Paris Day Three: Boeing gets small orders; Airbus talks hydrogen and hiring

By Bryan Corliss

June 21, 2023, © Leeham News – After the flurry of news surrounding the blockbuster orders from IndiGo and Air India earlier in the week, Wednesday’s Paris Air Show news was relatively subdued, with Boeing announcing a handful of smaller orders from airlines and leasing companies.

Airbus had announcements of an MOU for a potential widebody order, successful trials of a hydrogen-fuel concept, an update on global hiring – and the winner of a design-the-livery content for its proposed A350F cargo jet.

We’ll need to see a major flurry of orders on Thursday, if we’re to get to the 2,000-plus orders some analysts projected for this year’s air show.

  • Indian start up adds 737s
  • Air Lease Corp adds 787s
  • Airbus halfway to 2023 hiring goal
  • First A350F will look like a packing tube

Indian start-up Akasa Air adds four more 737s 

Mumbai-based Akasa Air ordered an additional four 737-8s on Wednesday, as it tries to ramp up to take on market leaders IndiGo and Air India.

The deal means the airline, which launched in 2022, now has 76 planes on order through Boeing: 23 737-8s and 53 high-capacity 737-8-200s. (The -200s come with narrower 28-inch-pitch seats, which allows the operator to squeeze in up to 200 passengers in a single class; the configuration requires an extra pair of exit doors.) 

Akasa is a low-cost carrier that currently serves 16 cities in India with an all-Boeing fleet of 19 737 MAX jets.

The airline is aggressively expanding to compete with IndiGo and Air India. It said Wednesday it plans to use the 737’s range to expand into international markets in Asia. Indian media reports say Akasa is evaluating adding routes to Singapore and Middle Eastern and Gulf State cities later this year.

AirLease Corp adds two 787s to portfolio 

Boeing announced a deal to sell two more 787s to global jet-leasing company Air Lease Corp.

According to its most-recent annual report, ALC had 33 787s, either -9s and -10s, in its portfolio at the end of 2022. 

Luxembourg airline to be first Euro customer for 737-7

Luxair ordered four of Boeing’s yet-to-be-certified 737-7s Wednesday. 

The airline currently operates a fleet of eight 737 NGs (and 11 de Havilland Dash 8s). It previously had ordered six 737-8s as it starts to replace the older models. It will take the first deliveries of those 737-8s this summer. 

Jet lessor Avolon signs MOU for A330neos

A day after it placed firm orders for 40 737s and a sale-leaseback agreement for Embraer jets, Irish jet-leasing company Avolon was back with an MOU for the potential purchase of 20 A330-900neos from Airbus.

Avolon said it was acting to secure the earliest available slots to take advantage of  growing widebody demand around the world.

Including owned, managed and committed aircraft, Avolon currently has a total fleet of 616 Airbus aircraft, including 55 A330neos. 

Airbus says it’s halfway to 2023 hiring goal

Airbus said it has added 7,000 workers so far this year, despite what it called a “challenging labor market.” 

The hiring is “instrumental in supporting Airbus’ production ramp-up and decarbonization ambitions,” the company said. It’s goal still is to hire 13,000 people worldwide this year.

A global shortage of skilled labor is an issue facing all OEMs and MRO providers. In our view, it has the potential to be a stumbling block preventing Airbus and Boeing from hitting their ambitious delivery targets, particularly if fourth- and fifth-tier suppliers aren’t able to find the workers they need to deliver components on time. 

Airbus said a third of this year’s new hires will be new college graduates. As part of that, it announced it has extended its partnership with Georgia Tech for engineering talent, and it was expanding its collaboration with 42 business schools worldwide.

Airbus announces successful hydrogen fuel test

Airbus announced Wednesday that ArianeGroup – its joint venture with Safran – had conducted a successful proof-of-concept test of a liquid hydrogen fuel system for airliners that modifies liquid fuel systems Ariane builds for its rockets.

The tests – which included temperature and pressure controls and looks at how the fuel interacts with metals – were conducted last month. Airbus said the joint venture is working to bring a hydrogen fuel system to market by 2035.

Boeing, JAL announce maintenance agreements

Boeing and Japan Airlines announced a pair of deals Wednesday: one for a predictive maintenance tool to help the airline reduce unscheduled maintenance, and a deal to upgrade the interiors of JAL’s 787 fleet. Boeing will do the engineering work and provide component kits for the reconfigured interiors. 

Boeing had previously announced it was working with All Nippon Airways to enhance that airline’s 787 interiors. 

Embraer signs letter for pax-to-freight conversions

Embraer said Wednesday it had signed a letter of agreement with China’s Lanzhou Aviation Industry Development Group for Lanzhou to convert 20 E190 and E195 passenger jets to freighters for use in China.

The Brazilian OEM said it sees a significant opportunity in China  “It is a market with increasing demand for cargo aircraft to accommodate the tremendous growth of E-commerce trade and the consequent evolution of the logistics industry,” President and CEO Arjan Meier said.

Airbus announces winners of A350F livery contest

Airbus declared an Irish man and two Canadian boys winners of its contest to design the livery for its first A350F cargo jet. 

The company combined elements of both entries into its final design. Both envisioned the jet’s fuselage as a tube wrapped in brown packing paper with shipping labels applied. 

Airbus envisions an 2025-26 EIS for the cargo plane. As of February, it had sold 39. Air Lease Corp., Etihad and Singapore Airlines each have ordered seven apiece. 


112 Comments on “Paris Day Three: Boeing gets small orders; Airbus talks hydrogen and hiring

  1. Nice update.

    Have to say I thought some estimates of how much business would be announced were very optimistic. That said, if Turkish had met its stated goal of ordering in June we might have got close to 2,000.

  2. Is it just me, or do others also find that depicted A350F livery horrible? 🙈

    • I think it’s the right amount of silly. It’s going to stand out in a sea of white fuselages when it lands. It’s a freighter, and most thisr paint jobs are utilitarian.

    • @Bryce

      I like it, having fun. And look Airbus committed to EIS 2025-26!
      But the successful H2 demonstration was an engineering success. So many laugh this technology off, but I think theirs a future.

        • Not bad as an ‘iron bird ‘ version of the system – they call it a fuel cell *rig* and the photos show a lab full of equipment.
          ‘this level of power was achieved during *bench testing* at its Ottobrunn facility near Munich’

          Little steps is the way to go including a separate actual smaller system for auxiliary power

        • _flyable_ fuel cell!

          compare: the German design AIP subs come with 2 x 120kW.

          • Not flyable yet , unless you consider they are taking ‘the lab’ into the air inside an A380.
            I would think its 2030 before Airbus fuel cell pod including motor ( 1.2MW) is airborne on a wing and providing power ( even as just part of the propulsion)
            I wish them well

      • I still laugh at it, though i like the demonstrator.

        Just: Where`s the H2 coming from?

        If we take it from oil or gas, nothing is won.

        • Unless/until the Green movement embraces a mass deployment of (thorium) nuclear power, there’ll be no LH2 or SAF “revolution”.
          Electrifying everything that currently runs on fossil fuels will require ca. 7 times as much electricity as we’re currently generating — wind/solar just won’t cut it.
          Until then, there’s a plan to generate LH2 using excess solar/wind capacity, but that’s just small fry.

          • And China might put the whole West to shame, as they are about to take the first Thorium reactor online.

          • @ Matth
            Yes, I saw that news the other day — very significant.
            Extra benefit (among many others): because the tech involved doesn’t require a nearby water body for cooling, it can be located in arid regions…which is a big plus in China.
            I can see countries like India, Saudi Arabia, etc., embracing this tech and using it (inter alia) to run coastal water desalination plants.

          • The Chinese don’t listen to useful idiots like the Greta Thunberg’s. That’s why they are leading with thorium salt nuclear reactors.

    • Me agreeing with Bryce? The world will soon end.

      I did not like the Sunshine motiff Boeing used for a bit either and my mother loved it (and who can argue with their mother? Well not my mother anyway)

      I liked the Leeham Freight Livery much better.

      • I didn’t like Embraer’s “Profit Hunter” liveries, either (bird or shark).
        Certainly very clever, skillful, artistic and innovative — but, in my opinion, more suitable for a motorbike than for a plane…

        • I did like the Profit Hunter.

          It resonated for its honesty and the cool graphics that went with it.

      • Wheres the french sense of style ….Louis Vuitton-ish would work for me but instead of LV use AB monogram

        • whiffs of “smalish crocodile with a hand bag handle on its back looking flabbergasted”

      • I once flew from Johannesburg-Cape Town-Johannesburg. The crew were just as relaxed as the painting on the plane suggest.
        They ceased operations in 2022.

    • With delivery starting in 2026…who said that AB had no early slots?

      • Depends on which aircraft.

        Still thinking Airbus shot itself in the foot with the A330NEO as those who have Airbus in their line were willing to switch to the A350 rather than go Boeing.

        • How could have Airbus shot itself in the foot with the A330neo?

          The concept was already there, as the first try of the A350.
          They knew they could do it. It did cost them 2 bn. $ –
          one for Airbus, one for RR for the engine.

          It sold 300, put a ceiling to the B787 pricing, Boeing tried hard to kill the A330neo with a low price approach.

          Airbus can bring a freighter, will update the MRTT.
          It might not be the commercial success they hoped for, but it`s a written off production line, every A330neo sold is a B787 less in the sky,
          and it should be profitable, as the investment was low.

          What other options did Airbus have?

          • Every 787 sold is an a350 and a330neo less in the sky. So far there are over 1000 787s flying and only about 100 a330neos. The 787 is approaching 2000 orders so it seems the a330neo hasn’t done the job perfectly as you claim

          • The A330neo will be selling (and making money, unlike the 787) for many years. It was a smart and cheap move by Airbus.

        • The A330’s has a history of evolving, hence I think the A330neo will continue that trend and become more efficient unless RR overprize the T7000 price/PBH prices and kill it like they did the 757.

          • It was 9/11 that killed the 757 when orders practically ceased.
            The final assembly and major parts production companies was erratic too.
            By later standards the engines were oversized t/o thrust ( with power to weight ratio only exceeded by Concorde) in order to use smaller airport runways along with a generous wing area. Later a Pratt engine choice ,PW2000 was added to the RB211-535. GE CF6 -32 was mooted as well but no buyers so didnt eventuate. So much for the overpriced RB engines claim
            Led the way in US with unions agreeing to 2 person flight crew.
            Unusually in its class it was classified by ATC as ‘heavy’ due to the excessive wake turbulence which gave a longer separation.
            Never really popular with Asian carriers , it seems the A310 was more their thing.
            Nowadays its cargo payload in the freighter version in 31 tonnes , well in excess the A321 PF with 27

  3. Will be interesting to see if JAL keeps its 787s at 8-abreast (2-4-2) in Economy class or ditches their uniquely spacious & comfy cabins in favor of the despicable & horrible 9-abreast 787s everyone else has as part of the interior update/cabin refresh?

    • Good question.
      I suspect that they’ll be going for 9-abreast 🙈

      Interestingly, if you look at real-world, per-seat fuel charts for different aircraft from different airlines on different routes, there are common situations in which an 8-abreast 787 is barely better than a 767! So, it’s no wonder that most airlines opted for 9-abreast…the CASM for 8-abreast is a bummer.

    • Howard M:

      Keep in mind ANA and Japan use two different seat setups for 787.

      The Domestic Specials are dense packed. The Intra Island flights have used 747 in the past and were the target for the -3. Its a different market.

      The overseas allocation are much less so.

      The reality is making money and what works or does not and its up to the passengers to decide yea or nay. For all the complaints (here) if it was not working the Airlines would change the seating and clearly at the price points they are using, it does.

    • Qantas as well as BA but more have dropped out.

      If you have the right routes it works well and if you don’t then it does not.

      No one has dropped their 747-8F which is interesting (and granted it sold in low numbers)

      • ANA check
        Lufthansa check
        Singapore check
        British Airways check
        Emirates check
        Qatar check
        Korean and Asiana check check
        Only leaves out China Southern , Malaysia ( who dropped the plane some years back) and Thai ( too few)

        Theres 64 in the air right now on Flightaware

        • Qatar will drop them as soon as they get the A350 back from Airbus repair and or the new A350 delivered.

          The only reason Qatar will keep them going is a dearth of Aircraft with the Paint Repairs and the hassles between the two.

          So, nothing to make a big deal over and its more a 90% we dump them as soon as we can.

          As Greenspan so famously put it, excessive exuberance.

          • The flightaware showed MORE A380s airborne than A350K and 14 of that 51 A350K were Qatar
            so, no cigar

      • @Transworld

        You mean the 747-8I. The F is the freighter.
        You’re right sold less than 100 copies.

  4. Laugh of the day is Airbus hiring more people to make more airplanes to meet its decarbonization goals.

    Cut production in half and …………………………………… but Nooooooo.

    Seems to me its one of those scoring Own Goals (two of my nephews played Soccer of all things where the flopping was amateurish)

    • @Pedro

      I was chuckling at this quote:

      “I don’t believe it’ll be in a museum in 2031,” said Mike Sinnett, Boeing Vice President of Product Development for its commercial airplanes division.

      No it will end up like the NMA. The key phrase is ‘I don’t believe’
      Pure Boeing obfuscation.

  5. Third “disappointing” day regarding sales. I was expecting some announcements from the Japanese companies as rumors surfaced last week. Will we see any more big orders by the end of the show? Does Scott have any information?

    • People have been placing a lot of orders and the low deals (other than Indigo) reflect people did not want to wait to get their place in line.

      Both A& B mfgs have done well order wise and those sales will keep rolling in as the year goes on.

      Airbus had it figured and did the whoopee deal to start.

      Boeing may announce one of the deals before its done but its the sales before and to come that are important.

      • But no mad max -10’s…. Yet

        My son is type rated on the 737 (UAL) Said he likes the max (Type rated in the A320/321 as well).
        But he’s not looking forward to the -10, will have touch screen FMC. Ever try to use touch screens in turbulence 🤷‍♂️

        Evidently human factors has no place.

        • I won’t be surprised at all if the ultra-kludgy 737MAX-10 is Boing’s final undoing. What’s its latest projected EIS, now? 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026… kinda like the 777-X, no?

          Is there an expiration date on that sweetheart waiver Boing got for the MAX™-7 and MAX™-10?

          • @Vincent
            That’s a very good question. I’m sure the political snobs has no end date on the exemption.

            I do like that adjective, ultra kludgy.

            Boeing VP Mike Fleming uses terms such as “we hope” and “we’re working hard” for certification on the max 7 and 10. That’s code for we are clueless.
            When the FAA rescinded Boeing’s ODA (good decision) that changed everything and it’s no longer a cake walk for Boeing like it used to be with certification.

          • Not at all.
            The extra time has been spent on the advanced AOA alerting software solution
            It will be eventually retrofitted to all maxes , with wiring already being installed on production line .( but not the software yet till its certified)

            The enhanced angle of attack (eAOA)—required by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) as part of agreeing to the 737 MAX’s return to service following fatal accidents in 2018 and 2019 and its subsequent grounding—provides a third source of AOA data. It uses five software monitors embedded into existing hardware to track data from the aircraft’s two physical AOA sensors,…

          • Oh look!…Dukie actually believes the PR! 🙈

          • Yes, the MAX-10 will be certified with the AoA changes, as requested by EASA. All new MAX’s will be ready for these changes, and Boeing has worked out a retrofit engineering package as well.

          • That leaves the A320/a321 series as relying soley on AOA vanes -which have led to crashes on their planes- when a ‘vote’ on 3 vanes means 2 bad win over 1 good.
            oh dear , the goal posts have now shifted and guess who is left with ***** when the tide goes out

          • @ Dukie
            Do you really think that BA is going to retrofit the whole fleet of NGs with a synthetic AoA sensor? 😉

            So, does anyone know how MCAS will be modified to deal with 3 sensor inputs rather than 2?
            Answers only with links…we don’t want any “rabbit hole” stuff polluting the discussion 😉

          • @Rob
            “Yes, the MAX-10 will be certified…”

            The MAX-10 will be certified only if/when all the associated SSAs are adjudged to be satisfactory: merely submitting them isn’t enough — their content has to be vetted and approved. That process has experienced quite a few bumps already.
            Never underestimate BA’s ability to disappoint.

          • KISS, synthetic AoA, MTBF and the complexities of probabilities accessment.

            I see some just don’t grasp it.

          • MCAS does not need to be adjusted for the third synthetic AoA sensor. It will still be disabled in the event of AoA disagree.

            The purpose of the third AoA is to prevent the automatic disengagement of the autopilot on AoA disagree. Instead, the autopilot will compare the synthetic AoA to the two vanes, and select the good vane to continue operation.

            That satisfies the EASA requirement to maintain autopilot function on precision approaches.

            There is also a manual switch to permit pilots to select vanes, if needed.

          • No links from Rob, as usual.

            Has anyone else got any *substantiated* input, as opposed to personal musings?

          • Bryce, logic and reason suffice in this case, for those who have learned that MCAS is disabled when the autopilot is active.

            Thus the requirement to avoid autopilot disengagement, is not relevant to MCAS.

            In addition, the link that Duke posted explains how and why the new sensor is integrated into autopilot. It does not mention MCAS because there is no need for integration, as I explained.

            You asked a question, I answered truthfully, you don’t accept the answer. How is that different from any other interaction with you here?

            I knew you wouldn’t listen, that’s always a given, but I answered for the benefit of others here who actually are interested in understanding.

          • @ Rob

            We don’t need your very personal “logic and reason” in this instance, thanks 😉
            Anyone with a basic grasp of control theory will realize that this problem can be tackled in different ways — so it’s important to know which approach BA is actually going to use, as opposed to listening to the opinion (presented as fact) of the BA Damage Control Office.

            So, once again: does anyone have a *substantiated* elucidation of how MCAS and the 3-sensor system are actually going to be designed to interact?

            p.s. Dukie must have been alarmed to read Rob’s dissertation above because, if one of the AoA’s is faulty and there’s a software fault in the synthetic sensor, it may just discard the input from the good AoA and work with the faulty one. Lots of examples of software not doing what it’s meant to do, particularly at BA…just look at that nasty pitch down event during that 777X test flight, and the subsequent software mods demanded by EASA.

          • Thanks as always, for the confirmation of your intent.

            You are welcome to refute the information I gave. It is correct, to the best of my knowledge and understanding of MCAS operation.

            If you have factual evidence or reasoning to present, instead of bluster, then we, unlike you, are listening.

          • @ Rob

            Thanks for explicitly confirming that the info that you gave above was merely “to the best of my knowledge and understanding of MCAS operation” as opposed to being based on demonstrable/citable fact 😉

            On the other hand: we already knew that, so the confirmation was actually superfluous.

          • From this I conclude that you are unable to factually or reasonably refute my statements, as per the usual.

            That becomes obvious whenever you attack the other person instead of addressing the facts, which is your stock and trade.

            Again we are open to any of the knowledge you have on this subject, that exceeds my own. We are waiting….

          • @ Rob

            Why would I put any effort into trying to refute the fantasies of another commenter…particularly the type of alt-reality stuff that you regularly post? You have a constitutional right to indulge in your own fantasy world, and I respect that 👍

            It is, however, amusing to note that, of all the possible control-theory manners in which the third sensor input could be employed, the opined solution that you presented above is the quickest, least expensive and most amateuristic — completely in line with what one would expect from “a certain OEM” 😏

          • Its clear that Boeing *isnt adding* a 3rd AOA sensor

            Its more of a judge on the 2 existing sensors thats software driven from other data points ( much as the new widebodys have synthetic AOA). But I dont have a detailed background on what parameters

            So some assumptions about this mystical 3 rd AOA *sensor * are just pure invention of peter rabbit

          • Again, anyone here is welcome to factually refute my explanation. If I’m wrong, I welcome correction. Still waiting…

            The main issue here is the false belief that the EASA requirement had anything to do with MCAS. In fact, it arose in response to the RTS AD justification, which documented that in the event of AoA disagree in the new flight software, the autopilot would disengage.

            That caused EASA to place a temporary restriction on some precision approaches, due to the risk of autopilot disengage for AoA vane strike. The solution to that was the third AoA sensor, as described above. Once that is present in the MAX, the restriction can be lifted.

            The FAA did not require the third AoA, because the loss of air data or autopilot on precision approach is a go-around situation, which allows the crew to adapt to the failure before attempting a landing. This they considered safe and effective.

            The EASA perspective was that they prefer the autopilot function to be preserved during precision approach, as opposed to the go-around. Hence we have the third AoA request.

            As far as the form of the sensor, EASA accepted the synthetic AoA in lieu of a physical sensor. But the purpose remains the same, as a comparator to both vanes for the autopilot, in the event of an AoA disagree.

          • @ Rob

            “Again, anyone here is welcome to factually refute my explanation”

            If you go back up to the start of this thread, you’ll see that “your explanation” is irrelevant. The thread seeks *substantiated facts*, not personal theories. You do understand the word “substantiated”, don’t you?

          • Poor Dukie didn’t catch on to the syntax “sensor INPUT” as opposed to just “sensor” (emphasis added).

          • Brycey , you never have any source for your claims , they are factoids of your own imagination.
            The real sources are supplied for the other readers information, your typical doom spiral comments isnt possible to know even what you are talking about

          • Brycey provides LOTS of links to back up his points.

            Dukie posts links from time to time — though they’re mostly outdated, or he’s misinterpreted them.

            Robbie basically never posts links, because he believes himself to be speaking “Ex Cathedra”.

          • Bryce, still waiting on the demonstration of your superior knowledge and expertise? Or any factual evidence for your position? Or anything that disputes my explanation?

            No? Ok, then since you haven’t responded over three requests, we’ll presume you have nothing of substance to offer to this discussion.

          • @ Rob
            Still waiting for a substantiating link to the personal theory that you posted above.
            I asked first 😉

            And it’s 2:45 a.m. there in California…go get some sleep for yourself. Your assiduous devotion to the BA Cause is duly noted, but lack of sleep won’t help you in your mission 😉

  6. FG: GE insists open-fan concept can hit 20% efficiency target despite Boeing’s doubts

    • Probably Iran Air topping off their illustrious order intentions,with absolutely no chance of ever being filled .😆😅😆

      • No, Iran prefers to buy secondhand frames via clever subterfuge.
        They’ve bought 4 in recent months in that manner 😏
        And it appears that they’re self-sufficient as regards spares.

        P.s. “sorry to disappoint you”, but Spirit in Wichita rejected the company’s salary/benefits offer and the plant is now going on strike…so those storm clouds didn’t actually dissolve.

        • Sorry to disappoint you..
          They also supply parts to Airbus ..
          Even you should know that

          • They do: engine pylons for the A220…but just 8 pylons per month 😏

            I somehow don’t think that that will have much of an impact on AB’s revenue.
            BA on the other hand is suffering across all its programs.

            BA’s “Partnering for Poverty” program is really bearing fruit…

    • Well, his FALs are “in house” 😉
      Mind you, the constant QC issues that they serve up (FOD, shimming, wiring,…) might have something to do with the salaries/benefits that the personnel receive.
      But what can BA do? Better human performance requires greater expenditure of money…and that’s something that BA just doesn’t have enough of.

  7. “Airbus and EASA on the same page about the A321XLR Rear Center Tank”

    “Airbus and the European regulatory agency EASA agree in principle on the technical requirements for the Rear Center Tank (RCT) on the A321XLR. The regulator is satisfied that adding a protective liner to the fuselage will protect the tank from foreign object damage in case of penetration of the hull.”

    “In an advisory circular of December, the FAA said that it will “require that the lower half of the airplane fuselage, spanning the longitudinal area of the tank, be resistant to fire penetration. “Resistant to fire penetration” will, for this special condition, mean that this area provides fire penetration resistance equivalent to the resistance which would be provided if the fuselage were lined with thermal/acoustic insulation that meets the flame penetration resistance test requirements.”

    “Airbus says that it complies with this requirement by adding a structural reinforcement and internal liner to the RCT. Philippe Muhn, Executive Vice President for Programmes at Airbus, said in FlightGlobal that the three XLRs used for flight testing will be reconfigured to include the modifications to the tank.”

    • Indeed.
      Looks like Delta needs more time.
      Turkish and Riyadh have already explicitly said that they need more time.
      Emirates appears to be no further that a preliminary evaluation phase.

      But: Akasa said yesterday that it would “order a three-digit number of planes” later this year.

      We’ll just have to wait, it seems.

  8. The A350F livery is just awesome!

    I agree that it’s a bit overloaded but a lot of idea! I think they should have done something a little lighter with the cardboard packaging.

    They should have done a heavily torn wrapper and uncovered the more extensive “CFRP” pattern with white.

    I’ll try to screenshot and edit that in Photoshop®. 👍

    I’m ready to do it for fun and ready to show it if anyone wants it…

      • Not a problem for that.

        More 777-X orders IS good to their program

    • Good god, I’m not flying with them, I want an adventure when I get to my destination not on the way there.
      What are they trying to say? I am not sure that this is an accidental comment.

        • “…unmatched Boeing standards…”

          Yes, just look at all those historic groundings and production stops — they’re certainly unmatched 😉

          • Bryce

            Have these groundings served to slow down the market Boeing Widebody share ?
            Unfortunately for you, no, right?

            On the contrary, this one has only grown to the chagrin of the hateful Boeings. Boeing has imposed standards which Airbus and certainly Comac will copy. When you see the cabin of a 737MAX “Sky interior” adopting the Big bins that Boeing has offered for nearly 30 years on the 777 and only for ten years on the A350 and recently on the A32Xneo “Air Space”, while the 787 Dreamliner imposes itself on the market as the best widebody ever sold…

            The ✈️✈️✈️ple7-X also arrive!👍


  9. Wow. GE to build fighter jet engine in India with local partner.

    • The US is rather desperate to gain traction with India and draw them on to the “alligned” side.

      (I hope) India will not move.

    • Its merely a final assembly build , common when theres a large military order for the engine
      Note also according to Reuters
      “It is also manufactured in South Korea”

      It too is more correctly called final assembly with some small % local manufacture but well see it to happens at all

      • @duke

        There’s a tech transfer to India.

        Didn’t you say, not that long ago, a country can reverse engineer merely by maintaining its aircraft??

        • Whats reverse engineering got to do with a proposal for India to final assembly some GE engines.
          Thats the most common business model in China called shanzai

          India ( like Japan) for military aircraft has gone the normal licence production model its a win win for both sides rather than the plagiarism approach where the original maker is ripped off.
          the japanese F-16 look a like was done with Lockheed assistance and they improved the plane – larger wing made of carbon fibre etc

          • ” … approach where the original maker is ripped off.”

            the workbench country gets less of a rip off
            ( ie. in a typical American way you lament being hindered from exploiting other nations:-)

            China has been pretty careful in avoiding the “cheap labor trap” downsides of outsourcing. ( Look at Pakistan, Bangladesh … )

Leave a Reply

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