Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
China, Boeing appear near massive order: report
By Scott Hamilton
Aug. 21, 2025, © Leeham News: Boeing is nearing a massive order for up to 500 aircraft with China, Bloomberg reports. Completing the deal depends on political considerations, as so many of these do between China and the US for Boeing or Europe for Airbus airplanes.
Air China is the primary state airline of China. Boeing 737 MAX. Credit: CNBC.
But it’s significant that negotiations are active and appear nearing a deal if the politics can be worked out between the Chinese government and the Trump Administration. Boeing was frozen out by Beijing in 2017 when President Donald Trump, in his first term, began imposing tariffs on China in 2017.
President Biden, who took office in 2021, not only kept the Trump tariffs in place, economic and industrial sanctions were imposed when China covertly aligned itself with Russia following its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. When Trump was reelected in 2024, one of his first actions the following year was to impose more tariffs on China.
Even if the Boeing deal doesn’t successfully conclude soon, the very fact that serious negotiations and a near-deal validate LNA’s thesis since
Related Articles
- Here’s why China needs Boeing as much as Boeing needs China July 7, 2021
- China still needs Boeing as much as Boeing needs China July 11, 2022
- China still needs Boeing as much as Boeing needs China despite interminable limbo Oct. 31, 2022
- China banks on C919, but numbers say it still needs Boeing Sept. 2, 2024
LNA’s analysis over the years concluded that China’s home-grown COMAC C919 could not fill the gap for the domestic demand for new airliners in the coming years created with the 2019 21-month grounding of the Boeing 737 MAX. China was the first to ground the aircraft after two fatal crashes of the MAX five months apart in 2018 and 2019. It was the last to un-ground the MAX after the Federal Aviation Administration recertified the airplane in November 2021.
Airbus can’t fill China’s need
Airbus, which assembles the A320/321neo in Tianjin, China, and delivers more from its facilities in Europe, also could not fill the Boeing gap. China does not yet manufacture widebody airplanes, and Airbus alone cannot fill the Chinese demand for this category airplane.
Hence: China needs Boeing, regardless of politics or domestic ambitions.
Throughout LNA’s advocacy that Boeing would see a return to receiving orders from China, readers and some analysts (who should have known better) believed that Boeing was through permanently in China.
I’ll be following this story with interest.
I’ll believe it when I see it 👀
I understand LNA’s analysis, but the world has changed in the meantime.
Trump is so anti-China on so many fronts that it’s hard to imagine any form of détante.
Your mistake is assessing him as anti China (and in my case, I am not either, I am anti dicatators)
He is a grandstander and China is the biggest elephant in the room to grandstand with (let alone its equal economy which does not reflect its build ability which is massive)
So, the OA causes problems and then claims to have solved them.
Brazil is a different nut to crack (yea bad pun). There it is the fate of a fellow dictator, I don’t know how that ends.
Still there is the transaction aspect (or claimed) where us builds a lot of the stuff going into an Embraer aircraft. The US Regional s have only one choice for aircraft in that segment.
” .. I am anti dicatators ..”
What about d i c k tators like Trump? ;-)))
“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”
Reminds me of a horse, windmill and mistaken “giants/dragons”…
“What about d i c k tators like Trump? ;-)))”
Yes, him too
So, are we talking a potential 1000 aircraft order upcoming .
According to Bloomberg, the big majors are already allocating who gets what on the mega Airbus part of the order.
Does Boeing get a slice of the pie, or quietly hoping on the sidelines.
In theory Boeing goes first to get Trump off China’s case.
No idea what drives the Chinese big 3 decisions on this. Its all a government order and then some kind of allocation and probably via negotiation to spread them out.
China Southern is more Boeing heavy.
Not really.
From Wikipedia, CZ NB passenger aircraft: 336 AB / 197 BA
Total passenger aircraft: 381 AB / 241 BA
What 140 is not heavy?
Odd match they teach over there
“Odd match..”
I wonder if that one ever reads its own comments before posting.
🙂
So, what kind of delivery slots could be given to China in the event of such an order?
2030 at the absolute earliest? More likely 2035?
That’s around the timeframe of the expected EIS of the C929…
After 2029… wink wink. I’m more interested in at what prices BA is willing to sell its aircraft.
+1
Correction: 2028*
Bloomberg:
2,326 AB vs. 1,874 BA aircraft in Chinese airlines’ fleet.
> The mega sale to China, *years in the making*, is contingent on the two nations defusing the trade hostilities that hark back to Trump’s first term in office — and could still fall apart…
> The nation’s leaders were close to a similar announcement in 2023*, but then-President Joe Biden and Xi left a San Francisco summit without consummating an aircraft sale.
> Complicating matters for Boeing is a leadership void in China. Alvin Liu, its top executive in China and a fluent Mandarin-speaker with extensive government contacts, left the company in recent weeks. Carol Shen has been named interim president of Boeing China…
> Shares of the US planemaker advanced less than 1%
> Aircraft orders for Boeing have figured large in US diplomacy since Trump returned to the White House in January, with nations touting new, tentative and existing deals for airplanes…
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/YyE9SXrmnIxHW81uq01aMQ–/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTY0MDtoPTM2NTtjZj13ZWJw/https://media.zenfs.com/en/bloomberg_holding_pen_162/891a6b511575ac56c17e52347cccf971
Rather large contingency, there.. as the article states,
we heard similar talk during the last administration;
idle talk, as it turned out.
FT: Chinese governmental agencies pushed to ban H20
With Trump/Trump admin’s loose mouth, who knows!
@ Pedro
That H20 story is a real laugh 😅
Nvidia assumed that, if it threw some scraps from the table, the dog would jump at them!
As it turns out:
1) The dog doesn’t need them, because it has its own, domestic alternatives.
2) The dog doesn’t trust them, because of suspicions of a killswitch / backdoor.
What a cold shower for some egos in the US.
Keep in mind that LOT jumped ship after a major Embraer commitment in regional s and now is going to A220.
Politics plays a part and sometimes the major part in those orders no matter who.
Embraer has not core base like the EU to leverage as local.
> Nvidia has told some of its component suppliers to suspend production work related to the H20
Just learned today China will add enough clean energy capacity to power (850 TWh) Germany & the UK combined (817 TWh)
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-record-solar-growth-keeps-chinas-co2-falling-in-first-half-of-2025/
@TW
I don’t recall LOT has made any new* commitment for the E2, your source(s)??
@Abalone
That is what I want to know. The C919 is not exactly spooling up as telegraphed. I believe I saw 6 deliveries YTD but that might be out of date. At its basest level, this might simply be an insurance policy against delivery delays.
The C929 EIS is not exactly written in stone either. I have to believe A330/350 slots are not nearly as constrained as A320. You do not hear about Airbus struggling to boost those production level.
The C939 is more of an idea than a plan at this point.
I concur as regards 6 C919 deliveries so far this year.
3 more frames are currently in production. Of interest — one of those frames (MSN0032) is the new C919-600 (the special, shortened version for use at high-altitude airports in the Himalayas).
COMAC said earlier this year that they expect a back-loaded 2025 delivery schedule.
Just because we don’t know about it doesn’t mean that there isn’t lots going on behind the scenes. For instance, I can imagine that CJ-1000A turbofan certification is being prioritized, as is “de-westernization” of the rest of the airframe, inspired by Russia’s progress on this front.
This year may end up being a slow one for deliveries, but that doesn’t mean that 2026 will be the same. COMAC has said that it has a large stockpile of LEAP-1Cs.
I think COMAC can event get wherever it wants for production but I am not enthusiastic about the timeline. Ambitious is saying it kindly.
One thing to consider as you start getting higher rates is the need to bring redundancy into the production mix to spread around the volume and risk. COMAC will get to experience that joy repeatedly. And all it takes is one bad or unproven actor to bring production to its knees.
@Casey:
I think most of the more serious and considered knew the C919 ramp up was going to be slow. Nothing against China ability, but a LCA is a massive endeavor. Some thinks its easy and its not. That Boeing was making anything is actually astonishing . Despite the best Management efforts to liquidate the company there was a core still working (not well but it was mostly producing safe aircraft).
COMAC has the added burden of being a state owned and controlled company. No one wants to risk getting axed or they would be working for one of the independents operations.
For some good reading, the attempt to supplant Starlink is fascinating with a major government company, a major somewhat private company (govt backed but not directed) and a number of smaller ones all vying for the same prize.
Diverting C919 resources to a limited need high and hot version is not a commercial decision, its a political one. I think I read there was 13 C919s currently being operated.
The 929 is a pipe dream. 939 is delusional. 2040 if the 929 comes to exist. If they are going to sell it to more than Zimbabwe, its got to be certified and reliable supported systems.
As for engines, China can and is making high performance (military) jet engines. What is not known is how long they last. Its a refining process to build, test, see where the weak wear out areas are, then upgraded. Russia never did get the same longevity Western engines have.
And that is a bigger rub for Civilian. If they are not reliable you have an issue. Get a history of single engine operations, bad news. Equally is the time on wing. All those can be solved, but there are only 8,000 testing hours in a year. And as RR has seen, you can have hidden flaws that take a few years to show up. GP found one of those though its been a single one, not sure what the trigger was.
And you also have to have a competitive design fuel economy wise. CFM and PW have shown that is a tough one. Push the limits and get great economy and the rest gives you grief.
Airlines are saying they don’t ever want to see a new engine again.
There are 28 C919 completed per planespotters, 22 delivered to customers, six test aircraft.
From what I can find, delivery this year is quite likely to at least match that of last year (13). Let’s see when B-658X is delivered.
From May this year:
“C919 carries over 2m passengers in two years of operation”
“As of May 27, China Eastern Airlines’ C919 fleet had logged more than 28,000 safe flight hours, conducted more than 11,400 commercial flights, and transported more than 1.57 million passenger trips, the carrier told the Global Times on Wednesday.
“The C919 has demonstrated a strong safety performance and shows steady improvement in metrics like daily utilization, proving its comprehensive operational reliability, the carrier said. ”
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202505/1335043.shtml
***
The Chinese seem happy with the aircraft’s performance.
And then there’s this:
“Air Karachi could be the first foreign customer for the COMAC C919”
https://www.airdatanews.com/air-karachi-could-be-the-first-foreign-customer-for-the-comac-c919/
COMAC delivered 47 aircraft last year.
From Jan to July 2024, only three (or four per planespotter) C919 were delivered.
This is funny!
Bloomberg November 9, 2017
> Boeing China Order Hawked by Trump Is Said to Be Mostly Old News
• Deal is signed in Beijing for 260 narrow-bodies and 40 wide
> US President Donald Trump on Thursday touted an order for 300 Boeing Co. planes. Yet the bulk of the deal announced in Beijing was old news.
> The 300 aircraft order from China Aviation Supplies Holding Co., the state-owned company that does bulk orders for local airlines, is mostly for jets that have been agreed upon since 2013 and set to be delivered through 2020, said one of the people…
> Last month, Singapore Airlines formally signed a firm order with Boeing for $13.8 billion at list prices in a ceremony witnessed by Trump and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. That was the finalization of a deal that was announced in February as a letter of intent.
> “Three hundred aircraft for China is supermarket shopping, not Costco stockpiling. There will need to be more orders soon.”
> Air China Ltd., China Eastern Airlines Corp., China Southern Airlines Co. — the three biggest state carriers — together plan to add more than 600 aircraft through 2020. Air China and China Eastern intend to introduce 167 and 191 aircraft respectively through 2019, while China Southern has plans for almost 300 more planes by 2020, according to the companies’ financial statements.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-09/boeing-wins-china-orders-for-300-planes-worth-over-37-billion
According to the chart from Bloomberg above:
Airbus had higher deliveries than Boeing from 2010 to 2012? What does “others” mean? Business jets??
Also from Bloomberg:
Christmas Decorations Come With Higher Price Tag This Holiday Season Thanks to Tariffs
Would it be cheaper if you cross the border?? 🙄
BA or AB?
with such an order
AB could expand production in Tianjin. ( The know how is established.)
Second A320FAL line, they already have the A330 finishing line ( running already?)
CN would smile on that.
BA has to get away from pushing stuff over with their ass that they just recently have errected. otherwise I see no traction there.
Forget about BA creating offshore FAL sites.
The South China Morning Post had a more nuanced story on this subject 3 weeks ago:
“Boeing’s orders in China may rise as Beijing surveys airlines’ needs”
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3319899/boeings-orders-china-may-rise-beijing-surveys-airlines-needs
Of note:
““The CAAC may be asked to make preparations [about new jets China may buy from Boeing] so the China side can present it to the US or use as a leverage in talks in Stockholm … And we know Trump will visit China by the end of the year so China needs to prepare for ‘gifts’ for him,” Yang said
“Yang added, though, that any deals for Boeing would remain “fluid” unless a long-term agreement could be reached.”
@ Mr. Hamilton
Typo in the article:
“When Trump was reelected in 2020, one of his first actions the following year was to impose more tariffs on China.”
Trump wasn’t reelected in 2020 (thankfully) 👀
Well if he had been he would be gone now! (well maybe)
fixed. thanks.
“Tipranks: “500 Planes”: Big New China Sale Proves Little Help for Boeing Stock (NYSE:BA)”
“I know we have heard this one before, but aerospace stock Boeing is currently in talks to set up a monster sale to China. As part of ongoing trade talks between President and President Xi Jinping, Boeing is in line to potentially land an impressive sale of up to 500 aircraft. And apparently, this time, China will take delivery of them. Yet investors proved a bit gun-shy, or at least wanted to see the receipts first, because Boeing shares slipped fractionally in Thursday afternoon’s trading.”
https://www.tipranks.com/news/500-planes-big-new-china-sale-proves-little-help-for-boeing-stock-nyseba
In understanding China requirements, Leeham opened my eyes. They have the data and pulled it together.
The logic of a Boeing order first is to let Trump crow and stop the tariff threats.
Its not like China does not operate Boeing current build jets (MAX and 787). Also some 777 and even 747.
China Southern would be heaviest in 787, 777 as well as NG and MAX 737s.
I would do some rationalization and make them Airbus or Boeing, it would simplify the structure a lot.
Maybe 2 go Airbus and one Boeing.
Boeing has shown price discipline on orders. China will get good discounts but not firesales.
Ryanair thought they could smoose them and they refused (the last round)
“Boeing has shown price discipline on orders.”
😅
Every Boeing quarterly earnings release contradicts that fantasy.
Average unit revenue is much lower than the corresponding figure at Airbus.
That’s why AB has average earnings of €4M per frame, whereas BA has an average loss of $10M per frame.
🙈
#SellingBelowCost
Per discussion above:
C929:
“China’s C929 widebody passenger jet to make maiden commercial flight by 2035”
“Comac manager tells partners at Paris Air Show that plane is expected to be certified domestically by 2032”
“Prototypes are under development and domestic suppliers are reportedly due to start shipping some large components, including the first fuselage middle section, in 2027.”
***
C919:
“The source said a stretched variant of the C919, featuring an extended range and higher passenger and cargo capacities, would enter commercial operation by 2030. The Comac manager said a C919 plateau version, tailor-made for high-altitude airports, is set to have its first flight next year and achieve domestic certification in 2027.”
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3315051/chinas-c929-widebody-passenger-jet-make-maiden-commercial-flight-2035-source
10 years to ERS is not unrealistic at face value. However recent history has not been kind to certification projections…COMAC included. I wish them luck.
I’ve mentioned this in other articles but unlike the C919 the C929 is going to have far fewer airlines to sell to. I can think of maybe a half dozen and then it starts to get pretty thin.
“…C929 is going to have far fewer airlines to sell to. I can think of maybe a half dozen and then it starts to get pretty thin.”
Essentially the same statement applies to the 777X.
China has a much bigger circle of friends than the US — I suspect there’ll be lots of potential takers in that group.
My statement is more of an observation that there are few airlines that fly widebody. Think large national airlines. Just fewer that play in that range…even moreso now that an A321 can fly as long as it can.
Outside of China…you probably have Vietnam and Indonesia as logical targets. Best bet is maybe a play for some ME volume.
Plus: Central Asia, Africa, South America.
Additionally: it’s quite popular in Asia to use widebodies on busy shorthaul routes.
Remember: middle-class population growth in the Global South is exploding.
China’s Belt and Road Initiative has put infrastructure consultants and expertise in many developing countries. That network could be extended to include aerospace product support, which is the key to any kind of meaningful aircraft export opportunities. China’s developing friends around the world will only purchase Chinese aircraft if a solid reliable support system is in place. That’s the reason Russian aerospace exports have had had limited success. The SuperJet is a great example where customers ordered significant quantities but after a few years found they couldn’t keep them flying.
COMAC has already set up customer support offices in Hong Kong and Singapore.
More will follow.
Singapore, in particular, is significant because it is seen as a center of technical and logistical excellence, and has a hub function in Asia. It also has large aviation MRO facilities.
Brazil has already expressed interest in the C919. Easy for COMAC to set up a pivotal base there.
https://theaircurrent.com/dispatches/?entry=27479
Remember that the BRICS block represents 50% of the world’s population, and 44% of world GDP (PPP). It has far more resources at its disposal than the G7.
Note the “Domestic” certification.
China does run A330 Regionals so the 929 (if its ever built) could take the place of those.
A recognized certification is critical for a wide body.
Granted there is the Russian market that is failing to produce much of anything.
How many years have they been touting the 929? Worse than the 777X.
Statements in a press release are not facts.
“A recognized certification is critical for a wide body.”
For the C909, we already have 6 countries outside China that accept its certification. More will come.
Looks like CAAC certification may become more “recognized” than some might think.
The US occupies about 6% of the world’s landmass. Same for the EU. That leaves 88% outside their airspace jurisductions. You can do a lot of flying in that!
You know better.
For others, EASA and the FAA are world recognized. If either approves it, then they honor that.
It does not mean they blindly accept it,l Brazil did not on the MAX and caught MCAS and made em put it in the Brazil manuals (good for them)
Zimbabwe will not get approval to fly their smoke in the sky 929 to Australia. They can fly a C919 in country all they want.
So apply to South Africa (who might). But that same aircraft in South Africa still can’t fly to Australia – where else do you fly a wide body? – oh yea, Europe and the US.
So yea, small countries on the hook to the Chinese can approve it, in their airspace. Their neighbors will decide for themselves.
Brazil will indeed be interesting to see if they violate their own certification process.
Still kind of tough to build an airline on a delivery every year or two.
“Hence: China needs Boeing, regardless of politics or domestic ambitions.”
I don’t buy that argument. Boeing has never been serious about industrial cooperation with China. If you want China orders, then you need industrial offset to get the deal done. Airbus has enough industrial capacity to handle China requirements Reminder last China order to Boeing was 2017 You don’t reward poor behavior (US tariffs)!
“With Airbus going a rate of 75 single aisle a month by 2027 (A321 assembly lines from eight to ten by 2026.) and is aiming to increase the A350 production rate to 12 aircraft per month by 2028 along with A330 production rate at 4 aircraft per month”
“Airbus has a Widebody Completion and Delivery Center (C&DC) in Tianjin (since 2021) that performs final assembly of components for the A350, including cabin installation, painting, and delivery to customers, particularly those in the Chinese market”
“Airbus produces the A320 family of aircraft in China at its Final Assembly Line (FAL) in Tianjin, which began operating in 2008 as the first Airbus production facility outside of Europe. The facility is currently undergoing expansion, which will include a second assembly line, to support increased demand and capacity, with the new line expected to be operational by early 2026. The Airbus Final Assembly Line Asia (FALA) in Tianjin, China, has assembled more than 750 A320 family aircraft since it began operation in 2008. “
I will happily accept Leeham assessment, they have the data at their finger tips.
And we have those who are clearly don’t understand profit and loss. Put em in the throw salt over your shoulder and it won’t rain.
I can differentiate from Boeing being in debt vs selling product.
There is the rant that Boeing could not fund a new aircraft, and then, they borrow 20 (30?) billion.
Boeing keeps doing what they claim can not be done. That is clearly different than the trajectory Boeing was on under Calhoun.
One aspect I do ponder a bit, does Boeing really need China? They have an enormousness backlog. 4000 something in MAX, a lot in 787s and the 777X keeps stacking up orders (Airbus is now talking about the A350-2000 again)
Boeing has put itself in a position they will be a perpetual 2nd place. If they pull the production act together, they make all the MAX they can.
So call it 500 a year. 10 years backlog? (with orders coming in during that 10 years).
Why should Boeing risk a new aircraft and why would Airbus? They have the 1 slot and will keep it.
Airbus could upsize the A320 with 4 more rows and slot in the A220-500.
I would like to see the profit and loss statements for the China A320 line.
Can the order evaporate, yep. Can the order be put in and then selective execution? Yep.
Various European nations (read that France and the UK) are doing drive by in the West Philippine Sea. You never know when the script gets flipped.
“I would like to see the profit and loss statements for the China A320 line.”
You need to look at China not from profit or loss for Airbus. Keep market share away from Boeing and sell single aisle at break even to get the orders for the profitable widebody market
AB is making a healthy profit from delivering a similar number of aircraft like BA in the first half, although BA lost $4.5 billion in the same period.
Anyone who’s rational knows AB adds a second a320 FAL in China because it makes money there!
Correction: although BCA* lost
> FM David Lammy challenged Defence Ministry’s plan to send a frigate through the Taiwan Strait
Don’t forget a second RAF F-35 was stranded following an in-flight malfunction. The CSG 25 lacks sufficient air defense protection, Their F-35 is all show and no go. Last December, then-NSA Jake Sullivan said bluntly that the US will experience “exhaustion of munition stockpiles very rapidly” if it were ever to face the Chinese military. (That was before the US used more than a year’s supply of interceptors in the summer.) Colby also said the US military balance with China in the region has declined so drastically that a conflict with China risks decimating the American military.
David:
You are going to get Frank P on your case.
Heresy, you can’t sell at a loss (how about all them at loss A380s and A350s and A330NEO?
@Transworld
“And we have those who are clearly don’t understand profit and loss. Put em in the throw salt over your shoulder and it won’t rain. I can differentiate from Boeing being in debt vs selling product.”
For Boeing, at this time – they are linked. Let me explain, perhaps in a way you can understand:
Let’s say YOU are the proud owner of the new manufacturing company “Transworld Farm Tractors”, which you started up in friendly Alaska with $1 million in seed money, out of your own pocket and a $5 million term loan (10 yrs) that you borrowed from the bank. You spent a total of $5 million (out of the $6 million), so you still have $1 million in the bank.
The bank has also extended you a $10 million line of credit.
So now, you’re building and selling tractors.
First month is done and after selling 50 tractors and getting fully paid for them, you took in $500,000 from customers, but spent $650,000 to make them.
Now, your bank account (backed up with the line of credit) is at $850,000.
Happens again next month – bank down to $700k.
Four months on, same old and you’re down to $100k. (6 months in and you’ve lost $900k.)
7th month and your bank account is ($50,000). You are now paying interest on the line of credit, in addition to your bank loan.
You can’t pull out, this is everything to you, so you keep going.
First year, you lose $1.8 million, while selling 600 tractors. Line of credit is now at ($800k).
In this case – is selling product linked to debt?
Sure is.
———————————————–
Here’s another point:
After the first year, you’ve sold 600 tractors and while everything seems to be working well, you’ve still lost $1.8 million.
It happens again next year. In two years, you’ve sold 1200 tractors and lost $3.6 million.
Year three – 1,800 total tractors sold and lost $5.4 million.
What do you do? Your tractors are selling like hotcakes, but your losing your shirt. Everybody loves ’em, your tractors are the toast of the town… but you’re going broke doing it?
You either have to A) Make ’em cheaper or B) Raise Prices (and risk losing sales) – don’t you?
Do you see the problems that Boeing is facing?
You’re a mixture of brave and foolhardy to attempt to educate that one!
🙈
@Frank P:
You of all people should know that losses are not a result of selling below costs.
By your reckoning Boeing would make ooodles of money if they quit building aircraft.
Airbus sells aircraft at a loss as well. The A350 has probably not broken even yet. Airbus lives on the glory of the A320.
What you cannot do is jack up prices to make up for past mis management. The losses were not a cost of aircraft issue, it was a 25 billion price tag on the 787 due to how they hosed up the program.
The MAX is the same for two different reasons.
Any given program has to break even, but do you chat the KC-46A costs to the 787? MAX?
Does the losses on the KC-46A affect the P&L? Yep.
So by your accounting Boeing should charge 100 milling per each MAX to make up the Space and Military contract losses.
777X is at a loss. Its not even being delivered yet. That program got caught up in circumstances that had nothing to do with the program.
“You of all people should know that losses are not a result of selling below costs.”
No further comment, Your Honor. 😉
@TW
“The A350 has probably not broken even yet. ”
The A350 broke even in 2019. This was reported in the Airbus full year results at the time.
BA charged off $10.83 billion against the 777X program.
How much did BA spend on 777X R&D that’s not included in the above tally?
“losses”
that is outlay they can not push into the deferred basket apparently.
Anything known about the tide levels in that bucket?
Boeing also built a completion center in China, and they’re probably saying if it’s not going to be utilized they’ll shutter it. It’s interesting that China wants and gets industrial offsets but when other countries demand the same it’s considered “unfair”.
Yea, we need to pollute because we have not achieved what the West has done.
Oh, our economy is 2nd? Oh woe is us.
How about not spending 72 billion on an aircraft that is out of date and trickle production?
You can try to play the victim.
@TW
If this was one airline I might agree. China needs more planes than either can produce alone. In honor of Jaws at 50 years, they need a bigger boat.
Noooooooooo…
He has a tiny, petit blonde girlfriend and they’re making it back to earth in the lifeboat, just fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaws_(James_Bond)
“Here’s to us!”
Double entendre I guess. My reference to jaws involves a big shark.
@casey:
Not arguing that at all.
Now if Airbus devoted its full output to China? Hmmm.
Better put is world orders are above what Airbus or Boeing can build, let alone the trickle line in C919.
Leeham has done the math and I defer to them. I don’t have that data, they do.
Basically they are being told they are lying.
..for some definition of “needs”.
We’ll see how it goes. Any word on when this “massive order”
for Boeing will seemingly be finalized?
Congratulations to Boeing! Good for them, good for the company. Damn the torpedoes full speed ahead …. Who cares what the others say.
Uh… “appears near” has been heard before, especially WRT Boeing and China.
We’ll see how it *actually* goes, in the fullness of time.
Your email to us all says “when President Trump was reelected in 2020”. Can you please have the decency to stick to facts? I don’t mind the evidence so long as it is real. Thanks!
Never heard of a typo?
A little harsh, indeed…
Hear that Vincent? Your partner can have em and I can’t? Hmmm.
Kind of like the FAA and CAC. One is controlled and the other is not.
Yours wasn’t a typo, Trans- as you know.
#Dunning-Kruger candidate
You slept in very, very late today, didn’t you bro? 😉 😉
“The concept of the Dunning-Kruger effect is based on a 1999 paper by Cornell University psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger. The pair tested participants on their logic, grammar, and sense of humor, and found that those who performed in the bottom quartile rated their skills far above average. For example, those in the 12th percentile self-rated their expertise to be, on average, in the 62nd percentile..”
Interesting, first time I think you have offered a tech example (well not tech but…..)
I pulled A and Bs in school. I pulled As and Bs in my college time (no degree, I like working in dirty nasty places),.
Reading comprehension I scored top of the class, was inducted into the High School honor society (yea that was a shock, something about my wrestling career getting me over the top)
Commercial Pilots license with instrument rating (I think commercial requires the instrument rating now but not back then).
Solid pilot, not brilliant aka Chuck and the fellers.
Not sure how you rate humor, mid level? I tend to have none on tech subjects but I don’t see tech subjects as humor as such.
Overall, above average but not in the top 25% for sure.
Age does impede thought process sadly but still ok.
China is figuring out the certification process for large aircraft. Their problem is that nobody will explicitly describe the process to them because this intellectual property is the core of an OEM knowledge base. China gets the same pile of regulations as anybody else but needs to develop a path thru them with proofs of compliance. The FAA provides limited guidance and consulting DARs with the breath of skills needed don’t really exist in the free market. The Chinese airplanes aren’t bad when yiu look at them hard. Yes they are heavy and miss the spec fuel numbers BA and AB hit, but the industry is littered with recent ventures that failed. If the TU204, Mitsu”s Spacejet and Sukhois Superjet failed, perhaps we’re actually bit hard on the Chinese. IF/When they get an approved path to certification, they will be formidable competitors in short order….. I was at DAC Long beach when we sent them the MD80 kits, I still feel that was an act of Industrial Treason
wasn’t treason…the trunkliner program was industrial offset to get commercial aircraft orders…but
“In 1992, McDonnell Douglas partnered with China to build a total of 40 MD-80 and MD-90 aircraft under license for the domestic Chinese market. ”
“The program’s failure was partly due to McDonnell Douglas ceasing to supply raw materials after its merger with Boeing.”
That said, it gave mfg. knowledge to the Chinese that lead to ARJ 21 aka C909 ( which is a overweight and long in the tooth technology aircraft)
Boeing was the dominant player in China, McDonnell had to break into the market. McDonnell had to offer offset and other provisions to win…
1985:
> Culminating six years of negotiations, McDonnell Douglas said Friday that it had reached a final agreement for China to buy and co-produce 26 MD-80 jetliners
Delivery of MD-80:
1981 61
1982 34
1983 51
1984 44
1985:
L.A. Times
> The deal took 10 years of negotiation to complete, Chang said. The long and tedious negotiations included a meeting between McDonnell Douglas Chairman Sanford McDonnell and Chinese leader Deng Xiaopeng in April, 1980, at which McDonnell officials thought the deal was clinched.
“Mr. Deng said, ‘Please be patient,’ ” recalls Chang, who attended the meeting. “He said he was still interested in the project.” But it was another five years before the agreement was concluded in a 500-page contract, a period in which other major aircraft manufacturers from around the world continued to sell aircraft to China.
While the big deal doesn’t give Douglas leadership in the Chinese market, it does put the firm on a par with other industry leaders, such as Boeing and Airbus Industrie, in a market that is expected to grow significantly, Chang says.
I wonder how come Chinese-built aircraft is able to have certification from both the FAA and the EASA, because they haven’t received the “special treatment” of today?
PNWGeek put out the wrong info on the certification situation.
Bjorn has a corner going on exactly that subject.
The FAA was working hand in glove with China to get their AHJ the same cross recognized certification that FAA and EASA had (EASA and the FAA are now doing analysis on the others work, all to the good).
China was too far on the 909 so they shifted to the C919. China would not build the system needed and they would not provide the documentation that would fill it out.
Without cooperation, it was wasting time and the FAA quit (this was well before Trump).
Now China is engaging EASA. Its the same issue except its a complete aircraft that lacks the documentation required to prove it is a safe one and can be accepted.
China has to adhere to what the EASA tells them. When they do not provide the structure to put documentation in they will not provide, they will be in the same boat.
Canada, Brazil and Japan all have AHJs that can do that cert process.
Japan failed because they had not done it recently. They did the logical thing and moved it to the US, the problem was their concept was never going to make money, so they canned the program. But they were almost at cert using US experts to get them through the process (and the 2nd Scope complaint design)
Keep your friends close, your enemies closer.
I recently flew on the 919 in China and found it on par with 737 and A320 offerings from a passenger perspective. Comac was targeting 2026 EASA certification and EU regulators are now saying the 919 could be 3-6 years out. This means all the interim 919 production will be absorbed into the Chinese market exclusively. Since Comac and indeed all of Chinese industrial output is subsidized by the PRC these companies don’t have to survive by the free market realities of profit and loss. I’m against allowing any Chinese aircraft into western airline fleets for this reason in particular.
“Comac and indeed all of Chinese industrial output is subsidized by the PRC”
Trump wants the US government to get partial ownership of Intel and other semicon names in return for subsidies under the Chips Act.
Boeing may be next.
So, state control isn’t just a Chinese thing 👀
Further: 6 countries have accepted CAAC cert of the C909, even without EASA cert.
There’s no reason why they — and other countries — won’t do that for the C919 also.
So, interim production of the C919 doesn’t necessarily have to be absorbed by China.
It’s a moot point until COMAC starts hitting production at rate. When they hit rate-10 we can talk.
The C909 isn’t at rate 10…and, yet, it’s already been delivered outside China.
COMAC said earlier this year that it expects a C919 order from the Middle East later this year. If that materislizes, the COMAC will be eager to deliver to the customer in question.
just a fyi, C909 has two FAL lines
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ET86M6IqXzI
@ DP
162 C909s now delivered.
There are currently 2 foreign operators — Transnusa and Lao Airlines.
@Abalone
There are 1005 C919 in backlog; 312 for C909. And the highest output for C909 was rate-3 last year.
If COMAC is selling C919 outside China then there is going to be a really long wait without rate-10…8 years even if they hit rate-10. The math is part of why they still need both Airbus and Boeing. I know you disagree but not ordering those frames today puts their own airlines at terrible risk for delivery delays.
Ideally they would want to hit rate-20 if going after meaningful foreign sales…rate-15 at the very least. And if I am a foreign operator then how much am I willing to hang my future fleet on a promise?
FWIW…I would have a hard time accepting Embraer scaling to that kind of throughput without serious fits and starts.
@Pritchard
That is 1.5 a/c per month on each line. That is not a line as much as it as a bay.
312 aircraft in backlog for a 10 year old aircraft hardly justifies a second FAL unless there are shaddow orders I am not seeing. By my research there have been 137 orders “this decade”
“312 aircraft in backlog for a 10 year old aircraft hardly justifies a second FAL”
The second FAL was spec and awarded in 2017 as moving line with robot assembly Comac uses ARJ21/C909 line as a R&D tool for development They solicit proposals from global suppliers of tooling and automation, update the spec and award a Chinese companies to design, install and maintain the production equipment
@ Casey
You keep forgetting to say “so far” when referring to orders and production.
Also, the FALs for the C909 can be rejigged to the C919 when the need arises.
The Chinese are taking their fledgling commercial airliner industry very seriously…but they’re currently just warming up.
They’ll soon have 4 different versions of the C919, including an A321-like stretch. That promises more orders to come.
As reported:
> Embraer is also seeking more European partners for its KC-390 Millennium program and a location for a possible future final assembly line.
> Embraer and Turkish Aerospace pact could see new E2 final assembly line
Earth to Abalone:
China is not selling aircraft, they are giving them away.
You can do that when you own COMAC.
Well more accurately arm twisting, kind of like the Mafia, they get countries in debt and then strong arm them.
Take a 909, we will give you .01% off on the interest you owe us for that railroad.
Yea, the Silk is all going to China now
Intel, TSMC, Samsung & Micron are heavily subsidized by the US government. The Trump admin is also looking into taking a 10% equity (or more) of Intel.
“Oh, that’s different.”
😉
Intel becomes the latest to join the TBTF list, 10% equity owned by the USG.
Will BA be next?
Partial government ownership in return for another subsidy?
Might be the only way for BA to acquire cash to fund future programs…
Ouch! 😂
> for decades the united states thought china would eventually become a free market system.
turned out it’s the united states becoming more state capitalist.
Hahaha
Not Onion!
> Trump Pentagon is ‘thinking’ about taking equity stakes in defense contractors, says Lutnick
I like how Paul Rodolf put it.
The C919 is probably a solid and safe aircraft. They just can’t prove it.
Boeing, Airbus and Embraer all have to prove it, COMAC refused.
If they do not cooperate with EASA its going to be the same story as the FAA.
CAC has no credibility, they are controlled by the government not capture but controlled. China controls their AHJ.
The Chilling words, We will not release further information due to national security concerns will happen with the first C919 crash. It may be pilot suicide or it may be a system problem, we would never know.
“Boeing, Airbus and Embraer all have to prove it, COMAC refused.”
Boeing hasn’t proven anything in more than a decade. The MAX was self-certed, rubber-stamped by the FAA, and then unleashed in raw firm upon the world — where it was quickly revealed as a fiasco.
FAA oversight of BA’s manufacturing processes for the 787 and MAX –> more rubber-stamping, and more fiascos.
EASA is steering the current cert process of the MAX-7/10 and 777X, so as to try to minimize the risk of another fiasco. The FAA doesn’t seem to know how to get a handle on the process.
The FAA can’t even get US ATC up to modern standards — yet alone perform quality certification of commercial aircraft.
Against that pathetic background, the CAAC has shown itself so far to have excellent certification standards. Not surprising — a domestic commercial aviation industry is a matter of national pride in China, and there’s intense focus on getting it right.
No, EASA is giving the FAA their input. Good stuff and a fantastic model to work with. No AHJ sees the same things or the same things the same way.
The A321 belly tank was a case in point. EASA did not like the initial design. For those not technically literate, its new because its built into the hull. Wings doing that have been done that way forever. Fuselages, tanks yes but separate tanks.
Airbus has to satisfy EASA and the FAA. A far better end result and hopefully a safe one and we never find out.
EASA felt that the MAX should have 3 inputs for AOA and Airspeed. Frankly this should have been done back in the A330 era and no latter than the 777-200/300.
The FAA says , errr, we see the logic but it has flaws as all of those pitots and AOA vanes you need can get frozen up and a single point of failure as none of them work.
Boeing in the meantime looks at it and, what is needed is to move this our of the Wright era and use modern electronics. Bonus is if we go Electronics AOA and Speed, its a non affected system.
Due to the now better process, we got something we should have as soon as they could do it. Airbus sure did not implement it.
AF447.
Out of tragedy EASA realized that the cross recognition of cert had to have layers. Neither the FAA, EASA, Brazil or Canada should blindly accept a submital.
The more eyes and the more different cultures looking at it, the better.
The passengers get a safer product. I for one think that is the goal here, keeping people as safe as we can make systems.
The reality is you can ‘t put a single passenger in a LCA and cocoon them, they call that a Space Shot. Economics have a say. It is non viable. All those decisions are based on economics vs risk.
Someone turning off the engines? Yea, that is an area no one knows how to address, at least yet.
Boeing has done some cool stuff. Auto Yaw control is one. Take advantage of the computers to reduce the overloaded tasking in an emergency.
And the goal here is not to poke EASA or the FAA its to improve safety when and where possible.
“Out of band sensor verification vs 3 voting”
The 3 sensor voting model has a common mode failure issue. The operational design is “simple”, non complex : compare values!
The newly introduced sensor “synthesis” over Kalman like matrix fusion is not simple but rather complex. _and_ it introduces complex decission _and_ failure sources that depress MTBF.
“Out of tragedy EASA realized that the cross recognition of cert had to have layers.”
Cross recognition requires nonpartisan and honest participants.
FAA did not fit that role. Neither by Charter nor by proceedings.
Thus Boeing had via FAA EASA over a barrel presented for rear entry.
( FAA exapanded scrutiny for Airbus and lax oversight for Boeing may have been an advantage for Airbus in the long run. Less unexposed issues versus a large bag of unexposed bugs.)
Not much different to the US.
( NASA grants, TAX gifts, overpriced military procurement, “simplified” certification. )
The difference is that CN government gets more for their money?
( same issue with RLI instrument in Europe: government investments that actually returned a profit. MUST BE KILLED! )
China is working hard to certify the CJ-1000A, ramp up production from there. They now know who to trust and who not.
Trust is important in confusian Chinese culture.
https://simpleflying.com/us-discontinues-cfm-leap-1c-engine-sales-comac/
Trump will need to bend over deep to get a significant deal for Boeing.
And as I posted previously, China signals to ban H20 chips. Trump may not get his infamous 15% cut! Who has the last laugh?
May 29 date. Engines deliveries have resumed.
The only certification the CJ-1000A will get is local yocals.
Sure they can force it on the C919. Then the airlines break em and park em until fixed, rinse wash and repeat.
As P&W and CFM have shown, it aint’ easy (well RR but that was the Trent 1000 though the XWB-87 is not doing good in the ME either.
Its nice having a captive system.
“Trust is important in confusian Chinese culture. ”
Trust but verify!
I have zero trust in the intercity of the Chinese government (none in Trump either).
No one is going to accept a Trust Us, its fine (well the Chinese Airlines but they too are owned by the government and know they will be covered).
> When they teach about the rise of China in textbooks someday, I hope there’s at least a section about how Americans psy-opped themselves into utter helplessness
“psy-opped” ? no
you can win by being better or by sabotaging the competition. ( sabotage is easier ).
surprisingly that sabotage creates blowback.
“others are not bright enough to do what we do”
is just posturing for the public image. folklore.
Is that maize like logic or what (well illogic)
China has set out to dominate all industries. Max nix what the US did, or the EU or the Seychelles (well those get submerged, you know, Global warming, massive coal plants because we deserved to pollute)
China has to control things and the higher on the tech list, the more.
So rather than created an Airbus like structure (do not copy Boeing) they go with the classic Iron Rice Bowl.
And you wonder why they get a risk adverse program? I would do the same, no one wants their heads figuratively cut off (read that as canned and blistered). Toe the Party Line (literally)
US took lead to weaponize supply chains under the EAR, it weaponized the entire semiconductor production supply chain, extending coverage to include products from foreign companies outside the US.
Are you kidding me that you’re unable to see how the US abuses its authority and overextends its control? Hah!
Why would one sit on their hands?
The US companies are going to be big lovers here.
EAR FDPR*
@Uwe
> In the USA there is an entire grift industry of stating opinions about China
Uncle Cheng’s The Coming collapse of China back in 2001!
@ keesje
I agree.
I’m sure LNA’s analysis is flawless from a pure fleet planning point of view; however, when we throw the current geopolitical and trade climate into the mix, I can imagine that China will do its absolute best to avoid having to order more Boeings.
It’s not only a matter of national pride and self-sufficiency — it’s also a matter of reducing unnecessary exposure to what has become a dangerously unreliable trading partner.
The EU has learned that same lesson, and there’s now an increased de-coupling from the US across various sectors (defense, financial, software services, etc.).
Sadly for the US, its attempts to bully other countries are backfiring left and right. For example, India is continuing to buy Russian oil despite punitive tariffs from the US — which, in fact, have only served to bring about a détante in relations between India and China.
Similarly, sanctions on Russia have served to give new imeptus and independence to its aviation industry.
And semiconductor restrictions on China have had a similarly envigorating effect on its semiconductor industry — to the point where it is now more self-sufficient than the US in that area.
One of these days, COMAC will announce that the C919 has been sterilized of western components, including engines. The Russians managed that for 3 aircraft models in 3 years, so the Chinese can do it also.
article from KOMO News-Boeing and China in talks for aircraft deal: ‘The end of Chinese airline manufacturing’
“Boyd further stated, “This is the end of the Chinese airliner manufacturing.””
https://komonews.com/news/local/boeing-and-china-in-talks-for-aircraft-deal-the-end-of-chinese-airline-manufacturing-millions-billions-deal-partnership-washington-airbus-trade-economy-travel
Looks like a Boeing talking head
Indeed. Some of the quotes are rich, e.g. “Boeing threw them [China] a lifeline”, and esp the one you provided- as though
CN is going to stop development of ther own airliners.. the mind reels. And all this for a “deal” that has not happened.
deludere, deludere..
What quality has that readership
when you can dump that on them
without screeches of derision?
Good question, Uwe.
Ahem. An article from 2018 by that commentator:
Don’t Expect China To Retaliate Against Boeing In Tariff Dispute; It Needs The Planes Too Much
Because
> Airbus Global Production Is Already Almost Full-Out 😂
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeboyd/2018/04/02/boeing-china-us-travel-to-experience-minimal-fallout-from-tariff-disputes/
So Mister Boyd is consistently wrong, then. 😉
shill
Mister Boyd has a job.
( probably well paying and/or with “benefits” )
this seems to be his “home”:
https://www.aviationplanning.com/
from there, article heading:
“Controlling The Product Message
Is As Important As The Product Itself”
says it all.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeboyd/
There must be a lot of $$$ floating around in the aviation industry.
seems Boyd is busy making the rounds
article titled “The End of Chinese Airline Manufacturing”: Big Boeing Deal Prompts Slip in Shares
“China has been working to develop its own aircraft through the auspices of the Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China (COMAC), with somewhat mixed success. But aviation expert Michael Boyd suggested that a deal like this would render COMAC largely meaningless. “This also goes out and tells the entire world that Boeing and Airbus are back in the program and there’s no one really to argue with them,” Boyd noted.”
https://www.tipranks.com/news/the-end-of-chinese-airline-manufacturing-big-boeing-nyseba-deal-prompts-slip-in-shares
Mike Boyd’s suggestion is poppycock.
“China has been working to develop its own aircraft through the auspices of the Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China (COMAC), with somewhat mixed success. But aviation expert Michael Boyd suggested that a deal like this would render COMAC largely meaningless. “
The so called deal is not what renders COMAC meaningless. That part is flat wrong. COMAC renders itself meaningless as it never will compete with Airbus and Boeing which was the justification for the C919 program in partial (and the very blurry and notional 929/349).
Right now COMAC is not even producing C919 in meaningful numbers but is also adding models.
BBD did a fantastic job on the C Series, but failed as they could not manufacture it at a price that did not bankrupt them.
72 Billion for a single aisle that is not as good as the competition even on paper, and add in, no experience in supporting a product sold outside of China (and we do not know how well supported the C919 in China is, no one is going to say boo on that subject).
How long does it take China to ramp up to A220 level with an inferior aircraft?
@TW
Read this yourself.
https://x.com/LeehamNews/status/1959720968902848873
😂
How many time do I have to tell you this is false??
“72 Billion for a single aisle”
Don’t get me started! BBD was pressured by BA falsely claiming unfair competition. Oh doesn’t it sound familiar??
Now let me bring back BA: How good is Boeing to manufacture at a price that did not bankrupt them? Only because of the fig leaf— program (a.k.a. false) accounting! BA carries a negative shareholders’ equity for years!
WSJ, August 3:
“China Is Choking Supply of Critical Minerals to Western Defense Companies”
“China is limiting the flow of critical minerals to Western defense manufacturers, delaying production and forcing companies to scour the world for stockpiles of the minerals needed to make everything from bullets to jet fighters.
“Earlier this year, as U.S.-China trade tensions soared, Beijing tightened the controls it places on the export of rare earths. While Beijing allowed them to start flowing after the Trump administration agreed in June to a series of trade concessions, China has maintained a lock on critical minerals for defense purposes.”
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/china-western-defense-industry-critical-minerals-3971ec51
***
A stellar example of retaliation.
Note: the choke hold only applies to the US — the EU is still receiving what it needs.
“The “Green Channel” Initiative:
In May 2025, China’s Ministry of Commerce announced the establishment of a dedicated “green channel” for EU firms seeking rare earth export licenses. This expedited licensing process was presented as a goodwill gesture recognizing the importance of EU-China trade relations.”
A lot are riding on a future Trump trip, whether it’ll go ahead and what Trump offers in exchange.
Remember, there was a “deal” when Xi visited the US, that didn’t materialize.
> Remember, there was almost a “deal”, when Xi visited the US, that didn’t materialize.
Yea, verily. Show me, don’t tell me.
Biden made a trip to Saudi Arabia — nothing came of it.
Putin made a trip to Alaska — nothing came of it.
Modi made a trip to the White House — nothing came of it.
Trips often don’t live up to expectations 🙈
Stay tuned!
Sounds positive! 😂
> Trump says China has to give US magnets or face 200% tariff
> How US nuclear sanctions on China backfired
Washington’s strict blacklist rule amid national security concerns has forced Beijing to become self-sufficient with ‘incredible’ results..
> China built a new, “fully self-sufficient nuclear ecosystem”, which is much more efficient than the West’s industry.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GzLjxJwWwAAV0NA?format=jpg&name=large
Same China that wants to dominate all industries?
Good for them. Shame they kept going with Coal though.
More proof that the US manufacturing has largely ossified, including technologies it once led. Why the Starliner has repeated failures?
For late comers who haven’t received the news:
> China’s CO2 emissions fall 1% year-on-year in the first half of 2025, *extending a declining trend that started in March 2024*.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gy2dVq4XkAA51Mu?format=jpg&name=medium
Funny that new US data centres have to be powered by NG generators, while Chinese national data centres have to be at least 80%* powered by green electricity.
Nuclear Reactors under construction:
China: 29
US: 0
> The two plants we just completed bankrupted the reactor designer (Westinghouse) & the engineering company building it (Chicago Bridge & Iron/McDermott). The two sister reactors in South Carolina were left unfinished. The two now being built in the UK are a bottomless pit.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GyPTnLlWEAAnSAP?format=jpg&name=small
Who is going to build new nuclear power plants in the US?
“Who is going to build new nuclear power plants in the US?”
Power plants being an absolute necessity for the energy-monster industry that aluminium manufacturing is.
You know that Canada has a cheap and abundant supply of energy because of a long-term investment made in hydro-electric power in the James Bay area, which was started in the 50’s and funded to the tune of $20bn.
To supply the electrical needs to replace what Canada produces in AL would require some 4.5 Hoover Dams.
I’m sure they’re going to get right on that…
> German-based logistic company DHL has announced temporary restrictions on package deliveries to the United States…
August 23
> Postal services in Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Italy said they will stop shipping most merchandise to the U.S. effective immediately. France and Austria will follow on Monday.
Add Japan to the list
From March this year:
“The most recent tests integrated the CJ-1000 into the Chinese Y-20 military cargo plane. The idea was to evaluate the engine’s performance on a large aircraft before moving on to commercial flights. The results excited Chinese engineers: stability, power and reliability exceeded initial projections.
“According to industry sources, the engine is ready to begin certification flights with the C919 itself in the coming months. The expectation is that the final version will be approved by 2026, marking a watershed for the Chinese aerospace industry.”
“With the CJ-1000, China is entering the game once and for all — and promising more competitive prices and faster deliveries to its domestic customers.”
***
“With the Chinese CJ-1000 engine set to replace the LEAP engines, the plan is to make the C919 fully indigenous. This is China’s strategy to reduce geopolitical risks and gain autonomy in one of the most sensitive areas of the global economy: aviation.”
https://en.clickpetroleoegas.com.br/Chinese-engine-for-the-C919-jet-exceeds-expectations-and-puts-China-in-competition-with-giants-such-as-GE-and-Safran/
“India Tilts Toward BRICS as Pakistan Stays Close to Washington”
“In response to Trump’s pressure, Modi met Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, spoke to the leaders of China and Russia, and agreed to attend the next meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Tianjin Summit 2025. China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, visited New Delhi this week, and India’s external affairs minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar visited Moscow and was received by Russian president Vladimir Putin. Putin briefed his BRICS allies following his meeting with Trump, and will visit India by the end of 2025. And a stronger BRICS may make it impossible for Trump to achieve his goal, per Andrew Korybko, of “derailing India’s rise as a great power.””
https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Asia/India-Tilts-Toward-BRICS-as-Pakistan-Stays-Close-to-Washington.html
***
Further sets the stage for Embraer to cozy up to Tata in India: sales for Embraer, and a chance for India to further develop its aircraft industry.
One wonders if/when India will order any more Boeings:
https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/air-india-in-talks-with-boeing-airbus-for-major-200-narrow-body-aircraft-order-report-11748780048400.html
Boyd shouldn’t be holding his breadth on China ordering 500 aircraft from Boeing.
Trump Reaches Deal with China, But It’s Not Good News for Trade Agreements
“The core of this new arrangement sets the U.S. tariff rate against China at 55%. This figure represents a significant increase from the 30% agreed upon during a truce in May, at the start of negotiations. While President Trump mentioned the expectation that he and President Xi Jinping will work together to “open China to American trade,” the reality of a 55% tariff marks a continuation of the strategy of imposing high trade barriers, reversing any previous progress towards tariff reduction.”
Here’s the beauty of the China position:
China can order 1000 aircraft from Boeing, worth $100bn, with delivery starting in the 2030’s – with the intention of never following through on the deal.
They could even ‘involve’ Donnie in the process, making him feel good and to make it look like his tariffs are working.
“Look at this order! We are doing our part to level the tariff playing field!”
Donnie gets backed into a corner and China comes out ahead.
(All along, working to get the C-919 going, perhaps negotiating for more engines or technology. What they really need)
After all, what Trump really wants is adulation and to hold something up and say, “See I told you so!”
Even if they are empty promises
EVERY country that has a large population and growing airline segment, and is in the Donnie Tariff cross-hairs (looking at you, India) could use this strategy.
+1
So, against this background, China is expected to order more Boeings, and expose itself to even more geopolitical whim?
“Trump said China had 200 jets that were unable to fly because the US wasn’t giving it Boeing parts due to Beijing’s policies on magnets.
““I sent them all of the parts so their planes can fly,” the Republican said. “I could have held them back. I didn’t do that because of the relationship I have. And they’re flying.”
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-us-much-bigger-005351226.html
***
Looks like Trump is now getting desperate over rare earth metal shortages.
Interesting point:
– Russia de-westernized 3 plane models in 3 years…so China can also de-westernize its aircraft relatively easily.
BUT
– The average time required in the US to get a mine into production from initial geological survey is 29 years.
https://www.mining.com/us-has-second-longest-mine-development-timeline-in-the-world-sp-global-says/
“MP Materials Corp., the sole US rare earths miner, plans to start commercial production of magnets later this year. But it’s expected to operate at modest levels of production prior to an expansion — part-funded by the Pentagon — over the rest of this decade.”
***
So, it’s pretty clear who has the strongest hand in this poker game.
” The average time required in the US to get a mine into production from initial geological survey is 29 years.”
expect increased pressure ( USAID medling, military ) on Latin American countries that sit on “US mineral resources”.
fresh cue: the current US Anti Drug Naval mission to Venezuela, …
+1
“how’d Our rare earths gut buried under your country?”
The US is run by lawyers.
> Trump just confirmed China rare earth export control hits US where it hurts the most.
Does it sound like the visit is kept being postponed?
> “At some point, probably during this year or shortly thereafter, we’ll go to China,” [Trump] said.
Which deal will be announced first, AB or BA?
What we are about to witness:
China is about to triple production of its AI chips
> the US really might have shot itself in the foot by banning export of NVidia chips to China?
> There will be a “fully domestic Chinese advanced node foundry moment”
> … impact mainly on US tool makers, losing market share inside and outside China, while Huawei and SMIC move to US-technology-free production lines…
There are fears everywhere about the news.
Vive la liberte!
The pieces are falling into place.
“So, against this background, China is expected to order more Boeings, and expose itself to even more geopolitical whim?”
No, it gives China leverage
China can deferr any order they want.
What you can’t tell is there would be no difference, no orders they don’t get the planes and orders and hold and they don’t get the planes.
Clearly the OA is making Boeing a cornerstone of the insanity he claims to be negotiating.
China can take some or none of the orders as they see fit.
China has to make a determination if they want as many aircraft as are needed or they take fewer and the routes are not filled or used.
They do have an alternative to some degree with high speed rail.
Or they could do a hub and spoke and get pax to a region, buy Embraer E2s and distribute them on out that way.
OA has to decide what is he willing to offer in exchange! It’s up to OA to have a visit or not. Talking tough is as good as an ice cube under the sun in Sahara.
“No, it gives China leverage. China can defer any order they want.”
Trans, that is one of the most insightful and logical things I have ever seen you post. China is playing next level politics with aircraft orders…
Less than 6 days left in August and Planespotters is currently showing the following line deliveries (10:20 CET).
MAX: 21
787: 4
777: 2
767: 0
A320/A321neo: 29
A220: 5
A350: 4
A330neo: 1
Airbus has an excuse — August holiday period in Europe.
What’s Boeing’s excuse? 21 is 45% short of 38, and there’s only 20% of the month left.
“Na-na-na I can’t hear you, 38, 38, 38, 38..”
😉
Why would China want to do any form of deal with the US?
The UK thought it had a deal — and then this happened, out of the blue:
“Trump Slaps New Tariffs on UK Goods, Blindsiding Manufacturers”
“Donald Trump has imposed new tariffs of up to 25% on over 400 categories of British goods, including motorcycles and diggers, blindsiding UK manufacturers and officials.”
“The expanded tariff list follows lobbying from US steel companies, and comes despite a previously hailed “breakthrough” deal on steel and aluminum that has stalled.”
“The move, which UK officials say took them by surprise, comes just months after London and Washington hailed a “breakthrough” deal on steel and aluminium.”
https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/International/Trump-Slaps-New-Tariffs-on-UK-Goods-Blindsiding-Manufacturers.html
“Tariff terrorist”!
everyone is just waiting for:
Commentary: The courts may soon kill most of Trump’s tariffs
“A federal appeals court is set to rule any day on whether the legal basis Trump has used to justify the majority of his new tariffs is legally valid.”
“On May 28, a lower court ruled that Trump does not have the authority to impose import taxes by declaring a national emergency, as he has done in numerous cases.”
“That court’s ruling is likely by the end of August, and many analysts think Trump will lose. “It is the base case expectation of legal trade experts that the court of appeals will concur with the unanimous decision of the US Court of International Trade that the President does not have the authority to impose tariffs going forward,”
If the tariffs are deemed illegal
will the under bad faith scooped up dollars be reimbursed?
Not the big issue, getting it to stop is.
@David P:
I fully agree but the issue is the Supreme Court and if the decision is stayed.
Last time the OA was in office he got a ruling that said he could do it.
The Supremes majority is a bunch of right wing whackos. As one writter put it, they will come up with any gibberesh to put a fig leaf on a toally out of reality decision that enables what they think is their agenda.
Irony is, they are next on the list to chop.
That decision just might save the US economy from Donnie.
But the deficit will skyrocket past the $4.5 trillion he is adding to it, with his tax breaks for the rich.
He’ll lose tariff revenues and then what?
News regarding C919-600 and CJ-1000A:
“COMAC C919-600: Production Advances for New High-Altitude Airport Variant”
“The development of the COMAC C919-600, the shortened-fuselage variant of the Chinese single-aisle aircraft, is progressing as planned. Recently, a major structural component of the aircraft, the outer wing box, passed inspection by the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) and received its corresponding airworthiness certificate.”
“The part, manufactured by AVIC Xi’an Aircraft Industry Corporation (XAC), belongs to the aircraft with manufacturer serial number (MSN) 00032. This event, first appearing in Weibo social network and reported by The Air Current, marks the delivery of the first large structural component for the initial C919-600 prototype, confirming that the timeline projecting a first flight in 2027 and entry into commercial service in 2028 remains on track.”
“This model, also known as the “Plateau” version, stems from a strategic cooperation agreement signed in 2023 between COMAC and Tibet Airlines. The goal is to develop an aircraft specifically adapted for the demanding conditions of Hot & High airports (high temperature and high altitude), a market niche where aircraft performance is significantly affected.”
“The C919-600 is positioned as a direct competitor to the Airbus A319neo, a model the European manufacturer promotes for its excellent performance at such airports. To compete, COMAC plans to shorten the length of the original C919 (from 38.9 meters) and incorporate engine improvements over the current CFM International LEAP-1C. With these modifications, the aircraft is estimated to carry between 138 and 153 passengers, depending on the configuration.
“The choice of Tibet Airlines as a partner is no coincidence. The airline, based at Lhasa Airport (LXA) at 3,570 meters above sea level (masl), is the main operator in the Tibet region and flies to some of the world’s highest airports, such as Qamdo (BPX), located at 4,311 masl. Its current fleet, which includes about thirty Airbus A319ceo and A319neo aircraft, provides invaluable operational experience that will be crucial for the development and testing of COMAC’s new aircraft.”
https://www.aviacionline.com/comac-c919-600-production-advances-for-new-high-altitude-airport-variant
***
Especially interesting is this fragment:
“…and incorporate engine improvements over the current CFM International LEAP-1C”.
That points to the CJ-1000A, and it indicates that it will be in service on the -600 in 2028…and probably earlier on the -100.
@Abalone
There was a high-thrust variant offered on the A319ceo that was ordered for Tibet operations. Given the market conditions…the A319neo is not really a viable option.
China had asked about a similar A320 high-thrust variant…but not aware that ever saw the light of day. There are probably some throttle bump options out there…but not on a full flight profile.
A majority of the A319neo have gone to Chinese airlines, but it doesn’t sell well overall.
I believe the unique geographic circumstances of China makes it certain they want to have their own aircraft since the current market looks too small for AB to invest for next generation.
Indeed.
And also aiming at operators in South America, where there are also “hot and high” airports.
How about the wingbox of the 777-8? Have they finish their design yet?
Some holes are (allegedly) being drilled in wingspars — very impressive progress! 👀
Don’t worry – I’m sure that Boeing is going to sell THESE aircraft for a profit, to make up for all the losses on the other models…you know, while they corner the market while selling at a loss
Looks like BA is going to be partly government owned:
“Trump administration wants to own shares in defense companies like Palantir, Boeing, Lockheed”
“The Trump administration wants the U.S. government to start owning pieces of major defense companies. That includes Lockheed Martin, Palantir, and Boeing. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick confirmed this live on CNBC Tuesday.
“He said Pentagon officials are “thinking about” it. He didn’t hold back. This came just days after Trump’s government bought 10% of Intel for around $9 billion.”
https://www.cryptopolitan.com/trump-govt-shares-in-defense-companies/
***
Shock & horror for US readers — the US is showing Socialist tendencies.
It will now be harder to bitch about state control at COMAC 😅
Hardly a surprise, though — some form of government bailout at BA was inevitable, since it can’t realistically raise capital by other means.
Government controlling companies. That’s….hmmmmm….the word that the conservatives throw at the other side, all the time.
It’s not like Boeing is currently at risk of going bankrupt and needs a bailout, where the gov’t takes a piece of the pie temporarily. The worst is past for them.
so why would foreign companies/countries would want to buy from US companies that are partial owned and influenced by the US government?
Can you really trust Intel with US government ownership and influence?
Hobson’s Choice.
No trust with or without gov. ownership.
Hazing Huawei was done because they would
not submit to enabling US 3letter org snooping access.
Clandestine tracking and back door “kill switch”.
Reuters
> U.S. authorities have secretly placed location tracking devices…
> China has slammed the U.S. exports curbs as part of a campaign to suppress its rise and criticized the location tracking proposal. Last month, China’s powerful cyberspace regulator summoned Nvidia to a meeting to express its concerns over the risks of its chips containing “backdoors” that would allow remote access or control, which the company has strongly denied.
First rule of marketing: nobody actually needs your product — there are always alternatives.
Deliberately making your product more unattractive just serves to accelerate market migration to those alternatives.
As you pointed out in another post above, China is more self-sufficient — and, actually, more advanced — than the US as regards semiconductor msnafacturing.
We won’t have to wait long before it also becomes self-sufficient vis-à-vis commercial aviation.
@ Frank P
BA is still losing money — every single quarter.
So, the well is steadily running dry again. And it doesn’t contain enough to fund a new aircraft program.
The WH can use the Intel approach: we give you cash (also borrowed) in exchange for (newly-issued) equity.
200%, no, 500% tariffs on aircraft coming soon!
Boing is going to “corner” the market!
US FAA to conduct scenario-based planning with Boeing before it may lift 737 MAX production cap
“They still haven’t asked us to increase the rate, and we haven’t agreed to do anything,” FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford told Reuters on the sidelines of an event at the Philadelphia airport on Tuesday.
Bedford added he hopes to complete those exercises, which are still being developed, by the end of September. “Then if they want to ask us for an increase, at least, we’ll have a roadmap on how we can evaluate it,” Bedford said.
Boeing did not immediately comment. CEO Kelly Ortberg said in May the planemaker is “pretty confident” that it can increase production of its best-selling 737 MAX jets to 42 a month.
We have a strong, persistant tradition in the West of underestimating the Chinese, specially technology & and ability to determine their own course. Despite we have been proven wrong for decades too..
Likely China will ramp up civil aircraft aircraft production, like they did on automotive, electronics and machine building markets. With us kicking & screaming.
They’ll probably sell aircraft in China, Russia, South America, India, Middle East and who knows from there.
When Trump visits Xi, a J-36 with 4 J-20s will fly over & Vance will mumble it must be copies, like he was raised.
https://preview.redd.it/china-wz-x-hale-stealth-flying-wing-aircraft-v0-jd9o28jl28kf1.jpg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=c5cd722b83d7878cf8195b799b3c9f837d929555
“We have a strong, persistant tradition in the West of underestimating the Chinese”
Not accurate: the referenced underestimation is a US-specific thing — here in Europe, we’re very much awake and alert as to China’s capabilities.
Airbus has openly admitted that it takes COMAC seriously.