Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- How Trump tariffs affected, and could affect, Airbus, Boeing and Embraer December 6, 2024
- Start-up hybrid plane OEM MAEVE teams with MHIRJ for sales, more December 5, 2024
- Production increase delays hurt Airbus costs December 2, 2024
- Books to consider for Christmas November 29, 2024
- Slow, methodical process to restore Boeing’s trust, efficiencies November 28, 2024
Ortberg taps Mulally, Conner about Boeing’s recovery
By Scott Hamilton
Nov. 8, 2024, © Leeham News: When Kelly Ortberg assumed the chief executive’s slot at the ailing Boeing Co., he knew the company well as an 
outsider.
Ortberg had been CEO of Rockwell Collins, a major supplier to Boeing. After Collins was acquired by United Technologies (now RTX Corp.), he still had the vantage point of supplying Boeing. But he was and is nevertheless an outsider. He’s faced with the herculean task of fixing an American icon that’s descended into the abyss.
Being an outsider has its advantages and disadvantages. He brings fresh eyes and fresh perspective. But Ortberg doesn’t know inside Boeing, its processes, its culture (at least not intimately), or many other important things to fix the company.
Kelly Ortberg. Credit: Boeing.
To help mitigate this, Ortberg has consulted two Boeing “lifers” for background and input: Alan Mulally and Ray Conner. Mulally is a legend at Boeing, revered by many to this day for his engineering prowess and leadership style. His last position was CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes. Conner began working for Boeing on the shop floor and worked his way up to become CEO of BCA.
Ortberg knew both men from his supplier days. However, seeking their advice contrasts sharply with his predecessor, who was also tasked with fixing Boeing (and failed). David Calhoun didn’t reach out to these “wise men.” Instead, sources told LNA during his tenure that Calhoun believed he didn’t need and certainly didn’t want outside advice from them.
A group of wise men
Jim Albaugh, former CEO of BCA and Boeing’s defense unit, is missing from a “wise men” group. It’s unclear why Ortberg hasn’t reached out to him for counsel. Albaugh was one of two CEOs between Mulally and Conner. He was installed as CEO of BCA from his position as CEO of Boeing’s defense unit to fix the 787 program after years of failed efforts. Defense under Albaugh was profitable; this unit today is in great turmoil.
Irrespective of this apparent omission, Ortberg’s willingness to tap Mulally and Conner’s institutional knowledge is an important step toward returning Boeing to its former glory days.
According to a person familiar with the situation, Ortberg has been talking to both for valuable perspective. He’s also been using the term “Working Together,” a slogan adopted during the development of the 777 in the 1990s when Mulally was a leader of this program. This reference and tie to Mulally may be lost to the memory of most, and it’s foreign to a generation of new hires. But the sentiment and history are there.
Alan Mulally
Mulally spent most of his professional career at Boeing. Even though he left in 2006, he is revered by many to this day. His name was floated to succeed the fired Dennis Muilenburg as CEO of The Boeing Co. in 2019. Board member David Calhoun was tapped instead. When Calhoun announced in March that he would leave no later than the end of this year, Mulally—by now 79 years old—was floated again as a possible interim CEO. Ortberg, 64, was chosen instead.
Boeing let Alan Mulally get away in 2006.
Details of Ortberg’s consultations with Mulally haven’t been revealed. But Ortberg no doubt benefits from Mulally’s engineering expertise, institutional knowledge, and likely how Mulally saved Ford Motor Co. from bankruptcy (more on this below).
Suggestions had been made to the Board following Calhoun’s announced departure that they, as a group, tap Mulally, Albaugh, and Connor as a group of “wise men” advisors. Albaugh created such a group during the troubled days of the 787. This group included legendary designer Joe Sutter, along with Lars Anderson and others.
The Board did not create this advisory committee, and Calhoun eschewed any such outside advice, sources report.
Mulally’s background
Mulally was an engineer on many 7-Series programs. He is credited with leadership on the original 777, one of Boeing’s most successful aircraft. He later became president of Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA). His management style was soliciting input from subordinates to come forward with problems and solutions in weekly management meetings. He created a chart using Red, Yellow and Green color coding track production, an important element of these meetings.
Mulally’s focus on engineering got him crosswise with Harry Stonecipher, president and COO of The Boeing Co., following the 1997 merger with McDonnell Douglas and more so when Stonecipher became Chairman, president, and CEO after Phil Condit resigned in 2003 in the wake of a Pentagon procurement scandal. Stonecipher wanted to focus more on shareholder returns, profits, and returns on net assets (RONA). Stonecipher, at one point, suggested that Mulally should be fired over the dichotomy between engineering and finance, according to a source involved in this specific conversation.
Stonecipher ordered Mulally to sell Boeing’s Wichita facilities in pursuit of RONA. The sale to a Canadian private equity group was completed in 2005, and the operation was renamed Spirit AeroSystems. Today, teetering on bankruptcy, Boeing agreed to reacquire Spirit after years of losses and quality control issues.
Stonecipher was ousted from Boeing in 2005 after a relationship with a Boeing vice president became known. Jim McNerney, a former career GE employee and executive passed over to succeed GE CEO Jack Welch, succeeded him. McNerney became CEO of 3M and a member of Boeing’s Board of Directors.
Leaving Boeing
In 2006, Ford Motor Co. head-hunted Mulally for its CEO job. Mulally sought the vacant presidency and COO of Boeing Co. In the history of Mulally’s tenure at Ford, American Icon, it was reported that Boeing’s Board of Directors would not elevate Mulally—though the book also reported that the decision really was McNerney’s.
Mulally went on to save Ford from bankruptcy during the Great Recession, which began in 2008, and reinvigorate its aging product line. Competitors GM and Chrysler filed for bankruptcy reorganization as a condition for a federal bailout. Mulally pursued private financing, mortgaging everything to the hilt, including Ford’s famous blue oval logo.
Mulally retired from Ford in 2014. Since then, he’s hit the speaker circuit and has served on boards of directors.
Ray Conner
Conner joined Boeing in 1977 as a mechanic on the 727 program. He worked his way up through the ranks in the following decades. He became head of sales, marketing, commercial aviation services, and the BCA supply chain before being named president and CEO of BCA in 2013. He succeeded Albaugh. Conner retired as CEO in late 2016 and from the company the next year.
Ray Conner. Credit: Bloomberg.
During Conner’s career, Boeing faced a couple of serious crashes or safety incidents that left an indelible mark on him. Boeing once repaired the aft pressure bulkhead of a Japan Air Lines 747 after a tail strike on take-off cracked it. The repair was faulty; the bulkhead blew out in flight years later. The vertical tail was blown off. Pilots struggled for half an hour to control the plane before it finally crashed into Mt. Fuji outside Tokyo, killing more than 500 people. It was aviation’s worst single accident and a blight on Boeing’s reputation for building and repairing aircraft safely.
In 2013, a Japan Air Lines 787 caught fire in Boston shortly after a trans-polar flight from Tokyo. The fire was traced to a lithium-ion battery that overheated and caught fire. A thermal runaway blaze caused millions of dollars in damage to the airplane. Had the fire occurred in flight, the plane would have been lost, and all aboard would have been killed.
A short time later, another 787, operated by Japan’s ANA, took off. On climb-out, smoke was detected in the belly battery compartment. Pilots made an emergency landing, and all aboard evacuated safely. The plane suffered minor damage. But it became clear there was a problem with the advanced battery, which had never been used on an airplane before the 787. The Federal Aviation Administration grounded the 787 for what turned out to be three months while a fix was found.
By then president of BCA, Conner went to Japan to make amends to the airlines. A press conference at which he discussed the incidents and issued a public apology drew a rebuke from the National Transportation Safety Board for speaking out in violation of NTSB investigation rules. But Conner’s actions starkly contrasted with Boeing’s later defensiveness when two new 737 MAXes crashed in 2018 and 2019.
Jim Albaugh
Jim Albaugh. Credit: Seattle Times.
Albaugh came to Boeing in 1975. He was named president and CEO of Boeing’s defense unit in 2002. In 2009, while the 787 program was in disarray, corporate CEO Jim McNerney shifted Albaugh from defense to the CEO of BCA. It would be another two years before the 787 was first delivered to ANA. He retired abruptly in 2013, succeeded by Conner. Albaugh simply said, “It was time,” when asked about the sudden retirement. However, rumors of discord between him and McNerney (which Albaugh later denied) were common at the time.
Albaugh went on to serve on the boards of directors of American Airlines and small—and mid-size suppliers. He recently left the American board but continues serving in the supply chain.
Albaugh’s institutional knowledge of BCA and BDS, his recent airline experience, and his current experience in the small-to-medium supply chain would bring valuable insight to Ortberg.
Reconstituting leadership
One of Ortberg’s first moves was to fire the CEO of Boeing’s ailing defense units. An interim CEO was installed. When Calhoun announced his plans to retire, the CEO of BCA left immediately. Stephanie Pope, EVP of The Boeing Co., was appointed by Calhoun as the CEO of BCA in addition to her EVP duties.
However, observers quickly criticized Pope’s credentials for the BCA job. Her background is in finance; she’s never run an airplane program, and her resume lacks production, safety, and quality control experience—all critical areas of concern for the commercial airplanes division.
All who LNA has checked with believe Pope’s days as BCA’s CEO are numbered. She’s likely to return to the corporate level in some capacity, most often speculated as the successor to CFO Brian West. West is a Calhoun appointment with a long GE background like Calhoun. Many think the GE culture was critical in Boeing’s decline over the past two-plus decades.
The question is, who would replace Pope and how soon? Would Ortberg install another interim CEO, as with the defense unit, or hang on with Pope until a permanent replacement could be found? If he sought an interim CEO, then who would have enough knowledge of Boeing’s internal workings to step in without a learning curve?
Conner’s name has been floated as a possibility, but he’s not a universal choice. He was CEO of BCA in 2013-14 when McNerney launched what turned into a highly controversial and extremely bitter fight between management and Boeing’s largest union, the IAM 751, over contract concessions. The IAM was in mid-contract, but McNerney used the launch of the 777X program as leverage to wring concessions out of labor to amend the contract. He wanted to delete the defined pension plan from the contract and reduce the company’s health care benefits. In exchange, Boeing would commit to assembling the 777X in the Seattle area and build its wing production plant next door to the widebody production plant in Everett (WA).
The first vote on the amended contract was roundly defeated. Through a series of machinations, a second vote was scheduled right after the 2013 Christmas-New Year’s holiday period, in January 2014, when thousands of union members were trickling back from vacation. This time the vote passed with a 51-49% margin.
As CEO of BCA at the time, Conner was a target of much of the ensuing wrath. These bitter memories contributed to the 53-day strike that began on Sept. 13, when the base-labor contract came up for negotiation for the first time since 2008. Restoration of the pension plan was a key union demand. Boeing didn’t yield on this but agreed to a 38% wage hike, 401(k) retirement plan improvements, and other asks.
Only about half of the members in place in 2013-14 remain on the job today. Half of the 33,000 union members have been on the job for only six years, and half of these have been on the job for only two years. So, Conner is unknown to these people. How the old timers would remember Conner is unknown.
Conner was well-liked and respected by Boeing’s customers, nearly all of whom were disaffected by Boeing after five years of disruption. They would almost certainly welcome Conner’s appointment as interim CEO.
John Leahy, the super-salesman of Airbus for 33 years who retired in 2018, called Conner the toughest competing salesman he faced at Boeing.
Reconstituting the product line
Boeing’s product line is aging. The 737 MAX is based on a design that was developed in the 1960s and updated with major modifications in the ensuing years. Once dominating the single-aisle sector, the 737 is now a distant second to the more capable Airbus A320 family.
The 777 line was widely considered to be the best twin-engine, twin-aisle airplane developed. However, Airbus created the A350 (after several false starts), which rendered the 777 economically obsolete. Boeing responded with the 777X (a new wing, new engines, and some new systems). But some technical issues revealed during flight tests and the negative halo effort of the 737 MAX’s certification process stalled delivery. Entry into service was supposed to be in late 2019 or early 2020. The best target now is 2026, and even this date is met with skepticism in some quarters.
The 787 is Boeing’s newest clean-sheet airplane, but even it dates to 2003. In recent years, it’s been plagued by production quality issues that led to suspending deliveries for 20 months and massive rework of faulty fuselage joints.
Boeing desperately needs a replacement for the 737, but billions of dollars of losses, new debt since 2019, and other problems make pursuing a new design impossible right now. Mulally undoubtedly has views on this score, too.
This group of wise men would benefit Ortberg, the Board, and Boeing, just as Albaugh’s wise men were beneficial during the 787’s initial tumultuous period.
Nice to read this summary of the past.
It seems clear that after the merger there was a major culture clash between the old Boeing managers like Mulally and the GE-Cash flow-Beancounters like Stonecipher-McNerny-Calhoun. When Condit was ousted the beancounters took over. Whether or not their regime is finally over depends on Ortberg and the bod. Do they need to replace layers of management installed by the beancounters? Is there support for this?
Ray Conner is no better than the rest of the corporate bad guys from the leftover demise of Boeing, and I can prove it. I had a personal meeting with Jenette Ramose at the Frederickson plant, that Dennis Muilenburg himself set it up to talk about the extensive quality escapes, and safety concerns that were plaguing Boeing clear back in 2018. Ray Conner was also supposed to be part of that meeting to hear my ideas on how to help fix these problems. He did not show up to the meeting, but Jeanette Ramose did and basically did nothing but give me some stupid passes to the museum of flight for my dad and I. I still have the letter and tickets in her handwriting. These corporate people do not care about the business they work for! They just what to go home at the end of the day and have dinner with their family, or whatever it is they do.
@Raynor: Conner retired as BCA CEO in Nov. 2016, when McAllister became CEO, and left Boeing entirely in Nov. 2017.
The whole board of directors needs to be replaced with savvy engineers instead of folks who are more interested with shareholders and bottom line.
In addition, bring back engineering to US and specifically WA with people who know how to engineer an airplane instead of being outsourced overseas.
And do you suggest achieving this by poaching qualified engineers from other US aerospace companies (who have the means to pay much better)?
Or by paying to train currently unqualified US workers, e.g. the ex-KFC guys on the assembly line?
Or by trying to lure qualified engineers from Europe/Asia — where they currently enjoy much better benefits and work/life balance in a Tr#mp-free society?
Please do reveal.
Well aside from the off topic rant, he is talking about Board positions not full time.
Now whether all engineers is a good board operation, I am not sure.
I found a diverse group often came up with better solutions than an engineer would (we tend to want to just stamp a fire out)
Equally, a good discussion often got me to thinking along alternative lines that worked better or were economically more feasible to fund.
Its not that I did not come up with solid and at times brilliant solutions, but good discussions were equally important. Resources were never unlimited at that is what a good engineer thrives at and in, challenges.
Denis Muilenberg took away any and all perks from the workers. Leaving us with just trying to feed our families. Denis got millions of dollars for digging Boeing into a very deep hole. [Death]* of hundreds of people for profit.
You have the best employees. Now motivate them to pull Boeing out of the hole. You would be surprised what a small perk like a $5 coffee card. Or movie tickets will do. Boeing employees are there because they have to house and feed families. They do there job. They get paid. Your first step should be …. Win back your employees. Stop being the enemy!!!
*Edited by Admin.
I am on board with that and agree.
Its not the high value of a perk, its the fact that your efforts are recognized.
Yes you need the base salary and benefits for your living costs and even hopefully advancement for you or your kids.
A motivated workforce is a force multiplier for better performance that exceeds base goals.
Consulting Mullaly and Connor seems like a very good idea.
I’m quite curious about Ms. Pope’s tenure as BCA CEO,
and wondering if she’ll be replaced soon.
I hope she is out soon. BCA doesn’t need another beancounter CEO, it needs the opposite. Rather than Pope, an anti-Pope.
Oh, I fully agree. Check her CV, if you haven’t already.
curiouser and curiouser
IMHO the credentialism baked into the criticism of Pope in the LN comments section is not a good look. There is zero evidence that having a degree from Harvard/Princeton/Yale/Stanford leads to success outside of very narrow finance and Silicon Valley circles. Many very successful people in the history of US industrialism have started with Directional State college degrees or high school diplomas or trade school certificates or 8th grade diplomas – or none at all. If commenters have specific criticisms of Pope’s actions or results by all means voice them but let’s leave the veiled references to ‘not worthy’ at the door.
That is my take as well, I don’t know Pope obviously and you get mixed reviews.
Regardless, Boeing so called Glory Years (post WWII) was run by Allen (a lawyer) who most despise (I had dealing with an attorney from that era and he was truly an honorable man)
For me its her endorsement by Calhoun that makes it a no choice.
Those are good steps for Ortberg, it would be interesting to find out how much he was involved in the labor negotiation or that was a board decision he was kept out of (or he went with the “team” and should not have.
My criticism of Pope stem from the fact that her background,, like Calhoun, is accounting/finance. The source of Boeing’s troubles was never quality escapes in the finance department. 346 people did not die because some incompetent accountant mistakenly logged a debit as a credit. Boeing has been plagued by problems in the design and production of airplanes, not by accounting errors.
To put it another way, Ortberg was chosen as CEO because airline customers and regulators demanded someone with a background in engineering and production. If these are required qualifications for Ortberg to be CEO of the company, why would they not be desirable for the CEO of BCA?
I do not know Pope myself, but everything I have read tells me that she does not have the background for that position. If Ortberg had arrived 8 months earlier, I doubt he would have chosen her for that position. She was elevated by the dunderhead ex-CEO Dave Calhoun, whose tenure was described by analyst Richard Aboulafia as “a master class in incompetence”.
If Calhoun chose well in elevating her to this position it was the only good decision he made in his 4.5 years as CEO.
Good one on the master class in incompetence.
I still contend that once you get to a certain level you get into that intangible of people skills. You no longer are making tech decisions (engineering or financing) but assessing the views and options your subordinates are offering up.
They said Mulaly could not lead Ford because he was not a car guy.
What he was by then was a leader. I agree his ability to lead was buttressed by his engineering background.
I worked for a guy who went from working level to manager. His working level did not include my fields of expertise. I could convey the issues and he had the handle he needed without having to understand how the electrons moved in a transistor.
Often the problem required a monetray commitment and the company simply would not fess up for that (you had all the departments with all the needs that exceeded the budget).
But he understood the issue and could explain it to those affected (or afflicted) and, if you want it fixed you need to offer up funding or put pressure on those who can.
He was far from perfect, but he was trauly what I called a leader type.
While I doubt Pope, that based on factors of the Calhoun associated as noted.
But its fair that she be evaluated for what she brings to the table and that obviously is what is going on.
I am sure Mulally and Conner are going to bring information to the discussion in that regard.
I read a lot of war history and in WWII the top generals had people who they trusted that they would send out to review how lower commanders were doing their jobs.
Its an impossible task to assess those things as to a tough nut that was not going to crack vs an unprepared divisions that should have cracked it.
Some of those lower people they did trust based on past performance, some they had to send the team in to figure it out. The last thing you needed was a badly run division that would cave and hazard your Corp.
Ortberg has to build from scratch (and bring in people he knows are competent) in assessing the other operations. BD Ops dump may have been he had information on the person that he knew it was a bad fit.
Its also easy to criticize when in fact most of people have never had to fix something let along an organization.
My take was if at all possible, have ideas or solutions to the problems I was reporting. Sometime it was just bad news, yea, the boiler section is cracked, nothing is going to correct that but a new section. No you can’t weld it, not allowed.
@John & @Vincent,
+1
Definitely agree. She is condescending to her employees and knows absolutely nothing about what she’s doing. No clue about safety. No idea whatsoever about what it takes to build an airplane and the most important part- no desire to learn what it takes
My guess is Calhoun promoted her cause he saw her as non threatening since she didn’t know any more than he did, ie she was a one dimensional finance person, like him.
Basically, his mini-me.
Describing every management system at Spirit Aerosystems. We need to wipe them all out here and start over from the floor. We tell them things and they know nothing. No help no knowledge nothing. If we need something we have to figure it out. HOURS HOURS HOURS all they scream about and graphs are all they know.
I don’t know if that is an automatic disqualification. Frank Shrontz was a bean counter and he was a good CEO at Boeing.
I don’t know Pope, so I’m not saying anything good or bad about her. Just saying she might be good irrespective of her background.
frank was a lawyer
I believe Shrontz was offered an incentive to get the stock price up in the early 90s. The fastest way to do this is to cut overhead/reduce headcount, which did occur (30K). Laying off 30,000 in the mid-90s to hire back 32,000 in the late 90s is not an efficient way to expel energy and is disruptive. I remember Shrontz giving a speech in the Everett factory with the IAM workers turning their backs on him while he spoke. Mixed opinions about Shrontz.
EXCELLENT article by Scott. This old 1995 retiree agrees with most all of the article and the obvious effort to get qualified help. A few personal updates re Conner- Mulally and a comment about T Wilson.
On the 747 bulkhead failure- forgot to mention that virtually days after the crash, T Wilson made a trip to japan and got personally involved in apology and initial payments to victims families and eventually a memorial.
Noted that Ray Connor did almost the same. My last few years at Boeing was on 777. Dealt with Ray when he was a manager in operations- facilities area. When I came up with a suggestion as to how to improve the plant air systems and undersized hoses and connectors which facilities resisted – Ray was the first to allow a trial implementation.
Re Alan – had no direct comms with him during 777- but years later as a retiree and involved via SPEEA in a Countervailing duties issue before and after 911- an email question to him received a excellent reply and he noted that certain VP would contact me with more specific details which happened.
In 2004 when a mutual friend -employee [Dan Hartley ] wound up in hospital I notified Alan via email on a saturday- he responded almost immediately followed up and when Dan passed a few days later gave a great interview about Dan to a local paper-reporter friend.
Now if the bored of Directionless would claw back some of the Calhoun bone-us- it would send an even stronger signal to the grunts.
Just my .00000002
Boeing could have had the A220 for free. Passing on this state of the art jet with good stretch potential was a mistake but thank God they did. The shareholder value boys would have stripped it and sold it off to make their quarterly profit goals.
It would have fit in Boeing a heck of a lot better than it does Airbus.
BA/BCA wanted its much smaller competitor to fail. Boomerang badly!
The A220 is still a loss, Airbus need to get more volume and lower cost plus an alternative powerplant, hence the A220-500 might be the trigger for all this. As they are sold out on the A320neo/A321neo it might work for them to make their own “MD-80 of the 2020’s” and make some money before selling it off for a profit. The Chinese are making the DC-9 of the 2000’s and seems to work pretty fine for what it is. So maybe they and Embraer can make a bid when the program is up and running if they manage to be selected as supplier for major parts of it
Still a loss??
Not if under BA/BCA’s magic accounting black box, program accounting!
As noted the A220 is a loss, but no one is going to come out with a different engine for it. Its a loss for anyone to do so and the mfgs know it.
By the time you make an engine, P&W is more entrenched and they have solved the existing problems, its a matter of getting the backlog cleared up (and can you beat a good running GTF?)
so you get a new engine with its own teething issues and a tiny base. P&W will bid hard to keep it down so you go no where.
The A220 problem for Airbus is its an orphan system. Nothing in common with the rest of Airbus including the cockpit operations. In that light its like the MAX for Boeing, it is not reflected into the other aircraft. Ergo training costs are a lot higher.
The lack of cockpit commonality is never going away (or it will when the A220 is no longer produced)
In the meantime you are taking over problem build sites that will need investment and costs to get linked into the Airbus system.
When do you ever see profits off that program? It keeps getting pushed back.
Are 787 and 767F profitable?? Who’s kidding!!
As usual you comment has no meat to it.
The 787 is making money. It may never make enough money to pay for all the debacles involved. That is money spent and any money recovered is better than no money. Simple Finances.
the 767F has long made money. Simple mods and sales to Blue Chips. Bottom feeders make do with conversions.
A poster who provided no evidence to support his extraordinary claims. Lol.
Why didn’t you read BA’s recent SEC filings first before you bathered nonsense?
BCA lost like $4b last quarter before accounting for R&D & pension adj etc.
The 787 & 767 are producing at a rate below the min for break-even.
blathered*
BCA continues to incur substantial amount of abnormal production cost on their 787.
Knew Alan and Ray (especially Ray) well. First time I met Alan was at the LBG show and his first words to me “when are you guys going to buy the 777”. I always found Ray a class act and I could always count on him to reply quickly no matter how trivial my question.
Class acts both of them and introduction of the old Boeing DNA into the organisation will be a welcome breath of fresh air. I knew given his (GE) background that while Calhoun was a “caretaker” CEO that never knew he had shown the unbridled arrogance of thinking he was an island and could not benefit from the likes of Mulally and Connor.
Kudos to Kelly for doing the right thing.
Excellent articke and summary. If Boeing really changes the culture, the base for a great comeback could be laid. AM‘s working together culture – together with the airlines – created one of the best programs ever. Great to have his advice back. Stay the course and albeit at „throttled level“ get started publicly with a new program. BA needs and will attract great talent by doing it.
Of course, it goes without saying that Calhoun would have no interest in talking to any of these “wise men”. They were all “airplane guys”, anathema to the beancounter clique that made a project out of purging these guys, or at least, keeping them far from the company CEO chair.
And if he did speak to these wise men what could they tell Calhoun? To become the opposite of himself? To undo the top down, financially obsessed, totally remote management style that he learned from Jack Welch and which defined his whole career?
Calhoun was never going to be an agent of the drastic cultural change Boeing desperately needs. This would require him accepting that who was as a manager was completely wrong for the job.
In a football analogy, you don’t hire Knute Rockne as your coach and expect him to install the Run and Shoot offense.
Calhoun probably had his own committee of experts, but they were all in finance like him.
Here is his committee: Jim McNerny, Brian West, the CEO and a few executives from Blackstone, etc, etc. They would meet to discuss issues like, how much cash should be given to shareholders as dividends and how much in share buybacks? And should the real rate of change (after inflation) of employee compensation be -2% or -3%?
They should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. Their decisions ultimately caused loss of life.
Yes and is selling the BCA Headquarters at Longacres a good way to raise money and improve morale? Is working remotely from Lake Sunapee a good idea?
That was the major Boeing mistake of just taking ex. GE finance guys and not a good bunch of GE chief engineers to keep them earthbound. So Boeing took risks they or the board of director did not understand just to maximize stock price. When mistakes started to appear nobody could quickly correct it as it just continued with the 787 and 737 MCAS as proof in the pudding.
It’s great that Kelly Ortberg’s approach is collaboration (“Working Together “) and frontline focused.
It’s a wise move to tap into a knowledge base that has solid expertise in culture (specifically airlines and manufacturing), quality and safety, and successful recovery from commercial failure.
It still just frosts me that Ortberg’s immediate predecessor was paid $32.8 million last year (sweet!) for running BA right into the ground.
I hope Ortberg truly turns over a new leaf at Boeing,
and consulting with his successful predecessors seems
like a good start to that.
The last three CEOs (Calhoun, Muilenberg, McNerny) each damaged the company and left it in worse condition than when they started. For this, each took on the order of $100m in their time as CEO.
A rough measure of recent inflation is the number of years it takes a Boeing CEO to loot about $100m from the company in total compensation. McNerny needed about 10 years whereas Calhoun did it in 4.5.
Yes, “Working Together” is a huge improvement over the GE–McNerny-Calhoun business culture, whose guiding maxim was a cross between “Shut Up and Do What You’re Told” and “Arbeit Macht Frei”.
Thank you Scott for a great recap about Boeing leadership.
Brought back many memories!
Ortberg listening to Alan Mulally and Ray Conner is a good sign. Both are universally well regarded at Boeing.
Albaugh could offer insight on what led to a sudden and unanticipated retirement.
If I were Ortberg, I would try to get Conner to run BCA for a couple years and let Pope go back to accounting. Ray is an honorable guy. He would probably do it if asked.
Connor would also do and pick a successor for them to train
All, this is the start of the new Boeing company. Kelly is making wise chess moves and not quite at checkmate yet but close with the King closing in. I’m not too keen with having Connor but choosing AM is three jumps ahead.
The other wise move was Kelly shutting down the DEI (or DIE as many is referenced it) organization.
I could always deliver airplanes when we had three sources for the part one in Japan one in the United States and one at Boeing that way if one of our suppliers goes to war or they can’t produce the part we could build it to keep the planes delivering on time your comment from your Engineering Group is always we’re saving money by one vendor but you’re not able to deliver the airplanes on time what kind of sacrifices that
I must admit that I’m very much heartened to see the changes that Kelly Ortberg is trying to make as he takes on the role of a modern-day Lee Iacocca. Much appreciated is the article’s exposure of Harry Stonecipher’s short-sighted focus on immediate ROI – that cultural rot of bean-counting and schedule eclipsing the fact that Boeing really needs to be primarily an engineering company with finance and schedule as subservient is critical in Boeing’s demise. Harry put Boeing into a tailspin that is still going on. A testament to bad and short-sighted “leadership” that pays sour dividends for ages. This train wreck will no doubt be discussed in MBA courses for a long time. I retired in 2016 after 30 years and was glad to get out at the last good time to be at Boeing. I wish Ortberg lots of luck… and Tylenol.
I was until the strike.
What we don’t seem to have a handle on is if Ortberg is in control or the board is pulling the strings still.
Mullalys great move was not that he took over Ford, he took over with the condition of absolute and total control and backing of Clay Ford.
Ford needed a cleaning top to bottom and you don’t do that in bits and pieces.
I am staying fairly neutral on the Ortberg subject though I was not impressed with the failure in the IAM negotiations. That was a stupid operation that accomplished nothing other than more debt.
One sad thing in all of this evolution is that Dennis Muilenberg should have been able to turn the company back from the focus on short-term financial results since he was an engineer that came up through Boeing from his days as an intern. Sadly he didn’t do that.
The fundamental problem is that the focus on short-term results and a constant flow of high-percentage returns, preferably increasing every quarter, comes from Wall Street. Jack Welch spread that virus across US industry but it is embedded in the business and financial culture. Any CEO who says he is going to take a 10 year timeout from share buybacks to rebuild manufacturing and engineering capability will either not get the financing the company needs or be actively attacked by Wall Street-backed “activist investors”.
He sold out.
Muilenberg rose up in a culture dominated by the beancounters. Had he placed a clear priority for engineering and quality over bean counting and cash flow, he never would have risen to CEO in the first place. The beancounters on the board elevated him to CEO only cause he double pinky-swore fealty to their beancounter Cash-Flow ideology. Of course, most of his compensation was in stock, so he had about $100 million reasons to be onboard with doing whatever it took to pump the stock now.
I don’t recall the details of Ortberg’s compensation package. I hope he is not incentivized to pump and dump like the others were.
LOL. There is no pumping for along time!
Alan with experience from both Boeing and Ford should be able to guide Boeing to more efficient and quality production and at the same time guide Boeing to a 737 replacement that is much cheaper to build as being designed for robots, both final assembly and parts/sections build just like done on cars. It will be interesting to see his thoughts on the RISE once flight test fuel burn and noice data becomes available besides mass and cost.
Sorry, Ray Conner helped to run it into the ground. He was one of the biggest cost-cutting shareholder value evangelists. Albaugh would be the better choice of the two.
Boeing does not need to return to its Glory Years, in fact it can’t, that era is dead and gone.
It does need to return to sane operations. Mullaly and Connor are good moves in that direction but the strike being allowed to happen is a black mark. You can’t spin that any other way.
Stay tuned.
Aim low.
When you ship is sinking the only method that works to save it is stabilize it and then you slowly can bring it back up if it is indeed savable.
Aiming high is when things are good and they are not good.
Ask the expert:
What happened to the stonk?? Drifting and losing altitude…
As i recall- but cannot at the moment easily find- the closing date for submission of shareholder proposals for 2025 annual meet is coming up in a few weeks. It only takes $2000 worth of Boeing stock and agreement to hold for a year to submit.
And of course the perkins- coie gatekeeper failure to lawfare your wording. yes it can be done – Ive done it four times in the past without legal help. On the issue of pensions in 2000-2004 and got 10 to 12 percent of vote ( 50-60 million shares )- Read the SEC rules carefully !!
The Division of Corporation Finance receives requests from companies to state its informal, non-binding views on whether it concurs that there is a legal basis to exclude shareholder proposals from their proxy statements under Exchange Act Rule 14a-8 (“Rule 14a-8”). For information on the Division’s processing of Rule 14a-8 no-action requests, see our informal procedures regarding shareholder proposals.
Pending Rule 14a-8 No-Action Requests
Responses and Final Materials for Rule 14a-8 No-Action Requests
I’m still waiting for word from ortberg about how he’s going to fix the company’s fundamental inability to certify anything.
Forget a moonshot this is a company that cannot get the Max7 over the finish line
Agreed! The delay in 777X cert is hard to explain. Is it for lack of resources? I suppose covid cost a couple of years, but what is it now, seven years late?
Is Boeing paying standard lateness penalties on these sales contracts? If so, that would be some big $$$. I feel like old pre-merger Boeing would have thrown resources at this to get it across the finish line.
Don’t forget the possibility of bad design.
Fuselage rip-out; uncommanded pitch changes; multiple severed thrust links on all test aircraft after just a relatively small number of test flights…such things reek of design shortcuts! How many more gremlins are waiting to reveal themselves?
And the fact that the Airbus A280 wing broke before it was supposed to?
Metal panels tearing away from the attaching ribs?
You clearly have never built and had to develop anything.
The GE9X engine nacelles were made by Safran including the thrust links.
The wing actuators were made by another company so some sort of uncommanded pitch instability . The whole wing and furniture is of ciurse totally new
Oh boy! Nacelles and thrust reversers*. Lol.
“The GE9X engine nacelles were made by Safran including the thrust links.”
What I found:
Safran is involved in the GE9X program through its Safran Aircraft Engines and Safran Aero Boosters subsidiaries as a supplier of key parts: the fan disk, case and blades (via CFAN) at the front of the engine, the exhaust case (via FAMAT) at the back and the low-pressure compressor. “The GE9X benefits from Safran’s expertise and the many synergies we’ve developed, especially in composite materials, leading edges and casting of very large structures, to design and produce these highly complex parts,” adds Pierre Bachelier-Iltis.
via https://www.safran-group.com/news/ge9x-certified-safran-aircraft-engines-onboard-2020-10-07
no nacelle, no thrust links
clarify!
@ Pedro
The Air Current and MentourPilot report that the thrust links are made by BA.
The uncommanded pitch change was caused by crappy flight control software — which has since undergone a major revision at the insistence of the EASA.
Whereas the wing itself may snap during a wing load test, it’s not normal at all for the wing to rip up the fuselage — this was reported extensively by the Seattle Times when the rip-out occurred.
But, let them cling on to their fantasies… 🙈
Safran engine nacelles business ( one of 2 major global players) is a separate division to the engine division – which its a sub contractor to GE9X
@Duke:
The pitch was a software issue. One of the things they found was that programs were just cut from 787 and pasted into 777X.
Nothing wrong with the template but it has to be tuned to a much larger aircraft.
@TW
MCAS was essentially a software issue.
killed a bunch.
I have difficulty grasping how these things happen on a regular basis to Boeing ( the in your view prime aerospace designer. “nobody better than us” ).
Things that would fail you as a pre graduate engineering student.
Hear, hear. Maybe 2027 for the Max-7?
@Vincent
I love your sarcasm. But seriously, this is a barren wasteland of certification disasters. Max 7/10. B777X. Starliner. T7 Trainer. Full tanker capability. Air Force one.
There needs to be some deep soul searching here before Boeing takes on anything that resembles a paradigm shift.
And who says Ortberg is not doing just that?
All the pundits know exactly what to do, but then they are not on the pointy end of the spear are they?
As I told them at work many times, you don’t want me in management, I know I would be a disaster. Leave me where I am, I am good at what I do, but I sure am never going to be a manager.
Granted any resumes submitted from the posters would go into the round file .
@TW
Cycle back to my original comment. All I am curious to know is what his plan is. He is the new leader and one of his fundamental jobs is to address one of the elephants in the room. Clearly what had been going on at Boeing was not working. Ortberg does not answer to me, but he does answer to his customers, and the latest earnings statement was silent on Max 7/10 and vague on 777X. “2026” when it is Nov 2024 is an exceptionally broad range.
It has only been a few months on the job so some fact finding may still be in order, but if I were Emirates or Aer Lingus or Southwest I would be quickly reaching the point of throwing in the towel and cutting my losses.
@Casey:
I am a facts guy. Mechanics/technician/engineer (surveying, grunt labor, truck drive, house builder). All are based on what you know and what you want to do.
The only people that KNOW what Ortberg’s plan is would be the uppers in Boeing.
Unless you are into speculation you nor anyone else knows and he sure is not calling any of us (he might call me, common sense vs speculation).
So, the only thing you can do is watch how it plays out.
We saw part of it (or non plan) on the strike. But we don’t know what decisions were made by who, the end result is a mess.
With a bit of data you can speculate. My best guess is he left it to the group doing the negotiations before he took over. If so it was a bad bad bad decision.
He did get involved at the end and it was settled.
But the Bad Old Boeing clearly was driving that bus to start with and screwed it up just like they have done everything else.
Heads will roll. People will suddenly retire to spend more time with their families etc.
Right now that is as far as you can take it.
Make Boeing Great Again! ….or at least let it get back up to mediocre.
“Make Boeing Great Again!”
How do you pronounce that?
( “MAGA” is easy 🙂
I understand Mr. Kelly Ortberg is 64 years old. The article erroneously states he is 65.
Fixed the typo. Thanks.
It’s a good thing for Ortberg to be conversing with his predecessors — but it’s not going to solve any problems at BA.
People like to think that BA is now flush with cash and can take its time coming up with solutions to its problems — but that is a gross misunderstanding. A look at the balance sheet — or at the LNA article just above the current one — reveals that BA has about $35B in short-term liabilities, PLUS (the LNA article doesn’t mention this) another $3.5B in payments due to employee health and pension schemes. So, the ca. $35B cash that BA has in the kitty is essentially already claimed.
Meanwhile, 10% of personnel are going to be laid off — which will save costs on one hand, but incur costs on the other hand, by reducing BA’s ability to put staff on top of problem issues, such as cert delays. Moreover, the 737 MAX rate is going to be sub-par for years (according to last week’s LNA article), and Leonardo told us last week that BA only wants to receive 81 787 shipsets next year. At line rates like this, and with freshly increased interest costs, it’s going to be difficult/impossible to reach positive EBIT in the near term — which thus means that cashbleed will continue.
So, what’s the plan? Is there even a plan? Is there even a realization that there’s a need for a plan?
So far, Ortberg has done the following:
– Some shopfloor walkarounds;
– Pissed off 33,000 IAM workers, and also some other workers who had/have furloughs/layoffs hanging over them;
– Incurred billions of dollars in losses due to lost revenue as a result of an unnecessary strike;
– Diluted equity by about 21%.
– Had some conversations with his predecessors.
Doesn’t sound like a stellar performance to me.
Well you could wait and see what happens over the next few years?
I know you could fix it tomorrow but Ortberg is only human, its going to take him a while if he can do it.
Repeating the same thing over and over is, well repeating the same thing over and over.
Most interesting part is the analysis of the civil aircraft portfolio.
I don`t know if Boeing can finance another development right now.
Boeing would need an update on the B787, already 20 years since they started.
The Ten could use a bit more wing and range, so an increased wing + ER update would help. It`s a great plane, but the A359 is outselling it.
I don`t know if better engine tech is available yet, but a few % increase would put it up better against the A350.
The SA question is difficult. The Max might be outsold by the Neo, but it still has 6400 orders and will easy sell 7000+ frames.
Yes it`s not enough against the 10.000 of the Neo, and the A321neo has more orders than the Max, but still, that`s a lot of planes.
Unless Boeing can`t get the Max 10 through certification, how can you justify a new development without new engine technology?
Boeing went through the NMA twice already and left it.
I doubt that has changed.
Boeing is stuck with the portfolio they have. Their most important task is to get the Max10 and the B779 into service.
Then probably update the B787.
And then settle into being No. 2 for a while, fixing culture and development, while recapture some money.
When the balance sheet has less debt and the company is able to develop some good planes again, plus new technology is available, i`d go for a new family.
“When the balance sheet has less debt and the company is able to develop some good planes again, plus new technology is available, i`d go for a new family.”
By that time, COMAC will have firmly established itself, and BA (or what’s left of it) will be number 3.
It could even be Embraer at #3 by the time those actions
finally occur- if they ever do.
Indeed!
Especially if Embraer enters into some sort of mutual-benefit relationship with India or China.
I think meanwhile Airbus won’t sit on its hands and develop improved versions of their A220, A320, A350 and A330 families.
E.g. A220-500, A321MPA, A350 UltraFan, A330NEO MRTT. But Also FMTC, RACER, FCAS programs are moving ahead.
For Boeing just looking at their own finances & strategy seems risky. IMO they need alliances, government financing, new products, regain confidence. Sticking with upgrading 20-60 yr old platforms is removing development capability.
You are dead right. The problem is execution and cash. They need a cost effective profitable aircraft family for 220-300 seats, it can start as very light weight with just a few hrs range and as engine technology and structural design improves do the trans-continental ER. They need to be a tad bigger than the coming A322neo, lighter and cheaper. Sounds like a cross between the X-66A wing and Jetzero and opening the Douglas Long Beach FAL to get quality from day one.
@Kosmopolit, you are right, they are stuck with the present product line. I expect the next iteration of the 787 to get closer to the 777X in capability and better competitor to the A350. The only 777x that will competitive will be its largest version, because at present there is no competition.
The NB market is what it is. Calhoun was right when he stated 737 would not increase market share, that will have to wait for the next gen. Present job is getting the 737 numbers up.
I wonder if BA should be split into new/(good bank) which is going to raise new equity to develop new products, and old/(bad bank) which is responsible for its existing portfolio.
@Kosmopolit
You are starting to hit at the reality that Boeing needs more than just a new single aisle to make itself relevant. The only reason why Boeing has time is because of duopoloy. China is not a threat…yet. Or Embraer. The moment the market no longer needs Boeing is when they are in grave danger. I am not sure I would want to test how long that will take.
Boeing has not articulated a cogent product plan. All we have heard is a new single aise “in the mid 2030s” with EIS “around 2030.”
If Boeing is going to have a world-class product lineup it needs to fundamentally become a big enough company to update that lineup (or partner with other countries / OEMs).
“China is not a threat…yet.”
Certification of the Chinese CJ-1000A turbofan will be a pivotal moment.
Once that cert occurs — nominally within the next few months — the writing will be on the wall for the MAX.
Going (rapidly) to a C919 rate of 150 per year will rob the “western” OEMs of $8B of NB sales revenue per year (at typical discounts)…and most of that will be coming from BA’s slice of the cake.
@Abalone
Understanding we have a different view on China. Re-fleeting with an unproven international support network is not a light step. Even forgetting certifications you are now at the mercy of a substantially new supplier stream.
That said…you open up the door long enough. That is the basis of my “yet” comment. Most airlines are going to want to invest in aircraft types that have access to a full international lease support. And those lessors will want to know they are buying aircraft with a viable international market.
COMAC will carve out its market to primarily Asian markets with airlines who do not need a full portfolio of larger aircraft and who may have otherwise looked towards used aircraft.
Boeing needs to be better than the Chinese offering in the long run, because if cost is the only difference between products, then this will end badly for Boeing.
@Kosmopolit:
You are spot on. The 777X program needs fixed as well (and military programs put on a solid footing).
Stop the flooding , patch the holes, start pumping her out.
There is a lot to work with if you do it right.
A320Neo family Total Backlog
………………………….10,888 ……..7,281
A220 family Total Backlog
…………………912………….545
B737 Max family Total Backlog
——————–6,401……..4,756
——————————————————–
35% market share vs Airbus in the NB segment, based on orders.
38% of the backlog.
The other problem is that in both the AB & BA 20 year projections, some 20k NB’s are going to be needed. For every 10,000 aircraft that are ordered, Boeing will get some 3,500.
There also is Comac and Embraer, lurking around.
That is a clear listing of why Boeing can hang around.
You won’t see them ever back in the number 1 slot, but a distant Number 2 (Wide Body aircraft up in the air to parse a pun – 787 and 777X (in theory)
Comac a distant 3rd based on a China market almost exclusively.
Embraer does not have the ability to jump into true competition.
Russia a even more distant 4th.
“That is a clear listing of why Boeing can hang around.”
“Could” not “Can”
If Boeing can’t get even minor changes to market
and established production deteriorates further
they won’t hang around much longer but slide along the
ranked line of competitors into oblivion.
Could is fair.
They just got an order for 80 MAX.
I know, they sold them under cost, yadi yadi yadi, the thing the thing the thing. No need to repeat the mantra.
BCA just remove like 200 from its backlog because it can’t meet the delivery as contracted. More compensations have to dole out to pacify their “satisfied” customers.
Has anyone who habitually pointed to those outstanding orders considers such dynamic?? 🙄
Trans
“They just got an order for 80 MAX.”
Nope. “They” only got half of that!!
(further) MAX orders (80, 40, 20 .. ) are of less importance.
All hangs on production! It is essential.
no production definitely no income.
“f Boeing can’t get even minor changes to market
and established production deteriorates further
they won’t hang around much longer but slide along the
ranked line of competitors into oblivion.”
certification and sane production processes are the central hurdle in going forward.
@Pedro:
They got 40 firm and 40 options. They always take up their options.
Some interesting analysis here from Wells Fargo:
“How much can asset sales help Boeing?”
“Wells Fargo notes that Boeing’s leverage, interest coverage, and cash flow-to-debt ratios are well below the standards for investment-grade companies.
“While the recent capital infusion from the equity raise may avert an immediate downgrade, Boeing still faces ongoing pressures to address its substantial debt load and constrained cash flow.
“Boeing has about $16.5 billion in debt maturing through 2027, with a current blended interest rate of 3.5%.”
“Although the equity raise provides some relief, further improvements are necessary to enable Boeing to manage or pay down this debt without incurring these higher costs.”
“Specifically, analysts identify several segments that could be suitable for divestiture, including Boeing’s space operations, Jeppesen (a provider of data and planning services for aviation), and portions of its KLX and Aviall distribution businesses.
“Together, these assets could yield proceeds in the high-single-digit billion-dollar range, while having a limited impact on Boeing’s annual free cash flow.
“For instance, selling these units might result in a cash flow reduction of less than $500 million annually, a trade-off Wells Fargo considers favorable if it helps to expedite Boeing’s path to financial stability.”
“Although these asset sales appear promising, they come with challenges. Limited disclosure around each segment complicates accurate valuation, and Boeing might face tax implications that could diminish the net proceeds. ”
“Wells Fargo’s conservative outlook on Boeing is evident in its revised price target of $85 per share, down from prior estimates and well below the current market price. ”
https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/how-much-can-asset-sales-help-boeing-3699657
—
In theory: excellent idea to sell off excess baggage.
In practice: who’ll be interested in buying it? And at what price?
And just look at Wells Fargo’s 12-month target price for BA stock — only $85 !!
That’s 43% lower than today’s price!
Obviously you have not read my brilliant comments on the subject!
Some of it is worth a lot, Satellites would sell to 3 or 4 operations and bring in some decent coin.
Munitions wold sell like hot cakes.
What you do not get (nothing new) is that its not what it brings in, its the focus it allows into areas that do have possible future. Space you just dump. Write it off, few buyers. ULA might sell but thats a joint venture (Lockheed Martin). It would be at a loss but getting rid of distractions is what it is all about.
You have to understand the dynamics to understand that.
I’m afraid Boeing engineers / marketeers can, within a few hours, determine economics, investment costs, time to market and market penetration of a Straightforward, A321XLR based, 101t, capacity for range A322NEO.
And it is probably holding them back. Waiting for a moon shot technological breakthrough to restore everything.
https://07185918574543712684.googlegroups.com/attach/57f1d448a2948/Airbus%20Future%20A320%20portfolio.jpg?part=0.1&view=1&vt=ANaJVrGj_Sd9gIlJcJmn70-LTz32EZM4Na7jOplWPzE11dcAb4yNOQEuYAnEOKEFh628H4OLshXmCWinpn6W9AXH9zCqkLmwNyx_Md02L6x1bq7gRVNrSfY
It would be good if you can at least understand that like anything CEO said was pure manure.
Separate out the fig leaf stuff from reality. Calhoun no more wanted a new bird than I want to be President.
One of the issues you have to look at (or Boeing does now) is come out with a mee too A320 (929 anyone) and Airbus puts a new wing on the A320/321 and they match it.
How many sales do you get? How many years to get money back? The time to do a mee too was 20 years ago.
As it stands the MAX is as economical as the A320. The -10 has negatives in rotation and can’t match range to the XLR, but how many are going to use that?
No its not anything like perfect, but its a competitive lineup.
If Boeing can get 40% of sales in that Single Aisle area, that is a good future. You don’t have to be number 1.
If the TTBW pans out, then you offer a significant improvement. Right now there simply are no gains other than small ones like a composite wing (A220) that gets you anything.
If the TTBW does not pan out, then Boeing has to decide on the latest composite wing and fuselage build that is lower cost if possible.
Airbus can make moves to make its stuff better, Boeing has no where to go on the MAX.
Seattle Times: “Boeing’s head of quality for commercial planes, Elizabeth Lund, is retiring”
“Elizabeth Lund, senior vice president of quality at Boeing Commercial Airplanes and one of the company’s most prominent female executives, will retire next month, the company said Monday.
“In an internal message to employees, Boeing Commercial CEO Stephanie Pope wrote that Lund, 59, had planned to retire this year after more than 33 years at Boeing and thanked Lund “for her strong leadership during a challenging year and her remarkable contributions to Boeing.””
“In June, Lund made a misstep at a press briefing when she commented on details about the Alaska Airlines incident that had not previously been publicly disclosed. She was rebuked by the National Transportation Safety Board for breaking strict disclosure rules about ongoing accident investigations.
“As a result, Boeing’s access to the NTSB’s investigative information on the incident was withdrawn.
“Pope said Doug Ackerman, who has been serving as vice president of Supply Chain and Fabrication Quality will succeed Elizabeth.
“Ackerman has worked closely with Lund on the Safety and Quality Plan approved by the FAA.”
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeings-head-of-quality-for-commercial-planes-elizabeth-lund-is-retiring/
—
“Quality manager”– ehh, there is no “quality” at BA…
This is a smart move by Ortberg to clean up the house. Delaney and others handpicked by Calhoun at the surplus C-suite club should go and stop the circus show. It’s time to bring people like A. Mulally back as a special advisor role to rebuild the Boeing Engineering marvels.
The clock is ticking for BA:
“China’s COMAC seeks partnership with Vietnamese businesses to expand in Vietnam market”
“China’s state-owned aircraft manufacturer COMAC is seeking collaboration with Vietjet and other Vietnamese companies to introduce its aircraft in Vietnam.”
“Vietnam is a large and promising market and COMAC has been having in-depth technical discussions with Vietjet, Wei Yingbiao, the company’s deputy general manager, told Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh at a meeting with him in Yunnan Province, China, on Wednesday.”
“He sought favorable pricing and other incentives for Vietjet and new flight routes within Vietnam and between the two nations.”
https://e.vnexpress.net/news/business/companies/china-s-comac-seeks-partnership-with-vietnamese-businesses-to-expand-in-vietnam-market-4813697.html
That just means bribes can be offered, they might even be ex Airbus facilitators
“COMAC is seeking collaboration…”
No, collaboration isn’t the same as bribery 🙈
You’re confusing this with last year’s episode in which Taiwan was “encouraged” to order 787s by US Sen. Lindsey Graham…
Only in “twisted-mind” would surmise one with “bribery”, must be rooted deep in their SOP.
China Airlines -little China that is- ordered 22 787s in 2021 some years back, before ‘last year’
Like many others have since bought some more- as airlines do
They also have larger A350 from 2016
A senator boosting the US manufacture isnt bribery
this is bribery/corruption
Airbus: Vietnam Aircraft Deal
“between 2002 and 2014, Airbus engaged with consultants to facilitate and conceal bribe payments intended to be paid to Vietnamese government officials and airline executives in order to obtain and retain business in Vietnam, including the sale of three C-295s.
The details of this case are loosely transcribed and abbreviated from the Department of Justice report, United States of America v. Airbus SE, released on January, 28, 2020.”
Oh dear
another order for Comac
“Hainan Airlines Holding Co. (HU) has entered into an agreement to acquire 40 aircraft from Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China (COMAC) for a combined total of up to US$1.52 billion.
Specifically, the Shanghai-listed airline’s low-cost carrier (LCC) unit, Urumqi Air (UQ), will enter into a contract with COMAC to purchase 40 ARJ21-700 jets at a price of US$38 million each. The aircraft are scheduled to be delivered in batches between 2025 and 2032.”
So Hainan is out of bankruptcy ?
It has been for more than 2 years…
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202204/26/WS626759cca310fd2b29e595cc.html
I’m not aware that HNA has ever bk, but some may have been stuck under a rock.
‘Hainan Airlines was part of the HNA Group, which filed for bankruptcy in January 2021 after failing to restructure its debt”
Now there is a Blue Chip!
Who next? Mother Murphy’s Barnstorming Airline?
Well I was enjoying seeing new commentators with some interesting views and input.
for the sake of variety
Mastercard chair: ‘tremendous volatility’ in U.S. relations with China has some considering ‘purposeful decoupling’
“Are we moving into a more purposeful decoupling?” she asks. “There are a lot of questions about how this will evolve…We are not fully clear how much this tariff strategy will be deployed and [of] its consequences. [There is] a lot of uncertainty. But are there businesses that are still expanding in China? I think there are.”
None that can help it. Some like Apple are not pulling out but any expansion is now elsewhere.
Those making product for domestic Chi9na consumption will be looking to the future and not expanding unless they see stability or improvement.
EU investments in China soar to new quarterly record of US$3.9 billion
Foxconn Hires 50,000 More Workers as Apple Boosts iPhone 16 Production
https://x.com/philippilk/status/1855934167705346384
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GcGaSdcWMAA6xsj?format=jpg&name=medium
Yea, as I recall EU investments in Russia were soaring until the Special Action in Ukraine.
Kind of history repeating itself.
You might keep an eye on the property debacle on going in China.
European should ask those “Ukrainians” for NS2 reparation! If you know what I mean.. 😏
Where does Apple make its Vision Pro?? 🙄
Why can’t Apple make iPhone or any of its product in the US??
The Economist Jul 2023
“Making an iPhone involves a process of mind-boggling complexity. Despite the efforts of local officials, and strong geopolitical incentives for Apple to move away from China, India has struggled to become anything other than a destination for the device’s final assembly.”
>Why can’t Apple make iPhone or any of its product in the US??
Price and expertise. It’s astonishing how much of a grip the Far East has on manufacturing, automated manufacturing technologies, etc.
In theory there is opportunity for Western companies to repatriate production when the performance of automated production techniques gets to the point where no (or very little) labour is required. However, the window to do so is incredibly small, and you have to be paying very close attention to the state of manufacturing technology. The expertise in such techniques is firmly in the Far East, and they know this, and they do adopt automated production wherever they possibly can, as soon as they can, to reduce their costs further. For example, TV’s are made using zero labour. If a Western company wants to do it for itself back home, it works only if they can beat the Far Eastern expert manufacturers to it. Call it, what, six months?
Automated production isn’t any good for people in the Far East either; they’re put out of work, just like everyone else is.
There is. Just because it’s neither in America nor by Apple, so no one cares.
I suspect you need to have an indepth knowledge of the assembly process and close to an assembly line, so you can experiment and do it step by step.
Gosh, the Mastercard chair is very late to the party, because financial de-coupling has been picking up pace for two years now.
BRICS launched its cross-border payment settlement system in October, and is currently working on its own securities clearing system and grain exchange — all as alternatives to Western systems.
The EU is rolling out Wero as an alternative to Visa, Mastercard and PayPal.
Yuan use in cross-border trade continues to increase. India’s PM Modi recently declared that paying for oil in non-dollar currencies had saved him $7B in transaction fees compared to using dollars. 20% of world oil was traded last year in non-dollar currencies — the percentage will be higher this year. Saudi Arabia and China have set up a currency swap, and Saudi Arabia joined mBridge earlier this year.
As you already know, the Chinese and Japanese central banks are dumping US treasuries.
De-coupling is everywhere! And it’s going to pick up pace now that we know who had a clean sweep in the US election.
Visa partners with Tencent to launch palm recognition tech for digital payments
I wonder if VISA can find an alternative?
Employees definitely are focused on their work. I kid you not. Layoff notices may come out this week!
BA stock is now under $150, down 41% this year.
https://komonews.com/news/local/boeing-layoff-notices-loom-for-17k-workers-despite-recent-end-of-7-week-strike-debt-washington-state-everett-renton-local-economy-ceo-kelly-ortberg-employee-report-losses
I thought this article by Scott Hamlton was great. I was a Quality Engineering Manager om the 777 with Alan Mulually and his “working together” motto. What an wonderful 777 his team made. If you have Alan’s email, I would appreciate
it.
T.C. Howard
Perhaps our vision is getting too short-sighted, in view of current events. History tends to repeat itself. Look to WWII for hints.
The US may want to prepare itself better, like it tried to do in the 1930’s. There may be some marketing opportunities for military contracts that don’t appear profitable now, e.g. seaplanes.
Veteran BOEING ENG MGR (ret)
Veteran USAF, USN (ret)
If you were to ask average citizens in Europe and Asia which country is the biggest threat to world peace, I think you’d be very surprised by the answer.
Hint: The country in question doesn’t begin with a “C” or an “R”.
—
As regards the US “preparing itself better”, it’s interesting to note that the US now spends more on federal loan interest than on defense — and that situation is only going to get worse.
What (realistic) slice of cake do you see here for BA?
Your question re the slice of the defense budget for BA is one of priorities set by DOD.
Well then lets see your survey!
The US can’t hardly get out of its own way these days.
Not to mention we don’t claim entire Seas or parts of other countries.
I’d really like to see the argument in favor of Pope as BCA’s CEO: what are her qualifications?
Would she really be anyone’s first choice; and if so, why?
Sure, trot out the drearily standard “you’re a misogynist” verbiage if you like, but I’d really like to know what makes Ms. Pope a *solid, reassuring-to-customers* choice as BCA CEO, now.
You have seen others comment on their view of her, so go back and look at those, frankly this just looks like trolling to me.
As long as the comments are on Ms Popes ability then there is nothing to be said on her gender.
Ortberg does not have to answer to you, he is going to make his own decisions based on whatever his take is in regards to Ms. Pope. The Boeing customers will have some views as well he will take into consideration.
So, no one has to convince you of anything. Its going to play out without you in the loop.
So my advice is to see what happens, then you will know. As always, stay tuned.
What actually happens is worth a billion speculations.
I’m going to weight in here, just to show you how ridiculous the whole Mush storyline about DEI and how it is a problem at Boeing- really is.
It doesn’t matter if the individuals Calhoun advanced were male, female, black, white, asian, straight, trans, gay or any of the different groups that make up the world.
I would postulate that they were his ‘people’ first and foremost. DEI is just a wedge issue trotted out to fire up the great unwashed masses, to get them at each other’s throats, so the shenanigans at the top can continue.
Pope, Lund and that other financial engineer who RTF mentioned (the one who trumpeted RONA – return on net assets, her name escapes me) were part of his click.
Bean-counters and MBA whiz-kids come in all shapes, sizes, colors and genders.
They are put there to toe the party line and keep the company firmly in the ‘maximizing return to shareholders, above all else’ lane.
At that level, with that mindset – nothing else matters. You advance whoever is on the team and will do your bidding, without rocking the boat.
Culture.
I have to agree on that though I think the unwashed masses is above the pale.
A lot to parse on both sides. I was done out of my job as a heavy parts courier, she was given two laborers to do what I had been doing. Shrug, I went on with my life. I saw the flip of that.
I saw three women fail a physical test for Troopers and they showed up at the Academy. Again shrug, they may well have used their brains vs a male trooper brawn and the world better off for it.
Bottom line is if you adhered to Calhouns so called beliefs, then that is why you got promoted, he did not want capacity, he wanted adherence.
Mullaly succeeded because he was a manager despite being an engineer (you have to be able to make that transition, certainly not for me)
‘I have to agree on that though I think the unwashed masses is above the pale.’
Except here we are, having to explain to people that despite mountains of evidence to the contrary of the narrative they are pushing, DEI is not the problem at Boeing.
Call it what it is: It’s a dog-whistle, sideshow to distract from what the real problem is.
‘I saw three women fail a physical test for Troopers and they showed up at the Academy. ‘
We’re not talking about the Academy. We’re not talking about physical tests. We’re talking BA and the mess they are in.
Hardly any energy required to say “Yes sir – more buybacks” and write the memo to that effect.
The pen is always mightier.
Frank P:
Goodness knows the ladies were always smarter than the guys. For every smart guy (not me) there were 3 smart ladies in school.
So, DEI is nothing more than what the Academy was doing, ie, diversity. In their case the ladies probably aced the written tests. Where they failed was the physical side.
Clearly they got wavered. I am more than willing to bet $100 that if you put the Academy group on a sliding written scale, those ladies would have shuffled 3 guys off the bottom of the list.
DEI is portended to be a waiver of capability over diversity.
Certain groups hate it. I don’t. I have seen how certain populations are kept down. Some has to do with advantage. I have not had to deal with that, I had opportunities because of my race.
What one group did was use a policy of inclusion to throw red meat at.
So it was not unwashed masses at each other, it was deliberate focused at one group that in my opinion feels entitled. They always want someone lower on the pole so they feel good about what they don’t accomplish.
But, rather than come up with letters, you simply state that your company policy is to treat all people equally.
Sometimes people are elected by a majority, who’s trackrecord, reputation and statements are such that ROW wouldn’t expect them to be a candidate. They still can do well.
True, its just when you have a failure like Calhoun you get very very very suspicious of anyone in his orbit.
It’s fascinating that Boeing can’t even get relatively low-hanging
fruit like the 737MAX-7 certified, to date. And now they’re apparently laying off 10,000+ of their workforce, to boot?
#shouldbefine
@Vincent
The only remaining item I have heard is the de-icing on the nacelle which they had supposedly picked a design solution. At one point that was going to be somewhere “in Q2 2025” but Boeing was always cagey about exact timing. That fuzzy timeframe was also predicated on a performance flight this year. If you will remember this extra homework came because Boeing blew past the limit of when they could certify aircraft without meeting additional scrutiny.
The ambiguity from Boeing is not re-assuring. If the Max7 was really that close then Boeing would be all over this.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimosman/2024/11/10/why-a-boeing-breakup-could-unlock-massive-value-and-save-the-company/
From the article:
‘Breaking apart Boeing’s divisions—Commercial Airplanes, Defense & Space, and Global Services—could be a calculated action to release latent value and give stockholders a clearer road toward long-term success. Separating these divisions would enable Boeing to let every division focus on resources and leadership more precisely toward its goals. Recent problems have called for investor confidence to be restored, so this can offer a more open view of Boeing’s operations and value and help to rebuild it.’
Latent value. Stockholders. Investor confidence.
This is exactly what got BA into trouble in the first place…
https://www-barrons-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.barrons.com/amp/articles/boeing-stock-breakup-29a04c40?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17313854155450&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.barrons.com%2Farticles%2Fboeing-stock-breakup-29a04c40
@john: https://leehamnews.com/2024/10/14/boeing-breaking-up-is-hard-to-do/
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/daily-memo-boeings-breakup-not-if-how-when
Seems the idea of a breakup is getting some ink these days.
Lots of things get ink that don’t happen.
Rampant speculation sells.
What would be the most logical break up? Space, Defense, Civil, Helicopters?
I think also in Defense and helicopters modifying aging platforms has been strategy (F15, F18, Chinook, Apache, Little bird) all 50 yrs.
“What would be the most logical break up? Space, Defense, Civil, Helicopters? ”
Nahh!
Bifurcate into “management” and “conception/design/production”
🙂
@Keesje
A lot of people do not realize the Boeing Defense is probably in even worse shape than commercial. Some of it is opportunity; there are simply fewer high profile defense contracts to go after. The F18 is sunsetting in a few years. The F15 will have a trickle of orders for another 10. Little hazier on helicopters. And space is even worse.
I have to believe the US government would look very warily at anyone who would want to pick up the Boeing defense. This is a division that needs a long-term new project to stay viable.
I will disagree.
The non stealth fighters are selling well around the world. You just can replace mass. Lesson from WWII, outproduce them.
The P-8/E7/Chinook/Apache / V-22 (maybe) are all selling well. The T-7A has a bright future. Yea the KC-46A lumbers along but its worst issues are in the past or have a fix. Navy does not have enough fighters or FA for the Carriers, with nothing to replace the F/A-18…………
And there is nothing to replace it unless you want to go with all new A330-MRT and if you do a contract today, its 5 years away at best.
Do you retire KC-135? Tanker shortages right now.
And that does not account for the various munitions Boeing makes.
Some of the stuff can be and should be sold off. But there is some good money there. Its a lack of management aka Calhoun style.
@TW
Appreciate the deeper insight…my knowledge of Boeing defense lags as you get further away from fixed wing.
Tanker has the possibility of another tranche of orders. There is nothing in development to go with a “more stealth” option. The F18 is supposed to be replaced with a 6th gen replacement and the end of F18 production has already been announced. I have not heard much recently about that one. Rotorcraft is not really my strong suit, but i do know they lost out on the BlackHawk replacement.
My biggest concerns center on the fact that most of the product portfolio seems to be at the end of its product life cycle.
@Casey
BDS’s captive customer said it can’t afford
https://x.com/beverstine/status/1852423299134787715
@Casey:
Well the Russians keep coming up with new variations of the SU-27!
Fixed wing military is a fascinating area. Stealth has serious advantages but as we have seen with the F-35, LM has messed it up hugely. Its still selling because of the sensor system and stealth, I guess you only need 30% of them to work!
The next Gen programs for the USAF has failed. 300 million a copy was too much (even for the US!). So what do you fill in while the older F-16 and F-15 age out and you can’t replace them?
F-15EX is what the MAX should have been (more correctly NG). All new FBW systems, not just an add in screen that goes to the old controls systems.
The Navy is in the same boat (pun). They don’t like the F-35C (bit of a dog and range limited even more so than the F-35A). Unless we want to buy Rafael, the FA-18 is the only other carrier aircraft in the world (well there is China).
Apache is selling better than ever as is Chinook. Ironically Boeing lost the Army bid (along with LM) but the replacment is the same system as the V-22 that keeps failing (granted the last crash was an insane ignoring of alerts and alarms and diverting to a much further away field that in turn they went into a hold at because of other traffic, the reading of the crash is chilling) – now its not allowed to fly more than 30 minutes from safety.
Chinook is a lot more economical than the CH-53 Uber Bird. Only the Marines could talk congress into that one!
And I kid you not, the Army wants to go behind enemy lines to land an air assault (thousands of downed choppers in Vietnam and few manpads and no SAMS). But a good transport chopper behind your own lines works well.
The good old hardware looks to be around for a long time to come.
Nothing has the range and carry capacity of an F-15, and now we have an Air to Air missile that can go 200 miles (AIM-174B). Shorter range F-35A? Hmmm, tank up, stay way out and lob long range missiles, you don’t need to replace the KCC-46A!
Boeing has SAAB helping them with half the T-7A and its got growth built in for a light attack version as well as sell to allies.
And that does not include the munitions BD does. Also impossible to separate out BCA from BD as they share resources via the third Division (I can’t ever remember what it is).
Something like the Satellite mfg group, yes you can separate out and you would find buyers. The Capsule? Probably not unless Brazos wants to take it on. ULA is up for sale.
Ortberg said he wants to get rid of anything that is not aircraft related.
The incoming secdef lamented that US is a decade’s late, fighting the last war. Proof? See above. ☝ Oh also mentioned about war games and aircraft carriers. Hmmm not confidence inspiring. May be he has to change his tune in order to be confirmed.
Its unfortunate that this can’t go into other areas.
Clearly you are trapped in a belief silo that is not supported by facts.
For you the good news is we don’t want Europe. Most of us don’t want the mess the rest of the world is either, we got our own problems.
You might keep an eye on what the focus is. Certain actions if enacted is going to cost 100s of billions so we may not have anything left over for the foreign adventures, unlike China and Russia.
Trans
When US is able to abandon middle east? Huh?? US has like seven patriot battalion, how many are in middle east right now?? Huh? 🤣
When are the troops leaving Europe? Closing every bases? Are you Trump??
US navy future advanced carrier fighter F/A-XX is already in development – probably by Boeing .
” Until FY 2024, much of the F/A-XX funding were hidden under a classified special access program called Link Plumeria, among the DOD’s largest research and development programs. ”
For 2024 it was $2 bill and $11 bill more pencilled in spread over next 4 years
Then there is the USAF future fighter program
USAF program just went on the rocks because of cost.
The USN program will not be far behind, stalth and carrier is even harder (look at the lovely F-35C)
The KC-Z also is on the rocks due to costs
KC-46A anyone?
@TW
That’s what I also read. NGAD as it was going to be is dead. The Navy will be hard pressed to launch 6th gen on its own.
A “more stealth” tanker has some renderings but is not even in development. So if you want more tankers anytime soon its KC46.
Boeing is still getting some F15 orders but they are a trickle.
There is some business left but no flagship product like a B21 or F35. Boeing is eating table scraps.
@Casey:
Them thar table scraps to a dog are a wonder!
They are all upgraded and modernized (unlike the MAX).
When no one else has Stealth, then its numbers and an F-15EX can carry a phenomenal number of missiles.
As noted, those missiles have huge advantage in stand off range.
And they are Fox-3 type, so they go self guided.
Russia is now using T-55 tanks in Ukraine ans all their stuff is Soviet era derived. Huge damage and carnage.
You can’t beat a simple artillery shell for cost. Aim it more accurately with a gun that has a low CEP and its more lethal now than in years past.
I dont disagree on your assessment of the F15. It is absolutely more capable…if you do not care about stealth. There is a good chunk of the world that can buy that aircraft and get away with it, but that is a vanishing population of willing buyers.
Just understand what it is now…it is the economy option when you do not need the highest capability…and it is a ~50 year old platform. Just like the MAX…the end is closer than the beginning.
Wake up, smell the coffee!
From a recent report by FG:
Franchetti’s pronouncement comes as the navy has delayed committing some $1 billion in research and development funding for F/A-XX, instead prioritising readiness of existing platforms. US lawmakers are separately considering deep cuts to the navy’s budget for sixth-generation fighter development. […]
That would leave just $53 million for funding the project this fiscal year, less than 12% of the navy’s original request. […]
If the navy were ultimately to back out of F/A-XX, it would not be the first time the service has reneged on an initial commitment to develop a new stealth fighter. It was originally a key player in developing the Lockheed F-22 and Northrop YF-23 under the Advanced Technical Fighter programme, before later dropping out. […]
Boeing is in a particularly tight spot. The company already invested nearly $2 billion to construct a classified factory to assemble advanced combat aircraft
Launch customer for the C929 widebody:
“Air China signs agreement with COMAC to launch Boeing and Airbus widebody rival”
“Air China and Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC) have reportedly signed a framework agreement for the airline to become the launch customer for the C929 long-haul widebody aircraft.
“According to Shanghai Daily, Air China and COMAC announced the deal on November 12, 2024, at the 15th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition in Zhuhai, China. ”
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/air-china-comac-agreement-launch-customer
“Launched” as CR929 on 2017…now “first” C929 Chinese customer in 2024….my bet EIS about 2032 Over the past years they have been buying production equipment for research centers to do prototype subassemblies
“Broetje won the bid for the C929 fuselage assembly line
I think with the last couple of years…note who owns Brotje Automation
Broetje Automation (Shanghai), a Germany-founded company renowned for automated assembly in the aerospace industry, now a subsidiary of the Chinese group Shanghai Electric, won the bid for the wide-body passenger aircraft C929 production line project. The bid was initiated by Zhejiang Huarui Aviation, a Chinese company established in November 2019 mainly engaged in the design, R&D and manufacturing of large-scale aviation structural parts made of composite materials.”
back in 2021
“The announcement marks Huarui becoming a primary selected supplier of COMAC CR929 mid-fuselage, and it is also an inspiration to Huarui team’s effort over the past three years. Huarui will continue to make progress on the project and maintain close communication with COMAC to keep up with the development of the CR929 project, contribute to the construction of Zhejiang Province’s Wan Mu Qian Yi Platform, and to the development of China’s large aircraft.”
Oh my, is that hilarious or what.
laugh all you want, back in 2019, Comac already had a prototype composite fuselage section already developed and built (same section as Boeing 787 sections 41 and 43
see pic https://mentourpilot.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/CR929-Russia-China-Nose-Mockup.jpg
I laugh because of the nature of the program, two totalitarian governments trying to do a program
Also the other announcement was that it was going to be an all Chinese 939, something with range to compete against A330/350/787.
But, one side has the tech, the other side has the money and wants the tech.
Then there is the engines. China does not have them, their efforts have gone to military programs (and what success is not known).
Could Russia transfer all its tech to China? Sure. Likely? hmmm
COMAC can’t even produce the 919 in any numbers and most of its systems are Western Supplied.
So an all China 929 is 25 years away at best. Wing tech is the hardest and China has no background in producing civilian wings that are efficient (and that does not count composites).
Its not that China won’t make something eventually, its by the time they do the A350/787 is being NEOd.
The future in that category clearly is GTF. China nor the Russians have even started into that area.
And who will buy an unproven aircraft with a support system that is a challenge to maintain even for the best?
Failures in military areas are accepted for China. What is not is failures in public systems (and for good reasons). No one under that system(s) is going to risk anything and you have to risk with cutting edge tech if you are going to offer something better.
If you can’t offer better why should anyone buy it?
Yea the 919 is a raging success, with all Chinese buyers. Current mfg is 6 a year? And then we are to believe pie in the sky does not even exist? I don’t think so.
Trans
“So an all China 929 is 25 years away at best. Wing tech is the hardest and China has no background in producing civilian wings that are efficient (and that does not count composites).”
If I recall right, back in 2018 timeframe Comac/Chinese R&D center purchased a western AFP machine similar to this..AFP GANTRY 3D FOR WING SKINS_ A350
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hayxwnSpmis
C929 Large Aircraft MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH! China’s COMAC wide-body C929 jet in “DETAILED DESIGN STAGE”.
“First delivery of the C929 composite mid section fuselage (the one that Brotje machine does) is expected to be in 2027” FAL in starts in late 2027
enjoy the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wll6HIa7YQA
@All
I can somewhat get my head around the C919. There are enough buyers in the Asia area that will buy these aircraft that are not nearly as married to AIB or BA. The jump to wide-body aircraft is an entirely different story. That is a much shorter list of airlines…and they tend to be flagship operators.
I have a hard time understanding how you justify a C929 that targets a very narrow list of airlines…unless it is just for pride.
Trans
Hilarious? Current mfg is 6 a year?
You sound like leon who laughed at BYD. 😉
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ftbRWqkj0
@Casey:
China can sell all the C919 it (well the West mostly) manufactures to itself. The Chinese air system is totally under government control (and its bad in the US but great in China? – really?)
And there are the China dependents from going under from all the great infrastructure offerings from China that will take it.
But its China limited as it is not certified. So a country that is willing to waive cert can fly in country, to China but Japan? Singapore? India?
But it can’t even make the so called commitments in China. Yea, I can give you some Chinese Airlines that will gladly give up their slots.
Oh, and we are going to have a 929 Prototype flying soon. Very very soon. Oh no, we are not announcing any details, trust us, we are the government.
Now what happened to the 939? Or is that a relabeled 929?
Oh no, its Vaporware!
I don’t understand the so called limited flag ship carriers comment. There are few left. There are a lot of Airlines that fly wide body.
None of which will order that monstrosity whatever it is. Its a Bird, its a UFO, no, its Superdog!
A Boeing is far superior to pie in the sky. Or you can go Airbus.
Search engine is your friend, Trans. Why don’t you ask it? You’ll be better informed, at least. Lol. Yeah, where the ARJ is flying? Only China?? Haha.
Take a look at this, room service in BJ, not a high-end , expensive hotel I guess. Why no one made a machine like this in US?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GbN4OLFW0AATlcI?format=jpg&name=large
Time to relearn what you know, “the world is changing”. To turn back the clock? Can you? Resistance is futile.
Don’t fall into the trap of repeating what’s the propaganda: the “West” mostly?? Who designed them? Where are they made? Do you know who has the IP?
The 737-7, first flight in 2018!
The 777-9, first flight in 2020!
The 737-10, first flight in 2021.
What happened to them? Why it took BA so looooong and still none of them is certified?? Is BA in a state of atrophy?
What a delighted customer! 🥳
“Southwest offers buyouts to airport workers and blames Boeing for the job cuts”
“Southwest Airlines is offering buyouts and extended leaves of absence to airport workers to avoid what it calls “overstaffing in certain locations,” which it blames on a shortage of new planes from Boeing.”
“The move on Monday comes as a hedge fund presses Southwest to increase profits and boost the stock price, which has fallen sharply since early 2021.”
“A Southwest spokesperson said the offers of “voluntary separation” are limited to 18 airports. The company declined to identify the airports or say how many jobs it hopes to eliminate.
All the targeted jobs are in ground operations, including customer service agents, baggage handlers and cargo workers. Pilots and flight attendants are not included in the buyout offer, the spokesperson said.
“Southwest officials have said that the Dallas-based airline plans to end this year with 2,000 fewer workers than it started. That is after Southwest grew from 66,600 to nearly 75,000 employees last year. The figures count part-timers as one-half.”
“Southwest had originally expected about 85 new Boeing 737 jets this year but has cut that number to 20 because of production problems at Boeing that began after a panel blew out of the side of an Alaska Airlines 737 Max during a flight in January.”
https://www.scrippsnews.com/life/travel/southwest-offers-buyouts-to-airport-workers-and-blames-boeing-for-the-job-cuts
Buyer’s remorse? Open revolt??
“We usually will have some messaging from Boeing about the expectations [of delivery]. The way we have been planning has been to look at what Boeing tells us, [and then]…*plan for something that could essentially be worse than that*,” Goh says. […]
The group’s fleet forecast indicates it will end the financial year (on 31 March 2025) with five fewer aircraft than previously intended. The shortfall comprises two 737 Max 8s for mainline operator SIA, as well as two 787s…
FG: SIA Group has ‘levers we can pull’ to manage delivery delays: CEO
“EFW Delivers its 100th Airbus Converted Freighter Aircraft ”
“Elbe Flugzeugwerke GmbH (EFW), has just celebrated the redelivery its 100th converted Airbus freighter aircraft. The converted widebody freighter aircraft, an Airbus A330P2F, was redelivered from EFW’s facility in China.”
“The redelivery of the first P2F aircraft for EFW’s widebody A330P2F program was in 2017. Since then, the number of annual conversions carried out by EFW has grown steadily. To date, 47 A321P2F, 4 A320P2F, and 49 A330P2F converted by EFW have joined the global fleet of Airbus freighter aircraft.”
https://avsn.co.uk/efw-delivers-its-100th-airbus-converted-freighter-aircraft/
—
So, Airbus is also increasing its slice of the worldwide freighter fleet — more encroachment upon erstwhile “Boeing territory”
“(EFW), has just celebrated the redelivery its 100th converted Airbus freighter aircraft.”
How do they count?
EFW has previously been busy with A300/A310 freighter conversions. Add MRTT conversions ( A310, A330 )
~~~180+ frames?
EFW adds Japanese partner for A321 cargo conversions
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/efw-adds-japanese-partner-for-a321-cargo-conversions
“FreightWaves reported last month that EFW is closing its San Antonio (A321) and Mobile, Alabama, (A330) conversion sites at the end of the year and sending conversion jobs to its facilities in Germany, Singapore and China because of production challenges associated with a limited supply of qualified technicians.”
“At Zhuhai Airshow, Elbe Flugzeugwerke EFW signs an MoU with HNA Aviation Group for establishing an @Airbus A330P2F conversion line at Meilan International Airport.”
https://x.com/rschuur_aero/status/1856292118609678471
BA stock down again today: currently at $146.66 (down 1.54%; 16:17 CET).
Getting closer to the $143 level at which that recent extra equity was floated.
At that point, those new OTC shareholders will be under water — and they won’t like it.
Already down more than 5% relative to the close before the equity deal.
A slow manifestation of the effects of dilution…
Stock down even further now on the news thar BA delivered only 14 frames in October!
Also: BA has thrown Spirit Aero a $350M lifeline.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-12/boeing-throws-spirit-350-million-lifeline-to-support-production/
—
Stock currently down 2.86%, at $144.68.
Reaches new 52 week low today. Even those who bought the new issues got trapped, at least for now.
“Boeing Delivers Fewest Jets In Four Years Due to Strike’s Toll”
“(Bloomberg) — Boeing Co. delivered 14 jetliners in October, its lowest monthly total since November 2020, as a strike by the company’s largest union hamstrung its operations.
“At the peak of the labor strife in October, Boeing handed over just nine of its 737 Max jets, four 787 Dreamliners and one 767 freighter. ”
“Boeing has delivered 305 jets this year through the end of October versus 559 aircraft for Airbus.”
“The U.S. manufacturer remains on watch for a potential downgrade to junk status by S&P Global Ratings even after raising $24.3 billion in capital to bolster its liquidity. The ratings agency said it is concerned about a scenario where a longer-than-expected recovery in aircraft production and deliveries results in larger-than-expected cash outflows.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-12/boeing-delivers-fewest-jets-in-four-years-due-to-strike-s-toll/
The Messiah who walks on water. Not.
“Employees across Boeing face sweeping layoffs this week
Despite some expectations earlier, engineers and production workers won’t be exempt
“If the idea in Kelly’s mind is cutting overhead and programs will not be impacted, that’s not what’s happening.”
https://x.com/dominicgates/status/1856383506752143508
“Notable too: Boeing cut ~200 jets from its official backlog this year because the delivery schedule slide leaves the status of those contracts uncertain”
https://x.com/dominicgates/status/1856368536048021548
MAX fuselages stranded in a railyard in Seattle during the strike
https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1856367149172015104/ycHI7qR6?format=jpg&name=large
Hot air, empty symbolism, arrogance and fumbling incompetence — that’s all we’ve gotten up to now.
—
Lay off engineers…why not?
As soon as BA has figured out what’s wrong with those 777X thrust links (if ever), it can just hire some ex-KFC servers to do a re-design…much cheaper than qualified engineers 👍
Interesting — though not surprising — that the backlog is shrinking.
More to come. 🙈
😉
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”
― Rahm Emanuel”
why have engineers on staff if you are going cancel the 777x program?
I don’t believe that the 777X is going to be certified any time soon (if at all).
Eerily quiet from BA regarding those thrust links — suggests a big rat under the carpet, which they’re trying to keep under a lid. If the problem were innocuous, we’d have been told that very quickly.
That whole thrust link story feels off to me.
We’ll see- maybe.
interesting note
“A321XLR to Unlock New Routes
American Airlines sees the premium-heavy Airbus A321XLR as key to expanding routes previously unfeasible due to range or operational costs.
By summer 2026, the airline plans to launch new international routes using the XLR’s 4,700-nautical-mile range and its lower operating costs compared to larger Boeing 777 or 787 Dreamliners.”
It will be interesting as its fuel the XLR carries in exchange for passenger numbers.
Still, acquisition and ops cost a lot less than a wide body.
Have to do a bit of sleuthing, you won’t reach Asia but parts of Western Europe and South America yes.
@D:
leapfrogging Boeing’s Dreamliner P2P strategy.
If you go full P2P traffic per link is much less than
what goes to a central hub ( and then beyond )
Thus the XLR is a better fit than a 787.
@T:
forever wrong.
range is achieved via higher MTOW and replacing structure ( the substantial AUX tankage ) with a much leaner tank and FUEL. Additionally the new tank is more volume efficient leaving more room in the aft hold.
Trans
“It will be interesting as its fuel the XLR carries in exchange for passenger numbers.”
How difficult is it for BA to have a MAX 10 XXXLR? Can’t breath laughing so hard.
Ewe:
Sorry, look at the PAX numbers and range.
This is a direct quote and you need to be aware that flight diversions and fuel reserves push the pax numbers down to 170, not 200. Iffy weather and pilots take on a bit more fuel.
“However, the maximum range of 4,700 nautical miles can only be attained if the aircraft is configured in a two- or three-cabin layout to accommodate between 175 and 200 passengers.”
So yea, once again I am right. Its what I do.
I repeat, if that’s the case, why BA/BCA can’t make the MAX 10 XXXLR??
BTW what’s the max range the MAX 8 can attain with say, 210 passengers on board? 3,500 nm (or ~6,500km) as claimed by BCA? 🤭
Woo-hoo!! Direct quote: “Wizz will operate the A321XLR in a 239-seat*…”
Who said it’s impossible??
How to use search engine properly I guess. 😉
@Pedro:
Your usual diversion garbage.
Ok, this is the 001 level course for those who don’t get it.
You can stuff an A321 chock full with 240 passengers (ungh). You are not going to fly to the US.
Your rear tank stays empty.
You have the option to reconfigure the interior and go for a long range flight (with fewer passengers)
You can leave interior as it and do a long range flight, with even fewer passengers as you have those seats that add up to X number of passengers.
So stop trying to blow smoke. Flight has always been fuel and passenger trade offs.
The funniest one I saw was the biggest flight instructor we had (240 lbs or so) and a 250 lb Linebacker tryi9ng to fly in a C-150.
Yes they could do it but it barely got off the ground had almost no climb etc.,
They moved the operation to a C-172. Or they could have tried the smallest flight instructor.
Its a trade off.
How Many Pax does Singapore carry on the Singapore to New York route aka the A350?
Chat GPT >
design a single aisle 180seat transport class airframe.
Take cues from Airbus.
Chat GPT >
The 777X engine nacelles are designed and built by Safran
As supplier to GE engines its their job to come up with a solution for the thrust links to GEs engine, and Im sure they have done so already.
They have a substantial nacelles business, (3800 staff, formerly Hispano-Suiza Aerostructures) one of two such glogal companies all the major players use
@Duke:
According what I have seen, Boeing designed the thrust links.
Where is your source? The thrust link is designed by Boeing, everybody knows!! Lol.
Oh.. you saw it said on YouTube?
Lolsss……by a pilot!…eye rolls
Nope, all reports I accessed said Boeing designed it.
Pylon and Nacelle are two different things and yes, I am surprised Boeing had anything to do with it, per reports.
If they did not then its bad reporting
just fyi
article: Why Boeing Killed DEI
https://www.city-journal.org/article/why-boeing-killed-dei
Good article- thanks for that link.
Except:
‘City Journal is a public policy magazine and website, published by the conservative Manhattan Institute for Policy Research think tank, that covers a range of topics on urban affairs, such as policing, education, housing, and other issues’
‘The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (renamed in 1981 from the International Center for Economic Policy Studies) is an American 501(c)(3) nonprofit[4] conservative think tank focused on domestic policy and urban affairs.’
‘Insider’ source, huh?
Once again
“DEI is the problem, not the $99bn spent on buybacks and dividends”
Well said
After getting round to reading the article to City Journal I was about to write a similar retort to what you just posted.
The Trumpist and their political progenitors in the Conservative movement who invented the “culture wars” to hide the fact that under the old “privilege” ways that they espouse, a lot of incompetence cannot be challenged.
Any challenge to the locked in “ways” is immediately targeted as “woke” or DEI and this allows the “good old boy” networks to persist in milking institutions in the manner that the “GE boys” at Boeing, who have essentially destroyed a good company simply to line their pockets. Note that the damage to Boeing had nothing to do with DEI policies, but the blame in the Conservative political echo chamber is to blame perceived beneficiaries of DEI, and by the way the primary beneficiaries have been women in general (excluding more than 50% of population from senior management positions in any society to me is ludicrous), and specifically “white” (European descent) women. Women of color are the next group of beneficiaries followed by non-“white” men (Asians, Latinos) and then “black” (African descent) men.
So good luck to us all as we return to the days of “white” privilege under the anti-DEI programs that are now being unleashed in corporate America.
“Airbus agreed to provide Spirit (SPR) a non-interest bearing $107 million credit, the aircraft parts suppliers said in a statement on Tuesday.”
“Boeing committed to pay as much as $350 million in the advanced payment accord.”
That said, you still need to break even to exist in the long term
In the long term Airbus gets its bits and pieces and Boeing gets the rest.
Looks like Airbus has to pay something anyway as there is no money in the piggy bank.
@Pritchard
Spirit the supplier is more fortunate than Spirit the airline. The airline looks like its bankruptcy filing is imminent.
interesting fact about Airbus China FAL
“Assembles the A320neo single-aisle family of passenger aircraft in the northern port city.
A “quarter of deliveries” from Tianjin in 2024 were to non-Chinese airlines including Easyjet and Wizzair , Xu said.
However, he signaled a delay of potentially several months in opening a second Airbus assembly line in Tianjin, saying it would start operations at the beginning of 2026.
Airbus agreed to build the new line during a state visit to China by French President Emmanuel Macron in April 2023, in a move to strengthen access to the world’s second-largest aviation market.”
I guess you can build commercial aircraft in China and fly them out to international customers after all under EASA cert (aka Airbus cert)
EASA-FAA is a joint certification process. One agencys cert is valid for both, as long as they have the same rules.
EASA has no connection to Airbus , its not like the Leninist-Party-State system where government-business is subject always to the one entity, the party
OTOH we know too well how FAA worked by contracting out under the guise of ODA, especially in the last twenty years or so. Sent the fox to guard the hen house, Capitalist-Party-State system! LMAO.
@Pritchard
I have always wondered (and seriously) how it is that Airbus can open FALs in Mobile and China without issue (that you hear about) and Charleston is still struggling years later. Is there something I am missing?
Management!
Charleston has been chaotic from the start.
Ramp up to rate 14, then cut to (in theory) rate 3. They were supposed to be ramping up once again.
But that is also the place the canned independent workers (contract workers) when the 3 month hiatus of the -10. Place fell apart. Said contract workers were IAM or others with experience.
Charleston has been on its own for a while without the cross check of Everett. The IAM happy to knock the quality failures when the line was in Everett. Good cross check and that went and you saw the slippage into a huge mess.
You saw that when both made 787s with Qatar refusing Charleston 787s and the IAM being the one that pointed out how awful the travel work was.
Airbus is far better at maintaining build rates and treating its people decently.
one reason, the Airbus A320 FAL in China is “exact” copy of Hamburg plant
https://www.avionews.it/resources/big/88316356840454807e59148109306d76.jpg.webp
No, because the China built A320 is exactly like the ones made in Europe or the US.
The so called Plant is an assembly building, big open space.
Even Boeing can build one in Charleston and that is a swamp!
‘Forever w’
How hard is it to look up how deep AB’s supply chain is localized in the place that contribute the highest manufacturing value of the world? Hehe
AB is not BA. BA tried to be the system integrator. Oops.
Trans
“The so called Plant is an assembly building, big open space.”
Yes, that’s called Airbus A320 FAL just like Mobile Alabama
https://www.madeinalabama.com/wp-content/webp-express/webp-images/uploads/2018/02/Airbus-Assembly-Alabama.jpg.webp
It is just a “large empty building” when you think in Cargo Cultish metrics.
Push stuff in on one end {MAGIC} finished stuff comes out the other end.
@DP:
So?
You made a big deal about exact copy and that is meaningless.
Its building to the Specs that allows the A320 built in China to serve in the rest of the world.
Trans
So??
Oh why FAA has to clamped down on BA’s production rate, took away BA’s authority to issue airworthiness certificate? So???
Keep in mind the A320 and all Airbus are EASA cert and the FAA recognizes it (they are supposed to cross agree but since the MAX tragedy EASA is doing its homework).
An A320 series built in China is not China certified, its Chinese recognition of the EASA certification just like the MAX is recognized and allowed again.
You can ‘t just fly any airplane out of China into various countries as a commercial offering. You can probably get a test aircraft approval as long as no passengers are carried (COMAC contractors or employees may be able to ride along, but not paying).
I will disagree that EASA is not got its direction controlled. Allowing the problem Trent 1000 on the 787 was a classic example of controlled.
India does not have the greatest reputation and their AHJ refused to let A320NEO fly with two iffy P&W engines and the engines on that Norwegian 787 were beyond iffy. It was the lower time engine that went.
I see the two experts are in fine and very articulate form here.
😉
Not sure that “articulate” is the correct term — “noisy” might be nearer the mark.
Today’s fascinating geography lesson: “You only need a widebody to fly to places like Europe”.
Imagine that! No flight routes at all from China to central Asia, Russia, the Middle East, Africa or South America. Heck, even within Asia, it’s an 8-hour flight from parts of China to Jakarta, Indonesia.
Also: far more use of widebodies on shorthaul routes within Asia, due to population density.
Last time I checked, none of those destinations “HAVE” to have an EASA cert in order to be serviced.
🙈
‘Not sure that “articulate” is the correct term — “noisy” might be nearer the mark.’
“trumpish” . facts, truth are just distraction.
“An A320 series built in China is not China certified, its Chinese recognition of the EASA certification just like the MAX is recognized and allowed again.”
Does our “expert” forget how long it took for the 737 MAX to be able to fly again in one of the aircraft’s biggest markets?
“Boeing Chief Executive Dave Calhoun said resuming deliveries in China was critical to Boeing’s future, but the outlook for selling planes to China in the “near term … a year or two” was negative.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/aviation-regulator-met-boeing-737-095208873.html
Wikipedia:
The CAAC grounded the 737 MAX in China until January 13, 2023, when Air China resumed operations of the type.
one reason, the Airbus A320 FAL in China is “exact” copy of Hamburg plant
https://www.avionews.it/resources/big/88316356840454807e59148109306d76.jpg.webp
If it makes you feel better, keep telling yourself that.
Maybe the C929 is more aspirational. High targets can be good
for developing entities, and COMAC is surely one of them (along with Embraer). My guess is that the C929 will have a rather slow-walked development. Boing is presently just attempting
to get their own “legacy” house in order (laying off 10% of their own workforce is not a good sign); but I’m pretty sure
AB see clearly enough the threat quietly embodied in the C919.
The program should be called the 92X-X. Placeholder for dreams.
The sands keep shifting, after all China built the forward fuselage section years ago.
What you are seeing is the Iranian school of, well lets just say its so and there we go.
Of course it will be slow walked, they don’t have the tech nor the systems (and this time it won’t have anything Western). You want to sell it and you gots to have an engine (s) and it has to pass EASA. Nothing they have passes EASA.
The C929 is a program EASA took on to keep its people busy because there is nothing for them to do!
Keep in mind the dialog goes both ways between EASA and the FAA. Both will ask for clarification and supporting documents until the cows don’t come home (or to paraphrase a song, Until the 12th of Never and that is a long long long time)
All the stuff that was cited was timelines from times back, so no, I don’t take it seriously.
Along with all the other hurdles, you only need a wide body to fly to places like Europe. So it HAS to be EASA certified. Even Indochinese ai9rli9nes can’t fly it to Europe (let alone the US) unless it is.
30 years from now? That is a long long time. Maybe Trump sells Boeing to China and away we go.
Over the last 30 years I’ve seen so much downplaying, underestimating of what the Chinese can achieve that I’m surprised many stick with this approach. Comforting.
Only in the US.
Other countries have a more realistic view on the matter.
@Keesje:
I don’t downplay what they can do. But being discounted was a huge Western tech shift to China that companies have learned is then stolen.
That is aside from espionage steeling, buying companies in other countries and stealing the tech etc.
As time is going by there is less and less of that as companies really get it and in many cases security is tighter (still a lot of that).
When stuff is exported, its not as good as experience Western makers. Military systems is an open question as its not been tested.
Getting stuff made is the goal and stealing gets it done but a lot of the stuff needed is IP vs patents and those are held close to the vest.
Say China broke into Airbus systems and pulled all the details on the A350? How many years to reverse engineer it?
You still have to come up with production process to make the stuff and that does not include all the fiddly things like hydraulic pumps, control units and the avionics that make it go.
That is why the 929 is so far behind and they don’t have civilian engines for one regardless.
Military systems they understand the build, fail build. Civilian Boutique Prestige projects, they are not going to let that happen.
I wonder what happened to BDS’s starliner? Didn’t at one time, Boeing helped to land men on the moon? What happened? The good brains were stolen? Don’t you think it’s comical? Their institutional memory collectively went out the window?
From blaming AB’s success on “subsidies” to the current popular copium… there’s a tendency to put your head in the sand. Look how great BA is right now after peddling those “unfair” subsidies for AB for decades!!
Yeah it’s so easy, if one got the blueprint (where the hell are they, from the airframe to all the components from hundredsofsuppliers involved) then they could made everything. What have you consumed??
@TW
A lot of your commentary on China seems to imply that the Chinese do not have the intellectual capacity / know how, to be technologically innovative to design, engineer and build 21st century products. I am afraid you need to go visit other parts of the world and you can start in “lowly” Africa and get amazed at what people around the world are coming up with. The primary barrier to any global industry is money and the willingness to spend whatever it takes to achieve whatever goas are set by the new entrant(s).
China like most countries in the world, do not lack the intellectual capacity to build airplanes, semi-conductors etc. that they set their minds to build, and most importantly of all, they have the financial resources to throw at solving any problem in any industrial endeavor they wish to undertake.
Like the USA and most countries on the planet, they are not shy to steal, beg and / or borrow from others. The USA does that all the time usually by recruiting and retaining immigrants (yes the maligned people usually of non-European ancestry that the anti-DEI proponents stigmatize as “vermin”).
@branaboy:
I am not responsible for your lack of ability to comprehend what I have written.
The Chinese are as capable as anyone in the world.
Their system dictates (literally) what they can and can’t do and are or not allowed to achieve.
Hong Kong shows you what happens when you go against the system.
Ever hear of XIAN ?
Xi’an Aircraft Cy marks installation of 3,000th B737 vertical fin
Executives from Boeing and Chinese supplier Xi’an Aircraft Company (XAC) gathered in Renton, Wash., to witness the milestone 3,000th installation of the Next-Generation 737 vertical fin manufactured by XAC. This highlights the increasing role of XAC and its parent company, Aviation Industries of China (AVIC), as a key supplier on every Boeing …
Just around the corner are the terracotta soldiers … thats been going on since the mid90’s
Boeing charge an 8000% margin on soap dispensers and STILL can’t show a profit!
Only one dispenser per ..
8000% markup is by far not enough for profit.
What a pittance! A million $ overcharge (a v small sample of about a dozen) is nothing, “Military grade” that’s good enough for the “patriots”.
No wonder BGS is making $$ hand over fist!
“Since 2011, the U.S. government has awarded Boeing more than $30 billion in contracts to purchase needed spare parts for the C-17 and be reimbursed by the Air Force.”
So, now that we know that M#sk is going to be in charge of “governnent efficiency” in the US, will there be any more US defense orders for Boeing? I doubt it.
Also, in view of the pick for Defense Secretary, I think we can also assume that US defense companies won’t be receiving many orders from abroad.
Interesting times ahead.
Not sure about defence orders, but I expect that FAA will get its new marching orders to stop bothering Boeing and just rubberstamp everything.
Hear hear! Confidence inspiring! 😏
…in which case FAA cert will become even more worthless than it currently is…
BA stock down another 2.35% today, at a level of $141.76 (at time of writing).
That’s an 8.6% drop compared to the last close before the recent equity float.
No dilution, eh?
And the big OTC customers who bought the stock float at $143 — and thought that they were getting a bargain — are now under water. They won’t like that at all 🫣
Broke thru below $140. Wow.
Of key importance: daily trading volume has doubled in the past 2 weeks.
It was around 8M per day, and it’s now up around 16M.
Indicates massive — but gradual — offloading.
And all this is happening in a period in which the Dow 30 and S&P 500 are going UP.
🙈
Seems a lot of selling pressure. What happened? A child said the emperor has no clothes??
BA, a leaky ship with a few broken water pumps & non-functional water-tight doors, full steam ahead into a storm not seen for like the half-a-century. FAFO
Nov 5
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/boeing-ceo-in-battle-to-mend-rifts-after-bitter-strike-ends/ar-AA1tyysB
BA is financially exhausted?
“Effectively, remaining in business has consumed their ability to raise capital and they have not been left with much leeway to raise more to develop a new airplane later,” said Nick Cunningham, an analyst at investment research group Agency Partners.
FT: From cars to planes: global manufacturers brace for Trump’s tariffs
Trade wars could hurt Boeing more than its arch-rival Airbus given the US group’s limited production overseas, according to analysts.
Boeing has “very limited added value activities outside the US, so trade wars would have a big impact on its demand” […]
Whatever happens, Robert Stallard, analyst at Vertical Research Partners, said in a note that tariffs on new aircraft “are very likely to mean higher airline ticket prices”.
Oh no good deed goes unpunished!
“The [auto] industry is under massive stress financially but the bigger pressure point will probably be the German brands because they export quite a bit,”
Embrace for 2.0
Trump’s first trade war sank American manufacturing exports & inadvertently helped shift automaking jobs to China
https://reason.com/2021/02/16/the-trade-war-drove-american-automaking-jobs-to-china-as-tariffs-stalled-u-s-exports/
maybe Elon should take the lead by shutting down his China plants and mfg more in the US
Why should he replicate Boeing’s issues?
lawyers, banksters and such can’t build hardware.
.. lawyers, banksters and such can’t build hardware…
Were they still alive- I’m sure Bill allen and frank shrontz would agree- but while they did NOT ” build hardware ” they knew how to make it possible and with quality.
@Bubba2
Where the incentive lies?? The world has changed, at least in America.
NASA’s JPL issues lay-off notices
@Pedro
If space wasn’t bad enough…read where Artemis stands a better than fair shot at being cancelled completely. It’s a shame but I can hardly blame the decision. More gas on the fire for Boeing space
Artemis should be cancelled.
Its an out of control NASA boondoggle.
NASA should be broken up. Space Exploration (by robots) and Aeronautics, neither of which has anything to do with the other.
The only thing they did right was see money to Space X, sadly that comes with Musk but ………
@TW
I blame the federal goverment more than Boeing for Artemis. It was a poorly conceived program that is grossly inefficient by design. At least cooler heads will now prevail and hopefully cancel this boat anchor.
You dont spread around funding to maximize Congressional districts and hamstring the design with shuttle engines all to produce a production that is single use and costs over a $1B a launch.
Well NASA is the Federal Government in this case and yes, agree, its a bloated enterprise scattered around the US (mostly South and South East) and has turned into a jobs program.
It does not matter, kill Artemis for sure.
Kill all other NASA stuff, let what is left launch robots and put the Aeronautics into a Agency that wants to develop commercial product which is what it was supposed to do before Eisenhower hijacked it.
“TW: It does not matter, kill Artemis for sure.
Kill all other NASA stuff, let what is left launch robots and put the Aeronautics into a Agency that wants to develop commercial product which is what it was supposed to do before Eisenhower hijacked it.”
Much of the value to NASA to mankind, and to the United States, is in the space science program (JWST, Earth-observing satellites, joint projects with NOAA for Earth and solar-magnetic monitoring, etc). If there is no gee-whiz public facing stuff such as rocket launches eventually some Senator will campaign for re-election on cutting NASAwastefraudandabuse and the space science will get chopped.
In a rational society splitting NASA into a reestablished NACA for aeronautics research, a space sciences organization, and a launch organization (the last if for no other reason than to keep the private contractors honest, the way the Navy did it through the 1940s) would make sense. In our society and political environment without the jobs in Alabama from the launch activities the jobs in California building science satellites will get chopped chopped chopped.
Airbus forecasts close to half of aircraft demand in the next twenty years to come from the Asia Pacifc.
Passenger traffic in the region is expected to grow at 4.8% a year, while the overall market grows at 3.6%.
Sounds chaotic:
“Boeing Layoffs Likely to Impact Military Support Programs”
““I wouldn’t think of it like we’re going to take people off production or out of the engineering labs,” Ortberg added. “That’s not our intent.”
“But a Boeing senior engineering manager in St. Louis said the cuts in the works target a roughly 10% reduction across the engineers supporting military programs, including the F-15 and F/A-18 jet fighters and the Navy’s P-8 submarine hunter, which is built in Renton, Washington, with military systems installed in Seattle.”
“Those engineering organizations will shrink, said the manager, who asked not to be identified to protect his job. “If the idea in Kelly’s mind is cutting overhead and programs will not be impacted, that’s not what’s happening.”
“He said research and development work, and production programs, “will all bleed a little.””
“A manager of a small team of about 15 people, all working remotely — and ironically focused on ways to improve efficiency in program management — told one employee to expect a 30% cut in his team.
““If we are not holding a wrench, if we’re considered overhead, it’s about 30%,” said the employee, who also asked not to be identified to protect his job. The reduction for “people working on planes might be less than 5%.””
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/11/13/boeing-layoffs-likely-impact-military-support-programs.html
Short cuts make long delays:
Bloomberg: “Boeing Faces Risk as It Starts Job Cuts in Tight Labor Market”
“But if Boeing cuts too deep or in the wrong places, it risks undermining its eventual recovery from years of turmoil. Manufacturers like Boeing used to count on a large portion of furloughed workers to eventually return to work. That pattern was broken when its Covid-era layoffs spurred a permanent exodus, including top-flight engineers and mechanics.
“And these days, workers have more options. Unemployment in Seattle is hovering at 4% and aerospace workers are in high demand, particularly with the region’s booming space economy.
“Rivals like SpaceX, Blue Origin LLC and Amazon.com Inc.’s Project Kuiper are all searching for new hires to support rapidly growing operations around Seattle, where Boeing manufactures most of its commercial airplanes, said Stan Shull, a space industry analyst and consultant at Alliance Velocity LLC. The opportunities range from working on Starlink satellites for Elon Musk’s space venture to helping with rockets, space stations, lunar landers and the like for Jeff Bezos’s rival company.”
“There are about 1,350 job openings at more than 50 space companies in the Puget Sound region, by Shull’s count. While engineers of all stripes are in demand, the companies are also searching for machinists, administrative help, sales and marketing staff and other positions, said Shull.
“Shifting demographics within the US workforce and continued low unemployment mean Boeing will face more competition when it needs to resume hiring to support its growth, said Richard Aboulafia, a managing director with AeroDynamic Advisory.
“It works fine as long as labor markets aren’t tight,” Aboulafia said in an interview. “But aerospace and defense labor markets are really tight.”
“Besides, rolling out blanket workforce cuts are “the surest formula for losing 10% of your best people” who will gravitate to potentially more stable employers, Aboulafia said.
“The lost institutional knowledge was apparent as the company made only halting progress ramping up manufacturing of its 737 Max jetliner this decade. Executives later acknowledged they’d underestimated the training required to bring the large influx of new hires up to speed in their factories.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-13/boeing-faces-risk-by-jettisoning-workers-in-tight-labor-market/
Along with 40 firm orders, Boeing has 40 options from AVIA. At 20 a month that fills output for 4 months~! So, the good side of low rate production.
And they are going to sell 777F like hotcakes
“Orders are in fact on par with the pandemic boom years for air cargo. There were 35 777F orders in 2022, while in 2021 there were 42. In 2020 there were 13 and in 2019 there were 17.
From 2028, companies will no longer be able to order production 777Fs due to stricter emissions regulations. ”
Deliveries of the 777F have also been slow to get going this year, but 11 777F have been delivered in total during 2024 so far. There are 78 unfilled 777F orders.”
So call it rate 1 for the 777F. 10 years of production!
You just gotta look on the bright side!
The aircraft manufacturer’s World Air Cargo Forecast (WACF), released yesterday, predicted the global air cargo fleet will rise to 3,900 freighters by 2043, an approximate 66% increase from 2,340 cargo aircraft in 2023.
More good news… for WN. The flood gate of compensation is about to open!
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2024/11/13/southwest-air-sees-boeing-strike-cutting-into-2025-deliveries/
Southwest is going to take every aircraft they ordered, even those they are not needed:
“We are going to take take every single aircraft in the order book because there is a lot of value,” Jordan said
Proof that BCA goosed its orders by undercharging. This will hang over BA’s result over the medium term, esp when there’s an eight week long strike and its supply chain is hit repeatedly, some are forced to lay-off their workers.
Probably not old enough to know what a broken record sounds like. Save the space and just put Usual Comment.
Any aircraft that are pre ordered Boeing can deliver despite the emissions thingy.
So, build 777F until 2030 and you have the 777X coming along.
It will work nicely.
☝ what a broken record sounds like.
I don’t think so.
“As for aircraft types already in service, the new rules will come to effect from the 1st of January 2028. From that date onwards, any newly-registered aircraft will have to meet the new ICAO standards. That’s even if they were type-certified at a previous date.”
https://mentourpilot.com/icao-emissions-and-noise-rules-what-do-they-mean/#:~:text=ICAO%20adopted%20these%20CO2%20emission%20standards%20in%20March,define%20fuel%20efficiency%20standards%20for%20newly%20type-certified%20aircraft.
Leeham needs to weight in , my understanding was pre-orders apply.
We have been through that with emissions. You can order ahead.
If not then you will see the order books getting stuffed so they can be delivered before.
The 777F would be the only real factor, lots of 767s out there to convert (or A330) – no one wanted the A330F. A330-900NEO-F, yes.
but then a lot of A330-300 hulls to convert as well. 777 never had enough feedstock but that may be changing as well.
You don’t pay attention. LNA said quite a few times already.
“lots of 767s out there to convert” 😅
Pay attn! The feedstock for 757 & 767 conversion is drying up, that’s why the future belongs to A321 & A330.
Just think the thought that you have 2-3 planes almost finished and you didn’t get them registered before 1st of January 2028. Write offs!
That is why I believe pre orders are allowed.
‘Leeham needs to weight in , my understanding was pre-orders apply.’
https://leehamnews.com/2022/06/16/faa-adopts-icao-2027-emissions-noise-rules-death-knell-for-new-production-767f-777f/
“Failure to comply means the offending airplanes can’t be produced from 2028. ”
“The FAA’s move means that Boeing’s popular 767-300ERF and 777-200LRF can’t be produced from 2028.”
This is the key:
“I *believe… ”
Won’t believe unless it fits the narrative…
Boeing says it will take several weeks to resume production of planes after the strike
https://www.ksn.com/news/business/boeing-says-it-will-take-several-weeks-to-resume-production-of-planes-after-the-strike/
Wow, who knew?
“The Airbus A321XLR’s First Transatlantic Flight Took Off from Madrid, Bound for Boston”
“At 1:04 PM this Thursday, a new chapter in commercial aviation history began with the departure of the first transatlantic flight of the Airbus A321XLR. The aircraft, registration EC-OIL, departed from Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas International Airport, operating Iberia flight 347 to Boston, where it is expected to arrive at 3:20 PM local time, after a little over eight hours of flight.”
“In addition to Boston, Iberia has already confirmed Washington-Dulles as the second destination it will serve with the A321XLR, starting January 15, 2025.”
“Iberia’s A321XLR is configured with 182 seats, of which 14 are lie-flat seats in Business Class, and the rest in Economy Class with increased legroom.”
https://aviacionline.com/2024/11/the-airbus-a321xlrs-first-transatlantic-flight-took-off-from-madrid-bound-for-boston/
—
So, 182 seats: 14 business, 168 economy.
For comparison:
JetBlue A321 transcon: 169 seats: 16 business, 153 economy.
AA standard A321: 181 seats: 16 business, 165 economy.
And Wizz’s A321XLR will have 239 seats.
😉
Yes — because Wizz doesn’t bother with business class.
Business class suites occupy about 5 times as much floor space as a typical economy seat.
So, 14 business equates to about 70 economy.
168 + 70 = 238
going by Mr. TW at least 44 seats must be blocked and loaded with jerry cans of fuel ( 2per ) for 1750l. extra fuel.
FAs will pour them on demand into the main tankage.
😄
He’s confusing it with the MAX-10 🙈
What’s a MAX-10 ?
@ Vincent
Yes, I understand your confusion.
The MAX-10 is a paper airplane launched by BA in 2017(!), and still not certified…indeed not even certifi-ABLE due to an ongoing problem with nacelle overheating. Has a telescoping main landing gear whose design has also probably been botched (just not publicized yet). Previously got a congressional exemption so that it could keep its pre-historic cockpit warning system. Greatly loved by Ryanair, who have to keep telling investors that the plane will be delivered “any day now” (but probably not before 2026). Outsold 5-to-1 by its competitor the A321neo, the plane is a relic from a bygone age.
Great imagery, Uwe.
Double Ha!
Too bad you guys don’t understand MTOW and range. I know, I know, its technical and that makes it hard.
Not one of you listed what the longest stage length was.
So, all you have to do is look up the Air Distance, 3410 miles. Ergo, they are trading range for lower passenger numbers.
Obviously they think its worth it. But they are also obviously lower the pax numbers from MAX to get the range needed (3410 direct, add in a bit for departure and approach that are not direct, reserves and diversion and they are up into the 4000 mile area easily.
Then there is the winds aloft and you can only count on the full pax load going one way (normally).
Bjorn has written an excellent article on that range aspect.
The “range” is good enough for Wizz to put 239 seats on board and pay extra for the A321XLR. 😉
Huh don’t you know Wizz is looking into expansion to India??
“Bjorn has written an excellent article on that range aspect.”
And apparently you haven’t grasped its content or are intentionally deforming it.
wrong:”XLR as subtype swaps seats for range.”
correct: “XLR increases range via less structure and increased MTOW.”
obviously longer flight times increase deadmass ( potable water, foraging, more comfy seats and back up personel )
Poster who’ve never paid attention to payload-range chart had a “new” discovery, so the poster proclaimed.
No innovation??
This is now the fastest sedan around the Nürburgring
https://www.motor1.com/news/739132/xiaomi-su7-ultra-prototype-nurburgring-lap/
BA stock down again today.
Currently $137.98, which is 10.6% below the closing price just before the recent extra share float.
The effect of dilution continues to gradually manifest itself in the share price.
Since the dilution was 21%, there’s another 10% drop (at least) to go.
Yup, that’s why the poster who only counted # of seats missed the forest for the trees.
I am sure there is some kind of illogic that links stock prices with aircraft range and pax numbers.
In the case of stock, maybe Abalone can open up a Boeing stock only following site?
Its finally reflecting the abuse.
So what? At some point it reaches a bottom or becomes zero. Then its Chapter 11.
In the meantime its got nothing to do with Boeing recovering or not.
they can float lots more shares and still get money. Its legalized gambling.
We had one poster that said he was buying. Shrug. I never did and am not. Nor am I buying Airbus stock.
Or to put it via a movie title “Wake Me When Its Over”.
The totally (il)logical link and obsession with range and seat #. Old man yells at cloud.
The post was amended after I replied IIRC. You have to ask Scott for the timeline.
“they can float lots more shares and still get money. Its legalized gambling.”
Time to look back how ENE ended.
“Zhuhai air show opens with orders for Comac and a glimpse of a future spaceplane”
“ZHUHAI, China — China’s aerospace ambitions took centre stage on the first day of the Zhuhai air show, with Comac announcing Air China as the first customer for its C929 widebody jet, while a model of the country’s first commercial uncrewed spaceplane was on display.
“China’s Bayi aerobatics team, a flight of four J-20 stealth jets, and the public debut of the country’s J-35A stealth fighter were among the aircraft soaring overhead as attendees strolled across the airfield tarmac.”
“The C909, unveiled at China’s biggest airshow painted in white with a blue tail, has also reduced weight, resistance and noise as well as some improvements in flying costs compared to the ARJ21, staff at Comac’s air show booth told Reuters.
“Comac did not disclose the number of C929s that flag carrier Air China would purchase or planned delivery dates. But it announced that Hainan Airlines had placed a firm order for 60 C919 narrowbody jets and 40 C909s.”
“Colorful Guizhou Airlines has signed a purchase agreement for 30 C909 planes, 20 of which were firm and the remainder provisional, it added.”
https://www.asiaone.com/china/zhuhai-air-show-opens-orders-comac-and-glimpse-future-spaceplane
—
– A launch customer for the C929.
– An improved C909 (previously ARJ21).
– Dozens of new orders for the C919 and C909.
– Two types of stealth fighter jets — including the J-35, which will be sold abroad.
– An uncrewed space plane.
All bot-generated fake news, of course, because we’ve been assured by various commenters here that China is a complete dud as regards its aviation industry.
🙈
Just wait and see what happens when the domestic CJ-1000A turbofan gets certified!
What comes first, Trump Admin banning the export C919 CFM International LEAP 1 C turbofan engines to China or China’s domestic CJ-1000A turbofan gets certified?
“LEAP-1C engine features some of the industry’s most advanced technologies, including 3-D woven carbon fiber composite fan blades and fan case; a unique debris rejection system; 4th generation three dimensional aerodynamic designs; the Twin-Annular, Pre-Swirl (TAPS) combustor featuring additively manufactured fuel nozzles; ceramics matrix composite shrouds in the high-pressure turbine; and titanium aluminide (Ti-Al) blades in the low-pressure turbine.”
The Trump ban on the LEAP-1C will be largely symbolic: as far as I know, there’s only a slight trickle of these engines going to China as it stands.
Moreover, having a US-made engine exposes China to potential future bans on spare parts (look what happened to Russia and Iran), so China will be keen to wash its hands of this risk a.s.a.p.
I think it’s reasonable to allow for a “customary” few months delay in certifying the CJ-1000A. The Chinese said “before 2025”, so let’s make that mid 2025, and see how far wide of the mark that is.
I’m wondering if there’s a similar project to “purge” the C909 of its GE CF34 turbofans a.s.a.p? I can certainly imagine so.
I’m also wondering if anyone in the US administration ever pauses to reflect on the fact that sanctioning technologically capable countries only serves to make them (more) self-reliant — at the expense of US exports in the long run. In that regard, just wait and see how many countries will henceforth be buying arms from Europe, South Korea and China instead of the US. Pakistan has already placed an order for Chinese J-35 stealth fighters, and China has helped Saudi Arabia build its own ballistic missiles. Also, the UAE and Turkey have resorted to buying European fighter jets because they were tired of the constant “drama” coming out of Washington.
Interesting info on Pakistan J35. That said, if the US bans the export of LEAP 1C, then Boeing will not be able to export the 737 Max with CFM International LEAP-1B engines to China?
Just part of the decoupling process between China and US
Regarding the MAX with LEAP-1B: one sees why China doesn’t want unnecessary exposure to future sanctions on that platform, either — once again: look at what happened to Russia and Iran. That’s probably why we only see a slight trickle of MAXs into China: it’s not just a trade war going on, but also a vulnerability reduction exercise.
Things will really heat up if/when Trump attempts to ban the sale of LEAP-1As and PW GTFs to China. Can Safran continue to make and ship CFM engines regardless of what Trump orders?
just for those who don’t believe in the development progress of C929 program,…check out this recent video CJ2000 engine development
China’s CJ2000/AEF3500 Updates: 35-Ton Class Turbofan Engine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycuduKKZs5Q
It needs to be made clear that deliberately taking statements out of context shows a disdain for the forum.
China can clearly develop military aircraft at rates that looks like the US in the 50s.
But this forum is not about military aircraft though it touches on it as there is cross connections. KC-46A-A330MRT.
What is a viable engine in a military aircraft (lots of thrust and not breaking) is not the same as a civilian engine where time on wing and reliability during that time is crucial for success (and we have seen RR and PW in serious pain due to failures to do that).
The Russians made excellent copies of the RR Nene engine. What they did not have was the development time in the materials. For military purposes it was reliable enough, its rate of wear out was high. Easy enough answer, make more engines and they were easy enough to replace.
The good side was that the centrifugal flow engine was a dead end.
It took the Russians through the cold war to get even reasonably reliable engines.
China is making progress on the copies of the Russian engines and have indigenous builds that are close to thrust levels, wear out is still a significant issue. There is a critical difference between wearing out and breaking.
In WWII, RR Merlin wore out in 200-500 hours use. It did not break during that on frame time. Spare engines and overhaul allowed that to work.
The BMW Jet engine had 50 hours of life and it broke a lot. That made for a huge investment in an air frame that as often as not could not get off the ground or wound up back on (or in) the ground.
Long range Bombers required long range engines. The US engines for that class were focused on it and the jet engines that replaced the radials also focused on it. That in turn benefited the civilian industry and use.
In fact, the Radials were pushed so hard that they became extremly difficult to run reliably and often at least one would break down in flight. The tech had reached its limits at 3000-4000 hp. Turbo Compounding just made them more complex, more breakdown prone and harder to get to the guts to repair things.
China is going to need another 20 years to develop good on wing time and reliable commercial aircraft jet engines.
It does not mean they won’t be able to build enough reliability into 909 or 929 engines to fly. It also means that costs are higher. As long as you can pass those costs on in a fully controlled system, then its also not an issue.
Frequent engine failures and or crashes would be. Its not hidden like the military, its fully public and the last thing China wants is to have their commercial aircraft exposed as depth traps.
Its why the slow development. No engineer is going to risk it, so they design to a higher level. Any administrator is not going to push the edges, they both share the same camp if they fail.
The term is Risk Adverse and no one blames them.
In the meantime, Power Point presentations do not get you sent to a camp. So you can come out with all the whiz bang you want. And we see they are developing all sorts of variations of the 909 and 929, when they have not even hit limited production numbers.
China will succeed at it if they can continue to throw money at it. It won’t be cutting edge stuff, it will be copies of what is current, though that also means by the time of production it will be dated just like the 929 is.
The A220 has a composite wing. Airbus could do a composite wing for the A320 series if they wanted to. The MAX wing is better than the China wing.
When China does a composite wing, it will be heavier, because you dare not do what Boeing did and cut the margins so much you have a failure.
It was not the smartest decision Boeing made, but they were cutting weight anywhere they could on the 787 and that one bit them. But the -9 did come in at its specs.
Put Chinese engineers in an open system and they would come up with great stuff. In their system, the commercial side is going to be very conservative and for good reasons.
On the Military side its all hidden. If they fail only they know and as long as the uppers understand that and support it, they will continue the fail, re-design fail cycle until they get it. We have done the same thing, our stuff gets fielded, flaws found, then its corrected.
Boeing has pushed the limits for financial gain by the uppers, no one goes to prison. Under our system they get away with it.
Barrons: “Boeing Stock Sale Was Supposed to Mark the Bottom. Shares Just Keep Dropping.”
“Shares of the plane maker closed at $139.10 on Wednesday, the first time shares have closed below $140 since October 2022 and below the $143 level that Boeing recently sold stock.”
“Boeing is trading below recent support levels. If shares don’t turn higher, a drop to $120 is in play, according to CappThesis founder and market technician Frank Cappelleri.”
https://www.barrons.com/articles/boeing-stock-price-tariffs-9a2f31a7
Boeing just appointed a friggin’ *finance guy* , former Vanguard CEO Tim Buckley, to their BoD.
#shouldbefine
news items from the China airshow
“Liebherr will meet with the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (Comac) later this week in Shanghai to discuss specifications for Comac’s widebody C929 aircraft, with an eye toward making a bid, chief customer officer Alex Vlielander told the Post on Wednesday.”
“China is working on its first home-grown turbofan commercial aircraft engine, the CJ-1000, to reduce reliance on imports. The developer, the Aero Engine Corporation of China, is aiming to obtain an airworthiness certification as early as next year.”
“The CJ-1000A is being developed for the Comac C919 narrow-body airliner with a thrust of 98–196 kN; 22,000–44,000 lbf.
“It has a diameter of 1.95 m (6 ft 5 in) and a length of 3.29 m (10.8 ft), compared with the 1.98 m (6 ft 6 in) diameter and 3.32 m (10.9 ft) length of the CFM LEAP-1C. It uses a similar two-spool configuration to the LEAP-1C, with a one-stage fan, three-stage booster, 10-stage high-pressure compressor, two-stage high-pressure turbine and six-stage low pressure turbine (although the LEAP-1C has seven low pressure stages). Its 18 wide-chord fan-blades are made of hollow titanium like those of Rolls-Royce Plc., and its single annular combustor uses 3D printed fuel nozzles.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACAE_CJ-1000A
—
“The CJ-1000A also features a state-of-the-art digital control system, which constantly monitors and adjusts its performance. This system ensures optimal efficiency and reliability at all times, making it easier for maintenance crews to diagnose and repair any issues that may arise with the engine.”
https://www.modernairliners.com/modern-airliner-posts/comac-cj-1000a-engine
—
Sounds like the Chinese know what they’re doing…contrary to the narrative being peddled by some commenters here 🙈
In 2015 we find about Xian and Boeing and 737 vertical fins . .
” The two companies’ 30-year history began with XAC supplying 600 vertical fins for the 737 Classic between 1984 and 1999. Next came a larger share of work on the Next-Generation 737, with XAC delivering its first vertical fin for that airplane in 1997. This month, XAC delivered its 3,000th to the Renton factory for installation on a Hainan Airlines 737.
When you can’t compete………
Airbus CEO says SpaceX is successful because it’s a selfish American company
The CEO of France’s Airbus (AIR
-1.18%
) is both impressed and envious of success at its American rival SpaceX. Company head Guillaume Faury told attendees at a German aviation event that SpaceX would never have been able to achieve all it has if it were a European company, Reuters reports.
https://qz.com/airbus-ceo-spacex-comments-antitrust-1851700224
““In Europe, we tend to do the…opposite,” he said. “[Airbus makes] 20%, we buy 80%. And by buying 80%, you have a large supply base which is pleasing everybody. Well, Elon Musk’s SpaceX is not pleasing anybody except Elon Musk.””
https://qz.com/airbus-ceo-spacex-comments-antitrust-1851700224
I wonder why, during most of its existence – for like 20 years or so, the startup failed to generate positive cash flow. In 2021 & 2022, it lost like more than $1.5 billion. Chump change I guess!
May be that’s good news for BDS, it shows a positive path forward!!
Musk could provide financial staying power and very short decision path.
( out of area “political” decission path are the downers for EU space stuff. Everything moves at a snails pace.
Look at the potential designed into the ATV concept. All gone to waste for providing the “potty” to Orion/Artemis.)
both items ( money, determined decisions ) are not available to Boeing.
Nice to have quotes from the Airbus CEO himself. No need for summations or spin.
Boeing Hires Northrop Executive to Revamp Pentagon Projects
https://www.wsj.com/business/boeing-hires-northrop-executive-to-revamp-pentagon-projects-d64dab73
news about SPEEA
“SPEEA, the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace, represents more than 17,000 engineers, technical workers, pilots and other aerospace industry professionals. The union confirmed that 438 of their Boeing employees will be laid off, including 218 members of their professional unit and 220 technical employees. “
just a fyi
“The state-owned Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (Comac) will let tourists visit portions of its 2.67 million-square-metre (28.74 million-square-foot) factory site near Shanghai Pudong International Airport, the source told the Post this week at the Zhuhai air show.
The manufacturer was inspired by how Boeing made its Everett Production Facility – known as the world’s largest building by volume – into a popular tourist attraction in the US state of Washington, the source said.”
as note Boeing Renton: The Boeing Renton factory in Washington is 1.1 million square feet
Of tangential relevance:
“Megaport opens up Latin America to Chinese trade as US looks on”
“As the world waits to see how the return of Donald Trump will reshape relations between Washington and Beijing, China has just taken decisive action to entrench its position in Latin America.
“Trump won the US presidential election on a platform that promised tariffs as high as 60% on Chinese-made goods. Further south, though, a new China-backed megaport has the potential to create whole new trade routes that will bypass North America entirely.”
“President Xi Jinping himself attended the inauguration of the Chancay port on the Peruvian coast this week, an indication of just how seriously China takes the development.”
“As seasoned observers see it, Washington is now paying the price for years of indifference towards its neighbours and their needs.
“The US has been absent from Latin America for so long, and China has moved in so rapidly, that things have really reconfigured in the past decade,” says Monica de Bolle, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.
“You have got the backyard of America engaging directly with China,” she tells the BBC. “That’s going to be problematic.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg79y3rz1eo
“We buy your raw materials and foodstuffs in yuan, and you then use those yuan to buy all manner of goods and services from us”
Goods previously have to transit thru say Manzanillo or LA can now go directly to Asia thru China, saving 10 to 12 days. Unfortunately US makes no automated port cranes.
Opens up the possibility of China directly selling large volumes of defense products to countries in Latin America, without having to touch US soil.
Peru’s Chancay Port nearing completion “most advance equipment”
Short video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecD_lKBVmm8
just part of the long term plan to decouple from the US
Expect further upcoming color revolutions demanding “democratization and such” in the region.
What a contrast with SecState touting $6m used locomotives and gallery cars sold to Lima.
No wonder even the FT headlined: Joe Biden loses to Xi Jinping in battle for Latin America
Sorry, it’s not a competition for a “prize”, it’s a strategy to make friends and deepen relationships 😉
In an interview with Ben Rhodes, Obama’s dep NSA:
He says he’ll “always be haunted” by a comment that Xi Jinping made to Obama in 2016 when referring to Trump: “If an immature leader throws the world into chaos, the world will know who to blame”.
Why does it haunt him? Because in his words “we’ve kind of been dealing with that ever since”.
https://x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1859815614283645092
Chancay port: 100% automated, with AGVs
https://x.com/DavidLe76335983/status/1860333622080737350
show him the money
“Kelly Ortberg will be paid an annual base salary of $1.5 million. In December, he is due to receive a $1.25 million payment instead of a joining bonus as well as stock vesting worth $16 million over the next few years of his tenure.”
Next year (FY2025), his first full calendar year at the job, Ortberg will make a guaranteed $1.5 million in basic compensation though there remains a possibility of a performance-related bonus of $3 million and an additional $17.5 million in stock award.
“Ortberg’s maximum compensation come the end of next year could hit $22 million. That still significantly falls short of the $33 million Dave Calhoun received in 2023 as well as noticeably lower than his $22.6 million packet from 2022.
At the time of parting with Boeing, Calhoun was expected to receive another $45 million through stock awards and options that were vested during his appointment in 2020.”
…and what’s Ortberg actually doing to justify these benefits?
Take a look at the synopsis in the LNA article above:
“Boeing strike post mortem: Ortberg has work to do”
oh.
😉
““In a major flourishing sci-tech revolution, neither decoupling nor supply chain disruption is a solution,” Xi said. “Only mutual, beneficial cooperation can lead to common development. ‘Small yard, high fence’ is not what a major country should pursue.”
how many A32o series aircraft are currently in Spirit fleet that can be transferred by lessors or sold (does Spirit actually own any of its fleet)?
Doesn’t ch 11 protect the debtor?
“The debtor is typically allowed to continue to use a secured lender’s collateral during the bankruptcy case.”
“Secured creditors (even those who are oversecured) ordinarily do not receive principal payments during the case—even if they are due under the terms of the loan.”
from Wiki as of Sept 24
Spirit Airlines Fleet in service
A319 2
A320-200 64
A320neo 91
A321-200 30
A321neo 25
summary 212 in service along 79 on orders …so call it about 300 aircraft will be available after liquidation of Spirit Airlines (per Wiki info)
Any max users need a A320?
Air India would probably love to receive a bunch of early A320 neos.
And Qatar would probably jump at any early A321neo slots.
Allegiant might wake up, smell the coffee, bin its MAX order, and take some A320 neos instead — to supplement the airlines existing fleet of A320s.
Lots of possibilities.
My understanding is Spirit monetized their order book in July 2024. Lessor has taken over.
@Pedro
And to that end any interested buyer will be buying PW powered aircraft and slots
Older aircraft are V2500.
Also will need to contemplate maintenance reserves to liquidate
How about cleanup on isle 767-tanker ?
How did Boeing produce a 2020 version of tanker at everett without mil spec wiring and emp hardening.? Who was the bean counter that assumed standard commerical wiring practice was all that needed to be done? were they/them fired or promoted ?
https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ac/e-767.htm
E-767 Airborne Warning and Control System
The Boeing E-767 Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) developed as a natural progression from the E-3 Sentry following the closure of Boeing’s 707 production line. The E-767 combines a Boeing 767-200ER airframe with the APY-2 development of the Sentry’s APY-1 radar and mission system.
The first flight of the completed E-767 occurred on 9 August 1996 at Everett, Washington. To date only the Japan Air Self Defense Force (JASDF) has ordered the E-767, initially purchasing two in 1992, increasing the order to four in 1994. The first production E-767 is now entering an extensive testing and certification program with the aim of delivering the first two E-767s to the JASDF in 1998. Other military variants of the 767 are now under consideration, including tanker and strategic transport aircraft to replace the aging fleet of KC-135s and B707s in world wide military service. ==
Ooopsaie= should have said 2017-2018 instead of 2020 re wiring
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-shows-off-long-troubled-air-force-tanker-says-deadlines-will-be-met/
” Boeing will lay off more than 2,500 workers in the U.S. states of Washington, Oregon, South Carolina and Missouri, according to federally required filings posted on Monday and a union official, as part of the debt-heavy U.S. planemaker’s plan to cut 17,000 jobs, or 10% of its global workforce.
Nearly 2,200 layoff notices went to workers in Washington and another 220 in South Carolina, the two states where Boeing builds commercial airliners. Boeing declined to comment on the layoffs on Monday.”
One wonders what projects these people were working on.
Whatever those projects were, they’ll be (even further) delayed now.
More delay = less revenue.
How could Spirit go CH11? They operate the cool A321 with GTF engines?
For the same reasons that BA will ultimately be filing for Ch. 11:
“Spirit Airlines files for bankruptcy as financial losses pile up and debt payments loom”
—
More specifically:
“Spirit Airlines said Monday that it had filed for bankruptcy protection and will attempt to reboot as it struggles to recover from the pandemic-caused swoon in travel, stiffer competition from bigger carriers, and a failed attempt to sell the airline to JetBlue.
“Spirit, the biggest U.S. budget airline, filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition after working out terms with bondholders. The airline has lost more than $2.5 billion since the start of 2020 and faces looming debt payments totaling more than $1 billion in 2025 and 2026.”
“Spirit’s costs, especially for labor, have risen. The biggest U.S. airlines have snagged some of Spirit’s budget-conscious customers by offering their own brand of bare-bones tickets. And fares for U.S. leisure travel — Spirit’s core business — sagged this summer because of a glut of new flights.”
“The premium end of the air-travel market has surged while Spirit’s traditional no-frills end has stagnated. So this summer, Spirit decided to sell bundled fares that include a bigger seat, priority boarding, free bags, internet service and snacks and drinks. It also dropped cancellation fees after rival Frontier Airlines did so.”
https://apnews.com/article/spirit-airlines-bankruptcy-debt-losses-782c7fb892adf1d2f366411bab955668
Simple:
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/US-airline-RASM-CASM-protected.jpg
Spirit 2023
RASM: $9.63
CASM: $10.52
Operation margin: (0.89)
That $10.52 CASM is the second lowest in the industry – behind only Frontier.
For comparison
SWA 2023
RASM: $15.32
CASM: $15.19
Operation margin: $0.13
Spirit, flying an all-Airbus fleet had a 31% lower cost per air seat mile than Southwest, flying an all-Boeing fleet.
Spirit revenues were garbage.
How could BCA, with a backlog of $428 b, lost like $4 b, and BDS, with a backlog of $62 b, lost $2.4 b, in a quarter while its major competitors are making good money?? 🙄
P.S. I’m old enough to remember, major Boeing customers like United, Delta & Northwest bankrupted one after another. Wow there must be a common thread behind!! 😱
The pre-emptive decoupling continues, as a countermeasure to tariffs and other antics:
“Japan and China Dump US Treasuries Before Trump’s Victory”
“Japanese investors sold a record $61.9 billion of the securities in the three months ended Sept. 30, data from the US Department of the Treasury showed on Monday. Funds in China offloaded $51.3 billion during the same period, the second biggest sum on record.”
““It’s a cocktail of banks and pension selling ahead of the US elections in Japan — the risk of a Trump win and expectations of higher US yields bruised sentiment for the bonds,” said Shoki Omori, chief Japan desk strategist at Mizuho Securities Co. in Tokyo. “Even more so in China where geopolitical risk was a real concern, and that’s spurred investors to ditch Treasuries too.””
““We’re confirming everything we’ve started to price in — that Trump’s likely going to have inflationary policies, tariffs, and that’s going to only lead to more Treasury sales from China and Japan,” said Nick Twidale, chief analyst at AT Global Markets in Sydney. “They’ve been good defensive measures by China and Japan and that’s probably going to continue.””
https://www.yahoo.com/news/japan-china-dumped-us-treasuries-025623618.html
Boeing looking for more exemptions — the company just can’t seem to make products to spec:
“Boeing Asks FAA To Extend Exemption For Certain FDR & CVR Regulations For Test Flights”
“Boeing has asked the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to exempt its aircraft from specific regulations concerning onboard flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR), arguing that the exemption has allowed the company to remain competitive internationally.”
“The original equipment manufacturer (OEM) requested that the exemption, which will expire on April 30, 2025, be approved by March 31, 2025.
“Like the previous two-year exemption, if approved by the FAA, it would apply to all Boeing 737 Next Generation (NG) aircraft, 737 MAX, including the yet-to-be certified 737 MAX 7 and 737 MAX 10, 767, and 777. The latter does not include the 777X aircraft family.”
“According to the filing, Boeing sought two CFR exemptions for its aircraft: for the digital FDR not to have a pitch control position sampling interval of eight per second and for the CVR not to have datalink communications using an approved data message set and a 10-minute independent power source.”
“In the filing, Boeing specifically asked the FAA not to publish the request in the Federal Register, arguing that the exemption extension only affects its production processes and does not set a precedent.”
“The manufacturer added if the US regulator decided to publish the exemption extension request in the Federal Register, the following summary would be provided:
““In summary, given the importance of the sale of commercial jet airplanes on the U.S. balance of trade, granting of this extension is in the public interest because it enables Boeing to limit costs and remain competitive in the international aviation market. This exemption allows continued delivery of airplanes in a timely and cost effective manner while maintaining the intended levels of safety and quality.””
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-asks-faa-extend-exemption-fdr-cvr-regulations/
Spirit Airlines’ struggle to navigate post-pandemic trends lands it in bankruptcy
“The airline’s business model of an integrated fleet, keeping planes flying more hours in the day and putting more seats on every aircraft, helped optimize its resources and kept costs down. Its high fleet utilization produced double-digit operating margins for nine straight years until 2020.”
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/analysis-spirit-airlines-struggle-navigate-202926149.html
Let’s see if BA can also adapt in a changing world.
Optimizing into a cul de sac corner for a window of exellent margins has its downsides.
IMU we saw the same with Boeing ( beyond creative bookkeeping):
Optimizing into the cul de sac grandfathering strategy of floating on the weight and performance savings from a 60ties certification framework, never updated to “modern” values.
( same for the planned path for keeping the 777(X) competitive.)
787 was a different set of apocalyptic riders.:-)
“UAE’s flag carrier Etihad Airways is strategically expanding its cargo operations by exercising an option to acquire three more Airbus A350 next-generation freighters, increasing its total order to 10 aircraft.”
wiki shows they have 5 777F in operation.
American Airlines Abandoned Their Airbus A330s – Now Qatar Airways May Give Them New Life
“During the pandemic American Airlines retired a lot of planes. They simplified their fleet, so that they’d only operate Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 narrowbody families, and Boeing 787 and 777 widebodies.
That meant sending Boeing 757s, 767s, Airbus A330-200s and Airbus A330-300s to the dessert along with their Embraer E-195s. Some of the 757s went to Northern Pacific, 767s to Amazon, and Airbus A330s remained parked.”
“Even though the Airbus A330-200s were parked four and a half years ago, that fleet is still only about 13 years old on average”
“Qatar Airways has complained about widebody aircraft order delays, placed an order for 20 more Boeing 777-9 aircraft (which isn’t yet in commercial service) Used Airbus A330s could be a stopgap, adding to a small existing fleet of the plane type.”
Last month, Spirit sold 23 A320/321ceo to a lessor. I believe these aircraft are the most marketable of their fleet rn.
just a fyi
Stanley Black and Decker CEO
“Added Allan on tariffs, “When I look at our industry, if I took our Chinese operation that we have today that makes power tools and brought it over in the US, the cost to make that product would be about 60% to 70% higher.
So it’s substantial, which the consumer will not pay for.
And so if we’re going to reduce our China exposure, which we are, we’ll be looking at other southeast Asian countries like Vietnam or maybe Mexico, where we certainly have a significant operation already.”
so from a 30,000 ft view, new tariffs are just going to move the “deck chairs” between Southeast Asia countries…no new jobs in the US!
Why America’s Largest Tool Company Couldn’t Make a Wrench in America
“Stanley Black & Decker built a $90 million factory on the edge of Fort Worth, Texas, intending to burnish the Made-in-the-U.S.A. luster of the Craftsman brand by forging mechanics’ tools with unprecedented efficiency. But the automated system was a bust, and the tools that were supposed to be pumped out by the million are so hard to find that some consider them collector’s items.”
https://www.warehouseautomation.ca/news/why-americas-largest-tool-company-couldnt-make-a-wrench-in-america
“”and the tools that were supposed to be pumped out by the million are so hard to find that some consider them collector’s items.””
Is that Boeing’s future?
I really don’t get the regular failures of automated US production setups. ( as told above, as visible from Boeing, … )
Is it because management invariably hates the workforce ( who disassociate from the job )
or because the workers think that a stoker is the perfect accessory for diesel traction ( and therefor sabotage production )
or unrealistic performance and expectations are that included into the spec (to justify the return on investment to the bean counters) by engineers and management aka 777FAUB. This along with companies (aka Boeing) do not listen to key suppliers (automation experts) on what will really can be expected or accomplished. Next up the will be the automation “expectations” (e.g. remote operators from the machine and floor to floor rivet rate) for the new Renton wing automated fastening systems (wing riveters).
Caveat emptor!
“[D]eclassified Pentagon study of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 jet reveals multiple issues with America’s most-expensive weapons system”
https://x.com/ACapaccio/status/1859556316261281960
“A declassified Pentagon comprehensive test report of Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 warplane, America’s most expensive weapons system, reveals that six years of combat testing has been marred by reliability and maintenance delays, guns that don’t shoot straight and unresolved concerns about cyber defense capabilities.”
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/company-news/2024/11/21/declassified-pentagon-f-35-study-details-reliability-security-woes-for-americas-costliest-weapon/
F35 is less of an “UBER Weapons System”
than a “monetary depletion instrument”
first foreign buyers … then the creator.
It will be interesting to see how the J-35 stealth fighter that China will be selling abroad — starting with orders in Pakistan and Egypt — will score.
Interesting to see that Israel recently ordered more F-15s…not more F-35s.
@Abalone
There are reasons for that
The F35 is not supposed to be a dogfighting aircraft with maximum payload. You buy an F35 because you don’t want to be seen. What the F35 lacks if anything is range.
Similarly, a Max10 is sufficient if you just want a bigger tube and don’t care about range. That works for some airlines
Israel frequently performs hostile operations in the airspace of other countries — countries with increasing deployment of missile defense systems.
On the other hand, it doesn’t engage in aerial dogfights with anybody.
So there is a clear use case for the F-35 — or, at least, there would be if it weren’t such a monumental lemon.
As regards so-called “stealth”: read the article that Pedro posted above.
Also,”stealth” aircraft can be detected using passive radar:
https://caliber.az/en/post/chinese-scientists-develop-breakthrough-radar-to-detect-stealth-fighter-jets
That’s a value decision every country will make. The argument that the F35 doesn’t do what it is supposed to does not make an F15 any more suitable.
It makes an argument that you should invest in relatively cheap drones
@ Casey
Agreed as regards drones.
Disageeed as regards merits of an F-15 relative to an F-35.
Once again, read Pedro’s article: the F-35 spends most of its time in maintenance hangers. Better to have a 4th or 4.5th generation fighter that actually flies when needed…than to have a 5th generation fighter languishing in the hangar.
As always we may agree to disagree. There is however a difference between Mx issues and design capabilities. Mx issues can ultimately be worked out. Design issues are going to be a hard stop.
If you are worried about an F35 on radar then an F15 will stick out like a sore thumb
“Israel frequently performs hostile operations in the airspace of other countries ”
they are “yellow” only the munitions are lobbed across borders.
“As regards so-called “stealth”: read the article that Pedro posted above.”
Israels attack on Iran via Iraq airspace is said to have been planned in 3 waves. After/during? the first wave the operation was apparently aborted. WHY?
All: Leeham News is not about the Ukraine or Israeli wars. Get back on topic.
Hamilton
Found this discussion from a few years ago.
Scaled to 2019 GDP, America’s 1960s moonshot cost roughly less than half of the total JSF/F-35 program costs.
“It isn’t right. Total JSF/F-35 program costs amount to $1.5 Trillion. DoD changed the 70-year-program accounting rules to artificially reduce the flyaway cost per aircraft or it would cost more than F-22, a far superior aircraft.”
https://x.com/JohnCulver689/status/1307285584625500162
The government is its own worst enemy at times. There are many bad decisions that went into the program. Making three aircraft fit the same platform. The entire ALIS system. Horrible miss on aircraft weight. Production concurrency to development. Even the pilot helmet.
Way too many compromises. They thought they were going to make a Swiss Army knife capable of doing everything and instead got an aircraft that did none of those features exceptionally
“Making three aircraft fit the same platform”
repeat of TFX-F111 game
Same result
Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg says the company’s staff ‘spend more time arguing’ than strategizing about how to beat Airbus: report
https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-ceo-kelly-ortberg-company-culture-infighting-2024-11
“beat Airbus”
The trap in capitalist competiveness.
( by looking at superficial metrics Boeing did that for a long time.
by short sighted measures that ruined their product portfolio.)
they should be strategizing on how to produce good quality products.
Next step is doing that with new products based on state of the art designs conforming to current certfication rules.
If they still find leisure time on their hands they …
Just look at the headlines on CNBC on a random day…count how often you encounter the word “dominance”.
There seems to be a perpetual p#ssing contest going on there in the corporate landscape. Particularly evident in recent months with regard to the AI hype, but lots of other examples.
One wonders how Ortberg thinks that he’s going to “beat Airbus”. He has a sub-par, loss-making product lineup, no money, sub-standard personnel, and a whole bunch of p#ssed-off customers.
Boeing will be well served sustaining a 50/50 duopoly. There is no scenario where Boeing dominates the market again.
Maybe they start with just being able to make aircraft
Very, very doubtful that BA will ever again have a 50% market share.
Even maintaining a 35% share will be very challenging.
Bear in mind that COMAC is up and coming.
I don’t disagree that comac (or anyone else for that matter) can ultimately be a viable international option. I simply disagree on time scales. It took airbus 20 years or so to reach parity. Planes are not solar panels.
There is nothing profound about the Max that cannot be replicated, and until Boeing makes a plane that is cutting edge to the market again, the long decline continues.
Also not being able to make planes is their biggest problem in the immediate future
“The WSJ also reported that Ortberg has spoken with President-elect Donald Trump about the impact of potential tariffs on Boeing.”
“Ortberg told staff that a potential trade war with China might impact the company’s plane exports to Chinese airlines.”
“…might impact the company’s plane exports to Chinese airlines.”
What exports to Chinese airlines is he referring to?
Boeing’s deliveries to China have been essentially non-existant for years…
I was wondering what they were talking about, too.
The 787 manufacturing quality crap-athon continues:
“Manufacturing issue prompts FAA to propose 787 stabiliser inspections”
“The Federal Aviation Administration intends to require airlines to inspect horizontal stabiliser hardware on Boeing 787s due to components possibly being assembled incorrectly by the company during manufacturing.”
“The regulator’s action responds to a report of possible “misalignment at final assembly” of horizontal stabiliser hardware – specifically, a “pivot pin lock ring, outer pivot pin and outboard spacer misalignment”.
““One operator further reported a left-side pivot assembly that did not have a visible gap between the outboard nut and trap fitting,” the FAA adds. “A misaligned pivot pin lock ring caused a pivot pin outboard spacer to not be set flush against the horizontal stabiliser pivot bearing and outboard washer.”
“The result can be “decreased lateral load capacity”, possibly leading to “loss of pivot pin retention parts… [which] could result in the loss of the horizontal stabiliser.”
“The FAA’s proposal would apply to 145 US-registered 787s of all three subtypes – 787-8s, 787-9s and 787-10s.”
https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/manufacturing-issue-prompts-faa-to-propose-787-stabiliser-inspections/160849.article
(sarcasm button ON)
More evidence that the Chinese are complete duds as regards their aviation industry:
(sarcasm button OFF)
“China unveils ‘swarm carrier’ drone with payload comparable to fighter jets”
“China has unveiled an advanced unmanned aerial vehicle which can carry missiles, drop bombs and fire a swarm of smaller drones from a high altitude.
“Showcased at the Zhuhai Air Show 2024, which concluded on Sunday, the matte dark-grey Jetank “swarm carrier” has a maximum takeoff weight of 16 tonnes, payload capacity of six tonnes, and a wingspan of 25 metres. It has been touted as the next-generation large unmanned aerial utility platform, the Global Times reported.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/china/swarm-carrier-drone-china-airshow-zhuhai-b2648935.html
just a fyi
AW
Spirit AeroSystems Sells Hypersonics Specialist FMI
“Troubled Tier 1 aerostructures supplier Spirit AeroSystems of Wichita is selling its Fiber Materials (FMI) business based in Biddeford, Maine, and Woonsocket, Rhode Island, to Tex-Tech Industries for $165 million in cash”
Throwing good money after bad:
“Boeing secures $2.38 billion contract for 15 additional U.S. Air Force KC-46A tankers”
“(Reuters) – Boeing said on Thursday it has secured a $2.38 billion contract from the U.S. Air Force to build 15 additional KC-46A Pegasus aerial refueling tankers under the Lot 11 procurement.
Boeing now has 168 KC-46A tankers on contract globally.
“Since 2019, Boeing has delivered 89 KC-46As to the U.S. Air Force and four to the Japan Air Self-Defense Force.
“In October, the KC-46A Pegasus was deployed for its first full-scale mission after being approved for global combat operations in 2022.”
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boeing-secures-2-38-billion-234624301.html
I would not read too much into a Lot 11 award. The all-in contract award was for 179 aircraft over 13 lots. There will be two more lots to hit that final level and these are issued annually. The question the USAF will need to answer is whether to extend that purchase beyond 179 aircraft.
Without further orders Boeing will completely close the B767 line and the USAF will either pick up the A330 or wait for a “more stealth” option. The “more stealth” is not even funded for development. I would expect that 2027 will be the point where a decision point comes.
I dont see Boeing going to great ends to sustain this line. They have already taken a beating on it. Closing the freighter line shifts the entire overhead burden on the tanker contract.
good point on overhead shift to tanker…..
possible scenario
no 767 freighter
no 767 tanker
no 777F
no 777x
what are you going to do with 4.2 million square feet?
any updates if the second 737 FAL is being installed in Everett at this time?
“what are you going to do with 4.2 million square feet?”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_Islands_Resort
( remainder of the abortive CargoLifter project 🙂
Oh, oh…potential extra delays to MAX-7/10 cert:
“FAA to convene board to review 737 MAX engine issue after bird strike incidents”
“The FAA said it is addressing an issue with the CFM LEAP-1B engine and is collaborating with Boeing, CFM and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency.
“The Seattle Times, which reported the plan earlier, said the FAA could issue instructions to pilots for changes during procedures during takeoff until Boeing develops a permanent fix that could extend delays to certification of the MAX 7 and MAX 10 models.”
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/faa-convene-board-review-737-235815454.html
—
2026 just became 2027 🫣
‘The system linked to the smoke incidents *doesn’t appear in pilot training or operating materials*, which “is very concerning,” the internal FAA group said, likening it to the flight control system tied to two fatal 737 Max crashes in 2018 and 2019.’
‘In both instances, damage to the fan blades activated a load reduction device in the LEAP-1B engines designed to reduce unbalanced dynamic loads in engine structures, followed by shutdowns. Engine oil sumps were also damaged in both cases, allowing oil to hit the high-temperature engine compressor, resulting in smoke and fumes that can be fed into the cockpit from the left engine and into the cabin from the right, based on a memo sent by Southwest to its pilots in February.’
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2024/11/22/faa-examines-boeing-737-smoke-risks-after-bird-strike-incidents/
👇
The investigators “also urged the FAA to review all novel and unique features of the 737 Max to ensure that they are adequately communicated in pilot operating manuals.”
that can’t be true because:
“Boeing CEO David Calhoun projects FAA certification for the 737 MAX 7 and MAX 10 aircraft in the first half of 2025.” As of August 2024
👇
“The NTSB has opened an investigation into the Southwest Airlines left engine bird strike and subsequent smoke in cockpit event that occurred in a Boeing 737-8 near New Orleans, Louisiana on Dec. 20, 2023.”
https://x.com/NTSB_Newsroom/status/1860065282737471691
Why did it take so long for NTSB to pick up this case??
Because it’s in BA’s pocket?
Remember the Turkish 737 crash in Amsterdam, and how the NTSB behaved then?
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/safety-ops-regulation/internal-debate-over-cfm-leap-safety-system-prompts-faa-review
“FAA team recommends Boeing MAX design change and pilot notification
Burning oil, the LRD, smoke-filled airplanes, pilots out of the loop, and the advisability of mandating new procedures.
The sausage-making of hard aviation safety decisions”
https://x.com/dominicgates/status/1860192176497738023
The Seattle Times
FAA team recommends Boeing MAX design change and pilot notification
https://t.co/NqbozzR9bA
“There was nothing in the pilot manuals about the LRD..”
Thanks for that Seattle Times link.
“.. the FAA memo states that Boeing needs “to reassess their projected probabilities” of such a destructive event, given that the Southwest incidents occurred just nine months apart.”
“No similar incidents have been reported on the A320neo jets. Although their engines are similar in design, the way the airflow from the engines is controlled can be different.”
Oxygen mask for passengers not deployed??
https://x.com/fl360aero/status/1632501560373661696
Boeing secures $2.38 billion contract for 15 additional U.S. Air Force KC-46A tankers
“Boeing now has 168 KC-46A tankers on contract globally.
Since 2019, Boeing has delivered 89 KC-46As to the U.S. Air Force and four to the Japan Air Self-Defense Force.”
at 15 a year production rate…about 5 year backlog to keep the Everett line for now
Will the KC-46A™ be fully functional by 2027, too?
dream on..
Would BDS know??
“At this point the entire KC-46 program appears likely to stay in Low-Rate Initial Production as RVS 2.0 is still a couple years away.”
https://x.com/beverstine/status/1859957845552472471
Oct 30
“Shipbuilder HII has settled claims against General Electric that one of its units produced faulty propulsion gears for the USS Gerald R. Ford, the US’s costliest warship”
https://x.com/ACapaccio/status/1851659790830665983
“The $13 billion Ford carrier was forced to return to port after the failure in January 2018 of a “main thrust bearing,” a key propulsion system component. It returned to sea after the damage was contained. The defective gear was the result of “machining errors” by a GE unit, according to Navy documents obtained by Bloomberg News.
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/company-news/2024/10/30/ge-shipbuilder-hii-reach-settlement-on-aircraft-carriers-faulty-gears/
AW
Looks To Offload Boeing 787-8 Fleet
“China Southern Airlines is looking to sell all of its Boeing 787-8s, together with their GEnx-1B70/P2 engines and two additional spares.”
looks like about 10 aircraft…over 10 years old
https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/China%20Southern%20Airlines-active-b787.htm interesting note…from 2019 to 2024 only two 787-9 were delivered
Pre-emptive de-risking?
How long will it be before Trump starts witholding spares, or threatening to do so? Just look at what curtailment of spares from the EU has done to the Russian Airbus fleet.
Airbus widebodies with RR engines are a safer bet, where that’s concerned. Similar considerations apply to A320s/321s with CFM engines, since — nominally, at least — Safran can continue to make those if GE is curtailed by Trump.
“China is armed and ready for trade war 2.0 with Donald Trump”
“In part because of the first trade war which continued under President Joe Biden, Beijing, as well as Chinese companies, have already started actively reducing its trade dependence on the United States. The impact is visible in trade data and has come at warp speed.”
“As recently as 2022, bilateral trade was at a record high. But last year, Mexico overtook China as the top exporter of goods into the United States, according to the Commerce Department. China had held that perch for 20 years before its exports to the United States fell by 20% to $427 billion last year.”
“Just under 30% of China’s exports went to the Group of Seven (G7) rich countries last year, down from 48% in 2000, according to Matthews Asia. That’s why, despite selling less to the United States, China’s share of global exports is now at 14%, up from 13% before the first Trump tariffs.”
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/22/business/china-is-armed-and-ready-for-trade-war-2-0-with-donald-trump/index.html
—
Pre-emptive de-coupling: lots of that going on, and lots more to come.
Very interesting times ahead…
Mexico, Vietnam & Canada will be the top three countries hardest hit by potential US tariffs, based on their economic reliance on US trade and potential scope of new levies.
https://x.com/lisaabramowicz1/status/1856720130706751783
Re: the purported tariffs said to be coming: watch carefully what actually happens, compared to the [orchestrated?] bloviating in the press.
You could be right.
On the other hand, countries outside the US aren’t just going to sit on their thumbs while they’re waiting — they remember Trump 1.0, and they’re actively preparing for Trump 2.0.
Any pre-emptive decoupling that occurs now is unlikely to be undone again — even if it transpires that it was unfounded.
Trump is already talking about a third term…
Bond market response:
https://www.xm.com/au/research/markets/allNews/reuters/us-yields-rise-weak-demand-for-20year-auction-53972851
When US hunkers down behind a great tariff wall, the centre of the world economy will be centred on SH soon.
The real game: a politicized pursuit of exemptions??
https://x.com/petersgoodman/status/1860444524738413002
OMG! Watch out… you dated yourself? jk. (Regarding recent discussions of the average salary of BCA machinists.. in four years)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gc_yBUzWQAEhFFe?format=jpg&name=medium
AirAsia’s Tony Fernandes on being ‘loyal to China’, Comac’s allure and Asean expansion
“AirAsia is aiming to partner with China’s state-owned aircraft manufacturer to expand its fleet and increase its presence across Southeast Asia to meet rising travel demand in the post-pandemic era, according to Tony Fernandes, the Malaysian budget airline’s chief executive.”
Why BA sunsets 767F? Don’t forget about this:
“The FAS’ objections go beyond the 737 MAX. The prevalence of exemptions during aircraft certification programs and following major rule changes is another key concern. Manufacturers’ confidence in exemptions—which have become commonplace in the last two decades—means they do not have to abide by certification rules meant to ensure designs are safe, the foundation argues. Once granted, exemptions can too easily be extended, taking pressure off of companies to fix the problem.
One example is the 767-300F’s compliance with new flammability reduction rules put in place following the 1996 inflight explosion of TWA Flight 800.
In 2012, Boeing asked the FAA to exempt 767s from new wiring separation rules meant to prevent ignition sources. While design improvements were incorporated, they fell short of the FAA’s newest rules introduced in 2008. Among Boeing’s justifications: The required changes to the fuel quantity indication system would require the company to pause deliveries for three years while production for the model was nearing its end.
The FAA gave Boeing three years to develop a compliant system and said deliveries could continue in the interim. In 2014, with no new design in sight, Boeing asked for a new TLE—this time for just the 767-300 and 767-300ER and only until 2019, when 767 commercial production was expected to cease. Meanwhile, Boeing designed the tanker variant, which became the KC-46, to be fully compliant.
The FAA granted Boeing’s request. But in 2017, with the 767-300F still selling, Boeing asked for another exemption—this time pegging Dec. 31, 2027, well past the widebody freighter’s revised production end date. Annual deliveries were forecast at “about” 11 per year, the OEM added, equivalent to a final batch of about 90 aircraft.
One FAA senior aviation safety engineer had seen enough. Mike Dostert, one of the experts tasked with evaluating Boeing’s request, voiced his opposition. When the agency decided to grant the petition anyway, Dostert, as an engineer represented by the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, followed union protocol and documented his point of view.
“Co-routing of high-power wiring and lack of separation in [parts of the fuel system] between the high-power and in-tank circuits has been identified as a noncompliant and an unsafe condition since the TWA 800 accident,” Dostert, now retired from the FAA and a member of the FAS advisory board, wrote in a June 2018 “difference in professional opinion” letter.
He also questioned whether the company ever intended to fix the problem.
“After three years of production of noncompliant airplanes under the provisions of the original exemption, Boeing requested extension of the original exemption from 2016 to 2019 based upon the cost of upgrading the design and their stated low production rate and end of production in 2019,” he wrote. “It should be noted that in that same time frame Boeing developed the 767 tanker airplanes . . . produced on the same production line [that] are fully compliant.”
Dostert said Boeing’s FAA-granted Organization Designation Authorization status requires it to “correct noncompliant design features in newly produced airplanes.” Granting the 2018 exemption “not only reduces the level of fuel tank safety of the newly produced 767-300F airplanes, it rewards Boeing for not producing compliant designs and likely will influence their actions regarding bringing other known noncompliant designs back into a compliant configuration.”
Since the 2019 exemption went into effect, Boeing has upped annual 767-300F production to satisfy demand. It delivered 94 of the freighters in 2019-23—nearly 19 per year. Counting another 27 in the backlog as of Dec. 31, Boeing is on pace to deliver 121 under the 2019 exemption—or about two more years’ worth of production than it anticipated in the rates and time frame detailed in its application.”
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/safety-ops-regulation/faa-faces-tough-choice-latest-737-7-exemption-request
Regulatory capture?
@Pedro
It certainly is an expensive lesson not only for Boeing but for any other OEM that wants to update an existing airframe. Boeing went into the Max thinking it would be a relatively cheap measure to slap on some new engines and call it a day. They never contemplated fixing every wart in the aircraft.
On a pure safety record basis, comparing a 40 year old production design at the end of its run against a new variant design space is not the same thing. But good for the FAA that they are no longer accepting IOUs for improvements that never come. Hold the type certificate until the homework is handed in. It also makes the notion of Boeing certifying a new aircraft in 5 years that much harder to believe.
At some point, the B787 will need some upgrade.
Has any older 787 been converted to freighters at this time?
None. Neither new nor old.
Talk is that the 787 design does not lend itself
for a freighter subtype
for freighter conversion.
( nothing tangible for or against though.)
@Uwe
The story I have read is that there is a technological nut yet to crack wrt opening a big hole into a carbon fuselage to load cargo.
Then the follow-on structural re-inforcement around said hole.
Maybe ask Airbus on the HowTo? 🙂
are you saying when Boeing was putting the design concepts together for the 7E7 they had not the vision or strategy of the making the new aircraft a freighter version in the future?
“not integrated in concept”
difficult to say but that seems to be the case.
blinded by their own fairy tail :
snap together plastic tubes.
freighter may have been visualized as a blended wing design?
Then, fixing the initial design shortfalls seems to have consumed most of the design margin provisions.
( take the dreamliner wikipedia page and peruse the article history. see the basic specs morphing over time.
on the other side of the pond
A350 Final Assembly Line gets ready for the Freighter
“As well as finalizing the readiness of our jigs and tools over the next six months, we will also finalize all the instructions and work orders to prepare our teams, train our workers and to secure that everybody is ready with everything in place for the A350F FAL start.”
https://aircraft.airbus.com/en/newsroom/web-story/2024-11-a350-final-assembly-line-gets-ready-for-the-freighter
AW: Amid Surveillance Push, FAA Still Largely Reliant On Boeing’s Data (paywall)
Unable to evaluate risks quickly and effectively in Boeing’s vast operation, the FAA depends on Boeing-produced data points to determine the airframer’s health
“Boeing’s version of events did not add up: A 737 MAX operated a ferry flight with a rag left in an engine cowling, and Boeing, which voluntarily disclosed the incident, blamed a mechanic’s tool-tray choice for the misstep. FAA inspector Johnathan Arnold was not satisfied with the company’s… “
This is from 2020, at the end of Trump 1.0.
Will he be as accommodating this time around?
“US Gives Green Light For LEAP Engine Export to China”
“Earlier this year, media reports indicated that the Trump administration had considered denying an export license to export the LEAP-1C engines to China, but President Donald Trump later intervened to promote the export of American aerospace products.
“Trump tweeted in February that he wanted “to make it EASY to do business with the United States, not difficult. Everyone in my Administration is being so instructed, with no excuses…””
https://dsm.forecastinternational.com/2020/04/07/us-gives-green-light-for-leap-engine-export-to-china/
—
A lot has changed in the meantime.
Biden’s limitation of semiconductor-related exports to China has been severe — even going so far as to (heavily) coerce semiconductor firms in The Netherlands and Japan into restricting exports to China, causing considerable ire in those countries. So, if Biden is that Hawkish, what can we expect from Trump 2.0?
That CJ-1000A turbofan is of pivotal importance to COMAC…
Bessent told the Financial Times last month: “It’s escalate to de-escalate.”
Would this time be different?? I mean some country is more prepared than others. Some like VN, MX or CA would have little choice, but AMLO took a more hardline position IIRC. 60% tariffs could kill many dollar stores and many would learn economics in real life.
How will the US consumer be able to pay for import tariffs?
– US credit card debt is at a record, with delinquencies rising.
– US pawn shop debt is at a record.
– US housing debt is at a record, with interest rates for fixed-rate mortgages at nearly 7%.
Nov 4
BofA’s Ron Epstein: Each month of Boeing’s strike pushes out 737 production peak by 9-12 months
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=22IjovpM-Wk
50/m 2027 -> 2029??
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/737-MAX-Del-Stream-at-12-31-23-1024×630.png
How BA/BCA is going to record massive compensation that has to be doled out as delivery falls behind contract schedule in next few years?
2029…just in time to launch a new aircraft
…except that all the money will be gone by then (again) 🙈
@Abalone
Afraid Boeing will not have a choice by that timeframe…money or not. If Boeing is too poor to launch by 2029, it truly is on its way out. That would imply that Boeing is fundamentally unable to certify its aircraft and/or ship them without FAA limitations.
Airbus is in no rush to launch anything to replace the neo, but only to a point.
BA is already dead — it just hasn’t been buried yet.
Even if the company had sufficient funds (doubtful), where will the necessary engineering talent and manufacturing quality come from?
Survey Boeing retirees to find out how many would be willing to come back to help save the company for stock options.
You mean the same retirees who designed the 737MAX, KC-46A and 777X…all replete with design shortcomings?
I believe one impact of the new IAM contract not covered is its impact on BCA’s program accounting. Not just about future profits, but profits booked on assumptions of stable labor wages. So I can see two effects: 1) the profits booked in prior years have to be clawed back, 2) lower profit per unit going forward and accounting block has to be reviewed and revised.
As reported in Feb 2024:
• Boeing increased the 737 Max deferred production cost pushed to future payment by 730% between the end of 2018 and the end of 2023.
• The result of this way of using program accounting to reduce what is shown today is that future profits of the 737 MAX program will be reduced by almost a billion dollars per year during the next 10 years.
https://leehamnews.com/2024/02/29/boeings-program-accounting-reduce-future-profits/
Considering the paper thin margins on the current MAX order book (with frames flogged off at bargains in order to regain momentum after re-cert), one can conclude that positive forward EBIT on the MAX program will be elusive…(putting it mildly)
@Pedro
Any line of sight on how many aircraft are left in the accounting block?
Curious to know how long that lasts even at 50/mo production
3Q24
737: 11,600
767: 1,270
777: 1,810
777X: 500
787: 1,700
For the 737, BA/BCA has received a total of 12,908 “firm orders”(3Q24). They can add more to the accounting block, however, as in the LNA chart I posted above, BCA likely has several hundreds of order they can’t meet contract delivery over next few years.
Emirates Takes Delivery Of Its 1st Of 65 Airbus A350s
“The aircraft, registered as A6-EXA, will be the first of 65 A350-900 that Airbus will deliver to the Dubai-based carrier. The widebody jet will be the first new type to enter its fleet since 2008 when Emirates took delivery of its first-ever A380.”
“The inaugural route for the A350-900 was supposed to be flights to Bahrain International Airport (BAH), with the type being scheduled to replace Emirates’ Boeing 777s on September 15.”
Remind me again, why do they need 777x?
“Remind me again, why do they need 777x?”
Because Emirates loves lugging around 30 tons of pointless weight per flight…could that be it? 🤭
They certainly don’t need it for capacity — 96% load factor in a 777-9 corresponds to 100% load factor in an A350-1000.
Just wait until Tim Clark sees the SIA A350s kitted out with their new first class suites…that may cause the penny to drop.
—
p.s. On Planespotters, you can see 3 additional A350s for Emirates nearing delivery…
here is preview of SAI A350 new first class suites
Preview: Singapore Airlines’ A350 first-class suite
https://www.executivetraveller.com/news/singapore-airlines-new-a350-first-business-class
video
https://youtu.be/benAWSGdgXI
“Facing further delays in the arrival of its next-gen Boeing 777-9 fleet, Singapore Airlines will now launch the 777X first and business class suites on its A350s in a sweeping SGD$1.1bn upgrade program.”
“The ability to get the first A350 today becomes potentially pivotal. Its second A350 is already conducting test flights. A6=EXB undertook its first flight on November 12. Typically the A350 spends ~60 days in tests prior to delivery. This measn this aircraft likely goes to Dubai by the end of January.
“If Airbus is able to keep its supply chain stable (a tough task) it could deliver a steady supply of A350s to Emirates. This becomes a compelling offering because Emirates might tilt towards Airbus for its freighter and fleet growth. The situation at Boeing is going to take a long time to stabilize. ”
https://airinsight.com/emirates-first-a350-can-airbus-exploit-this/
The Nation:
“Emirates expects to receive eight A350s by the end of its financial year, which runs from April 1 to March 31”
Airbus develops options for upgraded A350 cabins including 10-abreast seating
“For example, Airbus engineers re-sculpted the cabin sidewalls to allow for a further four inches (10.16 cm) of cabin width. This has consequently opened up the opportunity to make 10-abreast economy seating more comfortable on long-haul flights. ”
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/airbus-develops-options-for-upgraded-a350-cabins-including-10-abreast-seating
“Terrifying new video shows German Boeing 737 DHL jet nose diving before crashing in huge fireball”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14123521/boeing-737-dhl-flight-video-nose-diving-vilnius-russian-terror-plot.html
—
Another day, another total loss of a 737 hull.
That’s now two in the past month…here’s the other one:
https://aviacionline.com/2024/11/fire-erupts-on-total-boeing-737-400sf-following-emergency-landing-in-sao-paulo-what-we-know/
And, yes, they were old frames — but there are also plenty of old Airbus frames flying around.
EC-MFE :: EC is Spain.
https://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-b737-24445.htm
ex Qantas bird.
Yes, currently owned by Swiftair (Spain) but lent out to DHL in Germany.
Accidents on aircraft that old tend to mx issues…not design issues.
You are right, but the words “737 crash” are there, all the same.
German minister floated conspiracy theory?
“[This information is added by users of ASN. Neither ASN nor the Flight Safety Foundation are responsible for the completeness or correctness of this information.]
The Vilnius Approach controller had cleared the flight for an ILS Z approach to runway 19 and instructed the crew to descend to 2700 feet and report when established on the ILS. At 4nm from touchdown, the flight was instructed to contact Vilnius Tower at “118.205” with the ‘2’ being hardly readable. This was read back by the flight a “118.05”.
This was the last transmission from the flight. Both Vilnius Tower and Vilnius Approach then attempted to contacted the flight without getting a response.
Preliminary ADS-B data suggests the aircraft overshot the runway centreline during the right-hand turn to final approach. It became lined up about 1 nm past the Final Approach Point (FAP) for the ILS runway 19 approach, about 5,4 nm short of the runway threshold.
The aircraft impacted terrain about 0,8 nm short of runway 19.
https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/462773
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/safety-ops-regulation/dhl-boeing-737-400f-converted-freighter-crashes-lithuania
Actually there is no nosedive.
I’d more compare it to the polderbaan crash from some years ago.
much too low on the glidepath.
Collides with some housing, continues, comes to standstill before the airport perimeter.
1 dead 3 in hospital.
360 degree Baerbock should have kept her trap shut.
Boeing’s #organizationaldesign may have limited expert influence, contributing to the 737 MAX issues.
https://x.com/bureaulab/status/1855169052060119147
“How Not to Organize In-House Experts: Lessons From Boeing | MIT Sloan Management Review
… investigations by various agencies, including the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), revealed a more significant issue: Boeing’s organizational structure did not properly place internal experts, which meant that some employees were unable to continue gaining knowledge in their specialization, and some key roles were assigned inappropriately. The company also undervalued some critical knowledge required for its operations, including the type of expertise needed to oversee entire Boeing processes end to end and the technical knowledge required for informed decision-making, the FAA investigations found. Organizational structures define how roles and responsibilities are assembled, and serve as frameworks for individuals on how to navigate their work.
https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/how-not-to-organize-in-house-experts-lessons-from-boeing/
😂 ICYMI
“You may have noticed Emirates’ first A350 is heading north. The aircraft will pass through UK airspace to satisfy acquisition paperwork requirements before turning southeast for Dubai.”
https://x.com/flightradar24/status/1861087816844767622
just in
“U.S. President-elect Donald Trump said on Monday that on his first day in office he would impose a 25% tariff on all products from Mexico and Canada, and an additional 10% tariff on goods from China, citing concerns over illegal immigration and the trade of illicit drugs.”
Will Jet Blue and Delta not get the import tariffed since their aircraft are delivered from Mobile?
But will Airbus US/Mobile get hit with 25% tariff for sub assemblies from Canada? fuselage (including nose and aft) with center wing box and doors. Wings from Northern Ireland not get tariffed? Assuming main fuselage from China goes to Montreal first
Let’s not forget about Boeing
“SAFRAN operates the largest aircraft wiring plant in the world, in Chihuahua. Today, it comprises four production units and a wiring system design and engineering center. The site designs and produces 95% of the wiring used on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner” ”
“SAFRAN dedicated to composite parts for the LEAP jet engine in Mexico. The LEAP engine – the successor to the CFM56”
😭
Keep an eye on LT bond yield
Already going up again, since Trump’s tariffs announcement yesterday.
Don’t forget that Leonardo (Italy) makes parts for every 787…
—
Something else that needs consideration: other countries aren’t limited to using retaliatory *import* tariffs on products that they import from the US — they can instead/additionally elect to slap hefty *export* tariffs on (select) products that the export to the US. Such a measure would throw a stick in the spokes of the politically-motivated exceptions circus to which Pedro alluded above.
Imagine Canada slapping a 100% tariff on all that oil that they export to the US?
What about China putting a 500% tariff on all rare earth element exports to the US?
Oops.
We have a “reality TV show” IRL. No director. No script. No editing.
Rather fitting description. Thank you.
we are all aprentices:
” You are fired! “
How much rare earth does the US import from China?
74%
What Key Critical Minerals Does the U.S. Import From China?
Critical Mineral
China’s Share of U.S. Imports U.S. Imports (Tonnes)
Yttrium 94% 1,000
Rare Earths 74% 11,940
Bismuth 65% 2,800
Antimony 63% 25,590
A very recent, related example:
(1) US recently adopted a blanket ban on imports of uranium from Russia, but allowed exceptions for “special US interests”.
(2) Russia retaliated with an all-out ban on uranium exports to the US — including for said “special US interests”.
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/russia-places-ban-on-us-uranium-exports
We’ll be seeing a lot more moves like that, from a lot more countries.
And I won’t rule out that we’ll be seeing this in the aviation industry, also.
Scott Bessent on tariffs:
“Tariffs can’t be inflationary because if the price of one thing goes up, unless you give people more money, then they have less money to spend on other things, so there is no net inflation.”
Consumers will have to weigh between food, clothing etc and car payments, rent/mortgage payment, credit card payments. I call a spade a spade because I’ve no need to play with words: it’s either R or D coming.
Poor Mr. Bessent needs to go back to economics school.
People can borrow (and are already doing so) in order to purchase — which qualifies as “giving them money” (until the delinquencies start).
They can also draw on savings for the same purpose.
So, we have a treasury secretary who doesn’t understand the basics?
Wow.
what do you expect, Bessent earned a bachelor’s degree in political science from Yale University in 1984 Seems he only has bachelor degree?
just a fyi…75% of tomatoes sold in the US come from Mexico 90% of avocados sold in the US come from Mexico
Mexico: Corona is brewed in Mexico by Grupo Modelo, the largest brewery in the country.
“Crude oil imports from Canada have become increasingly important to U.S. oil refineries, now making up most U.S. imports. U.S. oil refining capacity stood at 18.4 million barrels per day (b/d) as of January 1, 2024. In 2023, 60% of U.S. crude oil imports originated in Canada, up from 33% in 2013.”
Looks like the prices in the US will go up with 25% US tariffs
In 2023, auto factories in Mexico produced 3.3 million cars, exporting 77% of them to the U.S.
So just pass on the additional costs to the US consumer?
just a fyi
“Ford Maverick, Ford Bronco Sport, and Ford Mustang Mach-E, all of which are currently built in Mexico. Regardless, it seems as if Ford isn’t currently considering moving production of those models from Mexico to the U.S.”
“In 2022, GM Mexico manufactured more than 743,000 vehicles in its three production complexes in the country made up of the Ramos Arizpe plant (Chevy Blazer and Equinox), the Silao plant (Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500) and the San Luis Potosí plant (GMC Terrain and Chevy Equinox). “
Boeing exposure to Canada and Mexico for possible tariffs
Air Canada 33 aircraft…19 787, 2, 767 Freighters, and 12 737 Max
West Jet 128 737s
Mexico
Aeromexico 11 737 and 1 787
While one country tries to address its trade deficit by slapping tariffs on everyone else, another country uses money from its trade surplus to expand/facilitate its global trade network.
Now that the China-built, ultra-modern Chancay port in Peru is open, the next step is to connect it by rail to Brazil:
“China wants to build transoceanic railroad in Brazil, linking Rio de Janeiro to Peru”
“Brazil, Peru and China have announced a strategic partnership for the development of the Transoceanic Railway.
“This bold and visionary initiative promises to revolutionize not only trade relations, but also logistics between South America and Asia, opening up new routes and opportunities for both continents.”
https://forumchinaplp.org.mo/en/economic_trade/view/7841
—
Great news for COMAC and Embraer.
More pre-emptive decoupling:
“Huawei launches first phones capable of running its new self-developed operating system”
“Huawei on Tuesday launched the Mate 70 series of smartphones that can run on the company’s latest self-developed operating system, as the Chinese giant continues its push toward technological independence in the wake of U.S. sanctions.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/26/huawei-mate-70-launch-harmonyos-next-details-specs-price-.html
remind me again, why does any country really need to trade with the US?
Why do you think that foreign holdings of dollar reserves are decreasing at such a marked pace?
One reason: If you trade less with the US, then you don’t need to hold as many dollars.
Another reason: avoiding dollars reduces/eliminates your exposure to economic sanctions.
On the other hand: if you lose China as an export market, then you have a nasty problem. Just look at the size of the Chinese market for aircraft and semicoductors (for example).
All-Airbus carrier Hong Kong Airlines considering the C919:
“The chairman of Hong Kong Airlines (HX, Hong Kong International) says the carrier is in talks with COMAC about acquiring C919s following 12 months of sustained fleet growth and a decision to resume long-haul international operations.”
https://www.ch-aviation.com/news/147350-hong-kong-airlines-mulls-c919s-returning-to-north-america
this is the future of Southeast Asia commercial aircraft purchases Airbus and Comac
I think you’re right about that.
Bombardier business jets will get a little pricier in the US with the 25% tariff applied to them
“new Bombardier business jet in 2023 is around $40 million with models like the Global 5500 starting at around $46 million and a Global 7500 reaching up to $78 million”
On the other hand: many of the people in the target group for business jets have firm plans to move overseas — and their Bombardiers will be available tariff-free there 🤭
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/01/wealthy-americans-plans-leaving-united-states.html
British Airways has finally announced its new First Class cabin, to be introduced on refurbished *A380s starting in mid-2026.
…and it looks very stylish indeed:
https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2024/11/26/british-airways-launches-new-first-class-seats/
are you saying they might not get their 777x timely?
“Hidden in its 2nd quarter results presentation, IAG revealed that its 18 firm Boeing 777X orders are now expected to be delivered between 2026 and 2028 (18 on order with 24 options)
ps here is a hint….don’t expect any 777xs until about 2028 at the earliest or ever
What a shocker! 😄
Well, seeing as Lufthansa and SIA have decided to unveil their (stunning) new first class suites now — as opposed to waiting for the endlessly-postponed arrival of their elusive 777Xs — it’s no surprise that BA has followed that trend.
😬 What happened?? The USAF found out its bad planning?
The War Zone: The Air Force Is Having To Reverse Engineer Parts Of Its Own Stealth Bomber
Twenty-one years after the last Spirit was delivered, the Air Force is working out how to build the exotic spare parts the bomber requires.
Note: 2021
“A supposedly rare failure that happened twice in 9 mos. Pilots need to react quickly w/ checklist that’s not memorized. FAA experts making recommendations to their own agency. An NTSB investigation launched–but not for 11 months.
https://x.com/AvWeekSean/status/1861411083476468096
AW: NTSB Probe Of Southwest Bird Strike Spotlights 737 MAX Engine Safety System
https://t.co/XHyBu1Zg4d
And some commenters here still try to assert that the FAA and NTSB are some sort of “gold standard”…🙈
#StillLivingInThe50s
From the article:
“On the Leap-1B, an LRD activation also opens an oil sump, releasing oil into the engine flow path ahead of pneumatic bleed ports that divert air to the aircraft for pressurization and temperature control.
“AVP’s position is that industry has not responded sufficiently to the two Southwest incidents. Boeing issued an operators’ bulletin in early February, explaining that a severely damaged engine can be accompanied by smoke in the cockpit or cabin, and pilots should follow a specific non-normal checklist (NNC). Several operators, including American Airlines and Southwest, issued bulletins to their pilots reiterating Boeing’s instructions, but stopped short of procedural or training-related changes.
The applicable NCC, the Engine Fire or Severe Damage or Separation (EFSDS) list, is not a required memory item, meaning pilots must reference a quick-access card or similar source to follow the steps.
Among the concerns AVP cites is a Boeing analysis that shows an LRD activation can reduce flight deck visibility to 5 in. within 30 sec. if the valve is not closed. This gives pilots a narrow window to keep the cockpit air clear.
Another issue: the 737 MAX lacks a modern flight crew alerting system that could direct pilots to the correct checklist based on automatically detected parameters. Absent automatic logic that other aircraft flight decks incorporate, 737 MAX pilots must process multiple cues to determine when an engine failure includes “severe damage” and subsequent LRD activation.
One airline’s EFSDS checklists advises pilots to use it when “one or more” of several conditions occur, including an engine fire warning and “airframe vibrations with abnormal engine indications.” Depending on the severity of the damage, the conditions may or may not be immediately obvious.
“[LRD activation] presents itself buried under a bunch of different things,” said Dennis Tajer, spokesperson for Allied Pilots Association and a 737 captain at American Airlines. “You have to analyze it, and you’re doing it when you’re close to the ground and your job is just to get the aircraft cleaned up. Then the [LRD] dumps a bunch of smoke into your office.” […]
While bird strikes on departure caused the Southwest incidents, other failures could trigger LRD activations, the pilot said. Among them: the engine anti-ice problem and potential severe engine inlet cowl damage flagged by the FAA in an August 2023 airworthiness directive, the pilot added.
“Another issue: the 737 MAX lacks a modern flight crew alerting system that could direct pilots to the correct checklist based on automatically detected parameters. Absent automatic logic that other aircraft flight decks incorporate, 737 MAX pilots must process multiple cues to determine when an engine failure includes “severe damage” and subsequent LRD activation.”
—
Ah yes…the joys of the MAX’s EICAS exception, coming back to haunt it.
#Primitive
Always beneficial to have just 5 inches of cockpit visibility within 30 seconds, not know what’s going on, and not know how to address it.
#MostScrutinizedPlaneInHistory
“Boeing analysis that shows an LRD activation can reduce flight deck visibility to 5 in. within 30 sec. if the valve is not closed.”
If the pilots can’t see, how can they go thru any checklists, or fly the aircraft??
#RegulatoryCapture Anyone?
More details on the recently-unveiled military ASuW/ASW version of the A321XLR:
https://www.edrmagazine.eu/euronaval-2024-airbus-defense-and-space-unveiled-its-new-a321-xlr-based-asuw-asw-platform
congrats you were the 500th commenter post!
🥳
more technology decoupling
“HUAWEI has unveiled its latest flagship smartphones, the Mate 70 series and the Mate X6 foldable, in China. But the real story is about HUAWEI breaking up with Android. These devices are the company’s first step toward switching to Harmony OS Next, an operating system built entirely in-house and free of US technological influence”
just in
“U.S. President-elect Donald Trump does not intend to spare crude oil from his planned 25% import tariffs on Canada and Mexico, sources told Reuters on Tuesday, as the oil industry warned the policy could hurt consumers, industry and national security.”
I wonder if he realizes/understands that US refineries aren’t tooled to refine sweet crude (such as the WTI produced in the US) — they’re tooled to refine sour crude (such as Saudi/Canadian blends), and it will take 5 years and billions of dollars to re-tool them?
That’s why the US exports its own oil (to countries that are tooled to refine it), and concurrently imports (sour) oil and refined products from other countries.
Does Don plan on giving US consumers / businesses much higher prices at the pump? They’ll really love him for that 👍
Lol. US imports oil like WCS at discounts. It provides net benefits as US exports their oil/refined products from the Gulf to the international market.
Canada & MX are largely captive suppliers. Can’t think of a better way to force them to break the chain!
US also imports used cooking oil from China. I love that economics won’t work IRL anymore. Lol.
Furthermore, from what I gathered, oil production in US had more or less plateaued. Not only it won’t go up, as DJT/SB etc believe, it will very likely come down, at first, slowly then accelerates. Most of the best wells in shale are gone, the rest are owned by the Big Oil, which are not in a rush to burn up their reserves within a few years.
The shale revolution is done. The lack of strategic thinking will come back to haunt the next generation.
China’s oil refinery output falls from a year ago for a seventh month
” China’s refinery throughput in October fell 4.6% from last year, down from year earlier for a seventh month, as plant closures offset the ramp up of a newly started complex”
other news
“Slumping refining margins amid tepid fuel demand in China have already claimed victims among the refineries in the Shandong province, where two plants operated by chemicals giant Sinochem were declared bankrupt in recent days”
“Refining margins across Asia fell in the first week of September to their lowest level for this time of year since 2020, which could lead to more curbs on run rates at Asian refiners, including in China.”
China Shock 2.0
Adam Tooze: “The first China shock was when China was incorporating into our supply chains. The second China shock is when we beg to be incorporated into theirs.”
From FT
Renault CEO Luca De Meo: “We need to find a deal w/ China because we won’t be able to compete . . . without the support of the Chinese companies that control the mining industry, chemicals, refining and their capacity and competence”
JX0189
Auto Flight
V2000CG
https://x.com/RJBK_spotter/status/1862623580439392293
#The World is Changing
Emirates Airline says ‘wings clipped’ by Boeing delays
“Boeing’s new CEO said in October that the planemaker had told customers it expects first delivery of its 777X in 2026, owing to challenges in development, a flight-test pause and the work stoppage.”
“Clark also said that the new Airbus A350 aircraft would drive the next phase of Emirates’ growth, enabling it to consider new destinations.”
remind me again of the last date for a 777x flight test How many 777x test aircraft, how many in operation today?
And they still don’t even know what the exact problem is with the thrust links — not to mind having a solution to it.
@Abalone
Boeing may know what the problem is. They may not have publicly disclosed that finding. And there is a line of thought that you do not disclose that finding until you have a technical fix approved and a schedule for incorporation.
So where does that leave us? Boeing disclosed “2026” as EIS during Q3 earnings. If this was 2022…that would be an understandable answer. However, “2026” can be anywhere from 14-25 months if my math is correct. Not exactly a definitive answer. If this was a Calhoun answer, I would immediately ignore that timeframe. We don’t know if Ortberg is sandbagging that timeframe so that he does not get a reputation for missing targets like his predecesor.
What was more worrisome was that no timeframe was given for Max7 or Max10. Those were two variants that were supposed to be a fix of inlet heating away from certification “Q2 2025.” I put parentheses there because Boeing waffled a bit on the exact timing. I have a hard time believing Boeing would not take any victory it can get if available. That will be your next timeline to slip…when it becomes obvious.
“Boeing may know what the problem is. They may not have publicly disclosed that finding.”
They should have an inkling … at least.
But pressure is on.
If they keep mum my guess is that
A: reason is absolutely dumb ( like thermal expansion ignored )
B: but fixing it includes a major redesign.
“And there is a line of thought that you do not disclose that finding until you have a technical fix approved and a schedule for incorporation.”
Extinct. I am sure.
They can’t hide forever. Come next January…
“[TC] also doesn’t expect President-elect Donald Trump to enforce another travel ban on Muslim countries in his second term.
When the first travel restrictions were introduced in 2017, Emirates had to cut flights to the US after demand dropped following visa restrictions on citizens from Muslim-majority countries and a ban on bringing personal electronics on board from some locations.
“Those are some of the missteps of his first administration,” Clark said. “I can’t see that happening again. It caused absolute mayhem.”
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2024/11/27/emirates-frustrated-with-boeing-as-777x-delays-slow-growth/
Oct 15
FG: Emirates’ airline chief questions Boeing’s new 777-9 timeline
‘The president of Emirates Airline is sceptical Boeing can meet its new goal of delivering the first 777-9 in 2026, citing the programme’s currently stalled status.
“Given the type inspection authorisation halt on the 777X, with no clear timeline for the restart, coupled with ongoing strikes, I fail to see how Boeing can make any meaningful forecasts of delivery dates,” says Emirates Airline president Tim Clark in a statement.’
https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/emirates-airline-chief-questions-boeings-new-777-9-timeline/160310.article
FG: ‘Expansionist’ Emirates unveils first A350 and waits on arrival of longer-range version
“Emirates Airline hopes by next summer to be operating both versions of the Airbus A350-900 it has on order, as deliveries of the widebody twin to the Gulf carrier ramp up.
Speaking at an event in Dubai on 27 November to mark the arrival of the first A350 from a 65-unit order, Emirates president Sir Tim Clark said the initial example was configured for “regional” missions of up to 12h. […]
Later deliveries will also include [a version] capable of flying “16-hour missions” to “almost anywhere in the world” from the carrier’s Dubai base. […]
Instead, Emirates will add a crew-rest area and reduce the passenger count to 298 – losing seven seats each from the premium-economy and economy cabins – to allow the longer flights.”
https://www.flightglobal.com/airlines/expansionist-emirates-unveils-first-a350-and-waits-on-arrival-of-longer-range-version/160905.article
I’m quite sure Emirates is not* reducing seat number to fly further. Wink wink.
When will TC reconsider the A350-1000?? 😉
Fairly strong language from Tim Clark re the ever-delayed 777-X.
true
Then why not put the 777x program out of its misery and cancel Emirates 777x orders. Then British Airways would follow since they are updating the A380 cabins
David,
Bargaining tactics? Would it backfire??
Can EK make the decision by y.e.? Or a bit later?
https://www.flightglobal.com/airlines/emirates-nears-decision-between-777-8f-and-a350-1000f-for-future-cargo-fleet/160364.article
On the subject of the A350F:
“Airbus gears up for A350 freighter final assembly”
“European aircraft manufacturer Airbus is gearing up for the final assembly of its first A350 freighter.
“Significant progress has been made, with large components of the aircraft already under production at Airbus Atlantic and Airbus Aerostructures in France and Germany. Meanwhile, preparations at the Roger Béteille Final Assembly Line (FAL) in Toulouse are nearing completion.
“The A350F, the latest addition to the A350 Family, combines substantial design commonality with its passenger counterparts but introduces critical structural adaptations, according to an official release from Airbus.
https://www.stattimes.com/air-cargo/airbus-gears-up-for-a350-freighter-final-assembly-1353805
—
What a contrast with the 777-8F paper freighter.
https://www.stattimes.com/air-cargo/airbus-gears-up-for-a350-freighter-final-assembly-1353805
Interesting read.
Note:
There is so much more to building transport aircraft
than pushing parts into a large building on one side
and expecting to emerge a complete item out the other side.
“An FAA internal report detailed serious emergencies last year on two Southwest MAX flights
An engine component caused an oil leak that sent toxic smoke &fumes inside the jets
But the component rarely activates
FAA ruling today:
No immediate action needed”
https://x.com/dominicgates/status/1861599621371568632
“The story contains new detail from the full internal FAA report about the seriousness of the two Southwest incidents
If the valves from the left engine air flow are not closed, the report said ingested smoke will reduce visibility in the cockpit to 5 inches within 30 secs”
‘After just 39 seconds, concentrations of noxious fumes — “acrolein and formaldehyde” — in the confines of the cockpit may exceed acute exposure thresholds, described as “potential lethality.”’
The Seattle Times:
FAA decides no immediate action needed on Boeing MAX engine smoke risk
https://t.co/5iD6KWSyZR
Wild stuff from the FAA, who calculated the LRD issue
probably won’t happen more than once a year or so.
#shouldbefine
Ford executives estimated that the design defects in the Ford Pinto would result in hundreds of deaths and that the legal liability would be around $200,000 per death, so it was cheaper to “let ’em burn.”
Let “Cooler Head Prevails”
787 supplier from the other side of the pond
Leonardo And Unions Set To Discuss Grottaglie’s Future Amid Boeing Delays
“Leonardo is poised to discuss the future of its Grottaglie plant with unions in December, spurred by Boeing 787 production delays that have disrupted operations.
This situation has led to major furloughs, impacting over 900 of its 1,200 employees in stages until early January.
As Leonardo’s leadership, including CEO Roberto Cingolani, prepares for pivotal discussions with union leaders, the emphasis is on redefining the plant’s future. “
#Make Tariffs Great Again!
CFM re-allocates some engines in boost to Airbus, sources say
“Jet engine maker CFM has agreed to divert some engines to Airbus to narrow a supply gap as the planemaker battles to hit end-of-year targets, three people familiar with the matter said.
This month’s agreement follows a tug of war over supplies between planemakers and maintenance shops and is expected to involve CFM diverting to Airbus some engines that had initially been allocated to the aftermarket, the sources said.”
Exactly as predicted above: China is already putting the screws on exports of antimony, which is a scarce and vital metal for use in electronics, munitions and nuclear applications.
“Trump’s Nightmare: The Critical Resource Biden Couldn’t Secure”
“Military Metals CEO Scott Eldridge sees a major antimony supply crunch coming. And antimony prices this year, along with new Chinese restrictions add extra support to that prediction with prices tripling since earlier this year from $12,000 per ton to $38,000. ”
“The current crisis stems from China’s dominance in both global antimony production and refining. China, Russia, and Tajikistan control 85% of the world’s antimony supply. ”
“Because China controls most of the world’s antimony, when they cut supply Western military supply chains are directly impacted.
“According to a recent article published by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C., the U.S. only has 20 days’ worth of antimony inventory. Germany has just 2 days’ worth of munitions supply. And geopolitical tensions in Ukraine, the Middle East, Afghanistan, and other places continue to aggravate the demand for antimony. ”
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Trumps-Nightmare-The-Critical-Resource-Biden-Couldnt-Secure.html
—
Don: “We’re putting 100% tariffs on all Chinese imports”
Xi: “That’s fine. We’re putting a complete export stop on all exports of Rare Earth metals to the US.”
Don: “What are they…?”
Xi: “Ask The Pentagon and Silicon Valley”.
Somewhat related:
“Asia likely to benefit from cheaper Canadian, Mexican oil if Trump imposes tariffs”
“SINGAPORE/LONDON, Nov 27 (Reuters) – Oil producers in Canada and Mexico will likely be forced to reduce prices and divert supply to Asia if U.S. President-elect Donald Trump imposes 25% import tariffs on crude imports from the two countries, traders and analysts said.”
“”The impact is all on the heavy grades. What are the U.S. refiners going to do? Even Saudi Arabian Heavy crude is limited,” a Singapore-based trader said, adding that some U.S. refiners can only receive crude via pipelines, limiting their options for imports”
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/asia-likely-benefit-cheaper-canadian-mexican-oil-if-trump-imposes-tariffs-2024-11-27/
—
Don: “We’re putting a 25% tariff on imports of your oil”
Justin/Claudia: “That’s fine — we’ll just sell it to Asia instead”
Don: “But where will we then get our oil?”
Justin/Claudia: “Call your friend Vlad”.
Vlad: Don we are busy with crude oil shipments to China, go see Jarrod investment friends the Saudi crown prince
“Russian crude oil shipments to China via the Northern Sea Route (NSR) have set a new record this season with approximately 10.7 million barrels shipped so far, surpassing last season’s total of 10.5 million barrels and highlighting the viability of the Arctic as an alternative shipping route for Russian oil to China, according to Risk Intelligence.”
…and all paid for in yuan.
China now takes 50% of Russian oil output and 90% of Iranian oil output — all paid for in yuan.
India takes 37% of Russian oil output — variously paid for using rupees, rubles and yuan.
—
Airbus started selling commercial aircraft in euros in 2010. Presumably all sales to European airlines/lessors are settled in euros, but I wonder if any euro settlement is occurring in other parts of the world?
I think we can assume that COMAC is tendering/selling its planes in yuan.
An important topic, since dollar avoidance helps reduce vulnerability to sanctions.
“The price of antimony doubled in July, 2024, according to S&P Global, hitting a then-record $22,750 per metric ton (antimony ingots 99.65% FOB) by August 6th. By November 15th, the price had hit $25,000 a ton, according to Forbes, for a 212% surge YTD.”
FAA Grants Airbus A350 Freighter Exit Door Visibility Exemption
“In a filing on November 25, the FAA granted an exemption for the A350F, whose official model designation is A350-1041F, to install exits that would not allow flight crew to view the outside conditions before using the door and/or hatch.”
https://simpleflying.com/faa-grants-airbus-a350-freighter-door-visibility-exemption/
“Mexico warns Trump-proposed tariffs to cost 400,000 US jobs”
“Mexico’s president and economy minister have given the clearest picture yet of how their government will respond to United States President-elect Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs on the country, which their government has warned will cost 400,000 US jobs.
“Speaking at a news conference on Wednesday, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said the Mexican response would be swift if Trump followed through on the plans.”
“”He added the impact would extend beyond workers to US consumers. For example, Ebrard said, most pick-up trucks sold in the US are manufactured in Mexico. He claimed Trump’s tariffs would add $3,000 to the cost of a new vehicle.
““That is why we say that it would be a shot in the foot,” he said.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/27/mexico-warns-trump-proposed-tariffs-to-cost-400000-us-jobs
seems $3k is low Average P/U truck in the US is $50K x .25 is about $13k..maybe a typo $3k should be $13k
AirAsia In Talks With Airbus, Comac, Embraer For 100 Small Narrowbodies
“AirAsia is in talks with Airbus, Comac and Embraer as it explores the acquisition of up to 100 regional airliners to complement its existing A320 narrowbody fleet.”
A220, C909 and E195?
Can Embraer win?
Nov 13
Embraer Sees Chinese Role in Strengthening Supply Chain
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2024-11-13/embraer-sees-chinese-role-in-strengthening-supply-chain-executive-says
The Air Current
Delta CEO cool to all-new Embraer airplane
https://t.co/RpP92nd0Nq
“Some reading while your turkey is cooking: After cultivating a third single-aisle player with its 2016 commitment to the CSeries, Delta’s CEO Ed Bastian is decidedly cooler on the prospects of Embraer doing the same.”
https://x.com/jonostrower/status/1862202312690999763
“Emirates eyes A350 order increase amid Boeing woes”
“On the occasion of the arrival this week of Emirates’ first A350-900 at Dubai International, its president, Tim Clark, said the company is interested in expanding its Airbus order and continues to evaluate a future order for A350-1000s as it copes with the implications of Boeing’s delayed certification efforts of the B777X programme.”
“While no numbers were revealed, Airbus expects that between 25% to 30% of all of its A350 deliveries in 2025 will go to Emirates, or about a dozen to twenty of the widebodies next year. The Dubai-based carrier expects the A350 deliveries to run between 2024 and early 2028.”
https://www.ch-aviation.com/news/147462-emirates-eyes-a350-order-increase-amid-boeing-woes
Today’s question, while the turkey sits in the oven:
“Will there ever again be a subscription-free article on LNA?” 🤭
As of this morning, there’ve been 9 subscriber articles since the current article…👀
@Abalone
Scott and the Leeham team have a livelihood to make. They are under no obligation to offer anything for free. Not trying to be preachy, but be thankful for what they do provide.
Who said anything about “obligations”?
Asking a simple question does not equate to complaining…nor does it indicate “ingratitude”.
There is such a thing as simple curiosity.
When Bjorn returns from special assignment, his free Friday Corners will resume.
Mongolia’s Deputy Prime Minister Amarsaikhan visited EHang’s headquarters.. and took a flight aboard the EH216-S.
A tour of Emirates first Airbus A350
The National
Inside Emirates’ new Airbus A350: From ‘cinematic’ screens to faster Wi-Fi
https://t.co/7mGHQFvBfj
NYTimes: The U.S. Is Building an Early Warning System…
Balloon launches from around the world are part of a new kind of global alarm system
=================
“Airline refund rules could be on Trump’s chopping block
https://www.axios.com/2024/11/28/trump-airline-refunds
MAX Suppliers Expect Rate 38 In 2026 — at least half a year later than the OEM’s current target — and they will start 2025 with an average rate of 20 shipsets, roughly 14% below where they were a year earlier.
Delta Plans Airbus A330 Retrofits As Of 2026
“Delta has a fleet of 31 Airbus A330-300s, which are an average of around 16 years old. These planes don’t have the newest interiors, and in particular, have pretty outdated reverse herringbone seats in business class”
“For what it’s worth, Delta reportedly doesn’t have any immediate plans to upgrade its Airbus A330-200s, which are even older, and are approaching an average age of 20 years.”
@Pritchard
I believe a lot of those aircraft are the old Northwest fleet
From E Russell:
“Qantas’ first Airbus A321XLR is in final assembly at the airframer’s Hamburg plant. Delivery is scheduled for April 2025.”
“Say hello to our first @Airbus A321XLR!
The aircraft has now progressed to the final assembly line at Airbus’ Finkenwerder production facility in Hamburg, Germany ahead of its scheduled delivery in April 2025.
Our first A321XLR will sport the rego VH-OGA and will be named ‘Great Ocean Road’, with our employees given the opportunity to name the new fleet after Australian walks, rivers, and roads.”
https://x.com/Qantas/status/1862617539043324319
Imagine Qantas had picked the “very competitive” MAX 10 (according to some here), I wonder if the MAX 10 is even certified by the time Qantas takes delivery of their first A321XLR!
“Galvin Flying, one of last Seattle-area flight schools, closes abruptly
And another local flight school Rainier Flight Service is closing its Renton location on Jan. 31”
https://x.com/dominicgates/status/1862641277072031761
Galvin Flying, one of last Seattle-area flight schools, closes abruptly
https://t.co/Bg6wUawTQW
Looking at Planespotters, there are currently 9 Emirates A350s off the line in Toulouse and undergoing testing there. Seven of them (at least) are already fully painted. This is all in addition to the A350 already delivered to Emirates this week.
This suggests a rapid-fire series of deliveries in the coming weeks, which means that Emirates will very soon have a sizeable mini-fleet of the type.
Revenue flights start in a few weeks (Jan 3), at which stage Tim will start to see real-world fuel usage figures.
Dangerous times for BA’s 777X order book.
Great info!
I’d say that AB is very shrewdly playing upon the continuing uncertainty surrounding the 777X.
Tim’s A350 deliveries may be delayed (primarily due to delays with cabin fixtures and seats), but they have now actually begun — and he’ll be receiving a steady stream of a certified, in-service, new aircraft type for the first time since 2008.
All the while, BA is keeping its lips tight regarding the ongoing thrust link debacle. One of these days, it will leak out that certification is slipping to 2028…
@Abalone
The last thing Airbus wants is for Boeing to kill the B777X. If your competition is busy trying to certify a boat anchor, then the only intelligent move is to let them.
Perhaps.
But getting a few of the (big) 777X customers to jump ship to the A350 would nevertheless be a satisfying achievement for AB…regardless of what then happens to the 777X “program”.
is the 777x program proof Boeing has “jumped the shark” in commercial aircraft mfg.
@Pritchard
I can understand why Boeing launched the program…but launch was 11 years ago. The A350 was not a commercial success yet and the single aisle intrusion into longer routes had not become a thing yet.
In Boeing’s case the development has taken so long that the market has passed it by…on a number of levels. Honestly, I am of the opinion this has metastisized into a chronic Boeing disease. It is a company simply unable to certify an aircraft now (military or commerical). This will be Ortberg’s greatest challenge of all. The plan of record is to replace the B737 in ~5 years from an EIS in ~2030.
The B777X is not a moonshot, and it is not presently failing due to an overreactive FAA. The 777X was never going to a fantastic commercial success. The best it can be now is a niche aircraft at the whim of Emirates and Qatar for half its backlog (like the A380).
And on a related note:
The first A350F for a customer — KLM Cargo — is also currently being built. It has MSN 842, which is about 90 slots further than the current “main run” of passenger A350s (which are presently at about MSN 750). Evidently, Airbus wants to accelerate the delivery process once certification is achieved — perhaps to capitalize on the current lack of a next-gen cargo offering from BA.
This KLM-bound A350F is in addition to two A350Fs currently being assembled for Airbus itself, for use in the certification program.
And now switching over to the 787 production list on Planespotters, we see that not a single frame is currently on the list for Emirates.
First delivery was initially slated for 2023…which then slipped to 2024. Subsequently, Clark indicated that he expected the first delivery in 2025.
Wishful thinking, it would seem.
Remember, some insist the 787 and 767F are both “profitable”!!
No meat and all bone.. whatever.
If you want to see “no meat and all bone”, take a look at the 737MAX production list on Planespotters. Sort the list according to “current status”.
Note how many ex-Chinese frames are designated as “not built” — as opposed to some that were built and ultimately re-assigned to another customer.
And note that 3 units shipped to Qatar in 2003 are now designated as “parked”. Curious.
The list is a mess 🙈
@Pedro
Not sure why the 767F would not be profitable; they have been making that forever. Unless you are alluding to the fact that the run-rate that Boeing can barely justify the overhead keeping the line running.
The tanker is another story.
@Casey
At less than two a month??
Not according to BA/BCA
See this comment by poster enrigh
https://leehamnews.com/2024/10/11/boeing-announces-preliminary-significant-q3-loss-cuts-767-freighter-program-delays-777x-eis-major-layoffs/#comment-525993
P.S. Take away the word salad, that’s admission from the horse’s mouth
From BA’s latest SEC 10Q filing:
767 Program
“.. We are continuing to experience factory disruption, including supply chain delays and quality issues. We have slowed production in 2024 to reduce traveled work in our factory and enable supply chain recovery, resulting in higher near-term production costs.”
@Pedro
The B767F if it indeed is not profitable is a function of no demand. There is a point where the volume is not sufficient to buy in the quantity needed to make a line viable. More of a market demand issue than a bad design.
The decision to let go of the freighter probably has more to with the fact there is no backlog. And another reason why I don’t think Boeing will try very hard to extend the tanker beyond 179 aircraft
“.. factory disruption, including supply chain delays and quality issues’
Also from enrigh:
‘The 767F is not compliant with the current wire separation regulation. In 2012, the FAA granted Boeing a temporary 3-year exemption that was later extended to 2019 and then 2027. To continue producing the 767F after 2027 without having to make it compliant with wire separation rules, Boeing would have to convince the FAA to further extend this “temporary” exemption.’
How much BCA has to spend to ensure compliance?
How many 767F BCA has to sell to recover additional cost? May be the current FAA quietly signals how likely a further exemption would be granted.
@Pedro
I dont disagree with most of your points…only the ramifications. Yes Boeing is noncompliant with redesign orders for wiring, but the FAA let them off the hook. That is not working out very well for Boeing on the MAX. Yes there is a 2027 ICAO order putting the aircraft non-compliant, but that does not mean aircraft is non-compliant today. Supply chain and quality issues are an industry-wide disease, but that is a disease that is not specific to the B767.
I will take it even one step further and point out that the problem with the tanker is not even the B767, but Boeing’s ability to add the widgets and systems that make it a tanker (same goes for the Air Force One).
But you are right in pointing out that the line has hit its limits. To fix all of the old problems and make it ICAO compliant would be a waste. They ran this platform as long as they could. And the fact that there are only ~29 left in commercial backlog makes this an easy decision to sunset.
from early October
“Boeing will cease production of its 767 Freighter in 2027, marking the end of the line for its workhorse delivery plane built in Everett, Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg announced Friday”
@Casey
I believe deeps cuts by BA/BCA top mgmt in 2020/1 had severely impact the production of its commercial aircraft.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54716296
It’s definitely beyond supply chain issues of the industry.
737 Max 9 doorplug blowout/777F production as reported by the Seattle Times.
the latest from Make Tariffs Great Again
“President-elect Donald Trump said he would impose a 100% tariff on the BRICS geopolitical coalition of non-Western countries if the group moves away from trading using the U.S. dollar”.
“The idea that the BRICS Countries are trying to move away from the Dollar while we stand by and watch is OVER,” Trump wrote. “We require a commitment from these Countries that they will neither create a new BRICS Currency, nor back any other Currency to replace the mighty U.S. Dollar or, they will face 100% Tariffs, and should expect to say goodbye to selling into the wonderful U.S. Economy.”
BRICS currently represents 37% of the world economy (PPP), with more than 50 countries lined up to join. In contrast, the G7 represents less than 29% of the world economy (PPP).
The BRICS bloc has plenty of other options besides trading with the US.
The very utterance of those (completely megalomanic) words by Don will only serve to further accelarate the de-dollarization process.
‘The “mighty U.S. dollar” is apparently so “mighty” that you need to threaten countries so they don’t abandon it… ‘
In gold I trust!
Read this 👇
Tariff will decimate the remaining innovative economic ecosystem, they will either decamp overseas or hunker behind a great tariff wall that render them incompetitive (in ROW).
“I can’t speak for [], but prototyping a complex device like his stove or our thermometer is practically impossible at any cost or, more important, turn around time that would allow you to run a viable business.
Technologies we use like precision ceramic molding, ceramic to stainless brazing, laser welding, and exotic pcba materials with extreme processing requirements shrink the universe of American companies that have the know-how and experience to a number near zero. And then when you call those companies, they quote turn around times of more than a month at costs that are absurd.
Effectively, our supply chain doesn’t want to get out of bed if you’re not price insensitive medical/aerospace. It is not an industry that acts like they’re in growth mode.
What’s unappreciated is that you need intense clusters of manufacturing that all compete with one another. Software works this way in the States, manufacturing doesn’t. It’s going to take a couple generations to rebuild the capability, and require massive tax incentives.”
https://x.com/ChefChrisYoung/status/1862975046907461835
Funny how many [not Chris] are shouting at the top of their lungs they want somebody to setup a business that can supply them price competitively and at a turnaround speed not worse than overseas suppliers but no one sense a business opportunity to do it themselves. No VC is interested in a business case that doesn’t make business sense! But this is the world we’re in, everyone sitting on their hands complaining, waiting for others to do the hard work on behalf of them.
just fyi
“At 860 billion, China currently holds the second-largest amount of US debt after Japan. The majority of that, $777 billion, is in US Treasuries, though its holdings have declined significantly since 2013, by nearly $500 billion from $1.27 trillion.”
interesting chart on the decrease percentage of China GDP was US treasury holdings from 2010 to 2024…(20% to 5%)
https://table.media/en/china/sinolytics-radar/why-china-continues-to-hold-on-to-us-government-bonds/
Here’s a better one for you:
In 2025, $7T of US federal debt will mature, and will have to be rolled over / re-financed at much higher rates. That’s about 3 times as much debt rollover as in 2024 or 2026.
In addition to this rollover, it’s expected that about $4T of new US federal debt will be issued…bringing us to a grand total of $11T in just one year.
Will there be an appetite among lenders for amounts of this magnitude — especially since Trump has openly talked about defaulting on debt and devaluing the dollar?
For context: contrary to popular belief, only about 25% of US debt is currently held by foreign lenders — the remaining 75% is held by US entities. Of the 25% in foreign hands, only a very small (and decreasing) fraction is held by foreign governments — the rest being held by foreign investment funds. We know that China, Japan and other countries are actively dumping US treasuries, so they won’t be buyers of this new debt. That thus leaves the question: who’ll be buying it?
We’re in for a VERY interesting year.
Good researching on the topic Does the new US Secretary of Treasury with just a bachelor degree from Yale in Political Science know this?
Safran expands plant in Mexico to assemble LEAP 1A engines for Airbus:
https://aviacionline.com/2024/12/safran-expands-queretaro-plant-with-720-million-investment-creating-128-jobs/