Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Little impact seen on Boeing by Trump’s new H1B visa policy
By Scott Hamilton
Sept. 23, 2025, © Leeham News: President Trump’s announcement last Friday that there will be a $100,000 fee on new applications for H1B business visas doesn’t appear to have much effect on Boeing.
Boeing has, for years, utilized foreign national engineers from Russia, India, Ukraine, and possibly other countries for work performed domestically. Foreigners are granted entry into the US to work under what’s called an H-1 B visa.
Boeing, tech companies, and other businesses commonly sponsor H1B visas. At Boeing, this has been a sore point for the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA), the union representing engineers and technical employees. SPEEA views each H1B visa engineer as displacing a local engineer or technician.
Under Trump’s Executive Order, which imposes a $100,000 fee, several exemptions appear to apply to Boeing and other companies. According to a US government website, a $100,000 payment must accompany any new H-1B visa petitions submitted after 12:01 am EDT on Sept. 21, 2025.
The relevant exemptions that appear to apply to Boeing are any previously issued H1B visas, or any petitions submitted before 12:01 am EDT on Sept. 21. Nor does the new policy “prevent any holder of a current H1B visa from traveling in and out of the United States.”
Boeing’s H1B visa holders
Boeing has been utilizing foreign nationals in its engineering programs since at least the development of the 787. According to the website Myvisajobs.com, Boeing certified 42 applications in 2022 and 33 in 2021. So far this year, Boeing has applied for 10 people.
The average annual salary was just under $142,000. The average stay in the US by Boeing workers is unknown. However, it is known that once Boeing has employed a worker for two years, they become a member of SPEEA. LNA understands that Boeing rotates H1B workers back to their home country before the two-year period is up and brings in new workers, thereby avoiding the unionization of these workers.
SPEEA declined to comment.
It’s disappointing that Boeing uses H-1Bs at all, since there are
plenty of qualified American engineers who could do that work.
Par for the course, though.
Those US engineers may prefer to work for a different US aerospace firm/institution…e.g. offering better pay, reputation, location, etc.
Vincent.
Last time I was staffing up things, Stress Analysts were in very short supply and we were platooning talent in from Boeing Moscow to cover the shortfall. That doors closed as well as the use of the Ukrainian talent we had access to. It IS better today, but Im not sure we can still get it done with US based talent.
Thanks for that info, PNW.
That’s not really true. It’s outsourced after last SPEEA strike and also cheaper overseas labor. To say that no IS talents can fill the requirements is not true
*US talents*.
It’s a matter whether one is willing to pay market salary or not? To say no US talents can fill these spots is also selling US grads and experienced folks short.
+1
Which brings us back to my comment above: the US talent is going to BA’s US competitors, where the pay is much better.
BA has been losing money continuously for 6 years now — offering more attractive salaries is not really something that the (beancounters think the) company can afford.
There is nothing to stop a job being sent overseas to be worked on.
That was getting standard with Oil Field and Building controls contracts.
It did not work at all well, the people doing the work did not know the situation and trying to put together a sequnce when equipment had different ops than was obvious.
That applied to local as they used programmer who knew noth8ing about machinery. But they were on site and you could point to something and, this is how it works, your program does not work because its not controlling that portion (wrong, did not know it was there etc)
The equipment mfgs had their own controls, best to just turn it on and let it do its own control (they were experts and much better at it).
Which one you wanna believe?
American Soldiers Don’t Wear American Combat Boots
> In one corner are American bootmakers who say that all combat boots should be made in America, even though they can’t keep up with demand. In the other corner are Pentagon officials who say that American companies *aren’t up to the job*.
An article from today on how other countries may/will benefit ftom the new H-1B fees:
“Europe’s work-life balance a key talent draw as Trump revamps H-1B visa”
“Talent hubs in the U.K., Europe, Middle East and Asia are widely expected to be among those that stand to benefit.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/23/europes-work-life-balance-could-be-key-in-trumps-h-1b-visa-shake-up.html
Here continues the US brain drain…, after a start at the highest level 😉
????
Brain Drain is when your talented people go elsewhere.
Per PNWgeek, there are cases where not enough of the right talent is available.
Other cases where its abused (I believe Boeing got caught pants down some years back and had to cut a number of the H-1s as it was a salary decrease issue)
There should be another step that any US company using this, also has to come up with a plan to get the talent it needs, be it scholarships, bonus to divert to that path of engineering or other ideas that work.
From the article:
“LNA understands that Boeing rotates H1B workers back to their home country before the two-year period is up and brings in new workers, thereby avoiding the unionization of these workers.”
If you rotate one out, but can’t rotate a new one in, then you have a net outflow.
Employees are considered just like another tool that rotate in and out every two years?
“LNA understands that Boeing rotates H1B workers back to their home country before the two-year period is up and brings in new workers, thereby avoiding the unionization of these workers.”
Just pay $100k to get Tr$mp off BA’s back or get exemptions thru the backdoor. I believe nowadays the backdoor has become the front door for most who know their way.
There’s a bipartisanship to cheapen cost of labor, at any cost!
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/60-minutes-examines-h-1b-visas-outsourcing-american-jobs/
There is an ebb and flow to staffing levels. Whether the person is H1B or domestic, staffing through temporary agencies is done for several reasons. It allows companies to establish a baseline employment level and manage variability through short-term staffing.
There is a limit to what can be outsourced. Anything ITAR controlled is going to be “difficult” to outsource. Leaving lesser tasks to outsource, then is it worth the price of admission if the visa price tag is high?
To the other points…absolutely there is a wage suppression element of concern. Is it that you cannot find domestic employees or is it that you cannot find them at the rate companies want to actually pay? Who actually benefits when H1B price tags go up?
And therein lies the biggest point…companies will source through third-party agencies as a primary means of employment. Those workers are never truly on the payroll; they are billed through a purchase order to their parent company…think companies like Belcan.
SPEEA representation is by job code. If your job code is engineering or technician, you are in that bargaining unit. Summer interns are in the Tech bargaining unit.
I am not aware of a 2-year waiting period.
That said, in my experience, Boeing has been indifferent to the long-term employment of H-1B workers. I’m not aware of any H-1B workers who were sponsored by Boeing for citizenship. More common is for the Boeing worker to get citizenship when the spouse is employed by Microsoft or another employer, who can get citizenship for both of them.
I remember asking a senior Boeing engineering manager why Boeing would not sponsor H-1B workers for citizenship. Many were lead engineers, or otherwise represented a large investment by Boeing in their knowledge training and experience. The senior manager said, “They knew when they took the job that the H-1B visa was temporary.” I was shocked, and so were the HR people who were staffing the meeting.
Stan
It’s not citizenship but green card (permanent residency). Boeing has sponsored certain H1B holders based on country of origin. I have seen a regular engineer (not ATF or lead) whose job code was on the chopping block and got sponsorship based on his country of origin. To sponsor an H1B for green card is costly and tedious process but yes, Boeing has done it for certain folks.
In my experience with foreign university grads, they were almost universally sponsored by their employers.
The typical practice was that their salaries were reduced or docked to cover the expense during the green card application period.
That has led to claims that they work for less than US counterparts, but generally they achieved parity within 5 years or so. Especially if they went on to attain citizenship after the green card, as most of them did.
I’m not convinced this will strengthen the competitive position of the U.S. aerospace industry. Let’s not forget, human resources, engineers are people.
Toulouse and Hamburg offer a high quality of life: affordable education and healthcare, open and multicultural communities, great food, cozy local markets, and music in the streets.
You might not earn an average of $142k, an AR-15 for self protection isn’t allowed. In return, you get reliable social security, civil rights, healthcare, long term perspective, pensions, access to sports and education, and a generally strong quality of life.
High value specialists from other countries have options, you have to remain attractive, not only as an employer looking for temporary HR.
Absolutely 100% correct.
Airbus and Boeing are really not competing for the same pool of people, globally. It’s very difficult for someone in the EU to get a visa that enables work in the US, and it’s very difficult for a North American to emigrate to either France or Germany. You would be hard-pressed to find American engineers working in Hamburg or Tolouse, and while there are a pretty sizeable number of Europeans in Seattle they tend to be sponsored for immigration status by the Software or Biotech industries.
Now consider an engineer from a third country, such as India, Tunisia, or Vietnam, for example.
Is he/she now more likely to go work in the US or Europe?
The European country where I live is absolutely teeming with Asian expats — all working in tech.
You’re absolutely right, Keesje. In Toulouse, I’ve met many highly skilled engineers from places like Brazil and Turkey—with years of experience on major programs at Embraer and Turkish Aerospace. They bring critical knowledge that even a top aerospace degree can’t fully provide.
What’s more, many of France’s best graduates lean toward Paris-based roles in defense and space, because of higher pay and prestige. That leaves the civilian aeronautics sector at a relative disadvantage in talent competition.
Perhaps some common sense is in order. The numbers cited in Scott’s article would suggest these are either specialist or ad-hoc positions, as they are a tiny fraction of Boeing staffing.
That would also align with the alleged pattern of not retaining them beyond the 2 year union vesting period.
At my university, the faculty routinely vouched for foreign graduates who were pursuing employment in the US, providing references at every stage of the process. I wrote many such references. It was never considered controversial or problematic.
These people typically were the cream of their respective nations. Even within the US, they were still in the top percentiles of the population.
Many studies have shown that they contribute substantially to the economy, more so than the average American because they attract higher salaries.
And further, they are very glad to be here because they have much greater opportunities. And in my experience, they have greater knowledge and understanding of American government than many Americans.
This has always been considered a win-win. So difficult to see what all the fuss is about. I have remained friends with some of these people, and they are baffled as well by this development.
For Boeing to employ a small number of them doesn’t seem to be anything out of the ordinary.
This may be a record for the closest runway incursion with loss of separation, without a collision. A very close call.
At Nice, a landing A320 crossed the threshold of the wrong runway, and did not see another A320 lined up for departure on that same runway. It aborted at the last second and overflew the other aircraft at an altitude of 50 feet.
The departing A320 was severely buffeted, and the flight was cancelled to inspect the aircraft. Passengers reported they could see and hear the overflying aircraft out the windows.
The captain of the departing aircraft reportedly was so shaken he declared himself as unfit and refused the flight. He also yelled at officials in the airport terminal, in front of the passengers.
The captain estimated the clearance between the landing gear and tail fin to be about 10 feet.
That would have to be pretty scary from the cockpit. You’re sitting there ready to roll, then there is a deep rumble that shakes the entire aircraft, then you see an aircraft right on top of you, then there is the jet blast and wake which is bouncing you around.
https://avherald.com/h?article=52d656fd&opt=0
https://simpleflying.com/nouvelair-a320-wrong-runway-occupied-by-easyjet-flight/
Juan Browne at Blancolirio has a preliminary video up re: this incident.
It looks likely *but not certain* that the Nouvelair A320 was cleared to land on runway 24L, but attempted to land on 24R. I feel for that EasyJet captain, and of course the crew and passengers. Super scary.
https://youtu.be/cvGGnfz2DXw?si=ydwJfNFxSsei281V
Thanks for providing the link, keesje.
“I feel for that EasyJet captain, and of course the crew and passengers. Super scary.”
I feel for all crew and passengers involved.
Fortunately it was an AK Black Door blowout type not a MAX 1.0.
We need a better system. We have had far too many of those in the US and the recent DC Crash.
In the case of wrong runway (or a taxiway) its stunning what can be missed or ignored on pre conceived commitment.
And yes, from flying at night, we look for the dark spots, airports are not well lit.
Mentour did a good coverage with details of the approach and runway setup. While not required, there are tools you can use that should be mandatory even for a visual approach.
In the Air India 171 accident, a safety group in India has filed a public interest petition with the Supreme Court, alleging conflict of interest of DGCA, and that the aircraft was brought down by electrical faults, and not crew actions. They are seeking full disclosure of EAFR, FDR, and CVR data.
The court has scheduled a hearing for October 11th, and said they will work to ensure the investigation takes place in a “free, fair, impartial, independent and expeditious manner”.
In response, a pilot’s association in India has also sent a letter to the aviation ministry, requesting a Court of Inquiry into the investigation.
Conspiracy theories have really taken hold in India since this accident, as the AAIB preliminary finding that the fuel switches were turned off, has been broadly rejected by the public.
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/09/23/India-Ahmedebad-crash-court-rebukes-aviation-regulator/3201758615602/
https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/india/pilots-assn-alleges-bias-in-air-india-crash-probe-seeks-judicial-inquiry/
I can understand the publics take. Hard to trust government and the actions are so out of bounds as to be believable though the evidence is solid.
Yes, it’s difficult to accept that airline pilots would do something like that. I think people won’t accept it until all other avenues have been explored.
One of the issues here is the weeks of silence from AAIB after the accident. Followed by a very limited preliminary report. Their intentions were good, but the reality of a major accident like this is there is fertile ground for conspiracy theories to develop.
The NTSB has learned over time that they have to get out in front of the public immediately, to control the flow of both information, and the misinformation which inevitably pops up. If you don’t do that, you quickly lose control of the narrative. That is what’s happened here, unfortunately.
“Air India crash victims’ families sue aerospace firms Boeing and Honeywell”
“The families of four passengers who died on an Air India jet that crashed in June have filed a lawsuit in the US against planemaker Boeing and aircraft parts maker Honeywell, accusing the companies of negligence.
“The lawsuit filed Tuesday, and seen by the BBC, said faulty fuel switches caused the accident and accused the companies of doing “nothing” despite being aware of the risks of the aircraft’s design.”
“The lawsuit alleges that both firms knew about the risk of a crash since they developed and marketed the 787 Dreamliner and its components.
“It cited a 2018 FAA advisory that urged – but did not mandate – operators to inspect the fuel switches’ locking mechanism to ensure that it could not be accidentally moved, thereby cutting off fuel supply.
“In the case of Air India Flight 171, the switch was moved from “run” to the “cut-off” position, hampering the thrust of the plane, according to the AAIB’s preliminary investigation report.
“The families said this amounted to a design “defect” that “allowed for inadvertent cutoff of fuel supply and total loss of thrust necessary to propel” the plane.
“They said: “And what did Honeywell and Boeing do to prevent the inevitable catastrophe? Nothing.”
“The companies also failed to warn airlines that the switches required inspection and repair, and did not supply replacement parts to enable its customers to install them, according to the lawsuit.
“Boeing and Honeywell “sat idly” behind a gentle advisory that merely recommended inspecting the switches, said the families, who are represented by Texas-based Lanier Law Firm.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07vdx9e1ygo
***
It’s hard to keep track of all the litigation running against BA: conspiracy to defraud, various investor misinformation cases, IP theft,…
It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the company’s legal charges.
Just to clarify, the referenced lawsuit is frivolous but could result in a nuisance settlement. There was no evidence of defective fuel switches on the accident 787 or detected anywhere in the 787 fleet. The referenced AD was a precaution only.
The fraud charge against Boeing is being dropped by the DoJ, as part of an ongoing settlement. It’s awaiting approval by the court.
Of background relevance, and general interest:
“Why Jurors and Jurists Should Doubt the Conclusions and Analyses of the United States National Transportation Safety Board”
“An unfortunate truth in aviation litigation is that a product manufacturer’s litigation defense begins during its involvement in the National Transportation Safety Board’s investigation of a crash. The NTSB’s regulations permit the companies who manufacture and sell products under scrutiny to “participate” in the government’s investigation of a crash involving its products. The NTSB’s regulations do not permit accident victims and their representatives to participate in the government’s investigation. This is a conflict of interest created by and condoned by the very federal authority tasked with responsibility to objectively investigate aircraft crashes. Simply stated, the fox is watching the henhouse.”
“In litigation, product liability defendants try to inform the jury that the NTSB found nothing wrong with their product. This creates the false appearance of a reliable investigative report authored by the government of the United States. It’s not true. This is a misleading tactic employed by defense lawyers; and every juror hearing it should immediately be directed to question the credibility of that assertion. It is most often the truth that the manufacturer who is the defendant evaluated its own product during the NTSB’s investigation, and the manufacturer itself told the NTSB that there was nothing wrong with its product. The defense lawyer hired by and paid by the defendant’s insurance company is paid to win the case, not to be candid about the bias inherent in NTSB investigations.”
“A trial is a quest for the truth, and jurors and jurists alike should be instructed at every opportunity to carefully question the reliability of an NTSB’s factual findings that somehow exonerate a product manufacturer.”
“Nearly 45,000 people have been killed over the past five decades in private planes and helicopters — almost nine times the number that have died in airline crashes — and federal investigators have cited pilots as causing or contributing to 86% of private crashes. But a USA TODAY investigation shows repeated instances in which crashes, deaths and injuries were caused by defective parts and dangerous designs, casting doubt on the government’s official rulings and revealing the inner workings of an industry hit so hard by legal claims that it sought and won liability protection from Congress.
“Wide-ranging defects have persisted for years as manufacturers covered up problems, lied to federal regulators and failed to remedy known malfunctions, USA TODAY found. Some defective parts remained in use for decades — and some are still in use — because manufacturers refused to acknowledge or recall the suspect parts or issued a limited recall that left dangerous components in hundreds of aircraft.
“The manufacturers involved paid hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements that received little or no public attention until now and that need not be disclosed to federal regulators. In addition, civil-court judges and juries have found major manufacturers such as Cessna Aircraft, Robinson Helicopter, Mitsubishi Aircraft, Bell Helicopter and Lycoming Engines liable for deadly crashes, ordering them to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages.
“The verdicts contradict findings of the National Transportation Safety Board, which conducts limited investigations into most crashes of private aircraft and asks manufacturers to look for defects in their parts, even if the manufacturers are being sued over a crash.”
“While the RAND report exposed the inherent bias in the NTSB party participant process, some rules have been adopted to try and fix the problem. For example, NTSB regulations try to separate the agency and its employees from litigation. NTSB regulations prohibit its investigators from offering opinion testimony. On its face, this may seem like an honorable gesture, but it eliminates a victim’s ability to cross-examine the investigator on the inherent lack of reliability in the opinions. NTSB lawyers instruct the investigators not to answer questions which require an opinion.
“In addition, NTSB regulations prohibit the use in court of its probable cause determination and final reports in civil litigation. On its face this seems like a step in the right direction, however, the investigator’s “factual report” can be used in litigation. The NTSB’s party participant process affords the manufacturer the right to review, comment, and make edits to the investigator’s factual report. As a result, these “factual reports” are less factual and more of a road map to a product liability defendant’s defense at trial.”
https://katzmanlampert.com/why-jurors-and-jurists-should-doubt-the-ntsb/
***
Even when foreign agencies are the primary investigators in a Boeing crash, the NTSB still has a long arm in the background…like with the manipulated Turkish 737 Amsterdam crash report.
Just to clarify, the NTSB findings and recommendations are inadmissible in the US court system, in order to ensure the full cooperation of the parties, without fear of consequence.
Congress has given NTSB and FAA full legal power of discovery, so as to have all the evidence available for accident cause determination.
Withholding evidence from discovery is a crime.
In return, their findings are exempt from litigation and also confidential, apart from those that serve the public interest.
Plaintiffs are still free to develop cases from the evidence on their own, they just can’t use the NTSB or FAA as proxy. This is what accident law firms do, such as the one cited here.
The reason a law firm wants to discourage plaintiffs and jurors from accepting the NTSB reports, is that the NTSB is mandated by law to be unbiased and truthful, whereas the law firm seeks to press every advantage on behalf of their clients. Which often involves untruthful statements and allegations.
A classic example of that was the 737 MAX accidents, wherein the law firms sought to portray the aircraft as inherently flawed and unstable. This was factually refuted by the FAA in their return to service documentation.
Another example is the Air India 171 accident, where law firms are mining the AD history of the aircraft to invent narratives that aren’t supported by the evidence.
The truly amazing thing is that this point has been explained and discussed numerous times here, yet the same false inferences are raised again and again and again. It’s almost like there is an agenda being pushed here. Or an inability to learn.
@Rob:
An aspect of this is the self reported and non prosecution if done so.
I have never made up my mind on our system vs France who has prosecuted (govt not private).
The Captain of the Exon Valdez claimed self report when he had radio call made that the tanker was up on the rocks. That should have been shot down. He was drunk though Exon had shorted the crew as well (making billions and a few tanker crewmen, phew)
It was most unpleasant to see people try to portray the MAX as inherently unstable and lethal when it was one portion that was faulty and nothing to do with aerodynamics in the normal sense (we continue to disagree on that).
But agreed, regardless of the motivation, its automatically goes negative regardless of the facts.
Its interesting to be reading about the A320 APU intake and how many people have been given toxic cocktails by that. The term they like to use is Odor, but its toxic to a small degree if you can just smell it and a large degree when its really foul.
I had the misfortune to fly one of the MDs with that issue. Very low level but it was there. Crew would be subject to that far more than pax were for 3 hours.
It’s definitely a trade, the US is prioritizing avoiding future accidents over pursuing criminality.
It does not seem to have affected civil liability litigation, there are countless successful actions, including the 737 MAX.
Agreed, the ones that bother me are where the actions were deliberate in violation of regs and or airline mandates.
When its an idnivual that does that, the organization gets sued when they have no involvement and in fact policies and training that contradicts what was done.
In those cases its criminal.
The guy who got led astray by his so called friends in the Magic Mushroom Horizon incident has been charged.
Ultimately it was his decision but he also was in emotional meltdown. I am glad he got the help he needed as well as working on educating others.
🤣 What’s the findings from the expert? Did you read their report? Have you done your own investigation? Did you collect all the relevant info and data? Are you [self-censored] kidding me?
“It was most unpleasant to see people try to portray the MAX as inherently unstable and lethal…”
“Air Austral plans to get rid of A220 fleet due to engine reliability issues ”
“According to data from ch-aviation, as of September 25, 2025, two of the three aircraft of this type in Air Austral’s fleet are inactive. One of these aircraft, with registration F-OMER, is listed as stored, while F-OTER is shown as undergoing maintenance.”
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/air-austral-plans-to-get-rid-of-a220-fleet-due-to-engine-reliability-issues
Possibly a hasty action? Maybe there’s more to the story..
Not much of a fleet and the impact of two out of ops is severe.
That said, what is the other choices?
Airbus with its GTF and LEAP engine issues? Embraer with Leap engine issues?
By the time they get replacement aircraft the problem will have been corrected (its been solved, but they have to put the engines in a shop to install and they are still backlogged)
Spain selects a Turkish/Airbus-modified trainer jet:
“The Spanish Air Force will fly Turkish: billion-euro deal for 45 Hürjet aircraft”
“The Hürjet, developed by Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI), prevailed over high‑profile Western competitors (such as the Boeing T‑7 Red Hawk and the Leonardo M‑346 Master).”
“The agreement foresees a complex and strategic industrial collaboration. The first aircraft will be produced at TAI facilities in Turkey, but will subsequently be modified and customised at Airbus DS España facilities. This localisation of part of the assembly in Spain is crucial to integrate the avionics, mission software and training systems required by the Spanish Air Force, while also ensuring significant involvement of the national industry. Hürjet deliveries are scheduled to start in 2028. The first tranche of jets will be ready for the familiarisation and training period 2029/2030, with the entry into service of the definitive Spanish‑configured variant estimated for 2031.”
https://www.avionews.it/item/1265799-the-spanish-air-force-will-fly-turkish-billion-euro-deal-for-45-hurjet-aircraft.html
Yea Airbus was desperate for a Jet Trainer and when the governments would not fund them they went to Turkey (who they refuse to do bushiness with previously over all sorts of human rights issues)
Of course Italy has perfectly fine jet trainers.
I think indeed the fine M-346 from a European manufacturer killed the Mako business case. And a credible T-50 alternative at that stage.
Not to mention something about A400s Turkey will buy.
The first order is in for an A330 MRTT+
(based on the neo rather than the ceo)
“Royal Thai Air Force orders next generation Airbus A330 MRTT+”
“Getafe, Spain, 25 September 2025 – The Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF) has ordered an Airbus A330 Multi Role Tanker Transport Plus (MRTT+). The A330neo-based evolution of the combat-proven, aerial refuelling and transport aircraft A330 MRTT, will be equipped with both the hose-and-drogue, and a boom, as refuelling systems. Also included is the Airbus Medical Evacuation kit solution and will come in a VVIP cabin configuration.
“The aircraft is scheduled to enter into military conversion at the A330 MRTT Centre in Getafe, Spain, in 2026, with final delivery to customer in 2029. ”
https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2025-09-royal-thai-air-force-orders-next-generation-airbus-a330-mrtt
Who said no one would buy?? 🤔
It’s interesting its a 2+ year to convert the feedstock airplane into a tanker. Is this a COTS conversion like the 2C?
KC-46 was never a COTS aircraft like the A330MRTT. Airbus even converted civil A330 from Qantas into MRTT. No 767-2C was ever sold to a civil customer.
“Spain’s Air Europa faces B737-8 delivery delay, trims orders”
https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Air%20Europa.htm
***
Curious…Air Europa has an all-Boeing fleet…
This sounds more like an acquisition schedule change, to leasing options over purchase options. But no net change in quantity.
https://www.flightglobal.com/airlines/air-europa-timeline-for-737-max-deliveries-shifts/164674.article
Yep, we are changing orders and we want to blame availability.
Yeah facts are not acceptable if they are against my wishes.
Who can blame them?
2023 😂
“Spain’s Air Europa to take first three B737 MAX in 2024”
I thought this was interesting as its a pretty well unknown operator though I had seen the Yangtze River Express livery come through Anchorage. I really like the Livery, some like them and Eva are great and others are dull.
https://www.stattimes.com/air-cargo/suparna-airlines-takes-delivery-of-its-first-boeing-777-freighter-1356610
It does look like they are going to go with the C919 for future pax fleet.
I really would like to see an airline with their eggs all in that basket and see what and how they do.
Hopefully this is available when people look at it, it indicated time limited to today
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/safety-ops-regulation/boeing-improves-777-9-flight-test-execution-new-pilot-display
I used to have a great discussion with the program techs on how I displayed my systems. I kept telling them, I am an operator first (first view) and a trouble shooter second (only if there is a problem)
This gets you the operating info.
Latter on one of them shifted to a position that was analogous to mine and told me, now I see why you had it setup the way you did.
Anytime the tech was involved there was a problem that needed fixed that I could not resolve.
Thanks for posting this. That’s pretty clever and innovative. Pilots can see in real time if they are hitting the test target profile.
Also the fact that they can swap in test data by exchanging a fiber optic cable, points to good system design.
Looks like another carrier bids “Au Revoir” to the A220.
Air Austral stated after persistent technical issues plaguing the type,and several years of recurring groundings, they will permanently
withdraw the fleet from service.
https://www.airdatanews.com/air-austral-to-retire-entire-airbus-a220-fleet-amid-ongoing-engine-issues/
Is that like 4 operators who have retired the type?
Can Iraqi Airways be far behind.
Just a thought.
Definitely looks like a possibility, considering they’ve been grounded since May’23..
2 aircraft temporarily returned to service a short time. As of August this year,the entire fleet
remains grounded.
Gee ;
Thanks Qantas, for one of the worst toilet to passenger ratios in the industry.
Not exactly comforting on a 8hr.+trip .
https://onemileatatime.com/news/qantas-bladder-defying-a321xlr-lavatory/
At last ,the Turkish order is finalized.
The exact order breakdown will be announced shortly.
Numbers should be inline with what’s been predicted for quite some time.
Around 150 737’s and 75 787’s.
https://anewz.tv/world/world-news/13580/us-envoy-confirms-turkish-airlines-boeing-deal/news
What’s interesting about this is that Turkiye had linked this order to the F-35 sale that was cancelled.
Rumor now is that Russia wants their S-400 missile defense systems back from Turkiye, because they are needed in Ukraine. So if Erdogan sells them back, and they are replaced by Western systems, then the prohibition on giving Turkiye the F-35 is removed.
Wonder how Boeing will be doing on 737 production rate increase for all the orders Donnie getting them.
Google AI ” mid-2027, it could be at a rate of 47 to 52 aircraft per month”
That said, good news “if” you have enough production equipment in place to produce them. Hmmm how are those new Renton wing riveters for the 737 production line coming, the ones purchased 19 months ago Oh, still not there yet? What happens “if” they are very late delivery (e.g. year or two) or “if” never? It would be another example of taking the low supplier bid. “If” worst scenario, say after two years late, then go to another supplier, then another 2 years for equipment, it would put out new 737 WRS to almost 2029. You never know!
@ David
Do you have a problem when the French President does the same?
Not the same, France doesn’t use “tariff extortion” as a tool Airbus uses industrial cooperation to get market access and new orders
France also doesn’t have like 700 military bases overseas.
@Pedro
For as long as it lasts…
Recent events in Qatar have shown a number of countries that such bases offer no real benefit when it counts.
“Gulf Countries Need to De-Risk Their Relationship with the U.S.”
“Gulf states are looking beyond the U.S. to China, Russia, Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan for defense and technology ties.”
https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/Gulf-Countries-Need-to-De-Risk-Their-Relationship-with-the-US.html
@David
I am going to give you credit you are not naive. Yeah, just “industrial cooperation.”
What works for one, works for the other. It’s the way of the world .
Let’s agree to disagree
@Abalone
Unfortunately, one found out the security guarantee from some is not worth the paper it’s written on.
I wonder when they’ll rip up the BA contract.
@Abalone
The Turk may not go ahead if the US doesn’t give them what they want. Hehe.
@ Pedro
Whatever about other aspects of negotiations, Türkiye won’t be getting F35s.
Why?
For the same reason that Egypt didn’t get them — i.e. Israel doesn’t want anyone in the region to be up to par with it. Since Türkiye has interests in Syria, and these conflict with Israel’s interests, there’ll be no F35s going to Erdogan.
That exclusion policy’s backfiring now, though, because Egypt is getting sophisticated weaponry from China — just like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iran.
Yeah. Furthermore Turkey wants engines for fighter they developed. I see that a major obstacle.
👇👇🤣 Lmao More orders means little to BA at this stage…
“The 225-aircraft number has already been debunked.”
Shot
“Boeing lands one of its biggest deals of the year”!??
Chaser
> Boeing scores Turkish Air order for 50 planes
Turkey’s flagship carrier will purchase 50 787 Dreamliners, with options for 25 more, according to a stock exchange filing…
When a RealityTv performer turn the real world upside down…
Pedro, this as usual is a misrepresentation. The article in fact notes:
— Turkish Airlines will purchase 50 787 Dreamliners, with options for 25 more, according to a stock exchange filing.
— Talks with Boeing for 150 narrowbodies have also been completed, pending a final agreement with engine maker CFM International Inc.
— The Boeing order could exceed $22 billion based on Ishka Ltd. valuations that account for industry-standard discounts.
The narrowbody order is contingent on the engine supply, which we all know is a limiting factor at present.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-09-26/boeing-scores-50-strong-order-from-turkish-air-options-for-more
The final agreement is not done yet. Those are no more that empty words. Can BA sue the Turks if they back off? Or OTOH can the Turks sue BA without a legal agreement?? Stop peddling your word salad here. Even Bloomberg realized/admitted its mistake and changed the title of the story! At least they try to be “objective”!!!
Even the pr people know better.
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:t2rloykje2a4vwe6yorlmk7q/bafkreihunsnaqqd2bdacxgr7e6szar4qjdp3fkzapszgzc2uplenksfwf4@jpeg
“Turkish Airlines further announced its **intention to acquire** up to 150 Boeing 737 MAX aircraft. Once finalised, this would mark its largest single-aisle aircraft order and, when combined with the Dreamliner deal, effectively double its Boeing fleet.”
https://avitrader.com/2025/09/26/turkish-airlines-unveils-record-boeing-deal-amid-u-s-turkiye-talks/#:~:text=Boeing%20and%20Turkish%20Airlines%20have%20confirmed%20a%20firm%20order%20for%20up%20to%2075%20Boeing&text=memorandum%20of%20understanding%20(MoU).
***
So, it’s an MOU…not a completed deal at all.
Little discussed in the western press, but 97% of the various “deals” that Trump struck during his May visit to the Arabian Gulf region were MOUs.
There’s a pattern here: flatter him with the illusion of a deal…but will there ever be any meat put on the bone?
There are many instances orders are announced without engine deals. One has to ask what actually hinders the Turk…
In today’s world, has to look beyond the smoke and mirrors.
Funny the actual misrepresentation is from the one labeling everything not acceptable to them.
Have to correct myself. The story title came from the Seattle Times, not Bloomberg.
Lol, Pedro. Pushing that agenda to the last dregs. It is entertaining at least.
“Factproof” is the first requirement for word engineers.
+1
Rob.
Our resident Downplaying expert is at it again.
Trying to find humor, painting a negative scenario for a great order for Boeing..
Looks like he’s thinking the narrow body part of the order won’t materialize…
Nice try Pedro
Here’s one for you..
We all know you wouldn’t be able to contain your exuberance if they ordered 50 A330 neos..😉
Imagine his infantile response to the upcoming China order ..
You’re the very one who’d pounce on @Pedro if he attempted to call an Airbus MOU a firm order 🙈
The narrowbodies are an MOU — just call it like it is.
p.s. You’re ignoring Mr. Hamilton’s recent admonition regarding personal attacks…
I suggest you do the same..
Remember, 3 strikes and you’re out .
It’s just a case of everyone being a bit chippy , because Boeing had a grand day.
Ohh yeah, another 30 Maxs’ for Norwegian…
FIRM !!!!!😉
Yes, the Norwegian order is firm.
BUT — remember that Norwegian is looking for billion-dollar compensation from BA for grounding-related charges, so one wonders what net revenue BA will generate from this.
On that point:
“The airline’s CEO, Geir Karlsen, said the order secures fleet growth on “attractive terms”…🤔
https://www.laranews.net/norwegian-and-turkish-place-737-8-orders/
The babysitters are going to relax oversight a little — one week on, one week off:
“Boeing given limited authority to issue its own airworthiness certificates”
“The US Federal Aviation Administration has granted Boeing limited authority to issue its own airworthiness certificates, a boost for the embattled plane maker as it seeks to recover from years of problems.
“The decision will take effect on Monday and will apply to certain Boeing 737 Max and 787 aircraft, which were not immediately identified, the FAA said in a statement on Friday.
“The FAA will allow limited delegation to Boeing for issuing airworthiness certificates for some of these aircraft.”
“The FAA and Boeing will issue airworthiness certificates on alternating weeks, it added.”
https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/aviation/2025/09/26/boeing-given-limited-authority-to-issue-its-own-airworthiness-certificates/
Remarkable- and not in a good way.
Indeed.
An established OEM is given only partial probation after years of intense oversight…🙈
Paper audits obviously do not count as intense oversight.
Q the Euro Trio
FYI
Safety Experts Slam Boeing And FAA For Design And Approval Of 737 Max Jets
> Investigators link both crashes to a new automated flight control system on the plane known as MCAS, which acted on faulty data from a single angle of attack sensor and repeatedly forced the planes into uncontrollable nose dives.
The panel finds that Boeing told the FAA the MCAS system existed in a broad framework, but the company did not fully explain what the MCAS systems would do nor how forcefully it would push the nose of the plane down.
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/11/769609684/safety-experts-slam-boeing-and-faa-for-design-and-approval-of-737-max-jets
AP:
> Federal regulators took full control over 737 Max approvals in 2019, after the second of two crashes that were later blamed on a new software system Boeing developed for the aircraft.
This is discussed in more detail in Bjorn’s series thread. From the posted article:
“Former National Transportation Safety Board chairman Christopher Hart headed up the review, and in a conference call with reporters Friday afternoon, he said that as the MAX was being reviewed for FAA certification, MCAS changed “from a relatively benign system to a not-so-benign system without adequate knowledge by the FAA.”
Hart says the review did not find any evidence of a deliberate effort by Boeing to mislead regulators; instead, he blamed poor communication.
“The information and discussions about MCAS were so fragmented and were delivered to disconnected groups,” the JATR report says, so it it “was difficult (for the FAA) to recognize the impacts and implications of this system.”
Miscommunication??? 😅
The 737 max as first certified is unsafe and not fit for flying.
And now we have Boeing CEO trying to *swing back* the pendulum! One more accident away…
Boeing May Be Getting Too Much Leeway From the FAA
Pay walled
https://t.co/HMGsNpA8Yh
AP:
> The company said in July that it reached the monthly cap in the second quarter and would eventually seek the FAA’s permission to increase production.
The FAA said in a Friday statement that if Boeing requests an increase, “onsite FAA safety inspectors will conduct extensive planning and reviews with Boeing to determine if they can safely produce more airplanes.”
Only one accident away… I’m waiting.
> PHL TRACON staffing for the EWR sector is currently at just 22 when the target is 46, or 48%.
Yep, it was called Niece.
I am not waiting, I am hoping never again.
😂
WSJ: Federal regulators are scaling back obstacles for Boeing to deliver some of its newly produced aircraft to customers.
https://x.com/WSJ/status/1971548317592048102
This was inevitable. FAA was never going to withhold this forever. Seems like a good plan to start off slowly with the transition.
Germany looks to be following France’s example, and is leaning toward Saab Global Eye rather than Boeing E-7:
“Germany Prioritizes Saab GlobalEye Aircraft for National Airborne Early Warning Needs.”
“German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said Saab’s GlobalEye is “in pole position” as Berlin weighs options to close its future airborne early warning gap. ”
https://armyrecognition.com/news/aerospace-news/2025/germany-prioritizes-saab-globaleye-aircraft-for-national-airborne-early-warning-needs
Across the pond, the show must go on!
> Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered hundreds of generals to travel on short notice from around the world to hear him make a speech on military standards and the “warrior ethos,” multiple people familiar with the event told The Washington Post.
Re: “AI”:
Gary Marcus: “Game over for pure LLMs. Even Turing Award Winner Rich Sutton has gotten off the bus.”
“It’s hard.” ;););)
C919 is getting a dose of production reality
https://simpleflying.com/comac-adjusts-c919-delivery-targets/
Even 25 seems ambitious at this point
as of few years ago, Comac had production capacity based on western automation equipment and tooling of 48 a year for C919
How a crisis is manufactured:
Can Boeing or Airbus announce in March to increase the number of aircraft produced like 500% by the end of the year? Is it reasonable? Would you believe it??
> “China’s leading aircraft manufacturer *plans* a further 50 per cent boost to *production capacity* for the C919…
Boeing, an airframer with over a century’s experience, couldn’t deliver what it promised:
2024 737 delivery: 260 even though BA scheduled for ** ~550 aircraft **
And BA will also fall short by ~200 this year? How can BA turn a profit after paying all the compensation credits?
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/737-MAX-Del-Stream-at-12-31-23.png
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GhWDUj2aAAA_HQW?format=jpg&name=large
@Abalone
Interesting that from the Seattle Times graphic above, BCA is billing its customers 12% less than est. fair value! Fire sale continues…
@Pedro
Making planes is hard. For everyone.
Only one of the two major OEMs- Boeing- makes absurd claims about its capabilities and plans:
-737 production rates
-787 production rates
-737-7 certification and EIS
-737-10 certification and EIS
-777-X certification and EIS
Shall I go on? The other guys have been doing much
better, and for many years now- while treating their
employees better. I like that.
@Vincent
By other guys…I can only think of one other guy…Airbus. To a lesser extent Embraer.
I separate Boeing’s problems into two pieces. Production (bad) and certification (non-existant). That is not a defense nor a criticism. Comac is not timely on certification or production either. The failure of one is not an endorsement of the other.
Maybe there is a lesson in this trend. For anyone pining for a new airframe…pretty much every airframer is spooked about development turning into a mega-billion dollar boondoggle that is “years” late and ultimately a zero-sum game in the spectrum of competition. Do you really think a next-gen Boeing airplane or C929 is coming anytime soon?
Somewhere along the line a value decision was made in the name of safety to interrogate the certification and production processes with more scrutiny. That decision bears a toll. I don’t care who announces…my opinion…any aircraft launched “today” needs to budget 10 years to EIS.
Pardon my rant…but there is a point. Making planes is hard. For everyone.
“Making planes is hard. For everyone.”
I have made that point on lo many occasions. Some believe you wave a magic wand and particularly if its China or Russia wand and it just happens. I call it the current generation App affect. No idea what goes into something but by golly you can make a game and it happens by magic (literally in many games)
Casey: Bryce, Pedro and to a lesser degree Vincent don’t want a discussion, they want to drive an agenda. People like you, Rob and PNWgeek are interested in facts and details.
Building aircraft is not the same as cars, TVs, Cell phones, they not only do not get that they refuse to get it because it conflicts with their world view.
@ Casey
If COMAC’s production plans have been rattled by trade-war-related interruption in supply of western parts, then it’s safe to assume that COMAC has now accelerated/broadened its drive to de-westernize its plane designs.
The Russians have de-westernized 3 models in 3 years — including taking the opportunity to do some significant design upgrades along the way.
China will surprise us one of these days when it unveils its own fully-domestic aircraft. From that point on, there’ll be no more interruptions to scheduled production.
@Abalone
You are what your record is. I have heard a lot reasons. Covid. Supply chain. Wars. Lack of inspectors.
Japan tried and failed (not the least of which there was no market for its plane).
China at least has the benefit of not being sanctioned. Russian aviation is in for years of hurt in its current state. If China really wants a winner then it needs to enter the market with an aircraft that is fundamentally better than other global options. You have to give global airlines a compelling reason to take the plunge. Go with a BWB or propfan and reset the market.
Just watch their development of jets over the last thirty years:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GycjLAIbQAAM65M?format=jpg&name=medium
It’s impossible to go from zero to a sixth-generation in one go without going thru all the intermediate steps.
Now I read that executives from LM are quietly admitting the inevitable (behind closed doors of course!).
Wait to see when they switch more resources to the civilian side.
@Casey:
Your post is an interesting start point in a discussion. And that is, you can’t iterate commercial like you can Fighter Jets.
So the strongest aspect of China economy does not work in this case.
So rather than jets lets look at a simpler item that is a long term buy (normally) and is really happening.
The Mini Excavators. China is selling those into the US market. They break and people can’t get the parts to fix them (and that assumes it was designed to fix in the first place.)
Its a coin flip, low cost vs a total loss. If its low cost (though cheap is also a factor here) you can guy 3 of them before its, I should have bought a Kabota.
Low end service, one of them may hang together and if its the first or second one, ok.
In this case at issue is there are a snoot-full of brands and no one puts the time and money into a good product. Pretty much the era of cheap Japanese goods (which over time did morph into good Japanese goods)
So on a small scale you need arduous testing (time and money) and you need a support network (all stuff breaks sooner or latter and your return customers are based on your warranty as well as a dealer that does the work).
Aircraft of course are harder. They cost so much that we are down to two world wide vendors (Embraer occupies a rare middle ground, first class operation but not up to Boeing or Airbus.
Airbus had an entry point because there was no competition, what Boeing had was aged and locked into an architecture that did not update well.
The A300 did not sell great, but it set the basis for where they could sell and that was the A320. Boeing was arrogant and dismissed them and they got a foothold and then more.
COMEC does not have that entry point. At its worst the MAX is better than the C919. Not because the C919 is a bad aircraft, its simply a copy of an A320CEO. Nothing better, nothing innovative and its locked in its space and can’t get better (caveat, a CFRP wing yes)
But Airlines don’t want a constantly morphing product. They need numbers and stability. A new but slightly heavy and less economical. Why would anyone that is not a Belts and Suspenders victim of the Silk Noose buy that?
No one has any idea what their support is like. No one should be foolish enough to think Chinese Airlines are going to speak up, its off the Gulag for you if you do.
Equally you are going to be very conservative in any aspects of an aircraft, failure is not tolerated. Heads would roll. So you do a conservative design.
I remember the invasion of the then Korean VCR. Yep they broke a lot. Could not keep up with repairs as they changed tghe boards every couple of months and your SAMS were obsolete in 3 (yes I was there).
Best advice if it broke? Throw it away and buy a new one, even if its in warranty its going to cost you to send it in and its going to be months before you get it back.
Aircraft are not cheap or low cost, you can’t do that. Its why the S100 failed, too much breaking and not enough support and the constant disruption was not tolerable.
Most of the C919 is Western. The cost is going to be high (I know of one case where a major piece of equipment that was bought just for spare parts, it was lower cost than buying the parts separately) – They are tearing down at least one A220 for parts (worth more as parts than as a whole with engines that need upgraded.
Sure China can come up with its own systems, it will only take 20 years to Chinafy and who will buy Chinese only certified aircraft (or can operate them in cross cert countries)
Shipbuilding?: Yep, why, Labor costs are a huge part and you can get low cost labor in China. A natural fit.
Commercial aircraft are supposed to return profits and the only reasons COMAC has not gone belly up is it has unlimited pockets to draw on.
But an Airlines with a C919 competing directly with a MAX or A320NEO is going to loose money, tolerable with govt backing but again, no country that has World cert standards is going to allow it.
We hear from the Chorus that China will Chinafy it, ok, then it has to be certified again (if it ever got cert) and its an endless process.
Military hardware is a whole different story but we are talking civie stuff, or are supposed to.
Trans
Every C909 and C919 sold in Southeast Asia is one Boeing or Airbus is not going to get The hidden competitive advantage is offering good financing from China banks that they couldn’t get from the west
ps Southeast Asian airlines are not waiting for FAA and/EASA certification
Google AI “Vietnam’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAAV) had to amend regulations to allow Chinese-made aircraft to operate, a move that was completed in early 2025.”
Google AI “Air Cambodia plans to begin using COMAC aircraft, having signed a memorandum of understanding in September 2025 to purchase up to 20 C909 regional jets from China’s COMAC. This deal makes Air Cambodia the fourth international operator of the C909, with previous overseas deployments to Indonesia, Laos, and Vietnam”.
Trans
Trans is lost again.
Well welk well in case this is the level of understanding I have, I would avoid commenting on subjects I know little about. No wonder America won’t be able to catch up as they failed to see what’s happening around them. Have you heard of LNG ships? Do you know triple E big box shops? Manufactturing is now so remote from most American lives that they lost touch with it!
“Shipbuilding?: Yep, why, Labor costs are a huge part and you can get low cost labor in China. A natural fit.”
Mini excavators can’t have parts? Give me an fking break. That’s not farmers on youtube talking about. They say they would rather have imported Chinese-made mini excavators. Go to their social media app, they work 24/7. Unlike Caterpillar which works as a vampire that sucks you dry.
Ship owners know how important reliability is, they want their ships running. So no, no one would buy substandard (and overpriced) ships unless you’re in America and subject to terrorist Jones Act. Lmao.
… big box ships*…
@ Casey
“China at least has the benefit of not being sanctioned”
But China *is* suffering the effects of export stops as part of the current trade war — it’s there in the article that you posted.
So, just like the Russians, they’ll remove that risk by changing to a domestic supplier.
The C919 *is* a game changer — it’s from a non-western OEM, and its cheaper than a 737 or A321. That will appeal to a lot of buyers.
***
China previously got hit by export restrictions on semiconductor equipment…so the country turned to making its own. It took a few years, buy they’re now self-reliant. They even make lithography scanners — the US doesn’t. And they’re good at it, because they got all the way up to 192nm immersion tools much faster than ASML did.
China heard it loud and clear that America wants decoupling. They know what to do next. That’s why they are piling up gold and abandoning T-bills. It’s remarkable. In 2008 China saved the US from ruin at their request but got backstabbed. They won’t forget.
Airbus A300 is a break through but relatively not a great success. Market doesn’t necessarily reward pioneers. Look at Apple’s Newton. You can’t get too far ahead while the rest of the world are not ready.
not a great sales* success…
How life goes in circles for the USAF:
> The U.S. Air Force’s renewed look at the future of its aerial refueling fleet is again prioritizing stealthy, new-build aircraft—provided the service can afford it.
An extra Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000) or so should more-or-less cover the DoD’s newly found needs for the next FY.
How long will it take?
Late 2030s? 2040s?
Casey, I am in full agreement with you that making planes is hard- especially making safe ones that don’t often crash,
are cost-effective, and can be produced at sustainable rates;
while treating those who make those who design and make those aircraft well.
One of the two major OEMs seems substantially better in all those aspects than the other, all while building a large cash fund to sustain them during a downturn (endemic to capitalism)- or, possibly, to design and build a new aircraft.
We’ll see how it goes.
Re: Korean workers in Hyundai plant
@Duke
Contrary to what you said, the workers weren’t construction workers, they were there to *install equipment and supervise the project*.
FT:
> A senior South Korean official said the companies had been placed in an “impossible position”, as successive US governments pushed them to invest billions of dollars in reviving American industry while refusing to facilitate short-term working visas for projects to be completed on time.
“The US government is two-faced,” said Chang Sang-sik, head of research at the Korea International Trade Association. “It is asking Korea to invest more in the US, while treating Korean workers like criminals even when it is well aware that they are needed for these projects to happen.”
Authorities have turned a blind eye to this practice for years because otherwise there’s no way the projects could be completed on time.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G0VVJ2QagAALO13?format=png&name=900×900
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G0VVVUoboAAB_D6?format=png&name=900×900
You would think that as the world has shifted away from working at the office, that the number of needed visas will drop.
Unless the employee needs to physically be there, to compete their job – you keep them at home and save a kaboodle.
Installing and calibrating complex equipment can’t be done remotely.
Neither can complex repairs.
The bigger question is: why are the locals seemingly incapable of doing it?
You are correct, of course. For some jobs, you need to be there.
However, SPEEA is an engineering union, not touch labour, like the IAM.
I was referencing work like BA did on the MCAS software (because yah, it worked out so well for the company, mind you…), where they had software engineers in India, do the job. I’m not blaming anyone, in the MCAS case, it’s just an example of work that can be done at a distance.
IIRC, in a highly unionized environment like BA, touching, assembling and working on parts has to be done by the IAM.
The bigger question you asked
I would suggest that there are a multitude of reasons why.
One of them is that performing such tasks, like the IAM does…is hard work. Physical. In many cases, it requires education, training, trade certifications, etc.
Then there is this:
https://leehamnews.com/2024/09/16/why-the-iam-751-rejected-the-boeing-contract-and-what-is-needed-for-approval/
Comparing Boeing’s wage offer
Amazon has openings for hundreds of delivery drivers, who make the same wages as entry-level machinists currently at Boeing. Entry-level pay for bus drivers in Everett is $8 an hour more than what Boeing pays entry-level Grade 10 flight line mechanics. (And the bus drivers get union benefits and a $5,000 signing bonus.)
Boeing’s offer to raise starting pay by $4 an hour across the board would have meant that starting pay for Grade 4 mechanics (the biggest within the IAM’s 12 labor grades) would have been 50 cents an hour more than what a national sandwich chain is offering for experienced workers in its stores south of the Everett factory.
Meanwhile, for experienced machinists, over the past decade, their wages have fallen behind inflation. For decades, a union-represented blue-collar job at Boeing was the ticket to a middle-class lifestyle. Hit maximum pay after six years, and you’re buying a house in one of the small towns near the factories. You’re looking at a new car, maybe a boat or motorcycle.
Today, Redfin says the median-priced home in the Everett area is $608,000, and to get a mortgage on that, a homebuyer would need to earn upwards of $130,000 a year, depending on their down payment. The average machinist makes $75,000 a year now, which would have climbed to $106,000 under the offer.
———————————————
Working at a company like BA, IMO – is a labour of love. Always has been. You work there, because you love aircraft and the aviation industry.
Once you are ambivalent towards the job and look at it solely on the basis of, “How much am I making? How much of myself do I have to invest to do this job?” and break it down on that basis…does the shine wear off?
You start comparing how much you can make there, versus doing something else. The mentality of people has shifted to, “Get mine, now. As fast as possible”
You know – kinda like the stance that upper management takes, in a company like that…
Regarding the C919 production slowdown:
“The C919 relies on western suppliers, which the company is looking to change as Chinese substitutes can be developed. As a smaller customer than Airbus or Boeing, COMAC has a lower priority for industry suppliers, as they sell fewer components to COMAC. With engines, flight control systems and other critical components supplied from the US, they are subject to potential tariffs and geo-political interruptions.”
“Navigating an international supply chain and solving problems for thousands of parts across hundreds of companies is not easy. Add in geo-political elements, and production is likely to continue to be constrained into 2026 and possibly 2027 before COMAC can fully remedy the situation. The current US administration, recognizing Boeing’s leadership position in the US balance of trade, is unlikely to embrace policies that aid COMAC’s growing position as a potential competitor to Boeing and Airbus.”
“Aerospace is an international industry, with global supply chains and strong economic impacts for aircraft manufacturing countries. Geo-politics have always played a significant role in the commercial aircraft sector, greatly benefiting Boeing and the United States balance of trade for many years. We don’t expect that to change, but with a mercurial President, COMAC cannot be assured that its supply chain will remain intact. A move towards Chinese components and subsystems is inevitable, at which point the C919 should see a significant production ramp-up. But that will take a few year in which delivery shocks, like we’ve seen this year, may recur.”
https://airinsight.com/comac-reduces-expected-c919-production-in-2025/
***
Only question now: when will the fully de-westernized C919 be announced?
Also: will COMAC switch to a Russian PD-8 engine on the C909, or develop a domestic alternative…such as a re-vamped WS-13A?
For COMAC’s sake, let’s hope that they do a better job, then these guys:
https://simpleflying.com/mc-21-6-tons-heavier/
Overweight & Late: Russia’s MC-21 Expected To Be 6 Tons Heavier
MC-21 to have reduced performance
The Kommersant reported after the Russification of the MC-21-300, it will be almost 6 tons (5.75 tons) heavier (Russification, in this case, describes the process of finding substitute Russian-produced parts to replace the original Western parts). The MC-21-300 was originally planned to have Pratt & Whitney PW1000G engines, but it is now impossible to fit them to the aircraft. In all, around 40% to 50% of the MC-21 had been planned to have been composed of Western imported parts.
The Kommersant states that the extra weight has “significantly” reduced the flight range and altitude of the MC-21. Its range is expected to be reduced to less than 2,800 kilometers or 1,740 miles, with the Kommersant quoting some sources saying it will be reduced to less than 2,000 kilometers or 1,240 miles. The publication notes that by using Russian-substituted components, the original specifications of the MC-21 will be unattainable. The maximum payload of the MC-21 will also be reduced.
And, yet, the MC-21 flew a 4,100km test flight in May…and still had 4.5 tons of fuel on board when it landed…and we don’t know if the tanks were full upon departure.
https://ruavia.su/mc-21-310-prototype-flies-from-irkutsk-to-zhukovsky/
Not prudent to write it off based on hearsay.
Two things with that:
It is even more prudent, to qualify the source of the information, when reading something.
RuAviationEverything you wanted to know about Russian aviation
——————————————————-
Secondly,
Do you know what was missing in that report from Russian Aviation?
How much weight was in that aircraft? Pax? Bags? Was there the equivalent weight added to the aircraft, to simulate the weight it would carry?
Yes, Frank, we indeed don’t know if there was ballast on board to simulate a passenger load — there might have been, or perhaps not. But it’s still 4100km, and there was still fuel in the tank upon landing. The Yakovlev website is still showing a range of 5100km with a full load. I guess we’ll just have to see.
As regards source: why would Komnersant be more trustworthy than RuAviation? At least the latter is a dedicated aviation site.
While Trumps MAGA movement is making it less attractive for young talent to work in the US, China is doing the opposite.
https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/china/china-k-visa-trump-h1b-100k-fee-b2833302.html
Maybe US government should rethink what the real consequences are of their actions. Some seem to really feel the world turn around them and misjudge the consequences of one side restrictions.
+1
“NCAA considers China’s COMAC C919 aircraft for domestic airlines ”
“Nigeria’s civil aviation regulator is considering certifying China’s C919 aircraft for use by domestic carriers.
“The move could open up a new front in the country’s growing aviation sector and deepen ties with China, the world’s second-largest economy. ”
“For COMAC, certification in Nigeria would be a critical step in its bid to enter the African market.
“-The Chinese planemaker has already held several talks with Nigerian officials and has offered maintenance and training support to local carriers.
“-COMAC is also exploring dry lease arrangements, a financing model that allows airlines to lease planes without crew, an attractive option for Nigerian operators looking to expand capacity.”
“With a population of 230 million, Nigeria represents one of Africa’s biggest potential aviation markets.
“-The country’s 13 active airlines rely heavily on leased aircraft, and recent improvements in Nigeria’s Aviation Working Group rating.
“-Meanwhile, affordability remains a challenge due to higher air travel costs for many Nigerians.”
https://nairametrics.com/2025/09/28/ncaa-considers-chinas-comac-c919-aircraft-for-domestic-airlines/
Does it look like America is investing in its next generation? No wonder America is falling behind.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G1846eAWcAAzcwa?format=jpg&name=large
One of the leading indicator is relative national educational levels…which is a factor Emmanuel Todd noted in “The Defeat of the West”:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G13lxBzWkAATufo?format=jpg&name=medium
You want to restoring (adv) manufacturing? GL.
============
Bettors are giving an 83% chance of a government shutdown
“Turkey says US Congress blocking engine exports for KAAN next-gen fighter jet”
“The KAAN, built by Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI), is designed to replace Turkey’s F-16 fleet and give the Turkish Air Force an indigenous stealth aircraft. The first prototype flew in February 2024 and completed a second test flight in May 2024.
“Those early prototypes rely on the US-made F110 engine, a derivative of the powerplant used on the F-16. Turkey has always intended to transition the KAAN to an indigenous engine, developed under the TEI TF35000 program, but that system is still years away from maturity. ”
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/turkey-kaan-fighter-engines-us-block
***
Two reasons for this:
– LM doesn’t want to have to contend with a western competitor for the F35.
– Israel doesn’t want Türkiye to have 5th-Gen fighters.
Friend or foe — same treatment.
Yeah. Will the Turk walk back from their BA order?
AW: Attempts to secure export licenses for the General Electric F110 engine for the Turkish Aerospace Industries Kaan fighter “have been stalled,” Turkey’s Foreign Affairs Minister says.
> US farmers are saying we “just need temporary help, until things get better.”
Here’s the thing. US farm exports- which are mostly soy- CAN’T get better.
Other countries are now fillingl China’s demand.
We’ve walled ourselves out of the global market, folks. This is it.
An interesting thread:
(Following the post above)
> The thing is, this isn’t even the first time US ag has wrecked itself with foolish trade wars.
In the runup to the Civil War, US cotton plantations decided to stop exporting cotton. Why?
Because the British Empire’s textile mills ran on cotton from US plantations.
> Without Southern cotton, the British textile industry would be brought to its knees.
And that would force the British Empire- with the world’s most powerful navy- to help the US South in its fight for “freedom.”
At least, that’s what cotton planters THOUGHT would happen.
> What actually happened? Egyptian cotton.
With lots of fertile farmland and desperate for something to sell for cash on international markets,
Egypt’s leadership dumped resources into building up cotton farming in Egypt.
> By the time the US Civil War was over, so was the US cotton industry.
Egypt had ramped up to growing so much cotton, nobody really needed any from the US South anymore.
> This is why “Egyptian cotton” is a thing now!
Egypt grew some cotton before all that, but not a “main export industry & household name” amount.
> This is why it’s so important that US agriculture drop the “positive vibes only!” strategy and actually learn from our own mistakes.
So we can stop repeating them already.
Anyway, here’s the next Egyptian cotton: Argentine & Brazilian soybeans.
https://x.com/SarahTaber_bww/status/1973166475654603213
> The story I thought I knew about China and the decline of US manufacturing is that opening trade with China created a “shock” to blue-collar labor that moved manufacturing to Shenzhen from Ohio.
@pkedrosky offers a (somewhat complementary) counter-history: What also happened is that the broadband Internet build-out of the 1990s required so much capital that it sucked investment away from manufacturing.
https://x.com/DKThomp/status/1973757003651485986