Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Dubai Air Show, Day 1: Boeing’s 777X; Anticipated orders
Boeing Insists 777X Widebody Is Worth the Wait
By Charles Alcock • Managing Editor
Charlotte Bailey • Writer
Nov. 16, 2025, © AIN: Twelve years since Boeing launched the 777X program at the 2013 Dubai Airshow, the OEM is back on-site with both its 777-9 test aircraft and a renewed confidence that delays to the protracted certification schedule are finally over.
With Boeing continuing to steadily work through FAA type inspection authorization (TIA) test phases, head of airline marketing for the 777X Justin Hale has a “high confidence” the airplane will enter service by 2027, with certification forthcoming as soon as 2026, he told reporters during a briefing on the eve of the Dubai Airshow on Sunday.
The full story may be found here.
Dubai Airshow Stands Out for Airliner Orders and Military Surprises
By Charles Alcock • Managing Editor
Nov. 16, 2025, © AIN: The Gulf, where blockbuster commercial aviation demand converges with rising regional military spending, is arguably the prime location for a major aerospace and defense event. With the UAE consistently demonstrating its willingness to handle international relations in its own unique way, the Dubai Airshow this week is poised to make its mark as the industry closes 2025.
Spending by airlines, airports, and other civil aviation service providers in the Middle East is projected to exceed $28 billion this year, on track to surpass $35 billion by 2030. Last week, the IBA consultancy predicted that more than 300 new commercial aircraft orders and commitments would be announced during the show. Based on very approximate average pricing, this business could add around $60 billion to the year-end tally.
The full story may be found here.
It’ll be interesting to see what what orders are finalized at the airshow.
Hopefully more Trump-tariff orders will follow, so Boeing can scale up, reduce debt, initiate a new NB and restore the duopoly with Airbus.
https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/boeing-ceo-credits-trump-trade-strategy-for-boosting-orders/163987.article
800+ Boeing Aircraft already & counting!
Would not be surprised to see 800+ orders being reduced from Boeing’s tally to date. Trump’s, apparent Hollywood Style Triumph may be short-lived, once realities start becoming evident to the Airlines, and these “DEALS” show more of a Propaganda-Stunt than realities of $Trillion Contracts in the Middle East. The days of Santa Clause are over ,!!
Its that inside information what sells your aviation newsletter ? Oh thats right…
Boeing only lists firm orders- due to more rigorous accounting rules- not faux ones like Airbus does
777X 583 firm orders + 169 options gives around 750 ‘on order’
Possibly not about the 777x
Accumulated reach forward losses for the 777x program has reached $15 billion, 583 firm orders
The revenue for selling say 750 777X planes is said to be $262.5 billion to $331.5 billion. So around 5%
All is fine as its not ‘cash’ loss but program accounting
Airbus doesnt give fo each commercial airliner product line revenue and profit /loss or even break out its ‘program/contract accounting’ write-offs
Despite all the fauxrage here over Boeing orders, I suspect as Scott said, most of the Boeing orders would have occurred anyway, independent of the tariff policies or Trump. There may have been a bump in some nations that are friendly with Trump, but also a dip in nations that aren’t.
The market doesn’t cease being a duopoly because Trump is president, nor will it cease when he leaves office. The allegations are amusing in light of Macron’s trip to China to secure a whopping Airbus order when the US defended Taiwan, and navigation rights in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. He saw an opportunity and he took it. Which is fine, but then you can’t cry foul when the advantage occurs on the other side.
I think the 800 orders I listed before have been named by the airlines’ governments, the Whitehouse and even Boeing as results of Trump negotiations on tariffs.
There is no reason to doubt IMO. Despite it being an unpopular, unheroic topic for many.
There is every reason to doubt, if you know anything about Trump’s reputation for claiming credit.
It’s very likely that he organizes the airline announcements to coincide with his foreign trips. He does the same thing with domestic announcements. He associates himself with the positive, and distances himself from the negative.
If Boeing gains an order, Trump did it. If Boeing loses an order, Biden did it. It’s just as amusing as Macron’s trip to China.
We don’t have to look hard to find confirmation from all sides on those deals and how / why they were made.
https://www.gurufocus.com/news/3197871/boeing-breaks-ground-on-1b-dreamliner-surge-as-trump-trade-tailwind-lifts-off
WTO, open competition, free market dynamics and technical merrits are just low on the priority list. A new reality I guess.
Exactly Rob;
+1
Wow. Reality is so hard that people refused to admit. Sad.
Whose reality?
Your version has been lined up with facts and at the very least found wanting.
Yeh that the issue: “Whose reality?”
There’re multiple realities? Trump’s reality? Not-Trump’s reality?
@Rob:
Well Macron is kind of a cry baby. Dire threats when Boeing got the KC-46A and how unfair that was.
Hmm, kind of two realities.
One is that they are two very different aircraft and the contract was for a KC-135R replacement (be that right or wrong of probably something in between with a bias to more and smaller, aka 767)
The other is we never were allowed to bid on any of the European tanker awards (outright award, not even a faux competition)
Then there was the over priced conventional sub the Aussies were going to buy (nuke hull, unproven power plant so called independent propulsion but several ways to achieve that). France builds nuke boats not independent propulsion.
Airbus cried fowl when Boeing took the Hawaiian contract and the foul was, Boeing did not stick to margins, how dare they?
Shrug, Boeing thought it was an opportunity and make more money on the options – and with AK merger, that is going up and up.
It should be noted that UK and I believe German are also doing Freedom of Navigation missions in West Philippine Sea and at least one down the Straights of Taiwan. Japan and Australia and probably others.
+1
Again the “KC-135R replacement” HOAX. According to that logic what aircraft the USAF would have bought to replace the P-51 Mustang or what tank the US Army would have replaced the Sherman tank with? – The KC-46 did won on only one factor: less fuel burn for touch&go manoeuvrers. A nice to have for USAF in contrast to more fuel or more cargo capacity other air forces get.
MHalblaub wrote.
The KC-46 did won on only one factor: less fuel burn for touch&go manoeuvrers.
Interesringly enough, the KC46 was the only aircraft that performed all mandatory qualifying tasks. The MRTT was, and still is, unable to perform the Acceleration and Breakaway climb due to its lack of reserve thrust. The way the MRTT got around this was to show it could perform a Breakaway and Climb while carrying the KC46s max fuel load. If the MRTTs highly touted extra gas capacity causes it to fail the basic requirements. It would be good to hear about it from the Airbus Proponents who still ignore the MRTTs lack of mission critical maneuvering thrust.
Oh yeah, You are welcome for the reply to your question about why holes from removed gasteners need to be filled for stress and strain reaaons.
Have a great day
I noted a few days back that Boeing had TIA for the next group of tests. Those are the most complex ones.
So Boeing can go full out and while that is being done, working at the approval for the last couple of approvals for group 4 and 5.
While most of the progress is incremental, that is leaps and bounds opposite of the direction Boeing was going.
I will take steady progress and building a good corporate strucutre vs the knee jerk stuff.
Add in settling the St Louis strike. T7A being a key aspect as its the first fully digital build though its not commercial.
“While most of the progress is incremental, that is leaps and bounds opposite of the direction BA was going.”
This is funny at so many different levels.😂 I thought BA was moving along the certification path in one direction, though the progress was rather sluggish, with repeated delays. Now, I’m told, that BA made a u-turn and went backwards! Wow, speechless… I’m speechless!
“So Boeing can go full out and while that is being done, working at the approval for the last couple of approvals for group 4 and 5.”
Wait, doesn’t BA have to finish phase three flight tests, and wait for approval to proceed to the next phase(s)?
What’s the accumulated reach forward losses on the “first fully digital build” T7A?
Last but not the least, AB might have cried fowl, but it’s now laughing all the way to the bank, while that other competitor which gained contracts with low-bids continued to mire in losses and drown under billions of debt. No money for new aircraft program while a huge market turned its back against it. Self-harm, endless self-harms.
As i told others, there are places one shouldn’t go or those not well-trained or lack of experience should have better stayed home for their own sake. It’s not healthy as they continued to lose aircraft at this rate.
Navy loses two aircraft from USS Nimitz aircraft carrier within 30 minutes
{Edited as a violation of Reader Comment rules.}
{Edited as a violation of Reader Comment rules.}
@Rob: It’s not up to you to moderate. If you have a complaint, reach out to me directly. I can’t moderate 24/7 (nor do I want to) but that’s my job, not yours.
Hamilton
Scott, I agree. It just gets really frustrating to constantly deal with the trolling responses from these guys, that are intended to mislead, agitate, and antagonize.
In the MD-11 thread, a quarter of the entire posts are Pedro. They are all anti-Boeing, and most are anti-American as well.
Further they don’t lend anything of substance or understanding to the discussion. They are mostly searches to find something negative to say. If he can’t find anything on the topic at hand, he switches to any other topic for which he can continue to make negative posts.
The agenda he has here is clear as a bell. I don’t think it could be mistaken for anything else.
You have chastised him dozens of times. He lays low for awhile until he thinks it’s safe, then he starts up again. He has no intention of doing anything else.
I try to answer rationally and present facts and reasoning. He doesn’t address either of those. He responds with derision and inanity.
Since he won’t engage on the facts, the only way to deal with him is to engage on his methods. The alternative is to just let him post open and obvious misinformation.
There are 4 simple rules that would eliminate most conflict here:
1. Distinguish between objective facts and subjective beliefs, which are not the same.
2. Distinguish between correlation and causation, which are not the same.
3. Accept the burden of evidence for your own positions, and develop responsible arguments.
4. Present facts and reasoning in their full and accurate context.
These are things we teach in debate, to prevent kids from developing the improper methods of argument, that are on full display here.
I also believe you would get better engagement from the aerospace engineering community, if that behavior was discouraged. I don’t think qualified people who read the MD-11 thread would choose to participate in the mudslinging against Boeing.
I know people in other forums who work for Airbus. They obviously advocate for their company, as would be expected, but they don’t make the kind of malicious comments routinely made here. In fact we can talk about Boeing issues without malice, and they make constructive comments and criticisms.
Those people are not anti-Boeing, and I am not anti-Airbus. That is normal conduct in a forum like this. What happens here, is not normal.
Rob.
EXACTLY on point. I have gone to great length to describe the workings of many things here for both Pedro and Abalone. It is as if facts don’t matter. Pedro gets on Both sides of the same argument with no regard to the fact that he does it. HOPEFULLY, somebody else sitting on the sidelines gains an understanding of just how complicated this business is. Something funny about airplane guys and my friends at Airbus. They can be both my fiercest competitor and a good friend at the same time. I wonder who pays him for his disinformation program
Of interest on the Russian LCA front
“The United Aircraft Corporation, faced a shortage of funds to pay contractors and is now entangled in hundreds of cases in court for compensation of debt.”
I am not going to cite the source, its one of several I follow and has proven to be good info and is in line with each other.
Where United Aircraft resources go in a limited work pool and resources as well as the financial end, I don’t have any insight.
It does have relevance as UAC also produces (primarily) military equipment. Between losses and wear out of airframes, that leaves a shortage. I am not guessing where they put the focus, just that it can affect the attempt to Russify MC-21 and LCA.
And a serious question if Russia makes the stuff needed or its cobbled together from gray market parts sources (a lot higher cost and how reliable is the supply?)
I just closed comments on the UPS MD-11 post, thanks to Rob, Abalone, Pedro and Trans World. I see they are also over-stepping on this post.
Clean it up, or I will close comments on this post, too.
Hamilton
Rob: totally agreed. Just as a side remark: I gave up following this forum closely since the quality of the posts was so hard to digest and I say this as a European who is really proud of Airbus’ achievements.
As to the Dubai airshow: 65 new orders from Emirates for the T7 and the outlook of a larger version. That is the first strategical forward move by Boeing since years and I think a wise one. AB has nothing in this area to compete and it will provide BA with some breathing space and hopefully turns the mood of the employees towards something positive
Any word on a possible 777X-10 announcement? Is this real or just a press release product?
@sPh: Just posted on this subject.
For years I’ve believed (& communicated) US Government support to bring back Boeing might be the only option and maybe best option left to secure global competition and innovation in the long term.
Well, despite many not being ready to admit, let alone say publicly, it is what we are seeing right now.
Denial is for believers only.
https://en.oninvest.com/article/u-s-to-cut-duties-on-swiss-goods-to-15-in-exchange-for-buying-boeing-planes
Will update my Trump Boeing Tariff orders overview, including credible sources.
I think Trump will lose on his tariffs in the US Supreme Court as they are a power of Congress only. They could pass a law verifying them but wont.
As Boeing only lists firm contracts the vapour ones from tariff promises wont affect them much.
Swiss is part of Lufthansa group , so In dont see much room for them to shift much in their fleet. Long haul is 777-300ER with 12 all under 10 yrs old.
Maybe the 787-9 could be used in their thinner long haul as they still have a few A340 and one A350 just delivered ( any orders moved to LH group?)
Shorthaul is all Airbus A320/321 and A220