Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Paris Air Show preview: Don’t look for big news
By Scott Hamilton
June 11, 2025, © Leeham News: Don’t look for big news at the Paris Air Show, which begins on Monday and runs through Thursday.
There won’t be any program launches. Orders from ATR, Airbus, Boeing and Embraer shouldn’t be anything huge. The engine makers won’t have anything new to announce, except perhaps Pratt & Whitney Canada. PWC has quietly been developing a small version of the Open Fan engine for MAEVE, a start-up Netherlands/German company.
The obvious question is whether the sibling, “big” Pratt & Whitney, is developing a full-size version for mainline jets. At big PW’s air show briefing, president Rick Deurloo vowed it’s only interest is an evolution of the Geared Turbo Fan engine.
Maeve and Pratt & Whitney Canada revealed a re-design by Maeve of its proposed 76-100 seat, five-abreast regional airliner powered by a new-design Open Fan engine. Credit: Maeve.
MAEVE is developing a 76-100 seat, five abreast aircraft aimed straight at the US Scope Clause-restricted market. It went public this week with its concept, which has operating specifications that directly compete with Embraer’s older generation E175 E1. MAEVE’s airplane is a hybrid-electric aircraft.
Downsized air show
Boeing won’t have any of its current passenger jets on display. This is a reflection of Boeing’s cost cutting this year and focus on completing certification of the 737 MAX 7/10 and 777X. It will have a mockup of the 777X interior, however.
In fact, a few manufacturers are increasingly questioning the worth of an air show vs the cost. The Paris and Farnborough Air Shows (and others) were suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic. The industry got along just fine without them. Boeing’s presence at Farnborough last year was smaller than pre-COVID, for cost reasons.
Boeing is not the only company wondering whether continued participation in the show is worthwhile. In private conversation—hence, no names here—the oft-repeated complaints about cost and benefit arises. Additionally, the fourth day of the industrial part of the air show—a Thursday—is usually a day when few announcements are made.
Leeham News will be at Paris
LNA will be at the air show. For a news organization, “everybody” is in one place at one time. In our case, we tend to work the supply chain more than the manufacturing side. But there are plenty of press briefings set up by Airbus, Boeing, GE, Pratt & Whitney, suppliers and defense industry companies.
We’ll not be paying daily attention to announced orders—plenty of other outlets will cover these. But we will have plenty of coverage during and after the show.
The UAM and Loyal wingmen companies should be there as well as the turbo-generator companies competing to be selected for the UAM manufacturers. The PWC Canada picture above shows a 10 blade prop that might be a natural progression from todays 8 bladed ones.
It is a prop with de-swirler vanes similar to RISE, hence unknown blade count prop system from RTX Hamilton Sundstrand I assume. It looks to make Heart Aerospace ES-30 uncompetitive and they need to restart with a bigger but still scope compliant aircraft.
The MAEVE looks interesting, though I’m pretty dubious of “hybrid” aircraft. A solution in search of a problem, perhaps.
On board with that. Interesting PW has at least been developing the idea.
Even in a conventional power train setup, I don’t see a market for a prop job.
The ATR and Dash 8 have more than proven the economics, the big guys want all jet fleets and are willing to charge what it takes (Horizon had horrendous pricing the last time I flew them).
RR is developing a demonstrator engine for the Single Aisle Market. Use of GTF of course aka Advance.
Its a bold move but it for sure spans the range of the RR Advance system, if it works as expected, then they can make an engine for any segment.
https://simpleflying.com/airbus-eyes-new-rolls-royce-engine-for-more-efficient-narrowbody-planes-by-late-2030s/
Hard to see where there will ever be too many conventional two-shaft engines developed again. GE on widebody might be all that is left.
@Casey:
RR has tried to make a case that its a 2.5 or 3 shaft engine, but as I understand it, PW GTF is a two shaft. RR is no different.
Clearly the days of 3 shaft having better SFC is done and gone.
GE has beat them to a pulp on the 787 engines.
GTF is a 2 shaft design with a reduction box in the low spool. Longer run will be making higher gear ratios and/or going to a planetary gear system.
If you are getting really fancy…always wondered whether you could squeeze a dual speed transmission into this configuration to contemplate a higher gear ratio at cruise altitude.
RR counts the fan, LPC and HPC as 3 spools(rotors) at different RPM’s but the turbines are just 2 spools HPT and LPT, hence 2.5 spools on average for the Ultrafan. RR often make big gas turbines with many expensive parts and now and then “hit gold” with a very competitive big engine like the T700/T-XWB. To be competitive on a 25-40k engine they must be lighter and cheaper to operate with good time on wing. Like a bigger geared Pearl 10X with Ultrafan technology.
The gearbox is another solution to the problem the 3spool layout solves.
To wit the blade tip speed limits that depress possible turbine rpm and thus require a higher diameter turbine ( with more surfaces ) to extract energy.
GTF has HP and LP turbine sections at similar rpm.
the lower RPM required for the fan is realized in the transformative gearbox.
I don’t see the 3 Spool solved that GTF aspect.
If it did RR would have continued on with 3 Spool
I am no engineer, but obviously PW went GTF as has RR because it has more return than 3 spool.
The V2500 was two spool. Under a 757 size I suspect it is a deficit.
Currently GE beats RR 3 Spool engines with a two spool. SFC, on wing time, repair.
A direct comparison is the GenX and Trent 10 (75% new from 1000). GE is exceeding their specs they committed to for the 787, RR is just about making them.
RB211 is an amazing engine. Some solid home runs with it (A330). Back then 3 Spool while costlier had offsets that made it worth it and it became very reliable.
Again the in depth details of how a two spool beats a 3 I am not capable of answering, but I can see the evidence.
ANA, NZ and BA have all given up on the Trent for the 787. The only reason for the 10 was to fix the 1000 which it failed to do and the base for the 7000 which did succeed, but without and competition.
Reports are its not as good as the RB on the A330CEO yet. No question they will get there. They may never sell a TEN engine on a 787.
@TW
GTF is fundamentally a simpler design and takes a lot of weight out of an engine.
Evolution shifts solutions.
TW regularly cannot grasp that time and the environment change.
Here the shift is in the growth ( and reliability ) evolution of gearbox solutions.
@Ewe:
Yea I do grasp it. RR struck with 3 spool when two spool proved to be better though the RB211 did turn into a very good engine.
So maybe you should read the posts.
I am curious on in depth details. Nothing calls for that kind of slander
factual observations can not be slander, right?
Just a broken record.
I will point out my own mistake here.
I referred to the RR GTF as Advance, its the Ultra Fan.
I agree with the paywalled Leeham post that the next NB
will likely be powered by a GTF, and I hope RR (with all their
research on Ultrafan) are in the mix. RISE/GE likely
to be the odd men out.
Agreed.
Not sure why PW is messing with an open rotor. Maybe insurance.
I don’t think anyone is going to buy an aircraft with RISE.
Turbo Props are taking a powder. One mfg left and they sell 50 a year?
An open rotor by PW keeps a foot in both configurations. I am assuming Airbus wants two choices. GE has an open fan option, RR an underwing option. Those two options are not going to be on the same aircraft
My thinking on it is if Airbus is faced with two jet options and one RISE type, they go with the jet.
While I can see RISE getting a core and a gearbox developed that can go into a jet engine, I don’t see any application that PW does not have.
RR has done the LEAP (pun intended) to a single aisle Demonstrator GTF.
That said, no one has the large engine GTF real world experience that PW has.
They spun the GTF core off in the form of the PW 800.
Embraer gave up on that rear engine aircraft and they were going for more economy with even shorter range.
I have flown the E175, it was fine. Twin seat setup vs 3 x 2? Unless its more width its just one row harder to get out of and in with the inner two seats.
I hear the A220 is nicer but do they have any more seat width?
Regardless the MAEVE thing is not going anywhere. Its morphed so many times now.
The only thing on the horizon is Jet Zero and I know they are fooling the investors in what they claim as a timeline.
Might be that Airbus requirements point to a 60:1 bypass ratio and 55:1 pressure ratio engine, 100% SAF with electrical power generation for electrical taxi.
Hence to meet that it points heavily to an open fan. With an open fan of the size of a DC-7 prop you need to be involved in the wing aero design.
CFM RISE is a GOR design.
as in Geared Open Rotor. 🙂
The power range for gearboxes will continue to grow upward.
Yea it is, it makes it a turbo prop type vs a jet engine.
I have pointed out that CFM gets a gearbox and a core out of RISE
Some good news for Boeing
https://archive.ph/Mq05T
Nice order.
Speaking of on the horizon: how’re things going at Boom™?
Haven’t heard from ’em lately.
😉
Politics has to come into play on the shrouded/unshrouded choice, due to the inherent protectionsim of both the USA & EU and the elevating risk of things getting worse. So to me CFM looks exposed both ways, and any market advantage would need to be siginifcantly higher now than when CFM elected to go RISE.
A perfect opportunity for RR — and other European engine makers, outside of JVs — to start taking market share.
Globalization has shown itself to be a dangerous indulgence.
“Airbus looks at transferring XLR wing to earlier A321neo variants”
“Airbus is looking to use the A321XLR’s wing on earlier models of the A321neo, to improve performance and simplify its industrial system.
“The long-range A321XLR – which entered service last year – features a number of aerodynamic changes including a single-slotted inboard flap design.
“Airbus originally developed the A321 with double-slotted flaps because the longer fuselage over the A320 meant a need for increase lift capability at rotation.
“Speaking during a technical briefing in Toulouse on 11 June, A320-family chief engineer Marc Guinot said the airframer is analysing a transfer of the XLR wing design to its predecessor variants.
“He estimates that such a measure would be implemented before the end of this decade.”
“He says the change would result in a performance improvement, although measuring it “is a difficult art” because it depends on circumstances and conditions.
“Guinot says the change could result in “better flying techniques” – in terms of commonality – between the XLR and other A321neos.”
https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/airbus-looks-at-transferring-xlr-wing-to-earlier-a321neo-variants/163317.article
Air India Boeing 787 crashed on take off In India bound for the UK.
“The aircraft, carrying 232 passengers and 12 crew members, had just lifted off the runway around 7:30 AM local time when it encountered trouble at an altitude of approximately 600 feet. Flight tracking data shows a brief climb before a sharp descent. Moments later, the plane crashed in a densely populated neighborhood near Meghani Nagar, just beyond the airport perimeter.”
“Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, an experienced pilot with over 8,000 hours of flight time, was in command of the aircraft. First Officer Clive Kundar had logged more than 1,000 hours. According to early reports, a MAYDAY call was made, indicating the crew was aware of a critical issue. The nature of the problem remains under investigation.”
https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/air-india/tragedy-in-ahmedabad-air-india-flight-ai171-crashes-after-takeoff/
Simple Flying: Ch-aviation says that the aircraft in question was VT-ANB, 11.5 years old, with 259 seats onboard.
BA stock currently down more than 7% in pre-market trading.
There’s a video of the crash in this link:
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/video/video-captures-moment-air-india-ahmedabad-london-flight-crashed-after-take-off-2739732-2025-06-12
And this link contains another video, from a different angle:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14806401/Terrifying-new-footage-shows-Air-India-jet-fall-sky-seconds-later-lose-power-exploding-deadly-fireball.html
Looking carefully at the takeoff roll in this video, there’s a moment where the left engine appears to produce a cloud of thin smoke (or dust).
Shortly after takeoff, the plane yaws noticably to the right, and seems to wobble.
May point to engine problems and attendant asymmetric thrust.
From the distance down the runway it rotates, the dust is almost certainly from the overun section.
Engine failure?
“While the cause of the crash is yet to be confirmed, the pilot’s last words could point to a possible source. The last words heard over the radio during a Mayday call to Air Traffic Control were “engine failure”, the Express reported.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/air-india-crash-terrifying-expert-35380467
Hindustan Times is reporting a survivor: a 40-year-old Briton in seat 11A.
““Thirty seconds after take-off, there was a loud noise and then the plane crashed. It all happened so quickly,” Vishwash, who received “impact injuries” on his chest, eyes and feet, told HT.”
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/40yearold-man-in-ahmedabad-hospital-says-he-survived-air-india-crash-101749734358509.html
Wonder if contaminated fuel… But the loud noise suggests foul play. They should be able to solve the reason for the crash quite quickly. A small area to search for the black boxes. Terrible and surprising in this day and age.
Loud noises can have lots of possible causes.
For example: an engine ingesting its own metal parts makes a lot of noise.
@abalone
Liberated rotor or bird strike comes to mind. Thinking not a bird strike though would cause that much damage.
It would take both engines to fail.
It can climb out on one engine though the first thing done is retract the gear.
It does not explain the extended distance down the runway.
Horrible tragedy.
Big cloud of dust on rotation, which looks like the overrun area. I don’t see that they got off by mid field.
If flaps down they are not evident. 787 pilot says 15 deg of flaps – granted the quality is not that good but you can see the gear down.
Gear never came up which is the first thing you do let alone struggling.
Just seen a clip of the aircraft it looks like the flaps was not down
“The 787 utilizes an automated system for flap deployment before takeoff. The Flight Management System (FMC) automatically calculates and sets the appropriate flap configuration based on factors like aircraft weight, runway length, and other performance parameters. Pilots still have the option to override the automatic setting if necessary, but the system is designed to optimize takeoff performance”.
Thanks I got the info from a pilot speaking on SKY news UK.
Your source may be correct.
In that case, the question then becomes: why weren’t the flaps deployed?
Did the FMC malfunction?
Or was the FMC given incorrect data as regards aircraft weight (for example)?
Or: maybe the flaps are too difficult to discern from that video?
Whatever emerges: this is a major headache for BA and/or for AI.
Or did the pilot lifted the flaps instead of the landing gear as it happened before on a British European Airways at Heathrow along time ago.
I don’t think so
The guy (very helpful) at VAS Aviation showed an image where it appeared that the speed brakes might have been partially deployed (?).
Pretty spooky footage as the plane slowly settles in, slightly nose-high.
Why was the gear not retracted?
Also I don’t think they used the full runway (uncertain!) for the T/O, despite the density
altitude being over 3000 feet.
@ Vincent
“Spooky” is a good descriptor — the slow, pensive inevitability is very disturbing to watch.
I can imagine that most of those on board had little-to-no realization that the end was nigh.
Let’s hope the black boxes survived the impact and ensuing conflagration.
If you look at the one video, the small house in the frame is about mid field.
The aircraft is still on the Runway a long way down from that location.
No more than 2/3 of the runway should be used.
Something was not right from the start. It is capable of one engine climb even that hot and loaded fully.
The gear never came up. That is the first thing you do once positive climb indicated.
The FBW will alert pilots that flaps are not set per spec, but it does not automatically deploy them ever.
If you enter the wrong take off parameters, it could call for flaps 5 and if you put them there, its going to clear the red light (or the green light comes on)
Per a 787 pilot, that is a flap 15 deg takeoff and it does not appear that they are set to that.
5 deg can’t be seen with that grainy a footage.
If I was going to list possible issues its a mis-configured takeoff as the top one.
Often there are multiples of things wrong so its possible mis configued takeoff and what flaps they had (if any) were raised instead of the gear.
They also should have had a readout on runway length left and reject is they were not meeting speed specs. But again, all that is data input and errors there can be fatal.
As far as I can determine, there are no controls in that area.
Grainy pixilated and false images do pop up. There is a term for it.
I saw one picture of what is the right wing.
Slats were out, but those extend at 1 or 5 deg setting.
At the 5 deg setting, there is a pretty clear rear flap deployment.
It seems confirmed that they used the entire length of the runway. 150 knots.
Tw,
> It seems confirmed that they used the entire length of the runway.
> 150 knots.
Why you think so??
Can someone explain why, if the aircraft could leave the runway and climb to 600 ft that it couldn’t maintain that altitude, assuming that nothing else changed?
However, the statement by the survivor that the lights started flickering between green and white sounds to me like a major electrical /computer related issue, even if the buses used for flight control are totally separate from the cabin controls
“‘Engines and lavatories’: Airbus lays blame for slow start to annual deliveries ”
***
A320/321 neo: shortage of LEAP engines.
““We are missing engines from CFM International. We have nearly 40 gliders, as we call them, parked at our sites,” said Scherer, according to L’Usine Nouvelle. “Some are visible here, and many more are in Hamburg, Germany. Without these engineless aircraft, our deliveries would be slightly higher than currently forecast.” ”
***
A350 / A330 neo: shortage of cabin equipment / lavatories (!)
“Scherer also reportedly said that delays to A330 and A350 deliveries were being caused by bottlenecks in aircraft cabin equipment and lavatories. ”
““It’s a bit embarrassing to admit, but right now the biggest bottleneck we’re facing on wide-body aircraft, especially the A350, is the lavatories,” explained Scherer according to Le Figaro. ”
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/airbus-delivery-aircraft-scherer
I believe interiors were or are the big hold up on 787 deliveries.
Argues against those boutique interiors but then how else do you differentiate ?
Can somebody please go interview ex-CEO Calhoun and ask him if this 787 crash was caused by poorly trained foreign pilots? I miss seeing the guy open his mouth and stick both feet in it like clockwork Alas, Calhoun has been allowed to slink off into the sunset with his ill-gotten gains.
Of course, best case scenario for Boeing is it turns out to be pilot error or poor maintenance, and it might well have been one of those. Just saying it would be premature and crass of Boeing to suggest those causes at the moment….which is why I would feel some real schadenfreude seeing Calhoun do just that.
Ah well, the witch is finally dead…
I believe Calhoun is still alive and living in luxury.
The 787 crash is truly a puzzler. This aircraft has even higher standard system than Airbus in that it has synthetic speed.
The Speed at the end of the runway is slow. Which at least partially explains no rotation.
Brakes dragging or not eno0ugh thrust. Flaps would only have a slight slowdown factor so how much those were or were not deployed? The 787 should also have an alert to not enough speed building.
It looks like 3 possible major issues.
1. Speed
2. Flaps maybe
3. Why takeoff was not rejected
each of those has a myriad of possible issues.
We had a DC-8 with locked up brakes and failed its takeoff 40-50 years ago. Ice on runway so the wheels were sliding in that case. There was no reason found for brakes to lock up. One other case before that that they got them released (dry runway). There was a Stop order out for any DC-8 with locked up brakes to not do anything to it so they could inspect. Never happened again as far as I know.
I don’t see lock up and again, there should be alarms on distance vs speed and not realizing speed needed.
Takeoff thrust set to idle by the software ?
Automated systems sometimes mean the pilots cant analyse a problem fast enough. See Air France over South Atlantic
Once a Tristar just after rotation from JFK did an immediate hard landing when the pilot flying let go of the control column.
Yeah, I know Calhoun is living in luxury.
I meant “the witch is dead” in a metaphorical sense. He is out of his position of power.
I hope he knows that he is widely considered a failure from a toxic management culture.
He does not care.
His only goal was to get lots of money.
To add to the news before the Paris Airshow, we now have a war going on in the Middle East, which is going to adversely affect commercial flights over the region.
The last 6 times that I flew in/out of Dubai on Emirates/Qatar, we flew extensively through Iranian airspace. However, Iran has now closed its airspace until further notice. What other options are left?
Even if Saudi Arabia / Egypt opened their airspace to these flights, the flying times would be much longer, and who’d now want to fly in the wider region with missiles flying back and forth?
“After Israel strikes Iran, M.East airlines divert flights, airspace closed”
“As reports of strikes on Iran emerged, a number of commercial flights by airlines including Dubai’s Emirates, Lufthansa and Air India were flying over Iran.”
“Eastern Iraq near the border with Iran contains one of the world’s busiest air corridors, with dozens of flights crossing between Europe and the Gulf, many on routes from Asia to Europe, at any one moment.
“Flights steadily diverted over Central Asia or Saudi Arabia, flight tracking data showed.”
““The situation is still emerging – operators should use a high degree of caution in the region at this time,” according to Safe Airspace, a website run by OPSGROUP, a membership-based organization that shares flight risk information.
“Several flights due to land in Dubai were diverted early on Friday. An Emirates flight from Manchester to Dubai was diverted to Istanbul and a flydubai flight from Belgrade diverted to Yerevan, Armenia.”
https://english.alarabiya.net/News/middle-east/2025/06/13/after-israel-strikes-iran-meast-airlines-divert-flights-airspace-closed
Adding to the rapidly-growing list of screw-ups brought to us by AI search bots:
“”How Is Airbus Not Suing Google?” AI Wrongly Blames Airbus For Air India Boeing Crash”
“As the controversy snowballed, Google applied a quick fix, stating it had manually removed the response from AI overviews.”
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/how-is-airbus-not-suing-google-ai-wrongly-blames-airbus-for-air-india-boeing-crash-8655959
***
And for those who missed this gem recently:
“Anthropic’s new AI model shows ability to deceive and blackmail”
https://www.axios.com/2025/05/23/anthropic-ai-deception-risk
Also:
“UK judge sounds alarm on AI misuse in courts”
https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-judge-alarm-ai-misuse-court-hallucination-chat-artificial-intelligence/
***
Hundreds of billions of dollars spent by US firms on AI…and this is what we get as a “benefit”?
Lawyers are not good at utilizing AI agents? Haha.
That’s the problem, spending time to verify the agents’ output.
Now Ortberg is no-show.
How soon BA/BCA is going to talk up using AI for designing their next aircraft?
I hear ya on the so-called ‘AI’. Smoke and mirrors..
AW: Airbus is building 60+ single-aisle monthly
AW: Airbus Sees New A350 Variant Flight Trials Coming In 2026
Not too shabby on the output, all things considered.
I think its amazing. I don’t care they have not hit rate 75.
60 hugely complex aircraft a month? That is just incredible (let alone the wide body builds)
> Airbus nearing deal to sell A220 jets to Poland’s LOT
Looks like the A220 is selling, unlike the elusive MAX 7. Will TW register new info?
AW:
> Airbus is looking to add two metric tons to the A330-900’s maximum takeoff weight, which promises to yield a 150-nm range improvement for the widebody.
> Airbus, in April, secured certification for what it calls a low-speed performance improvement for the A330-900. It includes the ability for users to optimize the aircraft’s aerodynamic configuration for takeoff conditions. It also allows for faster landing gear retraction to reduce drag more quickly, improving takeoff trajectory and performance.
In some cases, it could add an ability to take off with 6.9 tons more payload, with the average benefit around 2.6 tons—or the equivalent of about 20 passengers.
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/airbus-working-increase-a330neo-mtow
AB really are steadily improving the A330, aren’t they? TFTL.
April 3
AW: A 3.5-week strike at Safran Aero Composite in Commercy, Eastern France, resulted in a one-week interruption in the production of CFM Leap 1A engines at Safran Aircraft Engines’ Melun Villaroche assembly line, a union representative says.
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/march-strike-caused-leap-1a-production-halt-safran-factory
Leap’s On-Wing Time: 1,800 cycles in demanding environments and high thrust setting.
AW: The U.S. Air Force’s first Boeing E-7A Wedgetail prototypes are facing delays due to rework early in their builds