Pontificatons: Paris Air Show preview

By Scott Hamilton

June 13, 2023, © Leeham News: The Paris Air Show officially opens next Monday. LNA will be there, with some events scheduled as early as this Friday.

Our expectations are modest. We don’t expect any new airplane programs from Airbus, Boeing or Embraer, or ATR. These are the only remaining major aircraft companies outside China and Russia.

China’s COMAC finally saw its C919 passenger jet enter service last month after 13 years of development and seven years after entry into service was planned. There won’t be anything new this year from COMAC.

Russia, of course, is immersed in its Ukrainian war. No new civil airplane programs will come from here.

Based on the pre-air show pitches I’ve been receiving, the alternative energy sector is going to be well-represented and active at the show. Most concepts, LNA feels, have little-to-no future.

We expect the news from the Duopoly and Embraer and ATR to be pretty much all about orders. Expectations will be mixed.

No new products

Airbus tamped down expectations of the launch of the stretched A220, the -500. Last month Bank of America’s aerospace analyst forecasted that the A220-500 could be launched at the show. Airbus was quick to say this won’t happen. We have quite a bit of detail in yesterday’s paywall.

With the A220-500 off the table, for PAS anyway, what’s next from Airbus?

The short answer is, “Nothing.” Airbus has been very clear that it’s waiting for Boeing to make the first move with a new airplane. And Boeing’s CEO David Calhoun said in November that the company won’t “introduce” a new airplane until the middle of the next decade. So, neither will Airbus, which, like Boeing, is working on a radical design. In Airbus’ case, it’s a hydrogen-powered airliner that it publicly says will carry about 100 passengers and be a turboprop. The target date for EIS is 2035.

That’s the same year Boeing hopes to introduce its new airplane. It’s also the same year CFM International targets EIS for its Open Fan RISE engine. GE and Safran are 50-50 partners in CFM. GE, at its pre-PAS media briefing last month, reaffirmed its goal for the RISE to reduce fuel consumption by more than 20%, installed. Emissions would be reduced by a similar amount. The engine could be available for either Airbus or Boeing.

Airbus will be testing the engine on its A380 test bed. Boeing is designing, in cooperation with NASA, a high-wing, truss-braced (TBW) airplane that coupled with the Open Fan could reduce fuel burn by up to 30%. The TBW could also accommodate conventional engines that with performance improvement packages could get more than 20% lower fuel consumption.

But this is the next decade.

No 787 Freighter

There was speculation in some quarters (including here) that Boeing might launch a freighter version of the 787 to replace the 767-300ERF. The 767 fails to meet new emissions standards adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Governments must adopt these standards, and the US Federal Aviation Administration said last year it plans to. Boeing applied for an exemption for the 767 to continue production after the YE 2027 deadline. This application is pending, and there is no assurance it will be granted.

The ICAO standards mean that today’s Boeing 777F, based on the 777-200LR, won’t meet the standards, either. Any airplane not meeting the standards must cease production by the end of 2027. Boeing accelerated the launch of the 777-8F to replace the 777-200LRF. But replacing the 767 is more problematic.

The 787 isn’t exactly a match for cargo payload or volume. Its composite structure makes it difficult for a third party to convert freighters (mainly the 787-8). Boeing has been studying a 787-8 P2F program and a new-build 787-9 freighter.

More to the point, perhaps, is that if Boeing announced a 787 freighter program, there would be no incentive for the regulators to exempt the 767 from the ICAO standards.

Keeping the 767 in production

FedEx relies heavily on the 767-300ERF, as does UPS. Both buy new-build 767Fs; feedstock for P2F conversions is shrinking. FedEx makes an argument that continued production of the civilian 767 helps keep production costs down for the US Air Force KC-46A aerial refueling tanker. The KC-46A is based on the 767-200ER airplane.

With a backlog of more than 100 KC-46As and a production rate of only 12-15 a year, production continues to 2030-2032 for this batch of tankers. The Air Force is considering placing an order for 75 more. (Lockheed Martin and Airbus want to sell the Air Force the competing A330 MRTT.)

There’s a compelling argument to be made to exempt the 767 from ICAO standards on this basis alone.

No turboprop

Embraer hoped to launch its 70-90 seat turboprop last year or this year. At its pre-PAS media briefing last month, officials revealed that moving forward with the “TPNG” has been put off until the next decade due to the absence of a step-change engine that would radically cut fuel costs. So, nothing new from Embraer this year is coming.


ATR announced several interior upgrades and options for the current ATR42/72 series. There won’t be any new turboprop from ATR this year, either.

Orders galore?

The air show had the potential to see hundreds and hundreds of new orders. But Turkish Airlines said at the IATA annual meeting last week its expected order for 600 Airbus and Boeing aircraft is pushed back by many months. India’s Indigo is thought to be ready to announce an order for 500 single-aisle airplanes at the air show. This all-Airbus operator is believed to favor the A320neo family. But it was prepared to order Boeing’s 737 MAX to split its reliance when the MAX was grounded in 2019. Boeing has delivery slots earlier than Airbus, so I wouldn’t rule out something for Boeing—but I tend to doubt it.

Indigo may also place an order for widebody aircraft. It’s wet-leased a Boeing 777-300ER and it’s added the Airbus A330 to operations. I’d place a bet on Airbus.

KLM and an unidentified US airline have been mentioned as potential air show customers. We’ll see.

219 Comments on “Pontificatons: Paris Air Show preview

  1. On the subject of the NASA/Boeing TBW (now the X-66A), NASA issued a press release on this yesterday (see link).

    Of note:
    “NASA and Boeing sought the X-plane designation shortly after the agency announced the Sustainable Flight Demonstrator project award earlier this year. The Air Force confers X-plane status for development programs that set out to create revolutionary experimental aircraft configurations. The designation is for research aircraft. With few exceptions, X-planes are intended to test designs and technologies that can be adopted into other aircraft designs, not serve as prototypes for full production.”


    In line with other X-planes in the past, this is currently a concept study rather than an actual development program.

    • Where did BA find this MD-90 airframe for the demonstrator? How many more BA has??

      • From used market or the first production plane which they retained – which is scrapped now but fuselage-cockpit may remain

        • Com’on you think a scrapped fuselage would be used as the demonstrator??

          • Engines, undercarriage wing and tail movable surfaces may have been recycled , but not the nose/fuselage.
            Thats what I meant by ‘scrapped’ , no longer flyable but still largely complete. Its one of a number of choices but a recently retired plane is possible too

    • This brings together a set of efficient aircraft proposals

      Not sure that excludes any proposal including TBW…

  2. I expect some A350-1000 orders from A350-900 operators.
    ATR will be promoting its EVO project.

  3. Thought Delta was expected to be the “unidentified” US customer?

  4. Bloomberg: “Airbus Seen Expanding Narrowbody Lead Over Next Two Decades”

    “(Bloomberg) — Airbus SE will expand its lead in narrow-body jet manufacturing, the biggest segment of the commercial aircraft market, over the next two decades while US rival Boeing Co. maintains its dominance in widebody sales, according to a new forecast.

    “The global fleet will almost double to 46,880 passenger aircraft by 2042, jet lessor Avolon Holdings Ltd. said Tuesday in its World Fleet Forecast. Narrowbodies, the biggest segment of the commercial jetliner market, will pace the market with a 3.8% annual growth rate.

    “Airbus makes the top-selling A320neo family of single-aisle jets, which compete with Boeing’s 737 Max. The Toulouse, France-based planemaker is forecast to increase its share of the in-service narrow-body fleet to 58% over the two-decade span, from a current 53%, Avolon said.

    “Boeing, maker of the 777 and 787 Dreamliner widebodies, will hold onto its current 59% share of twin-aisle jets in service through 2042, the report said.”


    • I think that Airbus will still launch the A220-500 this year.

      • It doesnt seem likely until they have the supply chain costs and continuity under full control as well as the two FAL’s.

        Current production rate is are six aircraft a month. Airbus targets a 2025 production rate of 14 aircraft a month. That is a long way to go.

        The market wants it & it’s not really a competitor to the 180+ seats/AKH capable / cockpit commonality A320.

        Ramp up is priority, for the 500+ commitments in the backlog.

        • I suspect that AB will soon want to open an A220 FAL in Europe, so as to get a better grip on costs & quality, and to increase output. Would also make sense if the A220-500 will also have a LEAP engine option, in view of proximity to Safran.

        • Supply chain?
          First have to develop and sell a new model and then get certified ( delays)

          Full production may be 4-5 years away

        • AB will send a A321 built in China to a European customer for the first time.

          • Whose the leassor ?
            Is it one of the chinese affiliated companies for Wizz Air

      • Lol! My God, why do it?…

        I have already explained the disadvantage…

        • Its a derivative of existing model – so lowers the overall unit costs as the suppliers get more volume.
          Should be able to match or exceed the orders over the next 10 years for the A220-300 model
          A319neo isnt selling while the Max 7 is

          i think the go ahead will come when the A321XLR is certified and leaves a ‘development’ gap at Toulouse/Montreal

    • “Boeing, maker of the 777 and 787 Dreamliner widebodies, will hold onto its current 59% share of twin-aisle jets in service through 2042, the report said.”

      59% through 2042 ?! Based on what? It can’t be the 787 backlog or 777x progress. Surely some home front satisfaction going on here!

      • The 787 is selling in number larger than the A330NEO and the A350 combined.

        The 777X will add its number on top of that. Sure its a lower sales market but the A350-1000 sales are lower as well.

        Calhoun deserves no credit, he would never have done the 787 program and it was under his watch QC on the program went into the pit.

        The 787 program is like the energizer bunny, it just keeps going and going and going. It will easily break 2000 built, maybe even push 3000

        • “The 787 is selling…”

          Not sure that “selling” is the most accurate verb/descriptor here…”transferred at/below cost” is probably more appropriate 😉

          • That commenter has previously informed us that “they
            make it up in volume” though, so it’s All Good.

          • Still, Boeing solds ~2000 787 Dreamliners and new widebody 777-Xs. while Airbus “only” ~1150 A350 Family A330neo. I know it makes some people sick.

            But I don’t have a vaccine against that.. Sorry…

            787 : 1600
            A350 :850
            777-X : 350
            A330neo : 300

            Draw your own conclusions…

          • Wonder how many 787 can last for another twenty years? Question about cost of inspections as a result of BA’s manufacturing faults remians unanswered.

          • The high school cmparsion of revenue between Airbus and Boeing for wide bodies isnt based on reality.
            1) Airbus doesnt give revenue /costs for its different models ( Boeing does)
            2) Airbus subsidiaries are its biggest suppliers of airframe sections ( Boeing doesnt)
            3) Boeing uses a single accounting model for its separate plane versions ( Airbus doesnt, with program accounting model on early production only before switching to unit model and program accounting for all the research and development ($15 bill for A350)

            Your comparisons are based on little inside knowledge along with mistaken assumptions that they have the same airframe build subcontractor model – which includes or not revenue/profit sharing

          • BCA “gives” out costs for its different models?? Lol.

            Welcome to the wonderful world of alternate reality of LNA posters.

          • @ DoU

            “Airbus doesnt give revenue /costs for its different models ( Boeing does)”

            Well, if “Boeing does”, then why haven’t you provided us with a link to that info…?

            The rest of your comment was indecipherable…

  5. The combine backlog of 777 and 787 is almost 1000. The total order of the A350 is just at about 1000.

    • add the A330NEO, but anyway 2042, that’s 20 yrs ahead! Based on what, the 797 while Airbus sits on its hands ? W’ll see, hopefully things turn around for Boeing!

      777-9 Customers are discussing A350-1000s with Airbus & w’ll probably hear more next week.

      • If you are going to quote total 787 sales, let’s not forget that AB sold a lot of A330Ceos in competition as well before the A350 and A330Neo were available.

    • And the A330 neo order book is currently 289 units, with the main A330 replacement cycle yet to begin.

      With a 20-year horizon, there may also be a CR929(-like) offering in the mix.

        • Remind us again: when will the 777X get its TIA…not to mind its type cert? 😉

      • Bryce,

        …”And the A330 neo order book is currently 289 units, with the main A330 replacement cycle yet to begin…”

        Lol! Others will say that this is an opportunity for the 787 Dreamliner as we have seen with many airlines (Lufthansa, Air Tahiti Nui, Hawaiian). Your argument is quite flawed.


      • Bryce,

        …”With a 20-year horizon, there may also be a CR929(-like) offering in the mix…”

        Lol! Come on, China has only just begun to learn how to design and build civilian aircraft. It is not enough to tear an A320 to dismember to attribute to China a historic manufacturer and that even in 20 years…
        Go down

    • Lol!!! Seriously, we get anyone in here. So if I follow your reasoning 500,787 and 500,777 have been sold? Lol! Ridiculous though….

  6. The 787 alone outsell the A330 neo and A350 combine Mr keesje. How are you going to spin that. They will both be getting future orders. Delta airline is the only marque major in the A330 camp. The rest are marginal airlines.

    • And I believe Delta is shifting more to the A350-900 from the A330NEO.

        • and for the 787-8.

          About the 777-9, I’m a bit worried because it is so heavy, and that doesn’t go away.

          And the fact it’s a new aircraft with old name. But FAA has been discussing that with Boeing for years now.

          It means smoot introduction isn’t guaranteed look at the previosu two programs MAX and 787.

      • I was more noticing the YTD numbers, actually. Maybe the Gang Who Can’t Shoot Straight will turn it all around very soon, though that’s not the way I’d bet. Forty-plus MAXs
        per month soon, they’re saying? Mmm.


        • Oh yes, the YTD numbers are a wet firecracker. But, don’t despair: ” Always Getting Better* ” 😏

          *Service mark

          • More and better PR is clearly needed for that entity. I don’t want to see their current crew lose their jobs, though; their [inadvertent] comedic value is great.

  7. The issue with the A220 in general and the A220-500 concept in specific is the moving of the market upwards, more MAX-9/-10 or the A321NEO.

    So what is its monthly production rate at it peak going to be.

    20 a month? Far cry from The A321 alone or Boeing combined. That is one part that is important to Boeing sales, the -9 is an interim that Airbus does not have, the A220-500 concept touches on that area.

    But the A220-500 does not have commonality with the A321 and never will.

    Don’t get me wrong, I really like the A220. Seen it in person and its a beautiful aircraft. I recently flew a E175 and it was nice, I really liked it and the feel of it as a passenger and a tech (performance was very nice). The A220 is better still.

    But you need numbers and its a difficult aircraft to work with a a combined fleet (Delta has more than enough to make it work, Air Baltic wants to and will when they get the engine issues tamed)

    So you need a single fleet of A220 (and some are) or you need enough numbers for it to be stand alone (Delta with its mix of Airbus and Boeing larger aircraft gets it to work).

    But someone like Alaska with scope clause? hmmm/

    Airbus has a bit of a tiger by the tail.

    Boeing I can see, nothing we can do about it now, the market is moving up and a competitive aircraft won’t sell as the interest in that area is taken up. Flight system would not be compatible with Boeing either as it would have an all new cockpit.

    Boeing has accepted the China market may not be there either. Depending on China needs it may or may not come back.

    So Boeing need is now something in the 190 to 275 passenger area and if they actually do a new aircraft (well after Calhoun is gone) is a coin flip. Another bean counter and it could be the end of BCA.

    • Not every single aisle needs to be made at rates above 50 per month

      A220 production might be Ok at 10-12 per month
      Thats all that matters

      large orders ( more than 20) are Air Baltic, Air Canada , Air France, Breeze, Jet Blue . Lufthansa, Qantas plus 3 or 4 lease companies

      700 orders in total just for the -100 and -300. 500-600 of the likely -500 is possible

      • Duke:

        If they can make money at it no disagreement.

        Its also a reason that Boeing would not dwell on it, one LCA mfg might make money with those numbers, two would loose money.

    • If Airbus capacity is full on producing A320neo/A321neo’s. They could do the A220-500 and redo the A220-300 with cheaper and easier to build parts with more automation and be able to reduce supplier prices while getting a GE engine option, like a higher thrust Passport engine.

  8. As i said already here

    I expect a rather exceptional @PAS’23
    in term of orders

    • Agreed, lots of orders of existing.

      Boeing may win this one again.

  9. If the 767 gets an exemption from the ICAO regulations, does that mean those produced after 2027 cannot be flown internationally?
    If you can get a government extension, then the regulations are meaningless.
    Seem to remember aircraft been banned due to noise regulations a few years back.

    • “If the 767 gets an exemption from the ICAO regulations, does that mean those produced after 2027 cannot be flown internationally?”

      It would appear so.
      Any exempted frames will — it seems — be restricted to US airspace and international airspace, e.g. between CA and HI.

    • Boing got an exemption for the MAX-7 and MAX-10; why not one for
      the Stone Age 767 as well? Seriously- I agree with you: no way
      should any of these exemptions from the rules be / have been allowed for that one company.

      They’re digging their own grave, though (see their no-new-plane
      policy; their Partnership for Poverty for their suppliers; their
      horrid relations with their employees, whom they see as expendable; shall I go on?).

      • Agreed.
        A commercial entity that can only exist by virtue of exemptions…has lost its right to exist.

          • @Prichard

            Former CEO P. Condit said in 1996 that the 777 would fly for 70 years. There are 707s still flying after 80 years. We could see the 737s flying for a very long time in different guises in the futur.

            The 787-F, or the idea of a KC-787 could emerge in a few years.
            But I think you are not able to understand what Calhoun meant.

          • Checklist. I must of have missed that statement Phil Condit PhD dissertation But did lay out the 7E7 barrel concept in his PhD dissertation (University of Tokyo) in late 90’s (yes I have copy so don’t bother challenging it

      • Lets see, the A330CEO F of course falls into the same hole.

        And no, if exemptions are granted then the 767 can fly Intenationally.

        ICAO is an advisory body not a mandate of an AHJ to start with.

        And as long as the FAA does it withing the prescriptions of the recommendation and other countries do not mandate compliance, no issue.

        The 777F also falls into this and can get exemptions.

        And the reality is that the F market is such a small part of the LAC market, its irrelevant. All those fires in Canada vastly overcome any emissions from the relatively few 767F being built.

        The 777F and the 777XF in fact would be complementary to each other due to the significant size difference.

        • I have to think the KC-135 is stone age.

          The 767 is actually quite a tech change from the true steam gauge aircraft

          The MAX has been hugely updated, dang, they gave up the open cockpit and put glass panels in it. It has a more modern system than the 767 does.

          The KC-46A is different as it has a 787 panel system in the cockpit but we won’t talk about that.

        • “And no, if exemptions are granted then the 767 can fly Intenationally.
          ICAO is an advisory body not a mandate of an AHJ to start with.”

          Countries that have voluntarily adopted the ICAO measures are perfectly free to ban non-complying aircraft from their airspace.
          UPS and FedEx will just have to be content to use their 767s on their home turf.


          Who says that AB will be seeking an exemption for the A330CEO F?
          When was the last one produced?
          It’s been rendered defunct by the A350 F — which *is* ICAO-compliant.

          • First, it’s the titanium, now it’s about the A330F. I wonder why some here are so poorly informed.

  10. @Transworld

    …”Lets see, the A330CEO F of course falls into the same hole…”
    Exactly, you answered before me. But not that, what about the entire world fleet of A330 CEO even excluding Freighter which is only a drop of water?
    What to do with ignorant people in aeronautics with selective memory and having an obvious bias but who know what to do with accounting to give themselves a little credit ?

    • Truly the reality is that 767F production will have zero impact on aviation emissions.

      Two a month are being built for the USAF and other allies and one a month for airlines and that will slow down further.

      So with 1000+ emissions spewing models out there, a few freighters shakes the world? I don’t think so.

  11. @Transworld

    …” Calhoun deserves no credit, he would never have done the 787 program and it was under his watch QC on the program went into the pit…”

    No, your comment has no credit. You can’t TransWorld make such a distant projection and out of context (2000s)
    This kind of wacky speculation has nothing to do here, IMHO…

    Calhoun launching a new toy to please the aviation geek? Lol! Look at the certification time today (777-X, 737MAX-10, A321XLR etc )…


    • Better would be to see it fully conform to the -9/-10 build and then you could get commonality as part of the tool set and bring the price down as well.

  12. “…However, unlike Boeing, Airbus doesn’t remove doubtful orders from those top-line order tallies. For example, it still lists 72 orders for the A320neo from Go First, despite the bankruptcy…”

    What is commonly called, an “inferiority complex” embellished with a scam.


  13. “Safran CEO: Unprecedented Supply Crisis Looms Over Aerospace Industry”

    “”There’s a daily struggle to acquire the necessary parts. It’s an industry-wide issue, not exclusive to Safran,” expressed Andriès. “We have transitioned from a demand crisis in 2020 to a supply crisis now. This is an entirely new scenario for us.”

    “Airbus and other industry players are wrestling with similar problems, predicting supply chain restrictions until 2024, given the rush by airlines to acquire new aircraft to accommodate soaring travel demand.

    “Andriès predicted that these constraints will likely extend into 2024, impeding the pace at which the industry can augment production. He admitted, “I wish I could say it will end in three months. But the reality is, it will persist.””



    This is manifested in the delivery numbers so far for June, which are meager.

    BA: 11 MAX; 1 787 (from inventory): total 12
    AB: 17 A320/321; 2 A220; 2 A350: total 21

    • The supply chain issues are a nightmare. I recently engineered a control panel and was astounded to find that the lead time to obtain items that were once 4-6 weeks has extended to 12-24 months. Reengineering to use more available parts takes a great deal of time and is also frustrated by lack of availability of even simple parts: a swich, a door handle. Everything is going to take 6-12 months longer to manufacture than usual.

  14. Lol!!

    By frustration Airbus is no longer know what to invent to assert itself in the lands of Boeing

    With ~850 orders for this Boeing copy designed to Boeing standards, is it (still) out of an “inferiority complex” for self-proclaimed “most modern efficient widebody”?

    The limitless swindle of Airbus leads me to believe that it is quite possible that the A350 is far from crossing the bar of the 1000 orders expected.

    Who knows, the marketing department could do it with their eyes closed one day, since anyway the “dubious” orders are not updated for a long time there.
    Just ridiculous…


    • “With ~850 orders for this Boeing copy designed to Boeing standards”

      ROFL 😉

      – 967 orders
      – No groundings, no shimming problems, no battery fires
      – No $32B program cost (and still rising)
      – Greater range than any competitor aircraft

      Thank goodness that not every OEM designs things “to Boeing standards”…;-)

  15. Predicting some major next gen frieghter orders to be finalized next week or at Dubai in November…
    Looks like Cathay is going with the 7778F….
    Interesting to see where Emirates goes with their choice !!!

  16. J.P. Morgan analysts questioned UAL’s ability to have enough FCF to cover its capital expenditures this year.

  17. Bryce,

    Lol !

    1….”967 orders…”

    ->Whith or without order in doubt ?
    This is what is charged here.
    You are (still) at the heart of the problem,
    you can’t solve that

    2.”No groundings, no”…

    -> Thanks EASA for not having made a CFRP skin melting of Doha in december 2021 a judicious grounding
    During the hearing
    at the court
    Airbus would have declared (in pain?) that the 787 Dreamliner was a good aircraft.
    Did you know why Airbus would have recognized the thing at that time?

    ->No one knows if the problem is fixed today.

    3. No $32B program cost (and still rising)

    -> Airbus will be deprived of 1600 orders what a pity. The more time passes, the more difficult it is for the A350, because of the 787 Dreamliner.
    The gap between the two products keep widening…

    4. Greater range than any competitor aircraft

    -> Lol! Greater range for what ?
    Weak argument, the market prefers the 787 ( Dreamliner and its full capacity in terms of payload range.

    -> The rose-colored glasses worn still abuse it looks like

    5. …”Thank goodness that not every OEM designs things “to Boeing standards”…;-)

    ->They deeply copied the fundamentals of Boeing through the 777 and 787 (Dreamliner. -> 2win engines vs 4 Engine 4 long Haul Airbus philosophy. When they realized their mistake the A350 was launched in a deleterious climate at the center of the “Power8” scandal rescue plans so Airbus launched the A350 in favor of the A340/A380 which were errors like copy -> 2win engine, integrated CFRP, “Double Bubble cross section” allows to put the low floor of the cabin has a height favoring a feeling of space at optimized eye level “Big Bin” integration inherited from the 777 on the 787 before Airbus copied it. More humidity and low altitude cabin impression. big window. Now Airbus even copies dimmable windows, a decade after Boeing. Crew Rest Area integration is a “purely Boeing” idea already integrated on Boeing’s advanced widebody. Despite having copied, there was a problem in 2018 on the A350s.
    Thé C.R.A. were not fixed firmly enough and even risked collapsing. Also in 2018, coffee spilled in the A350 cockpit due to the lack of ergonomics that Airbus could not copy correctly on the 777/787…
    These two facts had appeared in a few articles…

    Must I continue ?
    Yes, one last thing, the A350 is also really ugly Lol!…

    • Does its mother wear army boots?

      Come on, the A380 was ugly, the A350 is a good looking aircraft.

  18. Total 787-8 order is 424. Total A330-800 order is 12. That answer your question Keesje.

    • Absolutely,
      Thank you very much Daveo, this answers the question factually and clearly👍

      This answers the question as to the viability of an NMA/797/757X launch
      (no matter as widebody or narrowbody)
      This market is really too small.
      Sorry for the #AvGeek but #Calhoun Is Right!

      Recently Airlines are satisfied with
      the 787-8 Dreamliner with the latest Air Niugini order a few days ago as a new 787 ( Dreamliner familly customer…


      • A little surprised the 787 8 is still selling ..
        Looks like J.A.L.may order more soon, ..I see Azerbaijan Airlines also ordered 8 more of the “8” variant !!

          • Sorry, beg to disagree with your overused “discount” theory.
            You discount your product, to better compete with your competition..,since the 787 8 essentially has none..
            Your discount theory is very lame to say the least.!!

          • It’s wrong. Since its launch in 2004 the 787 Dreamliner has been very attractive. As of 2005, it had 400 orders above the A350. Discounts (if they exist) do not contribute to success. But the success by itself which has meant that for almost 20 years the A350 is behind. The more time passes, the more the difference is felt. I don’t know where the A350 program will be in a decade.

            Airbus must offer attractive reductions but the companies obviously prefer the 787 Dreamliner /777X..

          • @ Robert L
            If BCA weren’t giving unsustainable discounts, it would have much better quarterly EBIT. As it stands, BCA’s operatonal EBIT has been hovering just above/below zero for several quarters in a row. In 2022, AB Commercial Aircraft’s EBIT was 31 times higher than BCA’s.

            The proof is there in the earnings reports.

          • “Since its launch in 2004 the 787 Dreamliner has been very attractive.”

            Wahoo BA is soooo good at selling at a loss -> 787 deferred production cost 😢

          • 787-8 is also a cost outlier. Since they’re so many changes for -9/-10, -8 is effectively an orphan with little economy of scale from -9/-10 (see previous LHA).

          • Really -“787-8 is also a cost outlier. Since they’re so many changes for -9/-10′

            Boeing seeks to cut production costs of 787-8 to boost sales
            Boeing looks to revise the build standard of the 787-8 to share as many parts as possible with the larger models. A lot can be shared as the fundamental difference between the models is the length of a few fuselage sections.

            Do try to keep up, this was 3 years back

          • Why it hasn’t been done yet?? Has BA found a way to increase commonality??
            Three years have passed, what’s changed?? 🤭

            Last but not the least
            -> As outlined in a previous Heard On The Ramp story, several second-hand 787-8s are coming on the market as a result of COVID-19 induced bankruptcies and fleet restructurings. Whether airlines are willing to take those aircraft when traffic recovers will be an indication of interest in the smallest Dreamliner variant”

            *Two of those were scrapped* and both are the smallest ones!!

            Hey why our poster so frequently failed to connect the dots? 🙄

          • What was announced in 2020 has happened now

            Takes time obviously. But thanks for your quick acceptance you were wrong and had made out of date claims ( not backed even by your LNA source)

          • “has happened now”

            Lol. Where is the proof? It was under consideration three years ago. You believe BA has the extra manpower to handle this when it was caught with pants down and hair on fire?? 🤣

          • Do try to keep up… again
            production changes announced in 2018 or 5 years ago
            As it was more alignment with existing builds for what is a shorter fuselage only.
            Clearly the sales team is selling the 787-8 Advanced already, with 20 sold since 2020.

            Again from LNA
            “Boeing will implement the production change *later this year,* Larson told the press briefing.
            “The 8s and 9s in this building will build the same. The only variability we’ll see is the 10 is eight feet longer. We’re very excited about this common aft.”
            Hilarious to see someone dig the hole even deeper even when their claim was refuted the first time.

          • @ DoU

            You’re contradicting yourself.
            You said “has happened now” — which is past tense.
            But you quote articles that talk about the subject in the future tense.

            Pedro’s point remains perfectly valid: show us the evidence that the changes *are already in place* (i.e. not just being planned).

          • @DoU

            “What was announced in 2020 has happened now”

            1. 787-9/10 have 95% commonality. Changes from 2018 brought 787-8 commonality from 30% to 40% only. That’s it. These are all written by LNA in 2020.

            2. LNA wrote in 2020:
            -> “In recent years, Boeing discouraged sales of the 787-8 because it is a low margin airplane with high production costs
            -> “During 2019 only six 787-8s were built against 122 787-9/-10. The economics of building six parts per year versus 122 makes the 787-8 a low margin product.”
            -> “Why hasn’t this been done already? With a production of a 787-8 every two months, the investment of revising the thousands of documents and procedures to bring the 787-8 up to the -9/-10 build standard wasn’t a wise investment.

            3. The first sentence of LNA’s 2020 article is:
            -> Boeing is considering production changes to the slow-selling 787-8 to lower costs and boost sales.

            4. Has the business case improved for further changes of the 787-8?
            How many 787-8 are BA going to make each year? As the first two 787-8 that went off lease eventually got scrapped, there’s hardly strong evidence there are a huge demand from the market.

            It’s illogical to point to a 2018 article as “proof” that what BA was considering in 2020 is done!!

          • “Boeing will *implement* the production change *later this year,*”

            For those date challenged, *implemented* and later in the year was 7-8 months after the story meaning by end of 2018

            Done and Done. Well before Covid [2020]
            Over 30 787-8 have been built starting in 2019 till recently

            I have 2 links giving evidence the 787-8 production was normalised with the 9 and 10 types in the 2018 time frame

            You have no evidence for the claim it didnt happen around that time

          • Your words:
            “What was announced in 2020 has happened now.”

            My goodness. How can you continue to argue that the 2018 article is the proof?? It’s so frivolous. 🤣

          • @DoU

            “I have 2 links giving evidence the 787-8 production was normalised with the 9 and 10 types in the 2018 time frame”

            You’re still getting your tenses mixed up.
            The articles you posted merely indicate *an intention* to do something: however, you’ve posted zero evidence that that *intention* has actually *been achieved*.

            Nobody with even half a cortex takes BA at its word: the proof of the pudding is in the eating — not in the recipe.

          • I believe LNA updating of events any day over your uninformed view.

            perhaps you didnt read the LNA story properly for ‘tenses’
            In 2018, Boeing changed the -8’s tail [past tense] to be virtually identical to the -9/10.’
            ……as it was written well after in 02/09/2020

          • @ DoU

            That’s great: they changed the *tail*.
            And what about the rest of the plane? Are you also going to provide evidence for that?

          • @DoU

            2018 changes: 787-8 commonality increases from 30% to 40%; while -9/-10 commonality is 95%!

            That’s why LNA’s 2020 article talked about further changes *in future*! But why BA hadn’t implemented yet?
            As I pointed out (and you refuse to listen):
            Low production rate of -8 makes it “unwise” to invest and revise thousands of documents and procedures (especially with FAA today’s close scrutiny – who knows what happens when a can of worm is opened! 🤡).

            To conclude: 787-8 commonality remains at a rather low 40%, making it uneconomical to make (and sell) more. Hope it’s clear for everyone (except @DoU).

          • Bryce .
            Read it again
            “In 2018, Boeing changed the -8’s tail ”

            The information was written in 2020. Its not a prediction when its already happened

    • @Bryce
      A bit premature talking about market share for 2 programs just establishing themselves in freighter market !!
      So one has a 42% market share vs. 58% for it’s competitor , launched months later…
      Let the programs mature , before giving your lofty predictions about market share!!

      • They’re not “my lofty predictions”: they’re *current observations* from Simple Flying.

        Bit inconsistent that we have to “let the programs mature” in this instance, but not in the instance of the A350/A330 neo…

        • Bryce

          The A350 has had time to mature. Too ripe that it has become inedible.

          The fruit has rotted…

          The A330neo has been launched since 2014, a year after the launch of the 777-X in 2013. The 777X holds 350 orders and the A330neo +/- 300. The price and size of the 777-X is much higher despite this. sells better. But the 777-X has hurt the A350-1000 with poor sales not even exceeding ~200 orders for 18 years. Boeing’s spanking is painful for Airbus… 👋

          Moreover, the argument of the Freighter market is insignificant since it is weaker than that of passenger jets. Even if Airbus held 100% of the freight market (something that cannot happen) the market share of widebody (787 Dreamliner / 777X) is more important.
          The spanking is still felt…👋👋

          • It is called data cherry picking.

            It does not matter when the ubber long hull market is in the entire scheme of widebody F market as well as the singles aisle F market.

            Boeing rules, 737/757/767/777F and 777XF) and the wide number of 747-400F and 8F out there.

            Give the worst batter a 100 swings and he will hit one ball against major league pitcher. On base percentage is in the pits.

            But he walks out on Wds and hits that one ball he is batting 1000 (right)

    • Bryce

      “…The A350 celebrates its 10th anniversary “…

      The A350 has been offered commercially for 18 years (2005-2023) even with a Freighter version, the symbolic bar of 1000 orders seems distant and not yet achievable.

      Boeing is giving a spanking 👋 to Airbus in this market segment…🤙
      Looool !

      • “even with a Freighter version, the symbolic bar of 1000 orders seems distant and not yet achievable.”

        Keep up at the back. There are currently 967 orders and deliveries on the books. The Air India order which includes 40 A350s hasn’t been added to the list yet. That’s your 1000 easily taken care of.

        • Indeed…although it apparently doesn’t understand/accept that the recent Air India and Saudi orders still haven’t been added to the books (Air India only managed to secure financing to pay $3B in order deposits this week).

          And we won’t even begin to discuss how far the 777X is from “the symbolic bar of 1000 orders” — a full 10 years after program launch 😉

          Let’s see who’s doing better in terms of return on investment (never a strong point at BA):
          – A330 neo: 289 orders for development costs of $2B
          – A350: 1007 orders for development costs of $12B
          – B777X: 359 orders for development costs of $8B (still increasing)
          – B787: 1656 orders for development costs of $32B (still increasing)

          AB: 1296 orders for $14B investment
          BA: 2015 orders for $40B investment

          • @Bryce

            I wish people in here (not you) would stop comparing the 787 and the A350 as equals. They are not.

            The closest they come, is the A350-900 and the 787-10, which both have an exit limit of 440 pax.

            The MTOW of the A350-900 is 624,000 lbs.
            The MTOW of the 787-10 is 560,000 lbs.

            The OEW of the A350-900 is 314,000 lbs (typical)
            The OEW of the 787-10 is 298,700 lbs

            The range of the A350-900 is ~15,400 km
            The range of the 787-10 is ~11,900 km

            It’s a different mission aircraft.



            Those who go on about the A330Neo forget to mention that the A330CEO was in production and produced from 2011, when the 787 entered service, the following numbers:

            (49) 2018
            (87) – 2011

            689 aircraft delivered during that 8 year stretch, when it overlapped with the 787 production run.

            A little blurb from wiki:

            ‘As of May 2023, A330 family aircraft orders stood at 1,775, of which 1,571 had been delivered and 1,457, comprising 587 A330-200s, 38 -200Fs, 730 -300s, 7 -800s and 95 -900s, were in airline service with 142 operators. The five largest operators were Delta Air Lines (64), Turkish Airlines (60), China Eastern Airlines (55), Air China (53), China Southern Airlines (40)’


            So the 787 hasn’t matched the A330 family in sales or deliveries. Yet.

            We do know, however – who the profitability for the OEM award winner is…

            …but I digress

          • Yes, Frank, indeed.
            Remember that the B787/A350 comparison is generally made by those who are not very “versed” in the aviation world 😉
            Some commenters tend to forget that BA launched the B787 as an “A330 killer” and that AB launched the A350 as a “B777 killer”.
            The only obvious aspect that the two aircraft have in common is the use of composites in the fuselage (though in different manners).

            Interesting tidbit for you:
            Air India recently scraped together enough money to pay its order deposit of $3B on its big headliner order. If we assume that the deposit was 10% (isn’t that the norm?), then the purchase price was $30B. However, the list price was $70B. That gives us an average discount of 58% for both OEMs combined — which chimes nicely with recent AB discounts of 55% and recent BA discounts of 60%.

          • Evidence that the Air India PDP was $3 bill ?
            All the India business articles I have seen dont mention specific numbers other than it ‘could be 30% of the contract price’ ?
            Of course under half are Boeing planes and the other half are Airbus -$60 bill plus combined
            So dont know where the ‘$60 bill order for Boeing only ‘came from.
            Your future tenses have tripped you up again, this time its money

            To help you out this story has numbers that at least are coherent, unlike your attempt. Maybe your numbers man Vincent can provide some guidelines for the future to prevent embarrassment

          • Poor Dukie is increasingly confused.

            Don’t know where you managed to get the “‘$60 bill order for Boeing only” rubbish from — I certainly didn’t bring it up.
            I mentioned a total order value of $70B (which is for both OEMs).
            More accurately: $73.55B

            Here are links regarding the $3B deposit payment:



            If you’re not able to follow the thread, you can always just do some knitting 😉

  19. Looks like the 2 Air Niugini 787 orders were conversions from (now cancelled) MAXs.
    Further interesting to see that China Southern cancelled a 777-300ER in May, and that Hong Kong International Aviation cancelled a 777F. Looks like China is losing interest in (some) existing BA widebody orders.


    Over at Airbus, 16 A320s for GoAir were cancelled, and 1 A330-900 for Virgin.


    The 2023 order tally:
    BA: 223 orders, but 96 cancellations, leaving 127 net orders.
    AB: 178 orders, but 34 cancellations, leaving 144 net orders.

    • Airbus raises its China market forecast by over 12%


      -> “Observing a strategic change in Chinese aviation policy, Airbus has significantly increased its expectation of the size of the long-term market for airliners in China. With the June 14 release of its annually updated Global Market Forecast, The Air Current was given an advance look at the Airbus figures which include a 12% increase in the total 20-year size of the China market to 9,440 aircraft, now 23.1% of its global total. It’s a sharp jump from the 8,420 it predicted in last year’s forecast for the period from 2022 to 2041.

  20. Bryce

    “…Looks like the 2 Air Niugini 787 orders were conversions from (now cancelled) MAXs…”

    I’m trying to figure out where the bad news is in there. It’s a swelling of the order book for the 787, and it’s more free slot for the 737MAX…

    …”Further interesting to see that China Southern cancelled a 777-300ER in May, and that Hong Kong International Aviation cancelled a 777F.
    Looks like China is losing interest in (some) existing BA widebody orders.
    Lol! How catastrophic for Boeing.
    I pity them 2 777’s canceled, and still more orders @PAS’23 …🤙

  21. When in Paris you can creep around until you find a quiet crêperie, creep in, have a quick crêpe and creep out again.

  22. Interesting:
    FG: “Airbus hikes payload specification for A350 freighter”

    “Airbus has hiked the payload capability of the A350 freighter, bringing it up to 111t from the initial level of 109t.”

  23. Storm clouds on the horizon for BA:

    Bloomberg: “Boeing Supplier’s Labor Standoff Puts 737 Output Hike at Risk”

    “(Bloomberg) — Boeing Co.’s largest supplier is racing to avoid a potentially crippling strike, a disruption that would jeopardize the US planemaker’s effort to hike production of its cash-cow 737 jetliners.

    “Spirit AeroSystems Holdings Inc. is preparing to make a so-called best-and-final offer this week to about 6,000 unionized employees at its Wichita, Kansas, home base. Members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers plan a June 21 vote on the proposal and, depending on the outcome, could go on strike at midnight on June 24.

    “The sides are at loggerheads over wages, mandatory overtime and a management plan to gut traditional health-care insurance, said Cornell Beard, president of IAM’s District 70, which represents IAM members across Kansas.

    ““The company is again telling us what a bad position they’re in,” Beard said in an interview. “Every time there’s a sacrifice to be made, we’re the ones to make it.”

    “A work stoppage could have far-reaching implications for Boeing and its European rival Airbus SE — also a customer of cash-strapped Spirit — at a time when their factories are straining to keep pace with soaring jet sales. After 15 years of labor peace at aerospace manufacturers in the US, investors may be tuning out the risks of a strike, said Kristine Liwag, an analyst with Morgan Stanley.

    ““This labor agreement is a very large catalyst because the market assumes the contract talks will get settled,” Liwag said in an interview. “Is the market underpricing the risk?”

    “Spirit, carved out from Boeing in 2005, makes most of the 737 Max jet’s frame in Kansas and sends the fuselages 1,800 miles by rail to Seattle-area assembly lines. The single-aisle aircraft is Boeing’s top seller and provided about 70% of its first-quarter revenue, according to George Ferguson, an analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence. Chief Executive Officer Dave Calhoun aims to gear up 737 output by 23% to a 38-jet monthly pace by mid-year.

    “The Wichita complex also makes engine pylons for the Airbus A220 narrowbody and the carbon composite nose section of Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner. A strike would be “very disruptive to Boeing,” Liwag said. ”



    Perhaps Dave, Stan & Co. will halve their salaries and pass the other half to the Spirit employees in question? No?

    • I wonder what quality of work Spirit- and by extension, Boing- can expect from a justly unhappy and restive workforce.

      • Well, we already know the answer to that, don’t we?
        Every few weeks, yet another BA QC issue hits the news wires.

        You get what you pay for.

        So, BA overcuts on sales prices, and then expects to recover some (meager) level of margin by squeezing suppliers to the hilt?
        That’s turning out well… 🙈

        • Completely false claims.
          The production model of Boeing – major outside contractors- is different to Airbus – with its own fully owned airframe subsidiaries
          The nett revenue is completely different for each
          Just last week someone tried to compare the runway performance- well guess which planes needs higher TO thrust for its smaller A320 ?

          • Hey Duke: speaking of *false claims*- do you have the update on the ABC article detailing the Boing 737MAX’s enduring deficiencies you said would be imminently retracted- over a year ago, now? The article is still up, with no retractions..

            “Stay tuned!”, Ol’ Reliable Dukie said at the time..


          • @ DoU

            It’s simple bookkeeping, Dukie: if you skimp on the sales price, then you have to cut manufacturing costs in order to make a profit.

            You do remember this recent LNA article, don’t you?

            “HOTR: Boeing slammed in absentia at conference”


            “Boeing’s absence was roundly criticized by suppliers on the sidelines of the conference. The suppliers complained about Boeing’s payment policies (deferring payment to them for 90-120 days) after years of cutting prices under Boeing’s Partnering for Success. They also complained bitterly about Boeing’s lack of transparency and frequently changing production plans. Boeing should have been at the conference to face them and communicate with them.

            “Kevin Michaels, managing director of Aerodynamic Advisory, is a supply chain expert. For many years, he criticized Boeing’s approach toward the supply chain. Tuesday wasn’t any different. He once again criticized Boeing for its treatment of the supply chain. Noting that suppliers, mainly Tiers 1 and 2, went through “Partnering for Poverty 1 and 2” cutting prices, Boeing then promised payment terms of 30 days. In subsequent days, payments stretched to 60 days, 90 days, and now up to 120 days. Coupled with the 737 MAX grounding, 787 delivery suspension, and the COVID pandemic, the extended payment terms put additional stress on the suppliers.

            “In terms unusually blunt for Michaels in this forum, he predicted it will not be long before “the shit hits the fan.””

          • The facts dont align there with your bubble

            Boeing spun off Spirit while Airbus bought its previous UK wing maker. With Bombardier , they got the final assembly line/Mirabel for $1 then bought the Bombardier structures business for serious money
            They are working on the Airbus plants in Cadiz Spain to bring them closer under the corporate umbrella
            Good on them if they thinks thats best but it means theres really no/few T1 profit sharing partners who design and build as used by Embraer and Boeing.

          • @ Dukie

            The former Bombardier wing plant in Belfast was bought by Spirit — not by Airbus. So, every A220 wing comes from an outside supplier (Spirit).
            The article above mentions how engine pylons for the A220 are made by Spirit in Kansas.
            And Spirit in Morocco produces keel beams and various fuselage sections for the A220.
            And that’s just Spirit.

            From the link:
            “The company works with more than 12,000 partners and suppliers across the globe.”


          • What main structures for A320-A330-A350 are made by outsiders , other than ‘bits and pieces’
            A220 was a special case in the split up from Bombardier as the Northern Ireland and Morocco went to Spirit

            Compare say 787 – which uses Spirit, Kawasaki , Fuji, Mitsubishi, Alenia for most of fuselage and wing ( Boeing only involved in rear fuselage as Vought went under)

            Whats the largest section of the A350 made by a non Airbus company ? A spar or 2 , undercarriage from Toronto ? the main structures all come from subsidiaries now
            ‘the rear fuselage barrel, produced at the Airbus Getafe plant in Spain, two lateral aft fuselage panels made by Premium AEROTEC of Germany, plus the upper and lower aft fuselage panels manufactured by Airbus in Stade, Germany.’
            The Wings ? Airbus UK of course

            Like Boeing they are improving and standardising production between the models all the time

            Something that is *planned* …future tense

            “Airbus is planning to transition the A350-900 and -1000 to what it calls a “new production standard” (NPS) between now and 2024, reducing airframe weight, improving performance and making the cabin longer — and wider.”
            And stealing a design idea from Boeing making the cabin interior wider with ‘frame sculpting’
            Thats going to required a backflip from ‘the hive’ that think its bad when Boeing does it

          • Poor Dukie was caught with his pants down, and is now trying to detract from that by waffling about “frame sculpting” 😉

  24. Further to @ Pedro’s comment above:
    Airbus is starting to use its Chinese FAL(s) to make non-Asian deliveries, so as to better deal with supply chain constraints:

    “European aircraft manufacturer Airbus is preparing to deliver an A321neo jetliner manufactured in China to a European customer for the first time. This move is part of Airbus’ efforts to overcome constraints in delivering new aircraft to customers and adjusting its global production network.”

    “As the popularity of the larger A321 model continues to grow, Airbus is upgrading its final assembly lines worldwide.

    “In November last year, Airbus announced the adaptation and upgrade of the Tianjin A320 series aircraft final assembly line to accommodate the A321 model. It’s worth noting that following the completion of the Tianjin facility’s upgrade last year, the latest final assembly facility in Toulouse is also nearing completion. Airbus’ global industrial system will have the capacity for A321 aircraft assembly, ensuring the company’s production capacity goals and meeting the increasing market demand for the A321 model.”


  25. So, did you do any research on current Russian developments or just blah-blah-blah pretending you understand everything about Russians without even trying?

  26. Checklist
    June 14, 2023
    “It’s wrong. Since its launch in 2004 the 787 Dreamliner has been very attractive.”

    .. Alzheimer or rewriting history?

    • Keesje

      Why do you say that?

      It was already at nearly 400 orders in 2005 including the 6 Chinese airlines ordered it with 60 jets as of January 2005.

      While Airbus totaled “only” ~200 A350Mk1 before being converted with agreement from the airlines to the A350-XWB in June 2006 under pressure from Steven Udvar Heazy, now AerCap CEO

      If the 787 wasn’t so popular then why didn’t Airbus stick with the A350Mk1 (based on the A330 fuselage) if sales were so low for the 787?

      Sales of the 787 Dreamliner at that time had 400 orders!

      So the story is made

  27. Bryce

    “Partnering for Poverty” scheme.
    Lol! It’s very strange that you say such a thing. Do you have proof or a source for what you say? I live in France, and there are a lot of social problems.

    I can’t believe life is good at Airbus too.

    I haven’t known a single company that pulls up employees.

    But your non-objectivity sometimes reaches stellar levels beyond the ridiculous.

    Do you reread you when you are in front of your keyboard?
    You had to do it for the general interest of all and yours too.

    I will also end with the example of China,
    this dictatorial and communist regime does not even shock you which you ridiculously put forward. China who has the reputation of making children work!
    But your central problem is Boeing
    Boeing obsess you too much and make you too ridiculous and that’s what makes you insignificant in your words…

    Your reasoning does not go beyond this allucination :

    “The world is fine but Boeing is the gangrene of this world”…
    What madman can still follow you here?

    • Less drama, more reading.

      The phrase isn’t mine — it comes (inter alia) from Kevin Michaels in the LNA link that I cited above.

      Put the bottle down and see if you can find the quote in question 😏

  28. From late May 2023

    -> The second aircraft with factory registration B-001K performed its maiden flight on May 8 and has done two more test flights on May 10 and 18.

    COMAC’s own test fleet has continued flying in the past months. Aircraft B-001C was active in March and April on three flights from Shanghai and B-001D did four flights out of Xian in April and May. B-001E has been active in the second half of May, with most flights around Xian and Kunming. B-001F and B-001G resumed flying last week out of Shanghai, and have done their last flights in late March.

  29. Second-Quarter 2023 Financials for AB and BA will be out fairly soon, I think. Should be interesting..

    • Not really: the analyst consensus is for yet another quarterly loss at BA…and then another one again in Q3. Still, BA does consistently manage to surprise the analysts by treating them to an even bigger loss than the consensus had estimated 😉


      The BA results will be out on July 25, and the AB results on July 26.

    • Bryce

      “Hong Kong International Airlines cancels 6 777F”…,
      Lol! ” technically” they’re not chinese are they ?

      • Checklist:

        Is that not the airline that has come and gone with all sorts of wild plans that never came to fruition other than some press release?

        Yep, just the kind of operation you want to hang your hat on as an example of a trend.

    • According to Cargofacts, the order has been on BA’s book *from 2011*! Lol.

    • Qantas Very disappointing

      They could have set up a social space 10-15 meters long where people can sit, or have a drink, stretch their legs.

      There is a cruel lack of innovation and ambition while they removed a lot of seats.
      Really no prestige…

      What is different from the ME3s in there? 👎

  30. Bryce,

    Lol! “Put the bottle down”?

    You don’t miss an opportunity.

    You will always remain an Boeing detractor…

  31. AvWeek today- ‘Boeing Plans More Autonomy, Internal Parts Production On Next Airplane’:

    “..Turning to producing the next new Boeing aircraft, Calhoun expects a different setup between the company and its suppliers compared to the 787, its last new clean-sheet design. Boeing leaned heavily on suppliers to both design and build 787 parts, gambling that the financially beneficial risk-sharing approach would not lead to bottlenecks. But a rash of supplier-related problems has plagued the program for years, prompting significant amounts of re-work, including a new issue uncovered in recent weeks, to ensure aircraft meet Boeing’s design and production specifications.

    “If I look at the 787 and I think about the make/buy decisions and the time at which they were made, the industrial United States was focused on capital-light everything, and The Boeing Company was focused on capital-light,” Calhoun said. “I think we probably over-indexed. I want to over-index back the other way and control more of the vertical, and I want to control more of the [intellectual property]. How far we get down that spectrum, I don’t know, but it’s a very different objective than the team that started the 787.”..”


    Whatever, since they’re talking about an event said not to occur for a dozen years.
    Talk is cheap.

    • Agreed and Calhoun will be gone.

      I think Boeing got its face rubbed into the joint venture thing and the fact it takes the same skills and numbers to monitor a JV member as it does to do it yourself.

      I think in the end of the first 787 debacle they had something like 20 multi discipline teams roaming the planet snuffing out problems. What is amazing is they succeeded and got an airplane out of it.

      The gory in depth details of the battery debacle makes a tech have nightmares. Stunning in its incompetence.

      Airbus followed Boeing down that outsourced patch and found it was failing and brought a bunch back in house and we have Spirit as trying hard but still failing at times.

      Charleston take over and factory started out as Boeing taking over from (Chances Vogught ?) as they could not get them straightened out and the only option was to buy their part of it and the JV assembly they have with (now Leonardo I think it is)

      If you don’t have your suppliers close then you need to monitor them and their product.

    • @ Vincent
      One wonders where the Dave is going to find the money — and qualified personnel — for all those “plans” 😉

      Also, one wonders what “next new Boeing aircraft” he’s referring to. The Bjorn articles above this one show that the “hotly anticipated” TBW design is somewhat of a wet firecracker. Maybe we’ll end up getting a re-hash of the 757 with folding wingtips?
      One way or another: if recent history is our guide, then BA won’t be making a penny profit from whatever it pulls out of the hat.

  32. Dukie’s tap-dancing around the facts (viz AB’s wing production) again.. trivially fun to watch, if one can follow its unique, carefully obscure syntax. Maybe it had lessons with Humpty-Dumpty..

    • Good proof how desperate our poster is. Unfortunately few would fall for the trick.

    • Nothing but a AB PR stunt to get a jump on Boeing , announcing orders just days before the show….
      Ofcourse , unannounced customers..
      Just wait for the silly show to begin for God’ sakes..

          • Even better, Frank:
            Look at all the “unidentified customers” who are cancelling 737s and 787s in the past few months…now who could *they* be…?

            For example:
            – April: 18 MAXs cancelled by “unidentified customers”
            – March: 8 MAXs and 4 787-8s cancelled by “unidentified customers”
            – February: 3 MAXs cancelled by “unidentified customers”
            – January: 39 MAXs cancelled by “unidentified customers”
            – December: LOADS of cancellations, but none of them by “unidentified customers”


        • Wow. I heard so often that AB has no available production slots and BA would just sit here waiting for orders to come.

          • I suspect that, by now, many airlines/lessors have copped on to the fact that BA is very good at *promising* early delivery slots…but very bad at actually *materializing* those slots 😉

      • Or…

        They have a bevy of orders to announce all through the show and want to make a splash each time. Give everyone their 15 minutes of fame.

  33. Interesting:
    “Airbus outlines parallel paths for A320 replacement and hydrogen power”

    “Airbus has delivered a strong indication that the airframer will seek to replace its A320neo family with a “relatively conventional” design in the mid-2030s, in parallel with the possible introduction of a hydrogen-powered aircraft in the same timeframe.”


    • Thanks for the link. Contrast Scherer’s plain language with the other guys’ tossed-word salads..

    • Quite the interview. I guess Calhoun’s answer shows the power of the Duopoly. I guess when you get paid 10s of millions of dollars, you really don’t worry about anything.

      I would think he is gliding over the fact that the 787 is a challenge to assemble because they outsourced everything part made to Timbuktu…

      He may be wrong on the amount of resources and time it takes to lengthen the A220 to a -500.

  34. “GE-Safran Venture Works on Engine Upgrade to Lift Durability”

    “(Bloomberg) — The CFM International engine venture plans to to roll out design enhancements late next year to make its Leap model powering the Airbus SE’s A320neo and Boeing Co.’s 737 Max more durable in harsh, dusty environments such as India and the Middle East.

    “The General Electric Co.-Safran SA engine venture is redesigning the Leap’s high-pressure turbine blades and nozzles, executives told reporters in Paris on Saturday. They’re trying to minimize a deterioration in performance that’s afflicted the engine as well a competing turbofan from Raytheon Technologies Corp.’s Pratt & Whitney division.

    ““The first iteration wasn’t a perfect hit. Blade tech is one of the most complex things we do,” Karl Sheldon, an executive vice-president with GE, said.

    “The group plans to roll out the redesign in the second part of next year, executives said. Engine durability has emerged as a flash point for operators who have seen the new-generation models from CFM and Pratt require servicing sooner than expected. Coupled with a lack of components and engineers, that’s led to more aircraft on the ground than normal.”


  35. So behind the paywall is an article about the shift away from regional carriers, using Delta as an example.

    I guess it stands to reason;

    As pilots demand more money and there are less of them around, the regionals costs go up, no longer able to pay them what a starting bus driver for the city of Seattle gets paid.

    As they approach the amounts paid at mainline carriers, I guess they have figured they might as well keep them in house, get jets like the A220 that can fly long & thin and are efficient.

    Bad thing is that those small communities that cannot support service for an aircraft in the 100-150 seat range will get lost in the shuffle.

    It makes sense;

    If they can make money flying from NYC to Syracuse using an A220, they can also fly the same route, with the same aircraft, from Atlanta. Then they could also fly from Atlanta to Seattle with the same equipment.

    Delta has firm orders for 120, about 60 have been delivered. They also have options for another 50. Their old A319’s are going away, as are the 717’s.

    • In my opinion, this type of nuclear power will be indispensible if the transport industry wants to produce large quantities of green LH2/SAF.

      Good to see that at least one country has the gusto to bite the bullet and get the ball rolling.

      Of course, the tech “must have been copied from the US” — even though the US doesn’t employ this type of reactor 😏

    • It’s been interesting watching Boing shift so quickly from “China is essential to us”, to “meh..”

      Airbus seems to be making the right strategic choices.

      • Indeed.
        BA’s new-found, muted attitude to China is somewhat reminiscent of the alpha college jock who is rejected by the prom queen:
        “Hey, she isn’t even that good looking”


      • Nothing to do with Airbus and Boeing, it’s a purely Sino-American crisis…

      • China 15% of 2019 global air traffic

        China 18% of 2042 global air traffic

        meh indeed for future aircraft orders

        • Poor Dukie is forgetting that there’s a replacement market in addition to a growth market…

  36. Indigo is evidently not going to just sit back and allow Air India to steal market share:

    “Airbus Set for Splashy Paris Debut With 500-Jet IndiGo Order”

    “A purchase by IndiGo would top a recent agreement by Air India to buy 470 aircraft from Airbus and Boeing as the country’s former flag carrier rebuilds its operations with a modern fleet under new ownership. India is one of the fastest growing aviation markets in the world with Indigo controlling close to 60% of domestic flying.”


    Also looks like Saudi carrier Flynas doesn’t want to be out-maneuvered by other players in the area:

    “Airbus is also working to firm up talks with Saudi carrier Flynas Co. for a large narrowbody order that could become another marquee deal of the event alongside IndiGo, other people said, confirming negotiations previously reported by Bloomberg News. Negotiations for both transactions could still drag out and final number might change, the people cautioned.”


  37. Looks like relations between Qatar and Airbus are all “lovey-dovey” again 😉

    “Qatar Airways will proudly participate in the 54th Edition of the Paris Air Show during June 2023. The National Carrier of the State of Qatar will showcase three aircraft: the Airbus A350-1000, the Gulfstream G700 (G700) and the all-luxurious Airbus 319 Corporate Jet.”


    Remarkable that Qatar is not showcasing its recently-acquired (ex-S7) MAXs, or its Dreamliners…

    • Bryce

      Lol !
      Nothing remarkable. There is currently no 777-X painted in the colors of Qatar Airways that’s all…

      It must be at the request of Airbus to deal with the media blow of the presence of the 787 Dreamliner of the rival RyadAir… Think a little. Can you analyze things?

  38. Another quarterly loss coming at Boeing Defense:

    “(Reuters) -Margins at Boeing’s defense unit will look similar in the second quarter to its first-quarter results, Boeing Defense CEO Ted Colbert said Sunday.

    “Margins at its defense unit were negative in the first quarter as Boeing recorded a $245 million pre-tax charge on the KC-46 tanker program. Colbert declined to say whether Boeing would take another charge on the KC-46, which has logged more than $7 billion in losses.”

    “Deliveries of the KC-46 have been stymied due to a supplier problem, and the company has yet to deliver a reworked KC-46 to the Air Force. Colbert declined to say when it will deliver its next tanker.”


    • Crystal ball time;

      BA has negative margins at BCA & BD, Services is in the black, deposits are made from the airshow and cash looks good.


      “Look at the cash! Yay!”


      Selling jets for a loss.

      • Analyst consensus now also expecting a Q3 loss — where, previously, a flatline had been expected.

        So, 2023 is another lost year for BA.

  39. seems like a busy Paris Air Show to me

    “Aviation analytics firm IBA estimated last week that there could be orders for about 2,100 planes during the show as airlines replace older aircraft and prepare for future growth in air travel.”

  40. Bryce

    …”Of course, the tech “must have been copied from the US” — even though the US doesn’t employ this type of reactor…” 😏

    Oh please, not trying to convince us otherwise. China is not a country that respects patented products.

    What are you trying to prove to us with your braggadocio link?

    Believe me it’s not just an American thing it’s global.

    China is copying everyone. Stop please brandishing the anti US card to promote your pro-Chinese propaganda…


    • I don’t think anyone is suggesting that China has not appropriated IP on a large scale by contractual and other means.

      The assertion is that China is building on this and is making advances in some fields ahead of the rest of the world.

      The assertion is also that those who claim that there are technologies that China won’t be able to match in the foreseeable future have their heads in the sand. If China decides that something is sufficiently important to achieve mastery then they can mobilize sufficient resources to do it without regard to the cost.

      Of course this means diverting resources from other things, but in their system they can do this.

      It remains to be seen whether they can continue to do this as their rate of growth slows. It is easier to do when the population as a whole sees their standard of living visibly increases every year.

Leave a Reply

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