary evidently wasn’t satisfied with the 65% discount that others got…”
—-
Your numbers are baseless. No knowledge of the file, it’s confidential.
Who are you to claim knowledge of a confidential record of sales agreements between two parties in an industry?
You want us to buy this kind of nonsense? These numbers are popping out of your head to sleep better at night. The “Coue method”.
Disappointed to see Boeing getting its head above water. My predictions have come true
…”2022 better than 2021, 2023 better than 2022. And it will continue…”
I repeated like a mantra but a true thing
https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9thode_Cou%C3%A9
The benefits of having available cash and engineering resources: semi-autonomous flying tech from AB:
“Airbus Uses A350-1000 To Test Automatic Landing & Crew Incapacity Assistance”
“The technology focuses on assisting a single pilot in the event that the other should become incapacitated. The primary purpose of the technology is to reduce the single pilot’s load factor, enabling them to avoid task saturation and focus on flying the aircraft. The new technology will assist pilots in the air and on the ground until the issue is resolved.”
https://simpleflying.com/airbus-a350-1000-test-crew-assistance/
Perhaps AB should test for the sudden disappearance of a350 1000 orders as well..
Add Asiana Airlines to the growing list of customers bailing on the 350 1….. Joining Starlux, whom also gave up on the the stretched variant…
Leaving a measly 124 units sold some 17 years on since launch..
Stellar numbers AB…
“Boeing cuts its 777X backlog by more than a third after pushing back deliveries until 2023”
“Boeing said its 777X order tally at the end of 2020 stood at 191 compared with 309 a year earlier, according to the filing Monday.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/02/boeing-777x-orders-in-doubt-after-schedule-delay.html
This same story was reported by LNA:
“Exclusive: Boeing shifts 118 777 orders to “iffy” under accounting rule; 191 firm orders remain:
https://leehamnews.com/2021/02/01/exclusive-boeing-shifts-118-777-orders-to-iffy-under-accounting-rule-191-firm-orders-remain/
*****
Perhaps the re-kitted A350-1000 could help look for a TIA for the 777X 😏
I see your rehashing old news again Sam….
Can you at least get with the times instead of pulling up 3 year old 777x sales numbers..
Pretty lame if that’s all you have to fall back on considering how many new 777x orders they’ve added since then…..55 XF’s alone…a little more research next time !!☺️
Did you check the date on your Starlux story, Sam? It’s from 4 years ago.
And regarding new orders: 191 + 50 is still only 241..and 80% of that tally can be cancelled without penalty, due to the ongoing delivery delay.
A little more research next time 😉
“China expects annual production capacity of C919 planes to reach 150 in 5 years”
“Zhang Yujin, deputy general manager of China’s state-owned Commercial Aviation Corp of China (COMAC), the maker of C919, said the company had received more than 1,200 orders for the jet.”
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/china-expects-annual-production-capacity-c919-planes-reach-150-5-years-3201131
CT,
I totally agree.
Sluggish A350-1000 sales after 17 years of below 100 aircraft is a bitter failure. Even the A350-600 had done better…
Moreover, IMHO,
I do not see the interest of this “gadget”. As it was common for a co-pilot to find himself alone in the cockpit. It seems pointless in real life. It’s like the “ZeroE” aircraft, no one believes in it, except Airbus …
Checklist
“..Even the A350-600 had done better”…
Even the A340-600…
It’s a typo
Boeing hasn’t sold a 77=9 in three years. Only a few 777XF’s without unknow lead times.
I think in Chicago people are worried about some of their 777 customers talking with Airbus on A350-1000s. I expect announcements from Korean, Lufthansa, Singapore, Delta, Air France and the long list of A350 customers.
They are communicating about a 787-10ER to make it more competitive with the A350. I hope so, we don’t want the NB situation becoming the WB situation too.
Definition of a handful of orders in the Keesje mindset is in order..
66 new orders 117779’s and 55 XF’s…in that span.
A mere handful.. .sure we get it..
Another stern warning about 777x customers bailing for the 350 …blah blah .
You and Bryce been relentlessly pounding that scenario into the ground..
Piece of advice to the a3501 faithful…
How bout being more concerned with retaining the orders you currently have, than questionable ones you don’t ;!!!
Some analysts put the whole 777X order book in ASC606.
All but the most recent 50 can be cancelled without penalty.
“How bout being more concerned with retaining the orders you currently have, than questionable ones you don’t ;!!!”
Some analysts!!!!
😆😆 Let’s hear more from your team of experts..
Eager to write off the 777x program !!
https://mobile.twitter.com/dominicgates/status/1613732639634251776?cxt=HHwWgIDTvaXSkOUsAAAA
Pedro, thanks for this. Hadn’t seen it yet. Its a depressingly refreshing segue from the whos order book is flooded with bigger lies stuff that has been dominating the traffic here. Maan I’m glad to be out of that place. It has turned into something the old guys cringe at.
To All.
ABs and BAs order books both have a lot of optimism built into them.
That’s normal, its always been that way, it got so bad that ASC606 was created to limit the craap. Im sure similar limits affect AB so bashing each other about “lies” in the order book is getting tiresome since all we actually know is that lies happen.
At Boeing, Aircraft are delivered when the CofA is transferred to the customer, not when the airplane rolls out. Line rate and deliveries don’t line up because of this. That said, BAs use of their mday calendar and the new policy of suspending MDAYs when technical issue/shortages of engines s arise means that the production months will have fewer days in them than a calendar month, and when you review the production rate that way, fewer airplanes are made than line rate says BUT when you are supposed to deliver X airplanes (or fractions there of) per MDAY, The line rate checks out as good, because it accounts for non production Mdays on the Mday calendar where the normal people calendar doesn’t., yeah its Boeing at its clearest…….After you deal with it for a while, it clicks…….
Keesje
Everyone has the right to hope for the A350-1000. But let’s be realistic. I do not believe it.
If the 777-9 has not received an order for 3 years, it is certainly also and above all because of Covid, but also the delay in the program.
Despite the availability of the A350-1000 nobody seems to want it.
The orders dry up.
What’s really going on?
Recently the 777XF was launched and the program has obviously reached 400 orders.
400 orders for an aircraft not yet certified and delivered is fine…
article Comac C919 is ramping up to 12 aircraft a month by the end this decade (current capacity is 4 a month)
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/comac-to-build-150-c919s-per-year-by-second-half-of-the-decade
TC, Scott Correa
The 777-X is at 400 orders.
(!) Even with accounting rule ASC 606 according to the screenshot
The cancellation of the program is an old pious wish to the anti-Boeing who want to harm it through the tool that let in anyone from the main boulevards speaking behind their keyboards, internet
https://verovenia.wordpress.com/2022/12/30/it-is-already-at-four-hundred/
Totally agree Checklist…👍
Linking to VeroVenia?
That is not really giving credence to your postings.
VV is RandyT for the poor 🙂
Uwe
Does 400 777-X orders bother you that much?
Will you deny the screenshot?
We may disagree with him however focus on what is true
Apparently you haven’t even understood what the VV guy has written.
Checklist.
The accounting block is far different than orders. The accounting block exists to provide charge lines for the purchase of long lead items that aircraft will need when sold. It also authorizes the ultimate manufacture of ONLY 400 aircraft, total, in the 777x program as of today. Today, the accounting block should be read as saying we see NO POSSIBILITY of the manufacture of shipset 401. The program has no chance of becoming profitable at that number…….. I personally think they should rename it THE BOEING 380
Uwe
…”VV is RandyT for the poor…”
—-
??
state your thoughts
One really has to “check for trash” everything some posters inject here.
VeroVenia is talking about 777X “accounting quantity”.
ie. what Boeing expects to sell over the forseeable programmes future run. a pretty soft metric IMU.
Now does the 777X actually have its own slot in that bookkeeping arena? I’d expect it to just be an extension of the 777 “over all times” accounting quantity?
Uwe
Do you have proof of the real number of 777-X sold?
Thanks
why should I?
You wrote about 400 _existing_ 777X orders
referencing that VV post from Dec30.
Going there one can read that VV references accounting block numbers ( i.e. the reasonably expectable sales in the programme runtime.
( Though the intention probably was what you gulibly fell for.)
( and that increase was due to adding another type and not an improved outlook.)
Thus your statement is in the same domain as the “wing join counts as delivery” quip that died with a small squeak.
Please don’t litter this place here… any further.
I don’t believe a word of what you say.
Observe that the 787 solds at 1,500 orders
(Now 1.600 order since 100 United 787 order last december not in the chart), reflects reality and not a hope or expectation.
So why not the 777-X program?
Can you please give me an explanation for this?
“Can you please give me an explanation for this?”
Whatever that “this” might be:
No, I can’t.
Nobody can ..
.. rationally explain “irrationality”.
EOT.
You don’t know yourself? Wow. Speechless.
Accounting quantity is a magic number in BA’s magic accounting black box. Period.
400? Wow. Not sure our poster even read what’s written in their link before they posted.
CT,
The market has changed since the launch of the 787, the leader in widebody aircraft market.
The center of gravity of the market is centered on the 2-class 290 seats with business class lie flat @ 80/81″ pitch.
The A350-900 also sells well with 2-class 305 seats with business class lie flat @ 80/81″ pitch.
In other words the ultimate size 787-9 and the A350-900 are 777-200ER proxy.
The A350-1000 sells very badly because it does not offer a downward gap in terms of additional seats. We observe a bit the same thing with the 787-10, but which sells better than the “- 1000” while the former is a simple stretch while the latter incorporates differences/changes in landing gear, wings and engines.
The 777-300ER was an astonishing success considering its large size. The A350-1000 did not manage to kill it as Airbus had planned.
The 777-X timidly took over, the 777-9 is slightly larger but I am convinced that if there would have been a simple 777-300ER re -engined GE9X, there would not have been a big difference in sales for the reasons mentioned at the beginning (787-8/-9 and A350-900) flooding of the market.
However, i would say “only” 550 777X/-XF sold by 2038…
(!)I can only predict over 15 years
Thanks
“The 777-300ER was an astonishing success considering its large size. The A350-1000 did not manage to kill it as Airbus had planned. ”
Let us Check:
A350-1000 is in production, gets bought, is delivered.
777-300ER and all lesser siblings are out of production.
except for the Freighter. ( similarities to A330 and the demise of the 767 ( again except for the freighter )
Couple of years back the 777X was said to be competitive to the A3510 on a per seat basis. But being larger it should best the smaller frame. 777X still is a 2019EIS frame while the A3510 has moved on quite a bit.
I don’t expect the 777X to be canceled.
But I would not be surprised if Boeing Civil gets canceled 🙂
Uwe
1…”while the A3510 has moved on quite a bit…”
—-
Moved to regress in terms of sales you mean
2…”But I would not be surprised if Boeing Civil gets canceled “…
—
Lol …
The pious wishes should be canceled …
VV is probably made by a nice guy and he knows a lot but lacks any objectivety. He worked for Airbus & never forgave them, then for BBD and raged a PR battle for years against Airbus, pro Boeing.
When Airbus saved his beloved CSeries while Boeing tried to kill it, VV seems to have polarized further. He/ his site embraced Boeings block accounting and free cash flow as the most brilliant metrics since Napolean defined metrics. Few aviation analysts agree.
On his blog he quickly deletes any opinion not in line with his own and created his own justifications for it. The old school censorship, keeping people / opinions out makes VeroVenia funny but not really a reference like LHnews, in my opinion
Lol! Yes Keesje you summed it up nicely. At the same time it must be hard to work for a big reputable company like Airbus and then get fired at the time of Power8.
I can understand his resentment. However,
I completely agree with you.
“I can understand his resentment, ..”
Watch his convoluted defective thinking and see that this is the foundation that creates stuff like MCAS+envirionment.
But even Boeing only works him as a shill 🙂
you really don’t want such a person in your team.
sleepy killer.
Uwe
I’m talking about a resentment because he would have been forced to leave Airbus…