Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- How good is the C929? Part 2. April 24, 2025
- Boeing First Quarter Results Update: China is 10% of the backlog, with 500 in “Unidentified” April 24, 2025
- Boeing First Quarter Results: Tariffs, Return flights, $10.55bn asset sale April 23, 2025
- RTX Q1 2025 Earnings: GTF Talk Takes A Back Seat To Tariffs April 22, 2025
- Tariffs Tumult Takes Over GE Aerospace Q1 2025 Earnings Call April 22, 2025
Boeing CFO Brian West: OK on tariffs for now, backlogs and inventories help
By Karl Sinclair
Brian West, CFO of Boeing.
March 20, 2025, © Leeham News: Boeing (BA) Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Brian West, was optimistic about Boeing’s path for recovery and appeared unworried about any near-term impacts of tariffs imposed by President Trump on aluminum and steel during an appearance yesterday at the Bank of America Global Industrials Conference.
West was optimistic that in the short-term, Boeing would face little trouble in dealing with the turmoil caused by the tariff war started by President Trump.
“On the supply side, we don’t see material impact (from the tariffs)”, said West.
According to him, the aluminum that Boeing uses is nearly all domestically sourced and makes up 1% to 2% of the average cost of an aircraft.
As well, 80% of all parts and materials used at BCA and 90% at BDS, are from domestic suppliers.
West also pointed to the large buffer in inventory, purchased pre-tariffs, which mitigates any short-term pain the company may face.
“We think we’ve got that pretty well managed”, West summed up, but concerns still exist.
“We do worry about parts availability, due to the supply chain”, he said.
While Boeing may be protected in the near-term, many suppliers in the chain do not have the financial capability to stockpile inventory and could be sourcing raw materials from tariffed nations.
There was no mention of who would be on the hook, for any price increases, in that regard.
Backlogs and inventories also “protect” Boeing
A recurring theme throughout the interview by B of A’s aerospace analyst Ron Epstein was the large backlog of aircraft that Boeing has to deliver and the substantial amount of funds invested into inventory, which was protecting the company.
West covered all three divisions of the corporation: Boeing Commercial Aircraft (BCA), Boeing Defense, Space and Security (BDS) and Boeing Global Services (BGS).
However, the current hot-button topics facing Boeing, and the industry at-large, were front and center.
Namely, the on-again, off-again, on-again tariffs that Trump is threatening to impose on the world, and the destructive fire at SPS Technologies.
On the aircraft demand side of the equation, West mentioned the large order backlog and how it would be used to re-jig deliveries from airlines that were under reciprocal tariff threat, to those that were not.
In short, Boeing would bump US domestic customers to the front of the delivery line, in lieu of international customers, if airlines and lessors wanted to move around deliveries to avoid tariffs.
According to West it is a short-term solution, which becomes more difficult with a protracted tariff war.
Related Articles:
The other issue threatening the smooth operation of the aviation supply chain, is last months fire at SPS Technologies in Glenside (PA), which resulted in a 10% to 15% production capacity loss of aircraft fasteners, according to Epstein.
Hundreds of employees at SPS have been laid-off, amounting to half its workforce, which hampers any future recovery in the supply chain, as those experienced employees now seek employment elsewhere. In a separate appearance at another banking conference, John Plant, the CEO of supplier Howmet, said his company is ready to up production that would help fill some of the SPS shortfall.
West pivoted again to the supply chain buffer and said, “[T]he master schedule is ahead of the production rate,” which has enabled Boeing to build up sufficient reserves for the short-term.
For the long-term, West reiterated that Boeing was looking at options, when referencing both the tariff threat and fastener fire.
On a side note: In a revealing moment, Epstein detailed that he had visited the SPS plant in the past and looking back, was not surprised that it burned down as “everything was covered in cutting oil.”
Lessons learned in the industry, after it all burns down to the ground.
Company Overview
A few short years ago, when Boeing was posting record financial results, West is on record as saying that the company was committed to returning 100% of free-cash-flow to investors.
In the Bank of America interview, West said, “The success factors for Boeing this year was always going to be about safety, quality and stability.” This is quite a cultural shift.
As far as BCA goes, the target of reaching 2025 delivery rates of 38/mo on the 737 MAX program and 7/mo on the 787 program are still on track, he said.
The 787 shadow factory that is completing the necessary rework on inventoried Dreamliners is nearing an end. The work is done and dismantling the line is underway. This will free up employee resources which will be deployed to other projects, namely the certification efforts on the MAX 7 and MAX 10 variants, as well as the much-delayed 777X program.
West said that the company was pleased with the results of the Key Performance Indicators (KPI), with many of them in the “green” and the others trending in the proper direction. Some of the KPI’s are rework, supplier shortages, noticeable quality escapes, and employee training.
Over at BDS, the focus is on turning the struggling division profitable.
On the recent KC-46 delivery stoppage due to cracks found in the leading edge, West explained that the fix is a fairly simple matter, due to its location. The company foresees no impact in deliveries for the year.
Given the recent political drama the world is currently enduring, there has been much chatter about an increase in global defense spending. However, at the moment, there are no firm orders to announce for Boeing, in that regard.
As expected, not much was mentioned by West about BGS, except to say that it was expected to continue its profitable ways in the future.
A hint about the 1Q numbers
On the first quarter, West commented that company “revenues will be seasonably lighter…expected to be closer to the quarterly average of last year.” This would put 1Q2025 revenues in the $16bn to $17bn range.
There is also expected to be an unspecified, one-time expense of $150m in the quarter, with less “working capital drag,” according to West.
Spin-offs, Spirit acquisition and Certifications
There has been speculation about Boeing selling-off parts of the company to focus on core-competencies. West was specifically queried about Jeppesen and WISK. He reiterated that the list of potential moves was a short one, rather than a long one. The corporation was focused on pruning, as opposed to wholesale changes.
Specifically related to WISK, West said that Boeing was pleased with the technological advances the company received in return for a relatively small investment.
The Spirit AeroSystems acquisition is proceeding according to plan and Boeing is happy with the strides being made there. West specifically mentioned Spirit CEO Patrick Shanahan and noted that there were significant improvements in the quality of products Boeing is receiving from Spirit.
West also commented how the parent company is looking forward to welcoming Spirit back to the Boeing family and pledged to work together with the Wichita-based division.
Expectations are for the deal to close during the summer months.
On the certification front, West once again deferred control of the timeline to the FAA. He noted that the 777X program was in the second phase of flight-testing, with over 3,700 hours currently accrued on the type. Good progress is being made in all certification efforts, according to West, as Boeing looks to begin delivering promised aircraft.
However, LNA is told that operators of the 777-300ER and 777LRFs are extending leases by five or more years, into the 2030 decade, and preparing to order Airbus A350s and Boeing 787s due to uncertainties over delivery dates of the 777X.
Future Clean Sheet
West said that any new aircraft was “a ways off,” without defining what this means. West explained that CEO Kelly Ortberg knows that Boeing is commercial aircraft, but the current focus is on getting current designs certified and into service.
He boiled the near-term future down to returning the company to historical financial results (most likely 2018 levels) by increasing production at BCA, returning BDS to profitability and allowing BGS to continue as it is.
The half-trillion dollar backlog and buffered inventory levels are crucial in that regard.
Mr. West’s assertions about the price of metals used by Boeing seem to be at variance with this report:
“US manufacturers see higher metal prices as tariffs near”
“Steel prices in the U.S. have surged in recent days, adding to gains since Trump became president. Hot rolled coil prices in the Midwest have jumped 12% to $839 per short ton during the two weeks to Thursday and climbed 20% since Trump took office on January 20, according to data provider Fastmarkets.
“By contrast, the price of that type of steel has risen only 6% in northern Europe and was barely changed in eastern China since January 20.”
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/us-manufacturers-see-higher-metal-111205764.html
“Copper price nears record as market braces for tariffs”
https://www.mining.com/web/tariff-risk-unleashes-record-copper-shipments-bound-for-us-ports/
—
“Given the recent political drama the world is currently enduring, there has been much chatter about an increase in global defense spending. However, at the moment, there are no firm orders to announce for Boeing, in that regard.”
Don’t hold your breath, Mr. West.
Apart from some processing of previous orders — which might yet get cancelled — there won’t be many international orders for US defense firms (except from Israel). Interrupting supply to Ukraine sent a very bad signal as regards reliability. The concept of “NATO standardization and interoperability” — which traditionally favored US suppliers — has now flipped to emphasize sovereign supply control.
Accordingly, defense firms and naval shipyards in Europe are humming with activity, and are expanding operations at a record pace.
West talked about in the short run, BA is protected from Trump’s tariffs because in the last couple quarters, BA took in excess inventory (for 737 MAX).
With regard to metals supply, @Pedro posted this informative comment elsewhere:
—
FG fact-checks Boeing CFO’s word salad?
FG: West adds that Boeing purchases “nearly all” its aluminium and steel from US suppliers and that those metals account for only “1-2% of the average cost of an airplane”.
That may be true, but the aluminium supply chain is still heavily dependent on non-US suppliers.
That is because US firms primarily produce aluminium alloys (which are used in aerospace manufacturing) using “pure aluminium” sourced from companies outside the USA, including to a large degree those in Canada, says Kevin Michaels, managing director of consultancy AeroDynamic Advisory.
Sheila Kahyaoglu with financial firm Jefferies estimates that the aluminium and steel tariffs mean Boeing needs to charge 15% more for a 737 and 5% more for a 787 to maintain the same profit margins, according to a 12 March research report.
Note that CFO West talked about aluminum and steel purchased by BA directly. How about those purchased by BA’s contractors and subcontractors, like Spirit?
Surprise!
“However, LNA is told that operators of the 777-300ER and 777LRFs are extending leases by five or more years, into the 2030 decade, and preparing to order Airbus A350s and Boeing 787s due to uncertainties over delivery dates of the 777X.”
Please do tell us more, Mr. Hamiton 👀
Trump activities really ratchet up pressure to avoid the US trade domain.
COMAC will gain from this.
And, afaics, Comac is less pressurable/exposed than Airbus.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/air-india-talks-dozens-new-widebody-jets-airbus-boeing-sources-say-2025-03-20/
In the same breath, air india is looking to order more 777x and A350s,
QR also looking to order more 777xs and A350s.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/qatar-airways-talks-airbus-boeing-054856749.html
Cathay pacific is also looking at more 777xs, albeit they’re looking at everything
Why? because at this point, if you’re ordering a jet now its being delivered in 2030, so you might as well just order what best fits your strategy.
Unless of course you’re ordering the 330NEO, which can be delivered within a year because of its lack of sales.
So yes there may be airlines looking to 350s and 787s because of uncertainty of delivery schedules, but that is in turn cancelled out by the airlines who are doubling down on the 777x, the vast majority being existing customers.
The only airline which i think migh be inclined to go with the A350 is Riyadh Air, due to uncertainty on the 777x, but they themselves are also not happy with the poor performance of the xwb-97 in extreme heat conditions
If you need A340/777 replacements, you’ll ALWAYS invite both Airbus and Boeing.
Even if you have strong reservations against one of them.
To avoid the other one putting his feet on the table & lighting a sigar.
@abolone: We’ve actually written about this in past past, but we had an update this week reconfirming this.
…oh, to be a fly on the wall during such updates… 👀
@Abalone
These lease extensions may have as much to do with Boeing giving Emirates a higher delivery rate of new aircraft from EIS than any further delays in the aircraft. If customer #1 is threatening to leave, you do what you have to.
OR…
Seeing as Mr. West:
– Didn’t give a certification timeline;
– Seems to have forgotten about the thrust link debacle;
– Appears to think that the 777X ball is now in the FAA’s court;…
…airlines may sense more delays and smokescreens coming, and are preparing a Plan B accordingly.
My understanding is LH now will be the first customer to take delivery of the 777-9, as confirmed by BA.
I guess EK is once bitten, twice shy about BA’s “promises”.
Even CX has pushed back once again its 777-9 delivery, thanks BA 😊
Yes, I thought that [777-X deliveries] was a biggie, too.
Wonder how the -7 and -10 are coming along.
Richard Aboulafia also gave his views on the current situation.
https://richardaboulafia.com/march-2025-letter
We see many industry executives, stake holders, politicians being carefull with words, sitting on the fence.
I think there is fear for personal consequences, reactions in the US to oppose Trump. People get hate mail, bad press from the Trump movement and worse. Scary..
(Richard is still Richard fortunately 😀 )
Interesting to see in the commerical sphere
how fast the previously established “moral” framework is dropped.
Snow White is roadkill.
Wow…that certainly is an astounding piece by Mr. Aboulafia 👍👍👍
I think he’s out over his skis a bit. We’ll see.
“On the certification front, West once again deferred control of the timeline to the FAA. He noted that the 777X program was in the second phase of flight-testing, with over 3,700 hours currently accrued on the type.”
Curious.
Does Mr. West think that it’s the FAA’s task to design a new thrust link for him…?
It’s the continued 38 p/m talk that’s cracking me up.
Sure, sure.. we all know BA’s talk is *always* backed
up.. right?
Dreaming
I counted 17 MAX deliveries this morning for the month of March to date (on Planespotters). Several were apparently from the parking lot.
We’re still nowhere near 38 p/m.
I’m counting 4 A350’s delivered the entire year so far.
Are you equally impressed with those numbers? Considering they are planning to go to six a month this year.
Nowhere near those lofty numbers.
Airbus is also having supplier problems.
As I understand it, the 787 has seat supply issues.
Makes you wonder why they don’t just stick with the setup they have until the mfg proves it can build the interior it promised in numbers?
Well, AB delivered 57 A350s last year…which more-or-less corresponds to its standing target of 5 per month. In contrast, when was the last time BA managed to get anywhere near this much-vaunted figure of 38 MAXs p/m?
Also: did you count the number of near-finished A350s on the line, waiting for some final parts? There are 11 frames on the line for Emirates alone — and 4 of those have been near-finished for weeks — plus 2 dozen other frames. Now, go and look at the number of in-progress frames on the 737 MAX line. Notice anything?
We know that the AB frames are being help up by supply chain issues…but what’s the reason over at BA?
> The first few months are never like the last few months for Airbus or anybody else for that matter.
Two delivered in March with more to come, congratulations!
https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/A6EXC
Hehe another two
A350 (MSN 714 & MSN 716) delivered on March 21. How many more can be delivered in next ten days or so?? 🤔
Did our poster inadvertently wake up the sleeping giant?
@ Pedro
Meanwhile, over at BA I’m counting just one March 787 from the line (Mar 21, Qatar), and I also found one from the parking lot (Mar 21, China Southern, 3.5 years old)…
“.. the second phase of flight testing” 😂
When will the final phase of flight testing arrive?
BA is BA, full of empty words.
Yeah, what exactly is “the second phase of flight testing”?
Does it have a conventional definition, or is it just a BA fudge term?
And how many such “phases” will flight testing entail? 20? 50?
We get it .Only Airbus is effected by supply chain issues..
Lighten up .
Boeing is clearing out inventory, taking in orders, apparently that’s not go enough for you.
Vincent and I (above) were discussing line rates — not inventory, and not orders.
Real-time earnings are (nominally) generated by line deliveries — not by loss-making inventory reduction, and not by orders.
There’s really no obligation to participate in a line rate discussion if it’s inconvenient to your narrative 😉
Also: the thread into which you interjected your above comment was regarding 777X cert…not the MAX 🙈
Explain how “supply chain issues” are affecting 777X’s second phase of flight tests.
Tier ZERO.
Boeing had issues providing a testable 777X airframe ?
🙂
Not for nothing, but this is in Bjorn’s article, about the C919 (just for flight testing context):
“The flight test program took a considerable amount of time, with a total of 4,200 hours required, whereas a typical Western program would typically require 3,000 hours. The C919 got its Chinese Type Certificate on 29th September 2022, 14 years after the program launch in 2008.”
Not sure if the typical Western numbers differ between WB & NB, but there it is, given:
“He noted that the 777X program was in the second phase of flight-testing, with over 3,700 hours currently accrued on the type.”
Google AI:
“The Boeing 737 MAX 8 certification involved over 2,000 hours of flight testing”
You tried to compare the CAAC and COMAC, a company formed in like 2008 with the FAA and Boeing? Wow, wow.. I’m speechless.
Not that long ago, on the net, I had to remind a poster what happened to MHI and its MRJ/SpaceJet. MHI has been making aircraft for like a century or so?
PS Don’t forget the 777-9 is a derivative, not an all-new aircraft
I think not many would treat the forteen years COMAC & CAAC took as a good example to follow. [But hey the MAX 7 isn’t that far off] Well it must be desperate time now 😅
We’re getting close to the 14 year mark!
August 2011: Boeing announces the 737 MAX, a new engine variant of the 737, to compete with the Airbus A320neo
Whoosh!
(that was the sound of the point rushing by….)
I was comparing the following:
Typical Western flight cert process: 3,000 hrs
Flight testing process for nations with fledgling aviation program (which is fine and to be expected – you’re learning): 4,000 hrs
777X flight testing: 3,700 hrs.
Does the 777X flight testing program look more like that of an experienced Western nation….or that of a fledgling program, trying to find it’s way?
And mind you…that 3,700 hrs is only bound to go up. How many more hours are needed to get it into service?
@Frank P
My apologies.
> “The Mitsubishi SpaceJet (formerly MRJ) program accumulated over 3,900 flight test hours before being officially discontinued in February 2023.”
@ Frank
It’s all about a learning curve for a beginner, isn’t it?
That same article by Bjorn references the C919ER derivative, — which is already being delivered, after a much quicker certification process.
The 777X has a serious design shortcoming (thrust link) that needs to be addressed. Flying extra hours is not going to somehow produce the required re-design. So, what’s the plan?
Exactly.
The 777X program is looking like it is run not by experienced vets, who have been in the business decades and decades – but by rookies. 3,700 hours and counting.
I’ve always maintained that the C919 isn’t really going to threaten the current market share of AB and BA – it’s the next jet, that will cause them trouble.
When COMAC learns from their missteps, learns how to navigate the cert process, learns everything that the other two have taken decades to find out about.
Even more so if China can produce a domestic engine that rivals what the current engine OEM’s are making – but as we’ve seen with the problems with the LEAP and GTF; that process isn’t smooth, either.
Starliner is still a go.
https://aviationweek.com/space/launch-vehicles-propulsion/nasa-still-pursuing-boeing-starliner-certification
Not sure if I would call that a win.
But is Boeing?
My neighbor prunes his hedge (so many twists there) when it gets out of hand.
After pruning its got a cut a new Marine would be proud of (well maybe shocked for a New Marine but a dedicated Jar Head would love it.
So, there is pruning and there is pruning and loose phrases leave the door wide open. That is a good thing but, Boeing needs some serious pruning.
Can anyone enlighten me on what return 100% free cash flow to shareholders means? Is it as dumb as it sounds?
@TW
It is a measure of health of profits. There is a line of thought that profits are not real until they are realized in the form of cash. Also a measure of liquidity.
Put another way an aircraft delivery with a profit that is based off of program cost is not a 100% return based on cash unless that profit truly matches cash in the door less manufacturing cost.
It essentially means giving all the profit to the shareholders in stock buybacks and dividends. It also means zero spending on R&D, product development, investment in the future, etc. If sustained over time this is like a farmer eating his seed corn, a sure prescription to erosion of market share and the slow death of Boeing commercial.
But hey, if you’re an investor, Wall Street analyst, of stock Rick Boeing executive, who cares? To them the future is the next six months, anything beyond that is irrelevant. So, do whatever it takes to goose the stock now, and to heck with the future.
+1
Ok, that is what I thought. So lets repeat stupid, got it.
Time to give West the Musk treatment. Heave ho!~
WSJ: AIRBUS WINNING AIRCRAFT CHESS AGAINST RIVAL BOEING
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mikekersmarki_this-new-airbus-jet-is-bad-news-for-boeing-activity-7297853292259233792-EhHn
It’s published like a month ago.
===========
Trump Says India Will be Hit by Reciprocal Tariffs on April 2
Time for BA to prepare its “thoughts and prayers”.
============
Akasa Air, India’s newest airline, is working to assuage anxious pilots who have been left idle due to lack of adequate aircraft, Reuters reported on Thursday.
=============
West talked about how BA will be able to re-jig deliveries.
But, but, but… I believe aircraft are not vehicles you walk to a dealer and pick one, they are more custom-made. For say CSE, there is a substantial time lag from order to delivery.
How much room does BA have to re-jig its delivery on and off like Trump’s tariffs?
I didn’t realize it’s so bad at Akasa.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/aditya-kalra-3b48408_inside-akasa-airs-struggles-with-boeing-activity-7308374372879056897-HzCn
Troubles at Akasa Air: Boeing delays, pilots at home🚨 ✈️ “Boeing bloody …retarding our speed”, Akasa co-founder Aditya Ghosh said in a town hall, an audio recording reviewed by Reuters revealed. In a private February town hall with pilots, top executives did not shy away from candidly revealing the operational stress they face
✈️ Chief of acquisitions, Priya Mehra, said Akasa told Boeing to stop “big events and parties” and “focus on production.” Boeing was the “elephant in the room” which caused “sleepless nights”, she said.
✈️ Hundreds of Akasa pilots are sitting at home as Boeing deliveries are delayed. Of its 775 pilots hired for flying, 60%, or 465, “are able to log flying hours”, Akasa said. That means 310 pilots are currently grounded due to the lack of planes.
SPS Technologies
Surprised to learn SPS is part of Berkshire Hathaway-owned Precision Castparts Corp (PCC)
A fire at the SPS Technologies factory, a major supplier of fasteners for the aerospace industry, could potentially delay Boeing’s recovery plans and impact its supply chain, as the factory was a critical source of parts for Boeing’s 787 and 737 jets.
A major supplier of titanium fasteners used in the assembly of carbon-fiber jets like the Boeing 787.
Some fasteners produced at the factory are also highly specialized and not easily sourced by other manufacturers, analysts and industry executives said.
GE Aerospace and others tried to figure out who can replace the factory’s lost production and also identify who has spare parts.
“These are not commodity fasteners,” Michaels said, adding that there is “a lot of concern given the large number of sole-source fasteners and unique capabilities associated with this facility.”
👀
In November, the Journal reported that Ortberg said the company would not achieve positive cash flow until 737 MAX production reached 38 units per month.
Now you understand this is why, like previously the $10 billion FCF at the end of the rainbow, BA kept going back to!
@Pedro
Everyone is feeling this. Though SPS does make many truly unique fasteners, they make many more industry generic parts. Any nut plate, bushing, nut or rivet you can imagine. Hundreds (at least) of different part numbers. While most of these are not terribly complicated, there is still the setup and production of alternate suppliers.
There are other examples i can bring up but it is a constant global game of whack a mole. A coating supplier in Thailand with a fire, a company making a specialized rubber compound in china goes on lockdown for covid or a war in Israel knocks out a regular supplier. The whole ecosystem is very fragile right now. I could keep naming examples from the last few years.
What is funny is someone tours the facility and oil everywhere and nothing is done.
The carrier for FedEx (used to be Factory Mutual but they call themselves FM global now) inspected things once a year.
A facility like that would be in a joint insurance pool (much like the ship that took down the Baltimore Bridge).
FM in this case is an arm of all the insurance companies and they inspect and require tier insurees to maintain standards. From sprinkler heads to fire pumps that feed them (if you need them, usually ground floor does not).
So a disaster looking to happen and no one does anything. So it goes and you gets what you pay attention to.
Buyers have a vested interest, they should insist on standards and take business someplace else if not (you don’t have to do it in one blow, you just gradually transition it over even if you have to fund a new operation yourself). There is no free lunch.
But then if you are a mechanic, you are always looking for ways to keep something working right vs letting it break down.
FM figured out a long time ago its better to prevent losses than to pay endless huge bills for losses that can be prevented.
Sounds like that place was so bad they should have had a foam system!
Buyers like Boeing would insist for the lowest bidder.
@Pedro
SPS sells to everyone. It’s not a defense but it is very hard to go all the way down three and four layers of separation. Tier 1 suppliers will not be this bad. It is a supplier making not even a specific part but a material or coating in the finished product that is where the worst problems lurk. Companies nobody has ever heard of.
“Sounds like that place was so bad they should have had a foam system!”
With “fine” machinery you can burn the place down or foam it.
Damage may well be comparable. 🙂
( didn’t LH get their restoration object in a US hangar foamed? )
Well in our case the goal was to save the Hangar.
As the aircraft would be a loss regardless. I know Memphis fought a fire in one of their hangars. Someone was smart enough to bypass the auto fill and go full manual (vastly high GPM).
Their fire did not go out the way the engineers scheduled it to!
Maybe depends on type of foam as well. USAF uses the expanding from and park F-22 and F-35 in those type of protected hangars.
Still nice to have a building to come back to.
The “New Normal”?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GmgFM85aEAM6ykf?format=png&name=small
Good laugh on the C919 and its 2200 mile range. ER has 3000, yee hah. E2-195 had that out of the box (though amended in clarification)
The ER version could not fly trans US due to reserves needed.
Hehe only one who has no understanding in aircraft would say so
You never read COMAC’s ACAP I guess. I wonder if their stated range has taken into account of reserve fuel requirements.
👇😏
https://epsilonaviation.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/mom_payloadrange.jpg?w=890
To our prolific poster, time to re-connect with the reality.
FYI
Delta A320 range 2,167 miles
LH A320 range 3,200 km
+1
heh.
“The ER version could not fly trans US due to reserves needed.”
The MAX-7 / MAX-10 could not fly trans US due to certification needed 😅
The 777X could not fly trans US due to reliable engine mount needed…as well as certification needed 🙈
Let’s see what range variants the C919 has in 5 years 👀
I await with baited breath. More like what is the production level in 5 years.
Can’t even build a basic model without mods, oh, we need more range, well why did you approved 2200?
Lets see, more fuel, less efficiency, check
Would this happen to other major airports? 😱
FG: IATA chief suggests Heathrow closure poses ‘serious questions
“The director general of global airline association IATA, Willie Walsh, has suggested that the closure of Heathrow airport on 21 March amid a power outage poses “serious questions” about the facility’s contingency planning.
Heathrow – one of the world’s busiest hubs – announced at around 02:30 local time on 21 March that it would be closed until 23:59, wiping out a full day of flying, after it suffered a “significant” power outage following a major electrical substation fire. It then cautioned that it expected disruption to last for days, even once power is restored.”
Airbus First Ever A380 Returns to Skies After 3 Years of Grounding
Airbus has its own “stage-two” flight testing?
https://www.flightglobal.com/air-transport/a380-testbed-starts-series-of-flights-aimed-at-in-service-fleet-improvement/162251.article
Surest sign yet that the US admin isn’t serious about NGAD:
“Trump awards Boeing much-needed win with fighter jet contract”
Nice ploy: give the world the impression that the project is going ahead…BUT award it to BA, so as to ensure that it will never actually materialize 🙈
Further:
“”Our allies are calling constantly,” Trump added, saying foreign sales could be an option. “They want to buy them also.””
Which allies are those, Mr. Trump?
Are there any left, besides Israel?
Spoiler alert: Europe and Canada certainly won’t be buying a US NGAD.
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-awards-boeing-much-needed-151102416.html
Surprise surprise! No wonder the stonk has been going up last couple of days.
Whether BA is able to make a buck remains to be seen.
I wonder how long it takes before the first public viewing. 😉
@Pedro
Not the best image…but here it is
https://aviationweek.com/defense/aircraft-propulsion/boeing-wins-us-air-forces-ngad-f-47-fighter-contract
I am going to take a more optimistic view on this one. This is a clean sheet aircraft that Boeing is not warming over. It is not at the purview of the FAA. This is a long-term multi-generational platform that Boeing needs to stay relevant in the sector.
We all have our doubts about Boeing, but at least this is a fresh start. And until Boeing commercial is ready to launch a commercial aircraft, this is nice development work that the company can use to build up its workforce.
Done right, this is an incredible opportunity.
Reality check:
BA has suffered a well-documented brain drain — it may no longer have the resources/acumen to produce a viable clean-sheet product.
Thx @Casey
I mean a prototype or the first one that flies in public*.
BTW
“Shown is a graphical artist rendering of the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) Platform. The rendering highlights the Air Force’s sixth generation fighter, the F-47. The NGAD Platform will bring lethal, next-generation technologies to ensure air superiority for the Joint Force in any conflict. (U.S. Air Force graphic)”
Development timeline:
Breaking Defence
“Air Force budget documents say the service plans to invest billions of dollars between fiscal years 2025 and 2029 to develop the NGAD fighter, with more funds planned beyond to finish development and proceed with production.”
=========
“Okay, I checked my encylopedias on my bookshelf, and Boeing’s NGAD win is the first clean-sheet jet fighter awarded in its entire history.”
https://bsky.app/profile/jonostrower.com/post/3lkvqgnqwac2m
Uncle $ugar to the rescue, as usual.
@Vincent
Reading the tea leaves there is more to come. NGAS is not going to happen…every last KC-135 is getting replaced by a KC46A. B21 ops means that they mean even boost the fleet size.
Two other big awards…F18 replacement…and whoever makes the loyal wingmen. Those will likely get spread around.
Does it look like NG will be the one to win the F/A-XX contract?
And LM will be a major contractor of both fighter jets?
@Vincent
Interesting you ask…LM previously was dropped from the Navy NG…leaving just Northrop and Boeing.
I can see it go either way really. Someone can probably make an argument that there is enough commonality that there is something to be gained by Boeing doing both. Northrop though might warrant a reward though for what is otherwise one of the more successful development programs in the B21. I would be surprised if Lockheed is NOT involved on some level. Boeing is going to need all the help it gets to bring this to market.
The other slice of this equation is the NGAP…GE vs PW. For no other reason than my previously stated argument of spreading work around, I will be surprised if GE does not get the nod on these aircraft. PW already has a rather dominant position in the market for new military engines with F135 and PW9000 on the F35 and B21 and PW4000 on the tanker.
AP:
‘With evolving drone and space warfare likely to be the center of any fight with China, Dan Grazier, a military procurement analyst, questions whether “another exquisite manned fighter jet really is the right platform going forward.” Grazier, director of the national security reform program at the Stimson Center, said *$20 billion is “just seed money. The total costs coming down the road will be hundreds of billions of dollars*.”
I think Mr. Grazier is precisely correct. Another ma$$ive, useless boondoggle, coming up.. you thought the F-35 was bad?
heh..
And don’t forget:
(1) Stealth is no longer relevant. Stealth aircraft can be detected and targeted by long-wavelength radar, passive radar, hybrid radar, etc.
(2) No manned aircraft can match the speed of a hypersonic missile.
A lot of people are buying F-35 because stealth is relevant.
Having a long wave radar say something is around somewhere, does no good, you can spoof that and it can’t say what or where and you can’t target what or where.
Sure you lob a missile, and then when it goes internal seeking and there is nothing there? Ooops.
No manned aircraft can avoid a SAM or an Air to Air but there it is, they do it all the time.
“A lot of people are buying F-35 because stealth is relevant.”
No — a lot of people *were* buying stealth, because *they thought* that stealth was relevant.
Then the Russian S-400 came along…and the fact that Iranian targeting radar locked onto a wave of Israeli F35s over Iraq….and the unveiling of the Chinese YLC-2E S-band radar.
The genie is out of the bottle.
This is what happens when hubris blinds one––openly mocking customers.
“Calls are mounting in Canada and Europe to shun the LockheedMartin #F35 fighter and other U.S. defense exports amid a backlash against controversial foreign policy changes in Washington”
https://x.com/AviationWeek/status/1903147857453977892
@ Pedro
One more for your list:
“Germany beginning to re-consider its F-35 fighter jet order”
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/3/10/2309152/-Germany-beginning-to-re-consider-its-F-35-fighter-jet-order
FG
> “I don’t want to see a German politician having to act like a twit in the Oval Office in order to deploy his purchased American fighter jets in a crisis,” says Thomas Pretzl, chairman of the general works council at Airbus Defence & Space.
Speaking during a meeting at the company’s Manching production site near Munich, Pretzl urged Berlin to axe its 35-unit order for the F-35, and to step back from other future procurements of US equipment.
“I dont know if there is a kill switch in the F35’s or not. We obviously can not take your word for it.
As one of the decision makers behind Denmark’s purchase of F35’s, I regret it.
The USA can certainly disable the planes by simple stopping the supply of spare parts. They want to strengthen Russia and weaken Europa and are showing that they are willing to do tremendous damage to peaceful and loyal allies like Canada just because they insist on existing as a country.
I can easily imagine a situation where the USA will demand Greenland from Denmark and will threaten to deactivate our weapons and let Russia attack us when we refuse (which we will even in that situation).
Therefore, buying American weapons is a security risk that we can not run. We will make enormous investments in air defence, fighter jets, artillery and other weapons in the coming years, and we must avoid American weapons if at all possible.
I encourage our allies and friends to do the same.”
https://x.com/RasmusJarlov/status/1902389277423509877
“A lot of people are buying F-35 because stealth is relevant.”
The F35 is a commercial industrial project.
workshare offsets are relevant.
Arm twisting was involved too.
( Germany got told that qualifying the Eurofighter for the nuclear sharing role (replacing Tornado ) would take “lazy eight” time.
Mix in judicious amounts of hype ( stealth! network! seonsor integration!! ) and the hard work of US 5th column “aides” in Europe.
The US having the means to disable foreign owned F35 and associated value loss of the assets is making the rounds here.
Germany is looking to replace the US nuclear share with french assets. France is willing.
Interesting to watch Trump take down a long time woven network of means to lead the Euros by the nose.
Caveat: USAID is taken down and a lot of the visible domination stuff too. But the US snooping infrastructure stays untouched.
and what do we make of this pretty flower:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025
Kind of curious. Hungary leader loves Putin, still part of EU and NATO with major arm bending. Don’t get me wrong, I share Scotts feelings about Trump. But, historicaly……
So, say France goes far right. As I understand it, that leader is a Trump like admirer of Putin.
So where does that put French nuke protection? Or NATO?
So the only real answer is do it all yourself.
Nothing Russia did got Europe riled up like invading Ukraine (twice). Now is riled up even more.
But shiftiness alliance were a European mainstay. France and the UK as modern allies much newer. Everyone has been against everyone else at one time or the other.
But lesson is also keep a strong defense, you never know.
“Nothing Russia did got Europe riled up like invading Ukraine (twice). ”
This is an elite political thing.
The Anti Russia Anti Putin mood that has been media injected. At least government possitions in Germany have been driven by press pressure.
With the discontinuation of influencing moneys from the USAID tree this may reverse in a rather short time frame ( good thing TM )
* USAID loss of moneys.
I see this in another more political forum:
Moderation there was extremely heavy handed towards anything the questioned the “official” narrative : West an innocent baby, Putin devil incarnate, Ukraine the defending knight of democracy. ( all Balloney! )
in very recent weeks this type of moderation there has folded. You can again touch on the real mechanics of the conflict.
@ Transworld
Why waste time on imaginative “what ifs” when we have a real-world issue right now?
Here’s a choice news item from this morning:
“Trump envoy dismisses Starmer plan for Ukraine”
“In an interview with pro-Trump journalist Tucker Carlson, Witkoff praised Vladimir Putin, saying he “liked” the Russian president.
“”I don’t regard Putin as a bad guy,” he said. “He’s super smart.””
“Witkoff, who met Putin ten days ago, said the Russian president had been “gracious” and “straight up” with him. Putin told him, he added, that he had prayed for Trump after an assassination attempt against him last year. He also said Putin had commissioned a portrait of the US president as a gift and Trump was “clearly touched by it”.
“During the interview, Witkoff repeated various Russian arguments, including that Ukraine was “a false country” and asked when the world would recognise occupied Ukrainian territory as Russian.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62zm4eqvp7o
—
The rest of the commenters here are talking about the F-35 and general arms purchases from the US, including from BA. Purely political ramblings have nothing to do with that.
Scott has expressed his opinion of Trump and it matches mine.
I always have done my duty as a citizen. I can do nothing about Trump (at least currently).
“Comac ramps up challenge to Boeing and Airbus with plans to boost C919 production capacity”
“Leading Chinese aircraft manufacturer aims to be able to produce 200 narrowbody jets a year by 2029, conference told”
“China’s leading aircraft manufacturer plans a further 50 per cent boost to production capacity for the C919 – the country’s first home-grown narrowbody jet – this year as it ramps up the challenge to the Boeing-Airbus duopoly in the domestic market, according to information shared with suppliers at a conference in Xian this week.
“Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (Comac) said it will increase production capacity to 75 planes – up from the 50 it announced in January – according to a WeChat account focused on the company’s supply chain that shared updates delivered at Thursday’s conference.”
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3303361/comac-ramps-challenge-boeing-and-airbus-plans-boost-c919-production-capacity
—
I think we can assume from this article that certification of the Chinese CJ-1000A turbofan is imminent…or, perhaps, already in the bag. On that note:
“He says the CJ1000A engine has a thrust of 14.5 tons, exceeding that of LEAP-1C, and will be ready for use in the C919 in 2025.”
https://asiatimes.com/2025/01/chinas-homemade-c919-jet-takes-to-global-skies/#
Higher thrust means we’ll probably soon be seeing a stretched C919, to compete with the A321.
Oh there’s a flood of posts coming…
Let me remind everyone BA had spent like a year or more talking their 737 production rate at more than 30 a mth.
Regarding China’s might when it comes to ramping up industrial output:
“THE ELECTRIC CITY Vid shows vast Chinese EV mega factory bigger than a CITY with its own football ground pumping out a MILLION cars a year”
“The site is set to dwarf rival Tesla’s Gigafactory in Nevada that covers 4.5 square miles.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/33926341/drone-vid-giant-chinese-ev-factory/
—
There’s that new theme again: sovereign supply control of key products.
As reported in January:
“Aviation consultancy Cirium said it expects another 27 C919 jets to be delivered this year.”
One wonders if they’ll all have LEAP-1Cs, or will some have CJ-1000As? Maybe even PD-14s…who knows?
That is a good laugh
Another nice order, 8 x 777F.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fedex-orders-boeing-777-atr-180746874.html
Looks like Korean will finalize their MOU for 40 Boeing wide-bodies as well.
https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/korean-air-sets-bold-new-path-with-over-thirty-billion-dollars-deal-for-boeing-jets-and-ge-engines-to-revolutionize-global-operations-and-expand-long-haul-reach/
The purchase decision is due to “the availability of Boeing jets at attractive prices”.
“FedEx hasn’t ordered any widebody aircraft in several years and Boeing was offering them at a good price because they are the last ones to be built before Boeing closes the 777 production line.”
🙄
Closing fire sale by another name, everything *must go*!
Coincidence??
FedEx $FDX stock getting dumped… down more than $15.
Or because they can get a proven freighter with little wait, instead of waiting years for a new type, more than likely to be delayed again.
Already into 2027 at a minimum before the lauded A350F makes it’s debut.
When will FedEx or UPS order a new type? I’ll wait.
But then you are not FedEx are you?
@Pedro
777F is closing for the same reason as the B767 closing…emission rules.
Buy now or not at all. Would imagine Boeing is looking to set their final MRP for the production line and telling FedEx or UPS to put in their final orders now or wait until whatever is next.
My quotes came from journalist’s report.
Source:
Fteightwave
FedEx CFO when asked to explain the decision to buy the 777 freighters talked about the good deal he got from Boeing to buy the last few 747-8 when he was in charge of Atlas.
Boeing warns about unclaimed 747-8 production slots
https://www.flightglobal.com/boeing-warns-about-unclaimed-747-8-production-slots/108758.article
Multiple angles. Having worked at FedEx I got a lot of insight into the company.
First, the MD-11s were perfect for what they wanted, but they do have 3 engine. A 777F loaded up the same as an MD-11F make Anchorae from Chinda just fine, if you want a lot further, then they have to drop payload for fuel. They had one Expedited plane that did that, SFO or LA. Saved 8 hours, premium service. No idea if they are still running that route.
As their structure (Anchorage) is setup for MD-11, the 777 land in Anchorage. Some sort freight and some are gas and go. Bennie is they can sort for East Coast, West Coast and MidWest/Memphis and do custom clearance. Saves them a bunch of money.
So long term, the 777F replaces the MD-11F and they have retired some anyway. They tend to store them where they can bring them back if needed and have a few times (COVID era).
They just paid to convert all those 757s and now they have parked 20? Phew. Really late to the realization the 727 was no longer viable. UPS has built to spec 757F. I suspect FedEx will hang onto them, otherwise its fight for 737NG for conversion and it does not carry as much as a 757 does.
Far better economics and a smart move would have been to order NG freighters new.
Regardless, no more 777F? Well you can convert old 777s and boy does that help the emissions.
My experience was FedEx tended to penny wise and dollar foolish. They jerked from one extreme to the other. No money to spend, oh, our facilities are again out, open up the floodgates. Oh, no more USPS contract, shut the gates, don’t you dare spend a dime to save millions.
They built a storage bay for A380 parts, which had be kept under 80 degrees or some such. 60 tons of AC unit. Oh, guys, its R22, you should get a green gas unit. Nope, we don’t care if R22 is going away or more far more expensive. Sigh.
For someone that was supposed to be aircraft oriented, amazing.
As I predicted a month ago Boeing gets the USAF F-47 development contract as the USAF folded on terms. The new Boeing CEO refused to do a military contract that had the chance of losing money. AW calls it a ‘cost plus’ contract for up to $20 bill
And NO , there is no flying demonstrator. That is just an advanced simulator, as the debacle that was the F35 development lessons have been learnt .
Put the mission software and systems first before the airframe hardware. Also the engine hasnt been chosen.
“Put the mission software and systems first…”
Well, then, considering BA’s stellar track record regarding software and systems, this promises to be another monumental Quasimodo…🙈
And the F-35 is a poster chi9ld for what? LOL.
Oh yea, software problems, systems that don’t work, huge costs per hour of flight, no, nothing to see here folks, keep moving on.
If what you said is USAF & BA’s plan, then when will the first flight of a prototype take place? When will the fighter jet be operational?
@Pedro
A version of this aircraft almost assuredly has flown already. There were thought to be three different bid aircraft flown confidentially. This was not a publicly staged competition. Digital design reviews have been introduced into these programs to de-risk the program before they are even launched. This program is further along than a lot of people realize. From what I have read…”early 30s” for EIS.
Also, as I mentioned earlier it is Boeing vs Northrop for the Navy aircraft…LM is out.
Those that flew for the last five years are aircraft of this (early) stage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-32#/media/File:USAF_X32B_250.jpg
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Have_Blue#/media/File:DARPA_USAirForce_HaveBlue.png
We can look back in a couple of years (or more) to see whether those that flew are early demonstrators or not.
@Casey
Apparently leaks have started to get out.
“F-47 Was Born Out Of Secret X-Planes Built By Both Boeing And Lockheed
Each firm built a demonstrator jet, one flying in 2019 and the other in 2022, that logged hundreds of hours… ”
https://x.com/Aviation_Intel/status/1903691531007222109
X32 flew on 8 Sept 2000
There were NO X planes flying for the F-47 program – except as digital designs on computer.
There is no 2 seat version and the people who claimed to have ‘flown in one’ were only talking about a flight and mission simulator. No way anybody but the most highly trained and skilled test pilots would fly any prototypes,- which dont exist.
The Myths endure because is hard to prove a negative, yet the previous programs for F22 and F35 types revealed their prototypes by this stage .
Even a hint of an airframe in blurred AW photos. Nope nothing
Even the UK, Italy, Japan advanced fighter program has large prototypes – as *show room models*! Ha.
@Casey:
It might be of interest that LM did the same thing with the F-35, they flew their version. Other than appearance, it was nothing like the F-35 that came to be. It sure looked good (and yes Boeing submission was ugly, looks like they learned their lesson, no ugly airplane allowed!)
Something or things flew for NGAD but how representative and realistic? USAF blows major amounts of smoke. Even as the Army Air Corp they lied (no escorts for B-17 when in fact P-47 with drop tanks could as could P-38.
The P-47 at the end of the war far surpassed the P-51, and in Korea what did the USAF fly? P-51, for ground support. P-47, far better range, great gun setup, tough as nails and a bullet proof (almost) engine. Not pretty like a P-51, so they dumped the best fighter they had that was equally good at CAS.
And don’t forget the Musk factor, drones are the only way to go despite the fact that none has ever done what a fighter does (a lot like his self driving cars that don’t work)
The sixth-generation fighter jet — which Trump named the F-47, a nod to him being the 47th U.S. president — will be “the most advanced, most capable, most lethal aircraft ever built,” according to Trump.
“At my direction, the United States Air Force is moving forward with the world’s first sixth-generation fighter jet,” the president said. “Nothing in the world comes even close to it.”
“China’s 6th-gen stealth fighter sighted again as Trump ‘set to announce’ jet contract”
“China’s massive J-36 purportedly filmed flying solo as Reuters says Trump about to announce US plans for US$20 billion jet to replace F-22”
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3303292/further-sighting-chinas-sixth-gen-stealth-fighter-suggests-smooth-progress-analyst
So, the Chinese have one already flying around.
Donnie just doesn’t fact check, does he?
Here’s another link for him:
https://aviationa2z.com/index.php/2025/03/21/new-glimpse-of-chinas-6th-gen-military-aircraft/
Donnie is the ?first? POTUS fully disassociated from reality.
The culmination of a range of influences that overlayed reality with an increasing amount of synthetic stuff. ( Reagan, Bush41/3, … admins.)
This is why there’s so much smoke!
> Trump said he and Pentagon officials are confident the aircraft “massively overpowers the capabilities of any other nation” and that it was equipped with state of the art stealth technology.
“It’s virtually *unseeable* and unprecedented power.”
Worse than Boeing building it is the Orange ones bragging on everything but something that is not even a reality.
Boeing is the logical strategic choice. NG is doing the B-21 and LM has its highly successful F-35.
I don’t see Boeing doing any worse than LM! They are still building fighters even if they are 4th Gen, very capable 4th Gen.
Some of China’s stuff is sort of stealth, SU-57 is sort of that but it keep changing as well.
So Boeing defense gets a shot in the arm. Reality is defense is not about efficiency but capability and keeping multiples in the game.
Great stores on how corrupt the RN supply systgem was back in the age of sail but they still clunked along.
The Ford Carrier was a disaster, some of the stupidest things I have ever heard of (Elevators that did not have a patch to their destination). In the end they fixed it.
Some like the LCS can’t be fixed, their manpower levels are so high you might as well have an F-100 Frigate! Lot more bang vs low bang for the manning of LCS.
Add in, the F-47 (they should not reuse common fighter ID) works, its going to have a lot more range and Boeing keeps making KCC-46A (or B) and get to numbers it might start paying back.
The T-7A could start on some returns and the F-15EX looks to be going well.
Looks like “stealth” is being abandoned for the sake of manoeuvrability: the new NGAD appears to have canards — like all the European 4.5 gen fighters and the Chinese J-20:
““If the Air Force is willing to show canards this early, it might signal they’re prioritizing dogfighting or complex maneuvers in environments where stealth alone won’t guarantee superiority,” he said.
“Pryce pointed to advancements in enemy radar technology, particularly low-frequency systems capable of detecting stealth aircraft at greater distances, as a possible driver for this approach.”
https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2025/03/21/f-47s-mystery-wings-stealth-takes-a-backseat-to-speed/
This confirms what was discussed above — so-called “stealth” is no longer relevant, thanks to new radar developments. So, with that in mind, why would anyone want to buy an F35 any more…?
I’ve not seen the trade-offs or even proposed concepts of NG, LM and Boeing. It seems a strategic good choice, Boeing wins this one. LM getting this one too would have let to a factual monopoly in the US.
I assume in Europe the 6th Gen projects will be pulled forward too. Probably a bigger and smaller platform sharing technology for some commonality. And a few partnerships from a few western countries outside Europe like Australia, Canada.
The best Eurofighter (Rafale) seems sold out for years to come.
“France could open a new Rafale fighter jet assembly line in India to fulfill large-scale contracts.”
https://armyrecognition.com/news/aerospace-news/2025/france-could-open-a-new-rafale-fighter-jet-assembly-line-in-india-to-fulfill-large-scale-contracts
There are also plans to increase the production rate of Typhoons and Gripens.
Nothing against Rafale, but I don’t see why it suddenly took off and the Eurofighter is third (Grippen E looks to be a viable 2)
Rafale does not seem to have anything really better. Zero stealth. True of the EF and Grippen E (F-15EX, F-16/FA/18).
Long range missile only get you so much, long range misled with stealth, now that is intriguer.
Grippen has a US derived engine, EF and Rafale do not.
Brazil is the only one making Grippen E in any numbers. Sweden is going pretty slow.
The Rafale is currently the only EU model with zero US content — that’s why it’s selling so well in the Middle East.
The Typhoon has a small number of US systems — remnants of the era of globalization. You can be sure that engineers are seeking to purge the design of those systems as quickly as possible. It can be done — for example, MBDA recently purged the Exocet missile of US systems.
The Gripen’s engine is — as you point out — a GE derivative. However, there’s a European replacement waiting in the wings if Saab wants to take that step — and it probably will.
In addition to the Rafale, France is pushing the SAMP/T as an alternative to the Patriot MDS — and it also has zero US content.
Dang, that is a good summation, well done!
Still nothing beats not being seen sans short ranges (radar sense) and how good any platform is at what the F-35 does.
Long range missiles can change things but only if you can get them into a no escape zone. Everyone is working on that long range arena. Probably the best one for a lob is the Aim-174B because of its size and what you can put in the nose.
Still any European efforts at stealth are years off and they depend on allies, that may or may not be dependable.
Germany was deep into Russian pockets before the 2nd Ukrainian invasion. Co-linked economies have proven to be zero deterrence.
It is always hard to find objective radar cross sectors of modern fighters, because most overviews are victim of Our’sBestYour’sWorse patriotic research. Look for e.g. F15EX RCS..
That said F35 has most likely the the best RCS of modern fighters. Compared to e.g. Rafale it however pays a price. Slower, less range, no spare engine, US content “kill button”.
Trump talking aggressively on Canada, Greenland (Denmark) has long term consequences for US Aerospace / Defense industries.
Hopefully the Trump government understands this isn’t pre-2025 FoxNews cocktail conversations. People do have memory.
@TW
I believe the current radar in the F-35 is the product of the early 2000s, not up to par in today’s world. LM has difficulty to fully roll out TR-3. The best hope for you is nothing happens in the near future, otherwise we may find out who has been wearing no clothes, again!
PS Upgrade the radar means you’re paying twice (both times at inflated price to the industrial-military complex), a nice rip-off. LM and its contractors invented a money tree that gives out $$$$ non-stop. They just have to make a wish and say, oh achkually your jet is now outdated, but we’ve a fix…
LM stock reached an ATH last year, grew 9.5 times since 2009.
With regards to performance comparisons between the F35 and the Euro-canard rivals, excluding the obvious cross section radar reduction of the F35 design, the available literature nowhere states that the F35 is superior in
1. Speed or agility (clearly not)
2. Network centricity – in fact the Swedes are probably more advanced in this sphere than anyone else. Note that they started working in this area way back with the 4 ship limited day sharing formation in the 1960s with the Draken fighter. They improved it with the Viggen and have now really perfected with the modular software and hardware architecture of the Gripen (especially the latest E/F iteration).
3. All the Europeans having AESA radars like the F35. Performance varies based on size of radar that can be accommodated in the nose. Eurofighter for example has 3 sizes of the same radar available to its users, biggest and most powerful being the Mk2 variant the RAF is installing in its fighter.
4. Situation awareness – the European fighters all have comparable sensors as the F35 with the additional advantage of inbuilt long range passive optical and heat signature detectors. This is a major way of defeating the vaunted “stealth” advantage of the F35 in the electro magnetic spectrum. It is being reported in some articles that these optical and thermal sensors have ranges of over 100 km and can be used to queue long range missiles like the meteor. If true, this somewhat negates the much trumpeted “see first, shot first” mantra attached to the F35, because the F35 currently does not carry a missile that out ranges the meteor.
5. The more modular architecture of the European offerings, especially the Gripen makes it easier and quicker to upgrade systems (hardware and software). Note the F35 slow upgrade process which is delaying the installation of additional weapon systems, especially non-American systems.
In my opinion a large part of the F35 chatter is “hype”, good marketing from LM and the USAF. The USN has not been too keen on the C variant for its carriers.
Europe is going to be fine if they chose to go it alone without the USA. There really is no technology that the USA has developed or is developing that Europe does not have an analog or cannot replicate, it is simply a matter of if the Europeans are willing to put out the resources, collectively or individually, to produce the technology.
Its does make you wonder why not buy Grippen E when the F-35 is so easily matched?
By a lot of countries with all sorts of procurement.
Maybe they know what they are doing?
Rafale: Egypt and India?
@TW
The limitations of the Gripen due to size ( less load carried and less internal fuel storage thus range limitations) are obvious thus making it more of “homeland” defense fighter. The Eurofighter and Rafale are bigger thus have a longer range and carry a bigger load thus making them more suitable “attack” fighters. Eurofighter is definitely the more agile fighter of the 4 fighters we are discussing and therefore best air defense fighter, and Rafale is probably the best all-rounder in terms of range, bomb load and air defense (good at everything if not necessarily exceptional at any).
F35 is being purchased by USA allies primarily because of it ability to use the vast stock of USA equipment available, and also purchasing this maintenance heavy aircraft, though not ideal, kept the USA “sweet”, at least until this year when Trump took office and decided to make enemies of ALL USA allies and friends of the past 80 years.
Freightwave:
Trans-Pacific container rates below lowest 2024 levels: Freightos
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/trans-pacific-container-rates-below-lowest-2024-levels-freightos
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/ocean-container-rates-slide-as-us-tariffs-shadow-logistics-planning
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/steel-aluminum-tariffs-may-hurt-auto-industry-supply-chain-risk-expert-says
https://aviationweek.com/space/space-exploration/china-invites-foreign-participation-mars-sample-return-mission
Here’s a better space-related story for you:
“China is practicing ‘dogfighting’ with satellites as it ramps up space capabilities: US Space Force”
“The Space Force observed “five different objects in space maneuvering in and out and around each other in synchronicity and in control,” its vice chief of space operations Gen. Michael A. Guetlein said Tuesday at a defense conference.
““That’s what we call dogfighting in space. They are practicing tactics, techniques, and procedures to do on-orbit space operations from one satellite to another,” Guetlein said, using a term that typically refers to close-range aerial combat between fighter jets.”
“Such capabilities could enable a country to destroy or disable satellites, potentially allowing them to interrupt a rival military’s communications or operations like launching and detecting missiles. Such interference could also wreak havoc on global navigation systems used for everything from banking and cargo shipping to ambulance dispatch.
“The US has been closely watching China’s rapid rise as a space power in recent decades, not only through its ambitious lunar and deep-space exploration programs, but also what analysts describe as its deepening counterspace capabilities.”
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/21/china/china-space-force-dogfighting-satellites-intl-hnk/index.html
It is a similar exchange to the Chinese A-Sat operation some years ago:
US: Space is ours, we control access
CN: Think again.
completely unsurprising that China saveguards its access to space.
Some good pics for China’s J36
https://theaviationist.com/2025/03/17/j-36-second-test-flight/
Whoops tell me it’s created by AI!
“Trump: We had a big day. We gave out the world’s greatest fighter jet by far, they say. I think in terms of every criteria known to man, it is the best. That does not mean in five years it will be good. It will be totally obsolete in five years, I guess but that is the way it works.”
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1903230548149252605
Well, if 5 years is enough for obsolescence, then the F-47 is already obsolete, seeing as it’s based on a demonstrator that was already flying in 2019 (per your link above).
And the F-35 is then more than obsolete — though we already knew that, of course.
LOL
All fighters are obsolete they day they are conceived. Materials change, better engines (though those can be retrofit aka the F-35 upgrade).
You are stuck with the form. But everyone is on the same foot in that, what the US has done is introduce vastly lower RCS.
That is different and how good anyone else copying it is a huge question. Like engines, you have to develop the processes yourself, the form just gives an idea.
And you have EW systems, towed decoy and the ASEA radars can do an electronic attack. Its really how it does as a package that counts as well as how it works within other support systems.
And brand new is not better, its the basis of design and where you stand in the spectrum. There will be complete flops. A12 being an example.
It will be an interesting conversation the day China starts selling and delivering J36 to other countries
Well, china’s already selling its J35 to other countries, e.g. Pakistan and Egypt.
It even has tentative plans to set up a J35 FAL in Egypt, to service all the expected orders from the Middle East. I wouldn’t be surprised if Iran has covertly ordered a fleet of them.
So, with all the J35s that will be exported before long, one wonders if foreign buyers will need the J36 any time soon. Suits the Chinese just fine: they can build up a nice fleet of them for exclusive use by themselves.
good info
A Case Study on the Effects of Program Accounting – Boeing vs. Airbus
https://www.cpajournal.com/2016/11/23/case-study-effects-program-accounting/
A shame the Airbus problems are behind the wall, could have a field day there!
Maybe its not as easy as people think?
One manufacturer is required to list questionable orders, yet the other is not. Seems quite fair.
Okay.🤔
wool pulled over eyes? 🙂
“Questionable orders” are a statistical estimate of probability.
there is uncertainty. on numbers, customers, ..
ASC606:
Boeing states icky orders as number of items ( nobody knows the associated loss of order volume or revenue ) very vague.
IFRS15:
airbus states an overall expected loss of revenue from potentially foundering orders and other risks:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jlcbta136/files/2025-02/airbus_financial_statements_fy_2024.pdf page 36
You can state all you want. But when they’re not required to show such orders that are questionable, your point is mute!!
Scott made that point quite clear.
Your entire “point” is mute, because questionable orders have nothing to do with delivery delays — which is the subject of the LNA article.
@OV1
a conversation is composed of sane statement.
your point?
The article referenced by Transworld concerns delivery delays.
What has that go to do with ASC606, which concerns shaky/questionable orders?
Okay that’s fine.
Just remember the next time you mention ASC606, which you have just recently, and take into context it’s not a level playing field.
I could give you about 100 widebody AB orders alone that would fall into that category.
I’m sure you’ll fall back on your…
go to ASC606 accounting standards when you find another Boeing gripe to post.
Go ahead — give us those 100 AB widebody orders that you reference, together with an explanation as to why you think they’d be in ASC606 — the standard reasons are customer financial instability, geopolitical constraints and prolonged delivery delays, but you may have non-standard criteria that you’d like to enter on the record.
Then, do the same exercise for BA’s widebody order book.
Just in February, BA moved 38 777X orders into ASC606…so there’s a nice start for you 👍
After that, you can move to the narrowbody order books for both customers.
splitting hairs:
(excessive) delivery delays lead to cancelled orders.
:-)))
With emphasis on “excessive”…probably beyond the contractually-specified two-year delay…which, of course, applies to vast numbers of BA orders, though very few AB orders.
Deferrals by the customer don’t qualify.
Well if you insist;
Let’s start out with the cancelled A330 800 order by Garuda.
Still in AB account as an active order,even though it’s been cancelled months ago. The purists will state AB will try to offer a leasing plan instead, that’s fine ,but it won’t be for the 338..
Without giving a lengthy explanation for each, I’ll list the
others for you.
Afriqiyah Airlines -10 A350 9
(A nearly 20 year old order not even listed anymore on their fleet
orders)
Libyan Airlines -6 A350 9
Another long dormant order still showing on the books in spite of the carrier stating they have no longer the need for the type.
Yemenia Airlines -10 A350 9
Another 20 year old bogus order cancelled years ago, of course still showing as active.
Srilankan Airlines -4 A350 9
Corruption and bribery scandal drags on as the carrier demands the cancellation of the order.
United Airlines -45 A350 9
Last but not least, a carrier with no need for the type, yet AB still
shows the order for 20 plus years, and to say it shouldn’t be listed as a questionable order is pure rubbish.
And ofcourse,47 undisclosed A330 neo orders still in the books waiting for actual customers to claim. I’m kind, I’ll give the Saudi carrier order for ten .
Any other questions?
“…Without giving a lengthy explanation for each…”
Oh, but that’s the whole crux here, isn’t it?
We’re talking about ASC606…not OV-1 606 😅
Explain, for example, how the UA order falls into one or more of “customer financial instability, geopolitical constraints and prolonged delivery delays”. Note that a deferral is not a delivery delay 🙈
Still waiting for the BA list.
I’m sure you’ll do a fine job on the Boeing list.
You don’t need a grown-ups help on that..
You can manage just fine
I guess when someone rebuts your claims, deflection is the best form of Defense.😆😆
Okay, just as suspected: all noise, no music 😅
“Any other questions?”
How did you perform in school?
orders exist in the books until all details are closed.
( this here is not cowboy country! )
order plus down payment plus defunct airline and state -> can’t be closed. Orders from iraq had similar issues.
He doesn’t seem to understand the concept of an order from an undisclosed customer 🙈
He seems to think that, because the customer is undisclosed, the order is somehow phoney 👀
Cry to your little friend for backup..
It’s ok, I’m loving this
“President Donald Trump said he would place 25% tariffs n all cars made outside of the U.S., a much wider net than U.S. auto makers had expected.” (note currently 2.5% tariffs for imported cars to the US)
just wait until April 2 to see what happens to aircraft! If slaps 25% (seems to be his favorite number e.g. steel and aluminum) on Airbus aircraft being sold to US airlines, it will be time for Airbus to shift deliveries to global airlines Airbus plant in Alabama for A320 and A220 will be interesting to watch what happens there
West’s claim that Boeing won’t be affected by Trump’s tariffs on Aluminum because Boeing buys most of its aluminum from domestic suppliers reveals a stunning ignorance of how markets work if West believes this.
Yes, Boeing (and its suppliers like Spirit) probably buys its rolled aluminum from domestic suppliers. Canada does not make rolled aluminum, but most likely their domestic suppliers get the raw aluminum (ingots) from Canada, so their American suppliers are about to see a dramatic increase in costs. Even if their suppliers source their raw aluminum from American smelters because the fact is that tariffs cause domestic suppliers to increase their prices to the new level that the market will bear. Why wouldn’t they? Does West think American aluminum smelters will keep their prices at existing levels?
West said that aluminum is only 1-2% of Boeing’s costs. Is that believable? From my research, it is 12-18% of an airframe’s costs.
Finally, has Boeing factored in the fact that a lot of countries hit hard by Trump’s tariffs will be favoring Airbus over Boeing? What happened to Boeing’s sales in China during Trump’s first term, when he imposed tariffs on China?