Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- Engine makers tout “Plan A” but have “Plan B” backups in R&D June 23, 2025
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 27. June 20, 2025
- Pontifications: A Personal Note June 19, 2025
- Airbus books 142 firm orders as Boeing retracts from the Paris Air Show June 19, 2025
- AIN Media Group Agrees to Acquire Leeham News & Analysis June 17, 2025
Boeing CEO: Lessons learned are key to certification of 737-7/10 and 777X
By Karl Sinclair
Analysis
June 2, 2025, © Leeham News: Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg believes that lessons learned from the 737 MAX crisis and subsequent in-depth oversight by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are key to certifying the 737-10 MAX and the 777X.
He explained why during an appearance last week at an investors conference organized by Bernstein Research.
“We’re watching real closely to make sure that we aren’t over committing in terms of how many different seat configurations we can get certified in a certain period of time and the complexity,” Ortberg said. “It’s something that we’ve got to watch, particularly the Dash 10s that have types of complex seat configurations.”
Ortberg added that the 777-9 also features complex configurations for international airlines, offering luxurious passenger accommodations.
Kelly Ortberg, CEO of The Boeing Co. Credit: Getty Images.
“It’s going to be with us also on the 777-9 as we bring that into service, making sure we incorporate lessons learned here so that we don’t have seating delays on those aircraft,” he said. “Those aircraft will have the most complex configurations in the front of the airplane.”
Certification of the 777X stalled because of the MAX certification review. There have also been some technical issues that have been and must be resolved. But at long last, flight testing with all four test aircraft has resumed.
“I’m hopeful that we’ll get through the certification flight tests by the end of the year,” Ortberg told the Bernstein conference. “We may still be doing some ETOPS testing going into next year, but there is no real change to our forecast of getting that certification done so that we can start deliveries next year.
“It’s an airplane that has had the most flight testing done of any other aircraft we’ve ever done in terms of hours. We feel pretty good about the stability and our entry into service for the airplane that we’ve done enough flight testing on that it’s going to be a great airplane.”
Increasing 787 production
The CEO told Bernstein that 787 production will increase to 10/mo soon. The final assembly line at Charleston (SC) was designed for 7/mo, a number reached before the COVID pandemic began in March 2020. Production rates were reduced to a mere 0.5/mo during the pandemic. The rate has been slow to resume due to quality control issues that were discovered during the FAA’s crackdown on Boeing following the MAX crisis.
“When you look at production, going to seven [a month] soon on the 787 in Charleston, my understanding is that without a lot of capital investment, you could get to 10 there. With the demand now, particularly with these new orders, it looks like there is potentially demand pressure to go higher,” Ortberg said.
An analysis by LNA years ago concluded that the plant can go to 12/mo with some additional investment. The peak 787 production between Charleston and Everett (WA) was 14/mo. All 787 production was consolidated to Charleston during the pandemic, and the Everett 787 space is being reallocated to the expansion of 737 MAX production.
Boeing purchased more land in Charleston for expansion, presumably for the 787.
“Once we get to seven, we can get to that 10 within the existing production, generally within the existing production footprint,” Ortberg said. “I think to go beyond that’s going to require some additional investment in our facilities there. We’ve authorized that, so we are investing in expansions so that we can go to rates beyond 10 a month rate.”
Ortberg echoed many of the sentiments in the visit with the staff at Aviation Week in an in-depth interview at the Bernstein conference.
There was some fresh ground covered, however, on the appearance:
- Boeing expects that China will begin taking commercial aircraft deliveries again next month;
- Commercial aviation was confirmed to be sold out through the end of the decade;
- 737 MAX production rates are quickly approaching the FAA limit of 38/mo;
- Ortberg expects deliveries to hit 42/mo by the end of the year, 47/mo six months thereafter;
- The new fourth FAL at Everett will be for MAX10 production;
- The 787 program is also quickly gearing up to 7/mo in the near term;
- Supply chain stability was “in good shape;”
- Spirit AeroSystems’ quality has vastly improved;
- Interiors (seats) remain a sticking point; and
- Every customer is reporting a higher quality of delivered product.
All are very positive indications of the ongoing turnaround.
Annual air show Aviation Week interview
Aviation Week magazine has published interviews with the CEOs of Airbus and Boeing in advance of the Farnborough and Paris Air Shows for nearly two decades. The interview with Ortberg was published last week.
Kudos to Ortberg for openly admitting what has been known in the aviation world for some time.
Since 2018, when the first of two fatal 737 MAX crashes occurred, Boeing has either been marking time or regressing in its recovery efforts.
Some seven years later, this is a clear departure from the stance of previous leadership. Ortberg’s predecessor, Dave Calhoun, had been tasked with the overhaul of Boeing and continually reassured customers and investors alike that Boeing was on its way.
Related Article
The company is now in a watershed period, where clarity of direction and methodology is essential.
“[So] we’ve got what it takes to recover this business. I’m not worried that we’ve lost a step and can’t recover. We’ve just got to execute better,” Ortberg said in the Aviation Week interview, about the beleaguered Boeing Defense, Space and Security (BDS) division – one of the problem children.
Boeing Commercial Aircraft (BCA) and Tariffs
Ortberg’s wide-ranging and frank dialogue was part of an interview with the AW&ST editorial staff in Renton (WA), before his appearance at the Bernstein Strategic Decisions Conference.
“It’s a very dynamic time. Every day is a new day with tariffs,” he told the magazine.
With those few words, Ortberg perfectly (and gently) summed up the current political and economic climate in America.
Ortberg steps into the breech at a critical time in Boeing’s history, where uncertainty is a daily occurrence, and what held true at 9 AM is done and dusted by 4 PM.
None of which is the company’s doing, to be clear.
“I’m in regular contact with the administration, all the way to POTUS,” he told the magazine. The cynical amongst us might quote the famous line, “Keep your friends close. Keep your enemies even closer.”
On the subject of items that are within the purview of Boeing, even with limited (certification) control, Ortberg had this to say:
“We’re hoping to get the two variants of the 737 MAX wrapped up this year so we can start deliveries of the -7 and the -10, two airplanes that are very, very important to our customers and our backlog. And then the 777-9, which will be the largest dual-engine widebody in the market…we’re making great progress.”
FAA oversight process adds to delays
Why has certification of two more derivatives of the 737 taken so long? In part, it’s because the entire certification process underwent a top-to-bottom review after the 2018/2019 MAX crashes and subsequent discoveries of design, safety protocol, and quality control defects. And, as it has turned out, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) kept asking more questions as new areas of concern were uncovered.
It’s the issues we all know about, one Boeing customer told LNA. But additionally, the elapsed time is just allowing the FAA to dig further on different things. The passage of time adds more pressure to resolve these new issues now, before certification, rather than certify the aircraft and require retroactive fixes.
“The question being asked with all these delays, why don’t we just get it done now? Why don’t you deliver a definitive airplane rather than deliver aircraft and then have people do stuff in 18 months or two years?
It’s more of this holistic approach of saying, taking advantage of the delay and doing more than just what was acceptable in the past, because these airplanes should have already been in service for a year or 18 months.
Previously, it would have been impractical to delay things to incorporate fixes, revisions, or upgrades. But now, is it impractical to delay these actions?
Proceeding with a new aircraft
Boeing has been under years of criticism for failing to launch a new airplane program. The last time a clean-sheet program was launched was in December 2003, with the 787. All aircraft models since then have been derivatives of the 787, 737, 747, and 777.
Ortberg told Aviation Week and Bernstein that he does not believe the market is ready for a new aircraft.
The new technology, which would deliver the needed step-change in efficiency, is not there, Ortberg said. Notably, he clarified that the company is not yet ready to assume the financial burden of such a commitment.
Ortberg places great faith in the hope that when the MAX 10 and the 777X are certified for service, the gap between Airbus and Boeing will narrow.
The ongoing 777X certification delay is something he says he could never have imagined. He told Aviation Week, “I’m still shocked. Now, it’s partially driven by circumstances outside of the 777X program. The additional regulations that emerged and the entire certification process were driven more by the MAX situation than anything related to the 777X. It’s remarkable that it has not been out of service for years. But it isn’t, and the task at hand is to get it over the finish line.”
His was a realistic assessment without dodging the question of what must be done to remedy the situation.
There is, however, a bright light at the end of the tunnel, in that regard, he told the magazine. “Remember, we have half a trillion dollars of backlog, and most of that is commercial products. We have huge demand for those products, and I would say there’s more focus on upgrading existing aircraft, putting new engines and capability on them.”
Ortberg didn’t identify which aircraft fall into this category. But in Boeing’s stable, only one fits this description: the 787. The 737 and 777 received new engines and upgrades in the MAX and 777X. The 787’s design roots for the airframe and engines date to the late 1990s and early 2000s. The days are approaching when the 787 will need significant upgrading, including perhaps new or substantially improved engines.
Additional reporting by Scott Hamilton.
“Interiors (seats) remain a sticking point”
Does anyone know what caused the recent, significant deterioration in seat/interior supply — as evidenced by the sharp drop in frame deliveries in May?
Is it related to the trade war?
Also: any improvement in the LEAP delivery numbers?
It might be just as simple as Boeing’s edict: Do it cheaper or lose the contract…
While I would agree with you based on the supplier history with Partnering for “Success” this has also been an issue for Airbus supply chain as well. However knowing some history of the past 10-15 years Boeing could also be experiencing some self-inflicted factors as well.
https://airinsight.com/aircraft-seats-symptomatic-of-supply-chain-challenges/
Interiors are customer specification – and cost
And everyone has their own take.
Like anyone cares what the decor is.
May be because you have never experienced something that’s great??
Actually I did (well our version)
Coming back from Japan on a NW 747, I think there was one other person in first class.
I pulled arm rests and got my version of lie flat seat.
I slept a solid 3 hours. Woke up in time to watch Alaska go by. Oddly they would not land in Anchorage and drop me off.
But, I did not care what color it was. Nor if NW had their logo on the seats (don’t remember).
I still have a salt shaker from that flight (yes I asked the attendant)
How many years (decades) ago?
Not all “first classes” are created equal.
Seats, toilets, galleys, carpets… are “Customer Furnished Materials” they buy directly and have shipped to the FAL
Sure.
But that doesn’t explain why there’s a sudden shortage of those items — with emphasis on “sudden”.
Things have noticeably deteriorated since April.
Tariffs??
There is a much higher replacement frequency on seats (and carpets) and seats are refurbished frequently and then replaced with new at 3 years intervals (LH and others). So the high volume is there and airlines want the low mass, slim seats to squeeze more “self loading cargo” in.
That still doesn’t explain why there was a sudden deterioration from April to May.
Could be coincidence, of course, but I’m tending toward tariffs / shipping issues associated with the trade war.
Interior issues have been going on for a long time
What makes you say there’s been a sharp drop in deliveries in May?
The official numbers haven’t been released yet but there are 50 Boeing delivery flights listed at aviation.flights compared with 45 deliveries in April and 41 in March.
I gave yesterday’s Planespotters MAX/NEO numbers in a comment below, and I’m only counting line deliveries.
For both OEMs, line deliveries were heavily backloaded in the second half of the month — the first half of the month saw very little action.
AB didn’t get near its target of 50, and BA also fell well short of 38.
BA had respectable 787 deliveries, but AB’s deliveries of A350s/A330neos were meager.
How many deliveries from the inventory?
I know there’re a couple (~six-year-old) ex-China 737 MAXs sent over to India near the end of the month
There were just two MAXs from inventory in May that I can see.
29 MAXs off the line plus a 737-8A. The official figures could be one or two out either way.
The 29 is higher than the previous two months so I still don’t get Abalone’s query re. seating.
It’s also been announced today that Boeing hit their limit of 38 new builds for the month on May 30th. Obviously ground and flight testing mean some of these won’t be delivered yet but from June’s figures onwards they should be delivering around 38 until the next ramp up.
Great sleuthing
@Russell
What does roll out means nowadays? Has interior work completed or not?
“Boeing Confessed To Fraud—The FAA Just Put It Back In Charge Of Certifying Its Own Planes”
“The FAA has renewed Boeing’s authority to self-certify aircraft designs and production processes, extending the company’s Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) for another three years — even as the plane maker has just escaped criminal charges (despite confessing).
“The FAA’s move, announced without fanfare when it was granted earlier in May, allows Boeing to return to performing critical certification tasks on behalf of the agency. The ODA program delegates regulatory responsibilities to manufacturers, streamlining oversight while preserving accountability through FAA supervision.”
“The FAA framed the renewal as contingent on “strict conditions and increased oversight.” The agency claims it will embed more inspectors within Boeing’s operations, require expanded training for Boeing’s self-certification staff, and audit delegated functions more.”
https://viewfromthewing.com/boeing-confessed-to-fraud-the-faa-just-put-it-back-in-charge-of-certifying-its-own-planes/
Continuing from the link:
“Boeing is said to sacrifice quality and safety for financial gain, but they haven’t actually gained. Boeing shares are at 2017 levels, and we’ve had 20% inflation since then.
“In most cases share price represents the discounted value of expected future cash flows, so long-term value is reflected in price. Boeing would have been rewarded by delivering quality products that airlines want to buy more than competitor offerings, and that airlines are willing to pay a premium for.
“Instead they have products they need to discount heavily in order to gain orders. And they have faced limits on their production because of questions over their quality process. Share price still lags even with this unshackling by the government!”
Now renewed ODA for the gang that can’t shoot straight, eh? Visions of that 737 door plug
floating slowly to earth a few months ago..
#shouldbefine
Imagine the embarrassment if the request was approved prior the Alaska Airlines accident!
As reported recently:
“The Office of Inspector General said FAA officials in 2023 sought to allow Boeing’s ODA to resume issuing final airworthiness certificates for 737 and 787s. Before FAA senior officials could approve the request, the Alaska mid-air emergency occurred.”
Not addressed by the comments is the FAA has no choice.
Even if it took ODA back, it does not have the engineers nor has congress given them the money to hire them.
It would take FAA years to take over ODA.
Also missed is the key is who the ODA inspectors report to. The used to report to the FAA directly. With a language change in legislation that could be done.
I forget what half measure they did do but it was not revision to FAA direct reporting.
Congress can pass ECASS but not ODA authority? Hmmm, which is more important?
EIS for the 777-X next year? I’ll believe it when I see it.
Agreed.
I’d like to see some detailed info on the required thrust link redesign — though I don’t think that will be forthcoming.
I saw a recent article confirming that the thrust link failure was vibration-related (as opposed to a materials spec issue, for example)…confirming something that I discussed with (Boeing insider) @A Jones here a few months ago. Probably rooted in shoddy higher-order simulations during design. Not something that can be fixed in a jiffy.
Ditto general sentiment as regards the nacelle overheating problem on the MAX.
Show me — don’t tell me.
Yes, that thrust-link issue was “fixed” remarkably quickly.
Reassuring..
I take that as sarcasm.
If you read the article I posted, it was a weird harmonic on one side.
They did a quick fix for the cause and a redesign of the tube that allowed the odd airflow.
As a mechanic I would put that into the realm of, ok, odd stuff, not part of Boeing issues. The kind of things that happen (A380 wing skin issues and the out of tolerance on the RR engine for it that (Qantas 32?) revealed.
Odd stuff does happen and that is why we test.
No question sorting out the corporate issues from a typical devleo0pment is
required and others will have their opinions.
Engine nacelle is subcontracted to Safran, so it was their problem to fix.
The business was previously known as Hurel-Hispano
@Duke:
Oddly it was a Boeing issue as they had the design on it.
No idea why, but it was Boeing all the way on it. I was not expecting that either.
I went back and found my post on it.
https://archive.ph/w0eC1
This was another link I found though it did not go in depth.
https://avweb.com/aviation-news/boeing-solves-777x-thrust-link-issue/
Each one refers to Boeing as have all the other initial reports I saw.
Again it is odd and not a clue as to why Boeing was involved rather than GE or the Safran but there it is.
What’s wrong with the engine nacelle? Something new??
Lmao 🤣👇🙄
> They are responsible for the exhaust system, including the complex-shaped unit that guides exhaust from the GE9X engine.
Clue: The Safran business division is called Nacelle
https://www.safran-group.com/companies/safran-nacelles
And yes the thrust reverser mentioned is part of what they make
“The nacelle is a structure that “links the engine to the airplane”. It comprises an air inlet, engine cowl, thrust reverser and exhaust system. It’s a complex system, and plays a critical role in the aircraft’s performance”
You’re welcome
Read FG, it has a good explanation of what happened. Hehe.
Note: Have you seen nacelles? They aren’t thrust links.
@Duke:
Others aside, if you would look at the two links I posted you will see its all reference to Boeing and design of the thrust links.
I get it, I would have thought nacelle builder would do the entire package, but for unknown reasons to us, they did not.
Thanks Karl and @Scott for this comprehensive article. Great job!
As reported during Trump 1.0
> Trump has… put pressure on U.S. allies to buy products from Boeing..
“U.S. officials and defense industry sources said that weeks after Trump pressed the Emir of Kuwait in 2018 over a long-delayed deal for Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jets, Kuwait said it would proceed with the order.
Boeing is also one of the largest U.S. exporters to China, and *Muilenburg told an aviation summit in Washington that purchases of its U.S.-made aircraft by China could be part of a sweeping trade deal currently being negotiated*.”
US politicians are heavily involved with deals by Boeing, Obama once joked Boeing should have sent him a Rolex because he was their best salesman.
Manufacturers of US aircraft (Boeing), engines and parts are major beneficiaries under the Trump 1.0 trade deal. Boeing enjoyed great success as a major exporter of a superpower, it is not an innocent bystander.
And on that note, same tricks from Trump 2.0:
“The Trump administration has been including orders for Boeing Co. planes in trade discussions,…”
““Boeing aircraft have emerged as a favored trade mechanism in recent US trade negotiations, which we suspect will continue,” Ronald Epstein wrote in a research note. ”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-02/boeing-ba-a-buy-at-bofa-as-trump-favors-planemaker-for-trade-talks
Its potentially encouraging report. Pretty well backs up what I have read from various sources.
As noted before, Boeing has a great backlog, its execution that is the issue.
We have to see longer term if its getting solved or not.
787 re-engine is interesting. All 3 majors would be in the running, I think PW has the advantage with the GTF experience (vs RR who is running test items)
Good work by the CEO- but unless and until a way is found to remove the Stonecipher-Welch-McDonnell interns from middle management and the Bored Of Directionless- the beatings will continue until morale improves.
Harry Stonecipher, 2004, former CEO of The Boeing Company, reflecting on the late 1990s
” When I say I changed the culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so it’s run like a business rather than a great engineering firm. It is a great engineering firm, but people invest in a company because they want to make money. “–
Spot on
You have forgotten the shambles Boeing was in before the merger.
The production – not the engineering- was frozen in the 1960s and required a 3 week shut down of assembly process in the mid 90s to fix it .
Financialization has been a disaster in general for all US manufacturing not just Boeing. The upside was fine for a while and great for shareholders but the shareholders have paid a steep price – as they should for management dereliction.
@Duke:
Thank you for the reminder. I think about that from time to time but not in a topic so have not listed it.
As I recall severe wiring issues? Alarms hooked up wrong engine?
Pretty vague as I believe there was a crash when they shut down the wrong engine and they checked. If memory serves (very possibly not) they simply shut down the wrong engine but found others that were mis-wired.
Was that the 737 that glided into a crash on the approach to an airport in the UK?
I would add the board was fully complicit in the issues and in the demise including the illustrious Calhoun who had a very selective memory.
No free lunch but you sure can stretch out the agony so the CEOs get their lucre when they are ousted over and over again
Because BA mgmt rushed to ramp up production, don’t you remember? 😃
It sounds familiar, BTW.
Around the merger in 1997:
> Boeing [had] been struggling to right itself since … fall [1997], when a surge in commercial airplane orders overwhelmed its assembly lines
”'”The production – not the engineering- was frozen in the 1960s and required a 3 week shut down of assembly process in the mid 90s to fix it …”
The reason for the shutdown ( 1998 ) as I recall – having retired in 95 ) was the result of ‘ overreach ‘ in automating computer systems and whiz bang (mis) management systems eg (DCAC_MRM if memory serves-Define-ControlAircraftConfiguration – Management Resource Method )- AND the not so wunnerful 1997 (love fest) buyout between Phil Condit and Harry Stonecipher of McDonnel Douglas and the (IN)famous Neutron Jack Welch management methods which put stock price uber alles .
Mister Ortberg’s claim that Boeing’s aircraft deliveries to China will resume “next month” made me smile.
Also, what’s with this C-suite thing of *always* speaking in euphemisms, metaphors, and the like? It’s almost as if obfuscation rather than communication is the goal..
I value plain speech, which can be either trusted, or clearly refuted.
42 MAXes per month by the end of this year, according to Boeing’s latest CEO. I thought there was some FAA-imposed
limit of 38 (not that they’re gonna be near that number, either).
Bookmarked for future reference. 😉
Indeed.
Line deliveries for the MAX in May were 30 when I checked Planespotters yesterday morning. Maybe more were built, but are sitting out on the tarmac waiting for interiors? Or maybe not.
A320/321neo deliveries were just 32 yesterday morning, so shortages are affecting AB more than BA. In that regard, see @Meg’s interesting comment below…
Maybe we should compare notes on end-of-year deliveries
for the two companies; possibly including a quality of life
indicator.. justice is eventually served, though it often takes some time.
Indeed.
And, of course, EBIT is even more important than delivery numbers. I’m wondering if/when we’ll ever see BCA hit meaningfully positive EBIT.
By the way, there’s a typo in my post above; the figure for AB yesterday morning was 37…not 32.
(I sense an enraged correction coming from the usual suspect…😉)
We live in a post-Soviet simulation where oligarchs run the show
(How) Is it legal??
> US Airlines Are Quietly Hitting Solo & Biz Travelers with Higher Fares
https://t.co/ph5uq8evJF
“It’s not just Delta. All three of the nation’s largest airlines are charging some solo passengers higher fares than groups of two or more – sometimes significantly higher.”
https://x.com/kpottermn/status/1928095244853108909
Agreed.
“The Truth is whatever we say it is.”
This is very valuable as he gets down into the tech details of replacing components on Russian aircraft as well as China (less tech details but conveys the picture). He delves into Boeing with facts on the MAX (or almost certainly the NG) and I was not aware of those details of non US suppliers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIxUJEjIOmE
You can see why Ortberg is iffy on what is going on, he simply does not know until Tariff(s) happen or do not.
As if I should trust any youtuber for stock picks! How not to waste time on the net…
Truly stunning you are not aware of Mentour. A 737 Captain, instructor, check ride. He wrote the public video on MCAS (which he had to take down as he used a Level D slight simulator to demonstrate and the owner did not want to be associated with MCAS in any way).
He has gone onto a staff of 4-6, quit flying and is doing presentations of both incidents and general Aviation discussions.
I don’t always agree with his take but he always leaves room for a disagreement.
Short of some of the Behind the paywall on Leeham its some of the best aviation information you can get.
Nothing in his presentation is wrong that I can see. The MC-21 drop off in fact is shocking to me. Bjorn can (and probably has) done the math, I certainly can’t.
The C919 sites the issues with trying to go it alone (also per Russia) and not just areas like electronics, the specific systems for aircraft you have to develop that others have and perfected.
So go ahead and knock it, it just reveals what is behind Door 3.
It truly says where your head is when you can’t sort out good material from bad.
It also says you are not in this for discus ion but an agenda.
Oh lord, just because one is an experienced 737 pilot, therefore I should take his word at face value about mc-21 and others?? Jfc. 🙄 Does that person has any access of non-public information? How?? He works for UAC?? I’d listen to those who have hands-on knowledge, rather than hearsay and gossip (for clicks).
PS: Let me remind you how you dismissed what Abalone posted, calling his sources propaganda.
SSJ100, not mc-21
PS2: This is what’s at the top of YouTube description:
> “For 48 hours, enjoy 15% OFF on all Hoverpens and free shipping to most countries with code MENTOUR. 10% after that.”
The sources listed are a bunch of yt videos, tell me how many of those have you watched? Can you vouch for each of their accuracy?
Unlike the pilot, I can tell you the iceberg your ship is about to hit, unless someone wakes up and changes the course.
> Terribly misunderestimated the other side’s ability to reciprocate with “chokeponts” in critical supply chains… It will get ugly soon….
> Several US automakers are considering moving some auto parts manufacturing to China to get around China’s export controls on rare earth magnets, according to
@WSJ
TW head explode?
@ Pedro
Qua Mentour: there’s something intrinsically iffy about sources that only present information via videos rather than via text — particularly when those videos are replete with self-serving adverts, and predominantly show us the narrator rather than footage relating to the subject being discussed.
***
It’s convenient to tell oneself that the “magnets” being withheld by China are fridge magnets…right? After all, the Chinese couldn’t possibly be exporting anything comprising cutting edge alloys, right? They’re good at making toys and cheap novelties…but leave things like aircraft to the experts in the US — right?
Still living in the 1950s 🙈
In view of recent events:
From Nikkei
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GstywbBbkAA1bsG?format=png&name=medium
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GstzI5nbMAAZXSP?format=png&name=medium
I wonder if the Russian has better luck than the derivative 777X — decade-long development
I guess this is how not to build jets and missiles 😆
https://www.mining.com/web/u-s-fighter-jets-missiles-rare-earth-firing-line/
It seems like CFM LEAP engines isn’t in short supply when Boeing needs them, but Airbus must held back production due to lack of engines. Seems anti-competitiv behaviour from CFM to me.
It is curious.
Although, one must remember that BA has admitted to stockpiling more than 100 engines in the past months, while MAX line rates were low.
@Abalone
It is two different engines…though there are some components that are probably “similar” it’s not as if you can easily swap one from a BA to an AIB installation. If anything happens on the BA side…it would probably involve delivering more spares to lift any MAX AOGs if the production side was lagging.
I’m quite aware of the difference between the engines.
Who said anything about swapping between them?
You implied that CFM could just move capacity over to Airbus. It is not that simple.
@ Casey
I didn’t imply that at all.
CFM pre-allocates certain numbers of slots to the various LEAP sub-types.
@Meg’s point was that CFM seems to be able to produce the alotted numbers of LEAP-1Bs, but not the alotted number of LEAP-1As. I retorted by pointing out that BA has been hoarding LEAP-1Bs in the past few months, which would (at least partially) explain the effect to which she alludes.
More like hoarding over the last nine months!
> IATA said the number of deliveries scheduled for 2025 was 26% less than what was promised a year ago
It can’t be Airbus aircraft only, right??
> Flyadeal is also among several carriers affected by a separate slowdown in arrivals of engines from CFM on the Airbus assembly line.
“I have got two (narrow-body jets) sitting on the ground in Toulouse at the moment that have been there for a couple of months and I don’t have any resolution in sight,”
Airbus came to a deal with CFM at the end of last year where they were sent engines that were meant for the aftermarket. As a result they’ve had fewer engines for the first few months of this year.
They’ve said all year the supply of engines will be an issue for about the first six months of 2025.
That doesn’t explain hold-ups in AB’s widebody deliveries…
CFM has less than nothing to do with AB wide body deliveries. Neither do parents Safran or GE since neither are on Airbus widebodies
@Meg:
Boeing has at times had zero production and has had tried ramp up only to stop again (aka the post door blank blow out).
Airbus is trying to take pretty much 60 per month.
The engines are different (diameter is not the same so none of the internals are the same either).
Parts are a holdup and the higher volume the worse it is. So even if you could shift people back and forth, CFM does not have the parts.
Safran has the assembly for Airbus (and no I don’t know how much of that LEAP-A engine is US sourced) – so its Safrans fault! No, they work within the CFM system.
So yea, CFM has build up excess to needs on the -B and the -A has taken all they could get steadily.
You also need to keep in mind the -C. I don’t know where that is assembled, but its a -A engine size. CFM has to keep an eye on the China ball as long as they are the C919 engine supplier. The protracted C919 development likely means excess engines for that one as well.
And the other twist is, with all the LEAP issues, there is a protracted rebuild saga and early shop visits that takes PARTS! So you need to build up a larger supply chain parts build that you had not anticipated (should have maybe but you go with your projections until they are proven wrong and it costs if you estimate too high so you go with what the design team says it should be initially).
P&W is having those same issue except worse as some of the problems demand shop visits well ahead of time. Even with issues resolved they have a significant number of engine to run through.
P&W got an early jump as its engines have more upside, so CFM could have had lower initial projections as well – note I say could. Factors we don’t know about can be in play.
CFM is not going to stiff Airbus, they are their most reliable customer. It does not mean they are not behind the 8 ball in this case.
Haha com’on engine supplier was not building many engines during the development of the aircraft, no more than a handful for flight tests etc. Where did you pull that out of?
> Over the past few years, Airbus has beat Boeing when it comes to net profits, aircraft orders, deliveries and backlog. Experts say Airbus’ A321neo narrow-body aircraft is propelling the company ahead of Boeing, which has been dealing with crisis after crisis over the past several years.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/03/airbus-boeing-biggest-plane-maker.html
“Spirit Airlines may cancel Airbus aircraft deliveries amid tariff uncertainty”
“Spirit Airlines has warned that it may need to cancel Airbus aircraft deliveries amid tariff uncertainty since the US government introduced new charges on imports in April 2025.
“In a SEC filing posted on May 30, 2025, the ultra-low-cost airline voiced concerns about the impact of new tariffs and the potential for retaliation and escalation between countries.”
““We may also seek to postpone or cancel delivery of certain aircraft currently scheduled for delivery, and we may choose not to purchase as many aircraft as we intended in the future,” said Spirit Airlines. ”
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/spirit-airlines-deliveries-airbus-tariffs
***
Qatar and Air India have probably already been on the phone, asking if they can have the vacated slots.
Maybe Ryanair and Spirit should swap their orders: pilot re-training costs for a new aircraft type would be much lower than having to pay tariffs.
Related:
“Spirit Airlines Delays Airbus Deliveries to Boost Financial Stability”
“US ultra-low-cost carrier Spirit Airlines has taken significant steps to delay deliveries of new Airbus aircraft. The decision forms part of a broader strategy to strengthen its financial position.
“This move was initially driven by ongoing losses, and engine issues. The issue of potential trade tariffs further exacerbated the problem in recent times.
“The aircraft delivery deferrals reflect Spirit’s drive to navigate a challenging operating environment as it continues post-Chapter 11.”
https://aviationsourcenews.com/spirit-airlines-delays-airbus-deliveries-to-boost-financial-stability/
> ADP payrolls fall to lowest in more than two years
> ADP payrolls report could be providing a warning about the weakening labor market
> Most companies are raising prices or plan to because of tariffs, data shows
IATA:
> Sweeping tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump have stoked fears of an economic slowdown and squeezed discretionary spending, prompting many consumers especially in the United States to delay or scale back travel plans.
I believe budget airlines are those initially affected as flyers begin to hold their purse strings.
May 31
> Delta Air Lines is taking delivery of an Airbus A330-900neo (N435DX). The delivery flight is from Toulouse to Tokyo in order to avoid US tariffs on new aircraft.
https://bsky.app/profile/flightradar24.com/post/3lqhcc4me5k2g
Lease back from Japanese bank, the actual owner ?
Leasing subsidiary incorporated in Ireland?
Delta is looking into flying a321 to Europe 😱 Remember Delta has not ordered any a321LR or A321xlr, but will they in the future?
It seems to have escaped you that airlines fly MAX across the pond as well (mostly -8).
While I know facts are like water off a duck to you, Singapore was going to fly Singapore/NY (and back of course!) with an A350. All of around 170 pax.
You can do a lot of range if you are willing to drop load and can get enough for the load you carry (be it freight or Pax)
In summer only? Of course, max 8 only, the -9 has shorter legs.
Airlines do what they know to compete and survive. Qantas’s Sunrise project rests on premium seats! United follows American to add A321 with 1-1 lay-flat seats, so the capacity will drop to about 150! @TW head explode!!
Usually Jon is accurate with his Boeing information (I knew Jon back when he was with FG and we had some interesting discussion)
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-making-38-737-maxes-per-month/
The final paragraph of the Simple Flying article does not correlate with its large-type headline.
I don’t see the issue.
Its been previously stated that Boeing has to meet the metric. Rate 38 does no good unless the FAA is approving the release of those air frames.
Rate 38 loaded is not the same as rate 38 that are delivered pr month.
It looks like Boeing has hit FAA metrics in Charleston and good to rate 7 and working on 10.
Bringing Everett into -10 production may be easier than increasing Renton as its all new. Maybe not but…..
No question we have to see how the FAA responds to the improvements (or not improvements) – its good news they can hit rate 38. That they are eyeing rate 42 is fantastic.
TAC:
December 2024 report:
“Boeing aims to have its production lines building 737 MAX jets fully transitioned to a rate of 38 per month in *May 2025*.”
“One senior official at a major Boeing supplier told TAC that the plane maker is at risk of repeating past mistakes.”
Can’t get them from Airbus, can’t get them from Boeing. What is an Airline supposed to do? China?
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/ethiopian-airlines-order-airbus-embraer-boeing
What is funny is the 737-7 is not going to be on the order, almost for sure E2-195.
Ethiopian is probably looking to replace the Q400s and the E2 is the obvious choice as its a true regional vs the A220 which is a full on Single Aisle.
Mister Ortberg claims BA will certify the MAX-7 and MAX-10 (!)
by the end of this year. Wonder what the FAA and EASA have
to say about that.
Interesting.
Ortberg has made it clear the FAA has to go along.
EASA has weighed in on their issues and Boeing supposedly has met those.
Ironically despite the hoopla, its not EICASS it was the lack of a third Pitot. Boeing went Airbus one better and put in synthetic. Frankly that makes a lot more sense than 3 Pitos/AOA vanes that can and have got iced up.
As we saw with MCAS, if its exposed to a single failure mechanism, then redundant is meaningless for that particular failure, in this case Ice up.
note: I believe the 787 also has synthetic AOA/Speed, I don’t think the A350 has it but could be wrong on that point.
Yeah BA CEO tells their regulator what to do! 😳 Back to the good old days.
I won’t be surprised if they eventually fold.
US FAA Not Currently Considering Lifting Boeing 737 MAX Production Cap, Official Says
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2025-06-04/us-faa-not-currently-considering-lifting-boeing-737-max-production-cap-official-says
Throwing fuel on the US-China trade war fire — this will absolutely enrage Trump if/when it materializes.
“China considers ordering hundreds of Airbus jets in major deal”
“LONDON – China is considering placing an order for hundreds of Airbus aircraft as soon as July, when European leaders visit Beijing to celebrate the countries’ long-term ties, according to people familiar with the matter.
“Deliberations with Chinese airlines are under way about the size of a potential order, said the people. A deal could involve about 300 planes and include both narrowbody and widebody models, they said, with one person saying the order could range between 200 and as many as 500 aircraft.
“Negotiations are fluid and could fall apart or take longer to reach a conclusion, the people said.”
https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/china-considers-ordering-hundreds-of-airbus-jets-in-major-deal-sources
***
Waiting to see if/when Trump tries to ban LEAP-1A exports to China — that will unleash a major backlash from both the EU and China.
> The order could rise to as many as 500 aircraft, one of the people told Bloomberg
> Deliberations with Chinese airlines are under way about the size of a potential order
What?? How come I was told repeatedly that they are a top-down central planned economy, “Leninist-Party-State system” — whatever that means. Can anyone explain to me what these big words mean? 🙄 Aircraft ordered are allocated to state-owned airlines (which, in their imagination, have no say).
Where is the reflection when it’s proven that such narratives are wrong?
> .. analysts have said that China has a deficit of aircraft after holding back on major orders for more than five years.
Fact check: Major airlines in China complained that their most profitable routes are being threatened by HSR. Analysts head explode!
> Shares were up 3.5% at EUR 172.30 as of 08:09 GMT.
> In a note, Jefferies said that while Airbus’ order backlog and focus on execution reduce the immediate importance of new orders, potential deals with China still carry weight.
The firm noted that a large A330neo order was rumored ahead of last year’s Farnborough Airshow but never materialized.
See, the spinning has arrived.
> After engine halt for Comac and under-ordering, China eyes massive new Airbus deal
https://bsky.app/profile/theaircurrent.com/post/3lqs5sbfu4c2r
Contrast with the report from Reuters:
> Earlier this year, industry sources said the scale of a deal being discussed, as a U.S.-China tariff war has effectively frozen Boeing out of China, had expanded to 500 planes.
> China Southern Airlines plans to double its fleet to 2,000 aircraft by 2035
Correction: Boeing did launch a new aircraft since 2003.
In 2014, a new fuselage, new systems, new cockpit, new tail, new wings, new engines and new landing gear; the 777-9.
It tried to certify it as a 77W version & FAA signed of in 2014 but got second thoughts, after the 737 MAX certification investigations and its fall-out. That’s why 777-9 is delayed for 6-7 years, after first it’s flight.
I think they still used the Grandfather clause. Same as Airbus on the A330NEO and A320/21 NEO.
Fuselage was modified but ………………..
Wing clearly is all new.
I believe the FAA put conditions on it as things developed. I am getting fuzzy on details.
There was a blowout on a pressure test.
There was an incident with wrong response. Something to do with a cut and paste code from 787 program. Using the logic makes sense but the PID statement would have been all wrong (or so it seems to me)
Engine Problems
Thrust Link Problem
Av Week had a good article on it, the FAA started to insist on supporting documentation and Boeing responded wrongly. As I recall the statement was they were used to self justification and it went off track as they did not answer the querry with the needed documentation.
The various management debacles.
The 737 has very old grandfathers: far lower acceleration ratings for fuselage and seats, no powered doors, no slides for overwing exits, … I doubt EASA would except that.
> The Boeing case is a cautionary tale of what can go wrong when a company fails to develop and implement sound internal quality controls..
https://www.cpajournal.com/2025/06/02/the-story-of-boeings-failed-corporate-culture/
As a general comment on the effect of tariffs on imports to the US:
“Empty Shelves Becoming Reality at Major Retailers Across Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin”
“Shoppers across the Midwest are starting to see empty shelves at some major retailers. Stores like Walmart, Target, and even Hy-Vee have warned that some products will become more expensive or in short supply. A recent report from Style on Main says this trend is no longer confined to isolated incidents. Rather, it’s becoming a widespread issue affecting communities, large and small, throughout Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin.”
“The primary culprit behind these shortages is the recent escalation in U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports, which reached up to 145% in April 2025. These tariffs have since dropped, but have significantly disrupted supply chains, leading to delayed shipments and reduced product availability.”
“As of now, issues have already arisen on the coasts and in high-population areas. However, lower population and rural areas will soon see a “limiting” of common goods until a new trade deal is worked out”
https://eagle1023fm.com/empty-shelves-becoming-reality-at-major-retailers-across-iowa-illinois-and-wisconsin/?utm_source=tsmclip&utm_medium=referral
Another source:
“Target And Walmart Sound Alarm Over Retail ‘Collapse’ As Shelves Go Empty”
https://styleonmain.net/target-and-walmart-sound-alarm-over-retail-collapse-as-shelves-go-empty/
***
We probably won’t have to wait long to see similar shortages creeping into the aviation industry supply chain.
Whoops 👀
FG: Judge holds off from approving DOJ request to dismiss prosecution of Boeing
> The proposed non-prosecution agreement would require Boeing to “admit to conspiracy to obstruct and impede the lawful operation of the” FAA and to pay $1.1 billion.
That amount includes a fresh $243.6 million criminal fine, $444.5 million paid into a “crash-victim beneficiaries trust” and $455 million in investments “to strengthen the company’s compliance, safety and quality problems”.
Those amounts are in addition to a $243.6 million criminal fine, and $500 million for crash victims’ families, that Boeing already paid as part of a previous deferred prosecution agreement.
Indeed:
“A federal judge has vacated the trial date related to Boeing and the crashes of its 737 MAX airplanes that left nearly 350 people dead.”
“O’Connor must still give final settlement approval and could reschedule a trial if he does not agree with the deal.”
https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/federal-judge-cancels-boeing-trial-over-737-crashes-after-agreement-doj
Mar 31, 2025
FG: China’s ‘Big Three’ expect strong growth in C919 deliveries
How many C919 will be delivered this year?
You know, if I were in charge of a Chinese airline, the first thing I’d do is to look for leasing new/used aircraft, not ordering new Airbus aircraft that won’t be delivered for many years, if, as Jon Ostrower imagined, the order is related to Trump’s export control of the Leap-1C.
The Leap-1c is also like 800 kg heavier. Why?
There you go:
> The plane’s avionics are developed by a joint venture between the PRC’s Aviation Industry Systems (AVIC) and GE Aviation, while Honeywell and Boyun New Materials build the plane’s brake system.
The IP most likely belong to Chinese JVs
I believe it reflects how badly-informed the aviation press was — a huge blind spot.
“…COMAC requires foreign suppliers to manufacture parts made for the C919 in China.”
“Aviage Systems, for example, is a 50/50 joint venture between GE Aviation and AVIC. Currently, it specializes in the supplies of the integrated modular avionics system to the C919.”
“…Honeywell Aerospace: “We have 700 aerospace experts working across seven manufacturing plants, including two joint ventures for the C919,” Kaul said. “These include supplying the aircraft’s fly-by-wire system with HonFei Flight Controls and the supply of the braking system under a joint venture with Boyun Aviation Systems.””
“Collins Aerospace also supplies avionics technologies to the C919, including its communication, navigation and integrated surveillance systems under joint ventures established with China Electronics Technology Avionics Company and AVIC.”
https://interactive.aviationtoday.com/avionics-in-china-c919-development-and-future-growth/
Nowadays no one wants to mention:
S&P 500 companies have generated $1.2 trillion in revenue, more than eight times US exports to China.. and they’ll go to zero??
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gpd34ZIWgAA1Qyz?format=png&name=large
Honeywell has over 13k employees there,many are scientists and engineers. I guess sooner than later, they’ll work for Chinese companies. Lol.
March 29
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3304271/development-chinese-engine-make-c919-truly-home-grown-progressing-well
In thre to five years, we’ll know who knows better.
https://bsky.app/profile/theaircurrent.com/post/3lqy5kl4aoq2l
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/heinrich-grossbongardt-06b4556_short-term-effect-crippling-the-production-activity-7334543881310531584-PdbA
==========
Stumbled on this. Reflection of the time:
https://bsky.app/profile/dancarlin.bsky.social/post/3lqy2soyoqc2p
https://dancarlin.substack.com/p/the-real-war-will-never-get-into
> ASML’s CEO Christophe Fouquet has become more outspoken against export controls on China, along with Nvidia’s Jensen Huang: “The people you try to stop will work even harder to be successful. It doesn’t matter how many obstacles you put in the way.”
> “The U.S. export controls have ironically created a monster.”
“FAA Maintains Production Cap on Boeing 737 MAX Amid Safety Concerns”
“The FAA has indicated that it will maintain a monthly cap on Boeing’s 737 MAX production line; limiting output to 38 aircraft per month amid ongoing safety concerns.”
“As of June 2025, the FAA continues to enforce this limit, signaling ongoing concerns about safety and manufacturing standards.”
“An FAA audit in March 2024 found multiple non-compliance issues at Boeing’s Renton, Washington, facility and Spirit AeroSystems’ Wichita, Kansas, plant.
“To ensure safety, the FAA limited Boeing to 38 jets per month, halting any plans for production increases until quality improves.”
“FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker has emphasized that lifting the cap is not imminent. In May 2025, he stated that approval for higher production is unlikely in the near term.
“The agency now conducts weekly reviews with Boeing, monitoring key performance indicators (KPIs) related to safety and quality.”
“The FAA’s firm stance reflects a broader commitment to safety, ensuring Boeing addresses systemic issues before scaling up. For now, Boeing must navigate its way around the 38-jet monthly cap on its most popular aircraft line.”
https://aviationsourcenews.com/faa-maintains-production-cap-on-boeing-737-max-amid-safety-concerns/
Looks like some of Mr. Ortberg’s recent comments were too rosy to be true.
One wonders if he was trying to talk up the stock price?
If it was not because of terrible events it would be funny. MW is no longer the head of the FAA.
Of the Orange One tells the head to, he will comply or get fired and so on until you get someone who will (likely a replacement from Senate approved types)
“FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker has emphasized that lifting the cap is not imminent. In May 2025, he stated that approval for higher production is unlikely in the near term.”
“The agency now conducts weekly reviews with Boeing, monitoring key performance indicators (KPIs) related to safety and quality.”
“Fired NTSB vice chair sues Trump over removal from office”
“WASHINGTON, June 4 (Reuters) – The fired vice chair of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board sued President Donald Trump on Wednesday, saying his removal from office was illegal and threatened the independent agency’s safety mission”
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/fired-ntsb-vice-chair-sues-trump-over-removal-office-2025-06-04/
***
It’s raining setbacks in Trumpville.
Not sure he’ll be doing much firing from now on.
That does not make the statements valid or even reflect current FAA take.
I have seen people post articles from years back as current.
Just do a simple web search for yourself:
https://airlinegeeks.com/2025/06/05/faa-not-looking-at-lifting-boeing-737-max-cap/
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-faa-not-currently-considering-lifting-boeing-737-max-production-cap-official-2025-06-04/
https://qz.com/faa-not-removing-boeing-737-max-production-cap-1851783629
Lots more sources available.
Back in 2019, Muilenburg whispered in DJT’s ear, insisting that the Max were safe to fly. How well did it go, eh?
Another casino ruined by Tump.
Trying to go thru GE CEO’s recent public comments:
> Services Orders Growth: 30% for 2024 and Q1
> Leap:
“there were a number of issues you had, you know, the engine radial drive shaft and the fuel nozzle coking, HPT blades. I know those have largely been resolved, and the latest appears to be your new Maverick blades on the with HPT.”
“we’re gonna take the the LEAP from about 3,000 cycles to eight.”
“That’s what we ship today with new engines. There’ll be a a multiyear field retrofit program”
787 engines:
“in harsh environments to to 4,000 cycles, in neutral environments up to six.”
“US tariffs could put air safety at risk, aerospace and airline industries warn”
“WASHINGTON (Reuters) -New tariffs on imported commercial aircraft, jet engines and parts could put air safety and the supply chain at risk or trigger other unintended consequences, groups representing global aerospace companies and U.S. airlines warned on Tuesday.”
“The Aerospace Industries Association, which represents Boeing, Airbus, RTX, GE Aerospace and hundreds of other companies, urged the Commerce Department in a filing to extend the public comment period on Section 232 by 90 days and impose no new tariffs for at least 180 days.
“The group also urged further consultation with industry on “any Section 232 tariffs to ensure they accurately reflect national security concerns and do not put the supply chain and aviation safety at risk.”
“The AIA highlighted how a fire at a Pennsylvania aerospace fastener supplier in February has impacted production and the difficulties in sourcing parts from new suppliers.”
“Airlines for America, the trade group representing American Airlines , United Airlines , Delta Air Lines, and other major carriers warned tariffs could hike plane tickets and shipping rates.
“Injecting higher costs into the commercial aviation sector will weaken our economic and national security and have a material and debilitating impact on the domestic commercial aviation industry’s ability to grow, compete, innovate and invest,” the airlines wrote in comments seen by Reuters that were filed with the Commerce Department.”
“The tariffs could dismantle the recovering aviation supply chain, result in more counterfeit parts entering the market and result in a cascade of challenges and unintended consequences, the trade group said.”
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/aerospace-sector-warns-us-tariffs-155752315.html
We can expect similar impacts in the aviation industry:
“Global Automakers Alarmed Over China’s Rare Earths Export Controls”
““If the situation is not changed quickly, production delays and even production outages can no longer be ruled out,” Hildegard Mueller, head of VDA, told Reuters this week, in yet another warning from the automotive industry about the impact of China’s policy on the global automotive supply chains.”
“”Without reliable access to these elements and magnets, automotive suppliers will be unable to produce critical automotive components, including automatic transmissions, throttle bodies, alternators, various motors, sensors, seat belts, speakers, lights, motors, power steering, and cameras,” the alliance and the Vehicle Suppliers Association, MEMA, wrote in a letter to the Trump Administration carried by Reuters.”
“The IEA finds that currently, more than half of a broader group of energy-related minerals are subject to some form of export controls.”
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Global-Automakers-Alarmed-Over-Chinas-Rare-Earths-Export-Controls.html
***
Trump has opened Pandora’s Box.
Xi can relax and sip his tea while Trump licks his self-inflicted wounds.
“Faury: ‘We Are Really Serious About The Successor Of The A320′”
“Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury has reaffirmed Airbus’ commitment to launching a new narrowbody around the turn of the decade. Faury says in a forthcoming interview with Aviation Week that Airbus plans to select an engine in 2027 for a launch around 2030 and entry-into-service in 2037 or 2038.”
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/faury-we-are-really-serious-about-successor-a320
***
Engine selection in just 2 years time — interesting.
Even more interesting: BA doesn’t have the funds to develop a response.
Very interesting! Thanks for the link.
One wonders if RR is preparing a narrowbody engine as a candidate for this new AB aircraft. An upsized Pearl might do nicely. AB would be delighted to have a European narrowbody engine without any US involvement.
A good idea, but with a rather tight timeline (taking all at face value). RR need to be in mix.
Well, EIS of the new aircraft is planned for 2037/2038 — so that should give RR plenty of time.
A feasible “paper engine” in 2027 — preferably supported by some sort of bench tests and/or extensive numerical simulations — might be enough to convince AB.
Yes, and I’d like to see it happen.
It’s not unlikely that AB and going to be *several generations* ahead of the Other Guys soon.
I see that outfit is claiming the -7 and -10
will be certified *this* year.. via magick, I suppose.
Rare earth shortages?
“EXCLUSIVE: Eyeing risk of radar ‘delays,’ Lockheed proposes new F-35 fuselage design”
“WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has maintained that a new radar for the F-35 would be ready for the plane’s Lot 17 airframes, which began production this year. But the CEO of F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin has quietly warned the Air Force of “risks” in the radar’s delivery schedule, leading the defense giant to craft workarounds that currently center on Lot 20, according to a letter obtained by Breaking Defense.
“To mitigate potential delays, Lockheed is proposing redesigning the aircraft’s forward fuselage to be capable of accommodating either the aircraft’s incumbent radar, the APG-81, or the new radar dubbed the APG-85. The fresh fuselage design could enter service in the program’s Lot 20 production, Lockheed CEO Jim Taiclet wrote in the letter.
“The letter does not say the cause of the potential delays — stakeholders declined to tell Breaking Defense — nor does it say what the fate of the radars for Lot 17, 18 and 19 is expected to be.”
““If it’s not a design issue, but a supply issue, you know, they find a supplier that can do what they need and you can get the 85 sooner. It really depends” on the reason for a potential delay, he said. ”
https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/exclusive-eyeing-risk-of-radar-delays-lockheed-proposes-new-f-35-fuselage-design/
Ka-ching! Keep those buck$ flowing upward to the Few..
Let there be peace on earth. Amen
> .. the fact that Taiclet personally penned a letter to Allvin about the radar issue suggests it could be a significant hiccup for a program defined by delays, where stealth fighters *currently being delivered are reserved for training roles* until full combat capability can be delivered with the TR-3 upgrade.
“We can milk this sucker [F-35 rev. 779] for another thirty years!”
-Our MIC friends
The Late Soviet America?
> About 10% of entire US Navy fleet participated in combat operations in the Red Sea from late 2023 through this year. In that time, the U.S. rained down at least $1.5 billion worth of munitions on the Houthis.
> “Officials are now dissecting how a scrappy adversary was able to test the world’s most capable surface fleet. The Houthis proved to be a surprisingly difficult foe, engaging the Navy in its fiercest battles since World War II”
WSJ: How the Houthis Rattled the U.S. Navy..
https://t.co/z30kiZlOqv
> ‘Crews usually only picked up drone and missile launches a minute or two before impact and had to decide how to respond within about 15 seconds. They intercepted hundreds of attacks by the Houthis.’
“As of June 2025 the FAA continues to enforce this limit [38 p/m]..”
Some appear to have comprehension issues.
Noticed that, had you?
Desperately clinging to an alternate reality 🙈
Official word until Boeing gets it done or the Orange Angry One tells them otherwise.
https://airlinegeeks.com/2025/06/05/faa-not-looking-at-lifting-boeing-737-max-cap/#
I had to look him up to see if he is a Fox News Flunky of some kind.
He has lots of aviation experience, that is a rarity of someone possibly competent in the administration.
Zzzzz.. sleepy.
😉
I guess the posts that natter on about the same thing that has little or nothing to do with aviation appeals?
Me, I am an aviation techno buff.
Makes for an interesting contrast. A tanker being built now vs one in the works.
https://armyrecognition.com/news/aerospace-news/2025/tuerkiye-evaluates-boeing-kc46a-and-airbus-a330-mrtt-for-future-aerial-refueling-capability
Keeping in mind the Vision system aspects but that would be resolved unless Turkey wanted an earlier delivery.
Computer modeling shows…………..
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2024-07-24/airbus-a330-multi-role-tanker-transport-goes-neo
95%? How about them thar engines?
Still its a nice efficiency pickup and range/offload if that is needed. Makes for a thin strike package but……………..
Pretty interesting as the site the Automatic fueling but I don’t know that is offered.
Singapore tested it but have not seen results.
Boeing had major problems with their wing pods on the 767T for Italy. A330NEO has a modified wing. Granted the pod is not on the tip.
But how much of the structure did they keep as that CEO wing was also the A340 wing. If you don’t plan on 4 engines then you can lighten it a lot but add in other profile changes.
And Turkey really wants its F-35s!
Türkiye doesn’t need the F35, you forget that currently they have prototypes of their homegrown 5th gen stealth fighter the KAAN in flight testing. They have their homegrown AESA radars, UAV wingman fighter also in flight testing, plus a plethora of homegrown weapons that can be delivered from the KAAN. Türkiye is looking for more 4.5 gen fighters to grow numbers of it fleet and to replace the last of their F4Es. So F16s yes, F35s I don’t think so.
On issue of the A330 NEO MRTT , I am certain Airbus thought of this transition when developing the A330 NEO and thus made provisions for it in the revised wing of the NEO. This transition should be fairly straight forward.
Oh, and the automatic refueling system on the Airbus, Singapore has had no reported issues and it is in use regularly.
“The F-35’s future: Can the fifth-gen fighter withstand political, technological headwinds?”
https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/the-f-35s-future-can-the-fifth-gen-fighter-withstand-political-technological-headwinds-video/
***
The last new foreign order for the F35 was in December 2022 (Canada)…
@Branboy:
Going off track a bit but I think its better than constant tarfiff harping.
Turkey is trying to develop an aircraft, they can’t come close to matching the F-35 in 20 years. So yea, while they develop it they would be delighted to get F-35s. They were a key supplier until they got kicked out.
I don’t know what Turkey is doing to replace F-16/F-4. No one that has a capable aircraft is going to sell them. They tried to get F-16 upgrade, I think that is still in congress.
I will more than accept you know more about Singapore and the fueling status. I have come across nothing but have not been looking for it either.
Periodic reminder for TW:
“The truth doesn’t change just because you don’t want to hear it.”
@ Transworld said:
“Turkey is trying to develop an aircraft, they can’t come close to matching the F-35 in 20 years.”
😅
Here we go:
“The second and third prototypes are expected to “be flying by the end of the year and early next year, and we’ll be heavily testing these prototypes,” TAI General Manager Mehmet Demiroglu told Breaking Defense in a February interview.
“He said then that the firm plans to “shorten the testing period, because we need to do lots of testing and to be able to deliver our first production to [the] Turkish air force in 2028-2029 time frame.””
“KAAN, which is described as a 5th-generation fighter jet will have 6th-generation features, Demiroglu said, adding that that the firm is working on manned-unmanned teaming concept between KAAN and Turkish UAV maker Baykar.”
https://breakingdefense.com/2025/04/indonesia-eyes-joining-turkish-5th-generation-fighter-jet-program-kaan/
***
“The KAAN itself is a technological marvel designed to rival the best in its class. A twin-engine, multi-role stealth fighter, it boasts a maximum speed of Mach 1.8 and a service ceiling of 55,000 feet. Its radar, developed by Aselsan, features an active electronically scanned array [AESA], enabling superior target detection and tracking.”
“The aircraft’s internal weapons bay can carry precision-guided munitions, including the SOM-J cruise missile, enhancing its ability to strike ground targets while maintaining a low radar cross-section. Advanced avionics and electronic warfare systems allow the KAAN to operate in networked environments, sharing data with other platforms to coordinate complex missions.”
https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2025/05/05/kaan-aircraft-turkeys-f-16-slayer-hits-air-force-in-2028/
@All
Turkey made the interesting choice to procure the s400 system from Russia.
Still trying to figure that one out but the penalty was expulsion from JPO. They have been trying to get F16s but that has been wrapped up in letting Sweden into NATO.
A big motivation for Turkey will be Greece having the F35
@ Casey
Turkey can forget aquiring any US aircraft, because the country has been labelled by Israel as a potential adversary.
European aircraft supplies are also iffy, because of the “democracy decline” in Turkey.
That opens the door to China — which can supply Turkey with multiple models…and will gladly do so, to extend its reach in central Asia.
https://x.com/JustinWolfers/status/1931384263800148140
https://x.com/JustinWolfers/status/1931703590285980002
Whoops! From that same poster who told others: “While I know facts are like water off a duck to you.. ” 😭
Many are agitated for depreciation of USD against other currencies to restore domestic manufacturing.
However, a significant devaluation USD v. CNY would likely paradoxically spike 10y UST yields.
Too many eager to FAFO:
> Goldman: the Chinese yuan may now be commencing a multi-year strengthening path against the USD
> An American Airlines plane engine that caught fire in March had a fractured fan blade and another component installed backward, federal safety investigators said
https://x.com/decodethefirm/status/1930734104821063722
Component installed backward?
Wonderful…so we can now add GE to the growing list of US aerospace companies that are producing sub-standard products.
“Investigators also found that the “lockwire of a fuel fitting on the variable stator vane (VSV) was loose and installed in the incorrect direction.” Additionally, a part of the plane that controls airflow through the turbine’s compressor was “incorrectly fastened and secured … allowing fuel to leak from the fitting.””
https://www.denver7.com/news/local-news/ntsb-report-american-airlines-plane-that-diverted-to-dia-before-catching-fire-had-parts-incorrectly-installed
I’ll point out that the American plane was a Boeing 737-800, which means this is old enough to have gone through airline maintenance. Nothing in the linked news report indicates whether this part was installed by GE or by AA. I haven’t found the NTSB report yet to see if it IDs who installed the part.
Hamilton
You are correct — my apologies.
I was assuming that the maintenance had been done by GE, seeing as it handled AA maintenance up until relatively recently; but the part may, indeed, have been replaced by AA maintenance crew.
Any further clarification would be welcome.
One way or another: someone did some pretty shoddy work 🙈
And of course auto jump to knock a US company.
@ Transworld
There are three big US companies involved here — GE, AA and BA.
Take your pick as to which one(s) to blame for a serious incident, in which multiple shortcomings were revealed.
Hehe when derangement overwhelmed clear thoughts
This AA engine fire incident highlights an interesting design shortcoming of the 737NG — namely the lack of slides for the overwing exits. Instead of using slides, passengers are expected to slip down the rear flaps toward the ground — assuming that those rear flaps are fully extended…which, in this intance, was NOT the case. As a result, dozens of passengers were left standing on a wing with nowhere to go, while there was a fire on the other side of the airrcaft.
Has this design been modified on the MAX?
The A320/A321/A220 all have overwing slides.
Nope afaik
Cirium:
> there are a lot of A320, A321, A330 and A350 aircraft apparently built and potentially ready for delivery, often awaiting interiors or engines
What happened?
Business Journal
> UPDATE: Machinists union, Spirit Aerosystems confirm more furloughs coming
FedEx 757 gear-up landing
> It touched down initially on its left-hand Rolls-Royce RB211 engine about 1,650ft from the threshold, with marks from right-engine contact appearing 735ft further on.
Scraping from the aft fuselage occurred about 4,500ft from the threshold, and the aircraft overran, coming to a halt *830ft beyond the runway end*.
757 has redundancy but it seems those systems are failing a lot more often as they age out.
FedEx had a recent landing with partial systems not to long ago.
I could be wrong but I believe Airbus has gone with tipple systems. It was the excess redundancy that kept AF32 in the air.
More than 800 ft beyond the runway end!
I was thinking more about the Jeju 2216 crash. How would it work out?
What are “tipple systems”? I am unfamiliar with that term.
Instead of a backup system, you have 3 fully capable systems (be it hydraulic circuits, heating/cooling pumps and boilers in my world)
757 has two and some kind of emergency backup but not 3 fully redundant and an emergency system.
The MIL allows ops with some degree of backups. Ergo AK could fly ETOPs with an issue because the backup (from memory) is the ability to drop to under 10k and make it to (Hawaii in this case) or back to the West Coast)
To me that is abuse. All your systems should be working. Airlines and FAA require that out of the factory but get in the real world and then they start skimping.
More than once I had two boilers down and was grateful for the third.
Interesting issue. I would think you could get it approved for the longer body.
https://simpleflying.com/american-airlines-boeing-787-diverts-unwelcome-at-destination/
Remarkable for 2 reasons:
(1) It previously appeared that Riyadh Air was going to make the 787 its workhorse widebody.
(2) Seemingly no reservations about the engines on the A350-1000, despite being in the same climate as Emirates.
“Riyadh Air Expected To Order Airbus A350-1000 As Flagship Aircraft”
“In the coming weeks, Riyadh Air is expected to place a huge aircraft order, for what will ultimately be the carrier’s flagship aircraft.”
“According to widespread reports, Riyadh Air has ultimately decided to go with Airbus, and an order is expected to be announced at the upcoming Paris Air Show, taking place June 16 through June 22, 2025.”
“While exact details remain to be seen, the plan is for the airline to order roughly 50 Airbus A350s, with a particular focus on the A350-1000, which is the largest variant of the jet.”
https://onemileatatime.com/news/riyadh-air-airbus-a350-order/
Once bitten, twice shy?
> Riyadh Air has postponed its launch because it won’t get enough jets due to Boeing’s problems
Delivery of the 787 was originally expected to start from *early 2025*.
https://www.spa.gov.sa/en/aeafeb9307i
1st: Vast size difference between 787 and an A350-1000. Riyadh seems to have rethought its carry limits with a 787, decided range was more important or both.
What drives what depends on the seating they want to go with and the mix of that seating.
2nd : By the time they get the 1000, the engine issues should be resolved. Wait and see. Current GTF deliveries should have all the fixes while the early adapters wait in line for their repaired engines.
> Alaska Airlines delayed the delivery of two planes from Brazilian manufacturer Embraer last month & trimmed its summer schedule..
https://x.com/LRosenblatt_/status/1929690776977776866
I suspect we’ll be seeing lots more order deferrals in the coming months, as a result of deteriorating consumer sentiment.
Consumer credit in the US has just topped $5T, which is $14,700 per capita.
Moreover, 90-day credit card debt delinqency now stands at 15%.
These are clearly worrying figures, which paint a picture of an increasingly strained consumer.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/current/
https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2025/may/broad-continuing-rise-delinquent-us-credit-card-debt-revisited
Maybe wait and see as China seems to be back on.
Or they can shift to A220 made in Alibama!
Or pressure on the Orange Angry One.
Bringing back the Pesky Dash 8s would be an issue as they are from Canada (aka Q400 but they changed the name back)
But they have a resource in Sky West who only has 1 E175 not delivered yet (or so its listed).
Seems nutty they can’t make do with 80 some E175s at their fingertips.
I think its worth some note that when AK/Horizon dropped the Dash 8, at least one place also lost most of its service. AKA Bellingham.
I think they have one flight a day with E175 now. I think there were 4 or 5 when they ran the Dash 8.
Back in the day you could get all in one flight until the one way fare era kicked in. No discounts for a round trip and the Seattle to Bellingham trip was a separate one going and coming back as well.
At that point (family in Bham) I took the bus. Going from memory but one way SEA to Bham were approaching the same prices as ANC SEA one way.
So much for de-regulation though Horizon was the only game in town. Some of those routs must have been like running a Casino.
Main routes less (or tend to be if there is competition).
While I believe there are some serous factual errors in this, its an interesting look on aircraft and routes. AK planning on flying to Seoul with a 787-9 (no idea why they would pick that, its got two competitors on it).
As far as I know all the 787s are from the Hawaiian order.
https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/alaska-airlines-sets-new-standards-for-long-haul-travel-between-seattle-and-seoul-with-boeing-787-9/
But the shift of a 787-9 to that route vs keeping Hawaii with the A330-200. So do they retire them as planned or keep them? Or buy A330-NEO?
AK is ambitious though have to see . Seattle to Rome is another, how needed?, though not served according to what I read. Not sure why Delta does not.
A strange statement of quantity over quality though I think low cost leisure vs business travel but you still have to fill the cattle class.
Seattle Narita is well served as far as I know.
This is an estimate for Boeing for May, not mine. Not sure why the call a Pax a Widebody and Fs and 2Cs not but that is the breakout. It does not mean Boeing is at rate 38. How many came out of the pool and how many were almost ready in April obviously changes those numbers. But it does look like Boeing is getting close to rate 38 as per reports
“Boeing delivered 47 aircraft, a rise from 44 in April and 41 in March. This includes 38 narrowbodies, mainly 737 MAX 8s and 737 MAX 9s, and 7 widebodies, all 787-9s. Additionally, the company delivered 4 777Fs, one 767-300F, and four 767-2Cs. “
Trade war visible at LA port:
“Jobs at the Port of Los Angeles are down by half, executive director says”
“In May, 17 cargo ships canceled their planned trips to Los Angeles amid uncertainty over duties the Trump administration imposed worldwide.”
“Conditions are not expected to significantly improve anytime soon.
“The June numbers that we’re projecting right now are nowhere near where they traditionally should be,” Seroka said.
“An average of five ships have entered the port each day over the last week. This time of year, there would typically be between 10 and 12 ships in the port each day.”
“The slowdown in activity at the ports of L.A. and Long Beach has also spread into surrounding communities. Businesses in the area rely on a robust community of port workers to frequent their establishments.
““We’re starting to hear from small businesses and restaurants in the harbor area that their customer patronage is trending downward,” Seroka said. “Outside of COVID, this is the biggest drop I’ve seen in my career.””
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-06-07/port-of-los-angeles-job-orders-down-by-half
***
Is this drop in cargos already having an effect on the aviation industry supply chain? Consider all the small parts present in seats, IFE, cabin lighting and climate control, galleys and toilets. And what about parts for airport equipment, such as baggage scanners and sorters, label printers and catering equipment?
Reports are coming out that Engines and other systems to China have been put on hold.
That can change on a dime and probably will as there is something of a Detante and a meeting in London on what is going on as well as the Orange Angry One in a phone call with Xi)
Good summation
https://airinsight.com/a-strategic-analysis-of-chinas-acae-cj-1000a/
As regards tomorrow’s US-China meeting in London:
– Trump is very unlikely to stand down as regards US semiconductor restrictions.
– Accordingly, China won’t meaningfully relax its real earth export restrictions.
– Accordingly, Trump is unlikely to relax aircraft parts exports to China.
– …and so forth.
The meeting is just a whitewash for PR purposes. Trump wants to create the impression that he’s sincerely trying to reach a deal, so that he can blame the other side when broader product shortages and price hikes manifest themselves across the US.
China has a winning hand here: it has stockpiled aero engines, whereas the US has not stockpiled rare earths.
Who has the upper hand here? I thought DJT begged for a phone call with Xi, not the other way around. 😂
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GstqrJjXYAAvYA6?format=jpg&name=large
“Magical thinking”?
> To summarise:
Tariffs on imports means production is relocated into the US.
Banning exports / erratic supply lines does not lead to China developing it’s own manufacturing.
“Magical thinking”.
NYTimes:
> “The big question lies in what concessions by the United States and others will prompt Beijing to allow further shipments of rare earths.”
A whole day of talks today, with no outcome. Talks will continue tomorrow.
I’m guessing that the US team underestimated the difficulty of the task at hand, and overestimated their negotiating position.
Weaponization of export controls is a double-edged sword. Carmakers lose from $2 to $4 million revenue for each hour a plant sits idle.
Let there be peace on earth
NYTimes:
> “Samarium magnets can withstand temperatures hot enough to melt lead without losing their magnetic force. They are essential for … electric motors in cramped spaces like the nose cones of missiles.”
FT:
> China’s latest controls focused on rare earths that enable high-performance magnets that can withstand higher temperatures, such as dysprosium, terbium and samarium. These are vital for military applications such as jets, missiles and drones, as well as rotors, motors and transmissions that feature heavily in electric and hybrid vehicles.
From liberation day to … ??
> BBG Markets Live: “Ironically, the current global shortage of rare earths, which are needed in everything electronic, and critical for maintaining defense capabilities, is forcing the US to capitulate in its trade negotiations with China. Beijing has spent decades building up this global reliance on its rare earth industries, knowing the growing importance they would have as the world modernized.”
“As a result, the US-China trade negotiations are likely to take on a more consolatory tone. Speculation is now that the Trump administration will ease the 20% fentanyl tariffs and hold off on secondary sanctions on the likes of Venezuela and Iran for exporting oil to China. Officials are also prepared to rescind chip and software export restrictions, while likely letting in greater imports of Chinese tech products. “
> Lutnick: we’ve agreed in principle on a framework to implement the consensus reached in Geneva