Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Boeing says 1Q deliveries will be lower than forecast, but will catch up later
By Scott Hamilton
Jay Malave, EVP and CFO of The Boeing Co. Credit: Boeing.
March 17, 2026, © Leeham News: Boeing’s deliveries in the first quarter may be lower than originally forecast, but will catch up throughout the remainder of this year, the company’s chief financial officer said today.
Jay Malave said that a quality defect on the 737 line affected about 25 airplanes. The defect was spotted by Boeing and involves scratched wiring traced to a miscalibrated machine at a Boeing facility.
“We’ve got about a population of about 25 aircraft that are impacted by that, so they’ll have to undergo some level of rework,” Malave said. “You’re talking around three days of rework, so not a significant amount. We have resumed deliveries as of last week. The impact here is really one of timing.
“We’ll see about 10 aircraft we were expecting to deliver around 120 737s in the first quarter, so we’ll slip about 10 of those deliveries into the second quarter. [The impact is] fairly limited in the grand scheme of things.”
Deliveries of the 787 will be slower and lower than hoped due to the timing of certification for premium-class interiors.
Rollouts good, timing is slower
Malave said that rollouts of the 787 have been “pretty good” for January and February, “but deliveries have been a little bit lighter.”
Boeing will deliver about 15 aircraft this quarter, compared with an expected 20.
“The build is happening, so we’re really not changing the production cadence. The factory’s been, for the most part, unaffected, so we continue to expect to deliver 90 to 100 aircraft this year. It’s a timing issue as well. And a little bit lighter in the first quarter, but we’ll catch up,” Malave said.
Everett line
Boeing expects to activate the new 737 production line in Everett this summer.
“We’re getting the tooling and equipment in place. We’re going through training. Our employees are being trained in the Renton factory, and that’s ongoing,” Malave said. “That’s been happening for a few months now. We expect that we’ll start our first aircraft build in the summer.
“The stands are in place. The line is ready to go. It’s going to be an exact replica of Renton lines, so there will be no change for those employees.”
Malave said that some employees are coming in from Renton. Some will come from the former shadow factory in Moses Lake (WA), where hundreds of 737s were stored during the 21-month grounding of the airplanes. And some will be new employees who are in training today. “It will be a mix of experienced employees that will work in tandem with all the employees,” Malave said.
“It provides not only just the ability to increase our rate, [and] also provides resiliency in the production system because now we’ll have two sites producing and delivering our 737s.”
Malave said it will take several months to build the first aircraft, and then Boeing will induct a second. “Sometime next year we’ll bump up to a rate two, and it will go from there.”
MAX 7 & 10 certification
Certification of two 737 family members, the MAX 7 and 10, has been a slow, arduous process. Certification is expected later this year.
“The good news on that program is that we have all of the flight testing envelope has been approved by the FAA, so it’s a matter of completing the flight testing. The remaining things, things like autopilot and the engine anti-icing that we implemented last year, have to go through the flight testing program as well,” Malave said. The advanced angle-of-attack system and a number of aircraft systems, capabilities, and functions must be tested. Boeing expects to complete these sometime this summer.
“We’ll be in a position where we’ll be able to provide the appropriate documents and paperwork for the FAA for them to do their analysis upon,” Malave said. “There will also be some reviews related to what I call engineering process reviews to validate that your validation program ties all the way back to your original requirements. That will take place this year as well. “We’re still on track to have these aircraft certified towards the second half of this year, and we’ll start delivering next year.”
777X Certification
Certification of the 777X has also been an arduous process, delayed for years following the FAA’s review of Boeing’s processes and its own performance in the wake of the 2018-19 MAX crashes, which cast a shadow over Boeing and the FAA.
“[Certification is] not as far along as the 737, but it’s still on the right pace,” Malave said. “We had approval for the TIA-3, which was the next big phase of flight testing. There are two more that we need to get approval for, and we’re waiting for the next one very shortly. Flight testing is ongoing, so it’s not like we’re paused in any way. We have a number of flight test assets that can handle or are configured for the different flight test program approvals that the FAA gives us so that we can run all of these programs concurrently.”
Boeing expects to receive certification late this year and begin delivering aircraft in 2027.
Production and Delivery Rates
Malave said once the 777X is certified and production can begin on a normalized basis, Boeing will assemble the 777X at a rate of about five/mo. “There’s discussion about potentially taking that higher, but for the time being, we’re right around five, and that’s something that we’ve been able to demonstrate before on the legacy 777 program.” The 777 Classic’s peak production rate was 8.6/mo. The 777 composite wing factory has a production capacity of 10/mo.
The 737 is currently being produced at a rate of 42/mo. It will go to 47/mo later this year. The Renton factory will be capped at 47, and the Everett line will absorb rates above this number. Rate 52 is the next expected rate. Everett will be able to reach 15-17/mo, Boeing’s 737 general manager said previously.
The 787 line should go to rate 10/mo by the end of this year.
Interesting stuff from Mr. Malave. Now talking 2027 for the MAX -7 and -10 deliveries, I see. Sounds like the 777-X is further delayed, as well- which does not surprise me.
We’ll see how it goes.
Vincent:
No more delayed than last time.
Max 7 and Max 10 were always due for summee cert.
Southwest said they’re not taking delivery till 2027 because they don’t want to induct over the summer season.
Max 10 was always due for Q4 Certification, it will be up to Westjet how quickly they’d like to take it.
777-9 still on track for Q4 cert according to both Lufthansa and Boeing. Lufthansa said they’re taking their first in Q1-2027 and that was last week
Cathay also last week said they’re impressed with the certification progress that Boeing has made on the 777-9 and they’ll be taking their first one next year, this was last week as well.
So no it’s not delayed, but that’s what you choose to see and that’s your prerogative.
The word “always” is doing a lot of work in your comment.
Are you trying to seriously claim that Boeing has not “moved to the right” (a detestable euphemism; not mine) *many times* on the 737-7, 737-10, and 777-X certifications and EIS? The original EIS of the 777-X- just as one example- was slated by Boeing for 2020. As Casey Stengel used to say, “you can look it up”.
Mentour Pilot, from 2023:
“What makes the certification of the 737-7, in particular, a bit perplexing, is… elapsed time. Unlike the bigger 737-10, the 737-7 has been undergoing flight testing since 2018 – BEFORE the 737 MAX grounding. About a year before, actually..”
https://mentourpilot.com/boeing-737-7-certification-whats-going-on/
Opus said: “Cathay also last week said they’re impressed with the certification progress that Boeing has made on the 777-9 and they’ll be taking their first one next year, this was last week as well.”
So you’re seriously believing that Boeing will be delivering 777-9s to customers in 2027?
Not bloody likely..
I’m glad to read that the 777 certification is moving ahead and that airlines are eagerly anticipating there arrival. I’m somewhat concerned about the largest orders however, which are destined for ME3 airlines. The whole business model for ME3 has been upended by the Iran War and may not recover for a very long time. Even when hostilities cease it’s gonna be a long time before traffic rebounds, likely years. The region could be unstable for years to come. The connecting traffic, which is ME3’s bread and butter, will have alternatives which don’t involve connecting in the Persian Gulf. ME3 will need to offer a compelling reason, likely significantly lower fares, to get that traffic back. The ME3 owners and guarantors have very deep pockets, so they may be able to do that. But I forsee a diminished demand for 777X from the ME3. Time will tell how many they are able to take delivery on. Lotsa possible scenarios could play out.
And yet, just in recent weeks we learned about:
– A serious wear issue with (a seal in) the 777X’s GE-9X engine;
– A serious cabin temperature control issue with the MAX — which prompted an AD from the FAA.
Of course, in both cases BA has *said* that certification timelines won’t be affected…but that’s just the standard corporate boilerplate response to prevent share price shock.
Previously, for example, BA *said* that the nacelle overheating issue in the MAX would be a quick fix…and, yet, it still isn’t ready.
Plus: even if the 777X can have EIS on time (doubtful), who’ll want to induct it if it has an engine wear issue? Particularly in the current, rapidly-deteriorating revenue/earnings landscape for the airline industry? It’s bad enough to have an A321neo or A220 sitting out on the tarmac without engines, but having a big widebody sitting idle is untenable.
And just like that TIA4 approved
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/hedwig-irriger-8a9535356_777x-boeing-activity-7439787459317604352-DQ-j?utm_medium=ios_app&rcm=ACoAACThKkoBh3By-Ww6cDS_vRNQ-p4605kQIWE&utm_source=social_share_send&utm_campaign=copy_link
Just to be clear, it’s “TIA4a” according to the post. We’re approaching April already.
Whether CX is able to take delivery of all nine 777-9 next year as contracted remains to be seen. There are quite a few airlines ahead of them.
Got any authorative links on that, other than a post on Ms. Irriger’s Linked In account…?
https://theaircurrent.com/feed/dispatches/faa-777-9-boeing-tia-phase-4/
You guys get such a [edited] for anything bad for Boeing it’s blocking you from acknowledging good progress on a program. It’s so funny
I’m curious. @Scott, have you seen TIA divided into so many phases before?
> TIA4 is split into two sections, 4A and 4B, that together account for roughly the volume of tests as the earlier Phase 3.
Pedro
The TIA process is still a bit of a moving target.
Boeing having had its TC ODA suspended is thought to have forced the FAA into trickling the workload to Boeing because the FAA lacks the personnel to run a cert program at Boeing with its ODA limitations and still provide service to all the other customers seeking cert services. And the autonomous air taxi industry is really sucking up both FAA and Consulting DAR services. There just aren’t enough qualified bodies floating around to do the work
Whoops! Stonk drops
Bloomberg: Boeing Delays Jet Unit Profitability Goal on Spirit Cost
Summary:
> CFO Jay Malave indicated that the company, which officially acquired the supplier, discovered deeper-than-expected performance issues at Spirit after taking over the operations.
> Near-Term Outlook: Margins for the first quarter of 2026 are expected to be negative, specifically between -7% and -8.5%.
Integration Costs: The “reset” of margins is driven by “short-term headwinds” and unforeseen costs in bringing Spirit’s production in-house, as full access to information was limited until the deal closed.
’Tis but a scratch?”
It makes me wonder how is it possible that AB is profitable (for years nonetheless)!
Furthermore, BA/BCA still refuses to have a second look of the assumptions of its program accounting:
the integration of Spirit should prove its previous cost assumptions are built on top of Spirit losing money perpetually.
Skeletons in the closet are waiting to come out.
No mention of positive CF?
PEDRO
Boeing’s stock is going down for 2 reasons. The war and their abysmal performance. Boeing has a long way to go to become profitable. FCF is not a measure of profitability. I agree with you on Europe’s perception of Boeing. While we’re at it, let’s look where Boeing makes money and where it loses its ass. BOEING has proven it can’t build a manned spacecraft despite buying Rockwell International, the Grandaddy of space flight. North American put the man on the moon. Boeing has lost every manned fighter project after the pre merger F15 and F18 both legacy McDac programs. They are so deep in the AIRFORCE 1 program that I’d love to see their path to profit. There never will be one.
I was tapped on the shoulder to go help stand up the 787 and I passed on it after I looked at how they were setting it up. The fundamental mistake was tooling to the OML surface, it drove so many problems. I got out years ago thank God. I’m probably one of BAs harsher critics when I get wound up because not only do I know where the bodies are buried, I’m sure I planted a few of them……
As far as being a universal supporter, that actually stung a bit because I’ve called the 787 a tupperware turd and think I look at BA objectively. They do some things quite well, many things not so much. I actually tried to tell you how BA was intentionally bending the use of the English language knowing full well that Bowings use of the word Production and Your understanding of it are vastly different. When Boeing tells you they have achieved rate XYZ, they did, in Boeingeze. Boeing produces airplanes. To produce airplanes, boeing uses a 3 step process. The names of these 3 steps are pre-production, production, and post- production. Here’s where Boeing intentionally bends English. You look at what a spokesman says about reaching production rate xyz and assume that’s what they are going to deliver. That’s not an unreasonable thing to think. But that’s not what they said. They use Boeingese to say things about the middle 1/3rd of the process where they can point to their MRP system and prove it. They tell half truths that require inside knowledge to decipher. You’re right and I agreed with you when you said deliveries are critical. Unfortunately, Boeing doesn’t deliver an airplane after production, because in Boeingese it still needs to go to Post Production and delivery after they complete that stuff. Anyhow Have a great day and maybe we can have discussions again later. We might start with Boeing having returned $68 billion to shareholders since 2010. What would a debt free Boeing look like today.
Thanks for this comment, PNW.
There is also this:
US Air Force puts hold on contract for extra 75 KC-46 tankers until Boeing fixes deficiencies
https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/usaf-pauses-contract-for-75-kc-46-tankers-until-boeing-fixes-deficiencies/166661.article
@Pedro
“Boeing (BA) stock is under pressure as of March 21, 2026, trading around $195-$201, driven by production delays, a new 737 MAX wiring flaw, and ongoing safety/legal scrutiny. The stock has faced a ~14% year-to-date decline due to weak commercial performance and broader market concerns. Despite some analysts retaining a buy rating, technical indicators show a strong, persistent downtrend.”
The hype / hot air is now rapidly running out of the stock market, and the biggest hype / hot air stocks are going down first and fastest.
It’s now “risk off” on Wall Street, and anything that looks at all risky is being dumped.
Just a fews days ago, BA’s “expectation” of flat gross profit was moved to 2027 from 2026 — yet another disappointment for investors. And then there’s that nasty class action investor suit that got a green light this week.
#HeadingForTheExits
True? 👀
> BOEING SAYS CEO Kelly ORTBERG’S 2025 TOTAL COMPENSATION WAS $23.6 MLN – SEC FILIN
GBOEING SAYS CFO JESUS MALAVE, JR.’S 2025 TOTAL COMPENSATION WAS $20.2 MLN
Didn’t that guy only start working from [mid-]August??
@Pedro: Boeing made Malave whole for the Lockheed compensation he had to give up to go to Boeing.
Excuse me…the guy’s first name is “Jesus”?
I’m wondering if that’s why BA hired him…they need a miracle worker 😅
“…scratched wiring traced to a miscalibrated machine at a Boeing facility.”
So, why was it miscalibrated?
And why wasn’t the miscalibration spotted *before* production started?
Was there no test run done?
The screw-up was as a Boeing facility — not at a supplier.
Makes me wonder if the 25 737 MAX affected truly represents the whole population or because the rest were sent off to the customers?
So, Boeing does it right and you pillory them. Got it.
So, Airbus lets through 150+ aircraft with bad panels. By your metric, they should Blow the buildings, plow the tarmac and salt the earth (hopefully they remove all the evil employees first)
Clearly Boeing is wrong even if perfect. But then Bryce by any other name……………………………………………..
And oh by the way, no one an no thing is ever perfect.
Even I was wrong once, I thought I was wrong once (horrors) and I was right. I will never live that down.
So not much chance that the 737-7 would be certified by Q2 (which some asserted being the internal timetable), with delivery starts shortly after and WN flies service before the end of the year. Lol
Last year, the operating margin of BCA is (6.6%) for the first quarter; this year it would be worse.
Deliveries 1Q25
737 MAX 105
787 13
Didn’t a Jeffries analyst suggest earlier that BA may attain flat gross profit this year?
Good luck with that…unless BDS does spectacularly well, which is in doubt seeing as the USAF is refusing to take further KC-46As for the time being.
The current consensus EPS estimate for Q1 2026 is a loss of 38 cents per share…and that has been trending more negatively in recent weeks (was +6 cents 60 days ago, and -27 cents 30 days ago).
The EPS trend for the whole year 2026 is also trending downward — was +$2.33 60 days ago and now just +$0.38. Add in the disturbances due to the Hormuz crisis and it won’t be long before that estimate also turns negative.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/BA/analysis/
‘Malave said it will take several months to build the first aircraft, and then Boeing will induct a second. “Sometime next year we’ll bump up to a rate two…’
As LNA previously reported:
“At the end of 2025, Boeing’s 737 delivery stream shows the program is sold out at a rate of 52 next year [2027??], in 2028 and beyond at a rate of 57, and potentially in 2029 even at rate 63.”
It sounds pretty cautious. Does it mean BA is going to fall behind its contractual delivery next year again?
HEY PEDRO read this…..
“Rollouts good, timing is slower
Malave said that rollouts of the 787 have been “pretty good” for January and February, “but deliveries have been a little bit lighter.”
Boeing will deliver about 15 aircraft this quarter, compared with an expected 20.
“The build is happening, so we’re really not changing the production cadence. The factory’s been, for the most part, unaffected, so we continue to expect to deliver 90 to 100 aircraft this year. It’s a timing issue as well. And a little bit lighter in the first quarter, but we’ll catch up,” Malave said.
Here is the CFO saying the rollout and delivery are currently happening at 2 different rates, identifying the Factory and Post Production as 2 different workplaces. This confirms Boeing can produce airplanes at a rate different from their delivery rate. Production marches to the MRP metronome and Post Production is worked as a variable work package for each airplane which differ with each customers demands.
And I expect you will still intentionally ignore the facts.
“Atlas Air Airbus Shift Tests Confidence In Boeing Widebody Freighters”
“Atlas Air’s decision to order up to 40 Airbus A350 freighters is a clear signal that large cargo operators are prioritizing early access to next generation widebody freighters over fleet continuity with Boeing. For Boeing, this is less about one lost customer and more about what it indicates regarding confidence in the 777-8 freighter timeline and technical offering versus Airbus. Cargo airlines that had historically relied on 747 and 777 aircraft are now showing they are prepared to split or even pivot their widebody fleets if delivery slots, fuel efficiency and payload economics are more attractive elsewhere.”
“The move reinforces the narrative focus on widebody demand, since Atlas Air’s growth in long-haul cargo highlights ongoing need for efficient large jets that Boeing aims to serve with its 777 and 787 lines.
“It challenges the idea that Boeing’s product range and execution alone will secure a large share of future orders, as a long-time 747 customer has opted for Airbus instead of waiting for Boeing’s next freighter platform.
“The Atlas Air order also brings freighter-specific customer preferences and program timing into sharper focus, which are not fully reflected in broad references to backlog and global air travel growth in the existing narrative.”
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/atlas-air-airbus-shift-tests-061703416.html
Looks like Atlas isn’t willing to follow the same “wait forever” road that Tim Clark got himself stuck on.
Has the design of the 777-8F even been completed yet?
For how long the Dreamlifters can continue to fly? The oldest ones have reached 36 years old. Atlas has already laid out its path of possible replacement in future. Assuming the 787 program has at least twenty more years to go, when is the time for BA to renew? Where will the feedstock come from? There aren’t that many 747-8 made, some have already been snatched by the USG and Sierra.
There are some A300-600ST on offer but I doubt they would replace the Dreamlifter.
🤣 At least they are younger!
Pedeo….
You have a good point re deeamlifter life. The fact of the matter is that Boeing may need to go to ocean transport of the components at a time in the future. The real tradeoff there would be one of time. You would have many more shipsets of WIP. The other consideration about the deeamlifter “age” is that tbey are not consuming fatigue life hours because the way fly very light compared to their past life. They are aging slowly when fatigue life is examined. Airbus flying parts makes more sense than tbe dreamlifter operations because tbe stage lengths are sborter and fewer hours of fatigue life per shipset flown make it very competiive because Europe is really a small place and the road networks make oversize loads difficult. Im not sure how oversize rail would work.
The A350F airframe has been completed, without the carbon fibre door, as its been stuck in regulatory limbo.
As well in early 2026, a proposed airworthiness directive (PAD 26-015) from EASA was issued to address *structural integrity concerns* regarding the bulk cargo door (a smaller door in the lower fuselage) across (some) the A350 fleet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7_TFCZFVpo
Poor production standards for certain line numbers risk the structural integrity and if the problem is found means a grounding until correction
DUKE
This didnt look too bad until they got to the Repair Before Next Flight notation. Thats tough….. A couple things to think about, First and most importantly is that the process is working and defects are identified and CA is sent to the fleet. Continued safe flight is the goal and that requirement is being met.
Second my question. How bad is this problem when you must repair the condition before next flight in the inspection. Airbus was given 78 monrha IIRC to repair fuel tank fasteners that may arc in a lightning strike and cause loss of the aircraft.
The carbon fiber door isn’t “stuck in regulatory limbo”:
—
“As of late November 2025, Airbus has assembled the first A350F freighter test aircraft (MSN700) in Toulouse with its fuselage, wings, tail, and landing gear, but notably without the main-deck cargo door installed.
“The large cargo door is a separate, complex component currently under construction at the Spanish Illescas plant. It is scheduled for installation in early 2026.
“The decision to install the cargo door later than other structures was planned to allow more time for design maturation.
“While the airframe is assembled, the first flight is scheduled for 2026, with entry into service targeted for the second half of 2027.”
Is it necessary for Boeing to ask for regulatory approvals for each individual components before it assembled the 777-9? Does it work that way??? 😭
Pedro.
Short answer is no.
Here is the why behind the answer. Boeing has to get regulatory approval for those portions of the 777x that are deemed to be Major Changes of the existing TCDS. The 777x still seems to be a derivative program. Derivative program Major changes were redefined by the Congressional Air Safety Acts adoption. The pathway to certification for major changes is to show direct compliance with the FARs, an AMOC or the issuance of a special condition letter. The timing of the approval of major changes is not tied to a specific point in time such as pre assembly, pre flight or such. The requirements are needed to be completed prior to TC issuance. This allows for the fact that there is always a need for flight testing of some major change items. The folding wingtips are one such thing. These were not approved prior to manufacture and installation on shipset one as they needed to be demonstrated in flight. The FAA was involved up front because there were no pathways to certification or requirements to be met, so they were created by committee between the regulator and Boeing.
This is the Exact same process that Airbus uses post Congressional Air Safety Act adoption. EASA has adopted those requirements by reference so the process is identical irrespective of which side of the pond you find yourself… The first notable Major Change to go thru the process that comes to my mind is Airbuses’ use of the aircraft fuselage skin as the exterior of an integral fuel tank. Nobody had that in the book either and it was a sticking point for a short time.
Boeing and Airbus both have adapted to the new reality of how Derivative Major changes are handled by the regulators. Its unclear to me how this process will differ on new designs.
“Boeing Under Pressure As Investors Sue Over 737 MAX Safety Claims”
“US-based aerospace manufacturer Boeing is under renewed pressure from investors after a federal judge certified a shareholder class action suit tied to alleged misstatements about the 737 MAX’s safety. The case allows investors who owned Boeing stock between November 7, 2018, and October 18, 2019, to sue as a group.”
“The argument behind this move is that the company concealed safety deficiencies, rushed development, and misled regulators in an attempt to protect its market share against its principal European rival, Airbus. For Boeing, the ruling matters because it revives one of the most damaging investor narratives surrounding the MAX era, namely that the safety crisis was not just an engineering failure, but rather a disclosure and governance failure with direct financial consequences for shareholders of all kinds.”
“The immediate development in this story is a class-action lawsuit. Judge Franklin Valderrama ruled that Boeing shareholders have shown a common way to measure damages, and, as a result, he has thus allowed the case to proceed collectively rather than through scattered claims by individuals.”
“Boeing shareholders are undeniably displeased because the MAX saga crystallized nearly every fear that equity investors in the commercial aerospace sector have at any given time. The aircraft, a flagship program, struggled with safety breakdowns, regulatory scrutiny, reputational damage, delivery disruptions, legal liabilities, and weak governance. In the lawsuit, investors argue that Boeing ignored internal warnings and misled the Federal Aviation Administration and the market about the MAX’s safety profile.
“That matters because shareholders were not merely exposed to an accident cycle but also to the massive and weighty allegation that management failed to tell the market the truth about a core risk of its business. This extensive frustration is compounded by the fact that Boeing still has not restored its common dividend, which has been suspended since March 2020.”
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-under-pressure-investors-sue-737-max-safety-claims/
Hey PNWgeek read this:
“The single-aisle jet is critical to Boeing’s financial recovery. Planemakers receive the majority of cash from customers when they deliver new aircraft.”
Delivery to customers is the time when BA/BCA books its “paper profit” in accordance with its program accounting.
I’m surprised that I have to repeat this to an “industry veteran”.
Pedro.
Im sure you are trying to say that Production and Post Production are 2 distinctly seperate points in times in the Boeing build process. Glad you agree with me.
Production, that work scheduled in a metronome like fashion by the MRP system ends at roll out, Post Production go’s from the end of production thru Delivery and is not discreetly scheduled via MRP. They have 2 very different names because they do 2 very different things. This explains why Boeing can have a difference in production numbers and delivery numbers as they are not necessarily operating using the same time scales. For example, Hundreds of 737’s were produced but not delivered during Covid and MCAS as they sat for a very extended time in Post Production. the same thing go’s for the 777Xs currently sitting in Post Production awaiting Change Incorporation and subsequent delivery to the customer, they are sitting completely distanced from the MRP system……
As an Industry Veteran, I don’t mind having to occasionally repeat the truth to those that haven’t benefitted from the skillsets insiders like myself have built during their careers.
LNA wrote a great article about this very subject today.
https://leehamnews.com/2026/03/18/change-incorporation-configuration-control-and-the-high-cost-of-getting-it-wrong/
“Tungsten Soars 557% Amid Middle East War”
“Tungsten prices have surged 557% due to tight supply, Chinese export restrictions, and rising military demand amid global conflicts.
“The metal is critical for defense (missiles, ammunition, aircraft) and heavily dominated by China, which produces the vast majority of global supply.
“Efforts to diversify supply are underway, but new production will take years—leaving markets tight in the near term as defense demand grows.”
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Tungsten-Soars-557-Amid-Middle-East-War.html
===
FYI:
Key Uses and Characteristics of Tungsten in (Commercial) Aircraft:
-Weight Optimization: Tungsten heavy alloys (often 90%–97% tungsten) are used in aircraft tails, noses, and wings to balance the center of gravity.
-Vibration Reduction: Used for balancing helicopter rotors and aircraft flight control surfaces.
-Manufacturing Tools: Tungsten carbide is heavily used in the tools that cut the composite materials (like carbon fiber) in modern aircraft.
-Coatings: Tungsten carbide coatings are applied to landing gear, flaps, and hydraulic actuators to reduce wear and tear.
ABALONE.
The tungsten price spike has a far worse effect that the article missed. TIG welding consumables. Every tig welder in the world uses a Tungsten consumable electrode that gets used up as you weld. Its not part of the weld metal you lay down, but the tip needs to be resharpened or melted back into a ball depending on weld polarity and base metal. I use mostly 2% Thoriated electrodes in my Miller rig. I usually have 6 or 8 packages in different diameters to cover the material I stick together.
According to Planespotters, three 737 MAX 8s recently delivered to GOL have already been placed in storage. Does anyone know why?
The three aircraft are:
PS-GRM (delivery date: Sep-16-2025; exit date: Feb-1-2026)
PS-GRN (dd: Nov-10-2025; ed: Feb-2-2026)
PS-GRO (dd: Feb-24-2026; ed: Mar-18-2026)
They are going to be replaced by C919, GOL is working on the trade with China.
PNWgeek
No.
Take a look at this, according to BA CFO:
BCA won’t be able to breakeven this year. First quarter margin is forecasted to be between -7% and -8.5%.
At the same time, Airbus has shown its capability to generate both profits and positive cashflow.
There’s a reason why outsiders pay attention to how many aircraft are delivered.
At the end of the day, no matter BA can produce one or a thousand aircraft, if it doesn’t make money then where the money for the R&D of the next generation aircraft comes from? That’s the conundrum BA has found itself in, no money to invest in new product to tackle the upcoming A220-500 which will have better economics than flying the MAX 8. It could be an onslaught.
It doesn’t look like the UK is a happy customer of BDS, contrary to the picture-perfect scene BA CFO tried to paint.
https://breakingdefense.com/2026/03/uk-defense-official-boeing-has-been-troubled-partner-in-much-delayed-e-7-program/
BA stock has dropped almost 10% from Monday’s closing price.
@ Pedro
I always like your informative posts, but Mr. Hamilton has made a request over on this week’s Open Forum, which you may not yet have seen:
===
Scott Hamilton
March 19, 2026
@PNW and @Pedro: I’ve had enough of this back and forth. Drop it.
Hamilton
===
You’ll save yourself a lot of (wasted) energy by adopting a non-engagement policy with certain commenters 😉
“The Iran War Will Delay Commercial Aircraft Production, Boeing Warns”
“Boeing has a new concern: how the ongoing conflict in the Middle East might impact the global supply chain, particularly the delivery of parts to carriers in the region. In addition, there are concerns that the war against Iran could impact Boeing’s production.
“Since the war began on February 28, Boeing has been delayed in delivering components to Middle Eastern airlines, according to Reuters. In addition, the aerospace giant has reached out to its suppliers in the region to determine if the conflict is impacting deliveries of some parts manufactured in the Gulf States.”
—
“Boeing is unlikely to be the only company affected by the ongoing war. Airbus, Boeing’s main European rival, will likely also be impacted if the conflict were to drag on.
““A spokesperson for Airbus said the planemaker is in close dialogue with customers and suppliers across the region,” Reuters reported.
“Brazilian aviation firm Embraer is also considering how the impact may affect its business, both in terms of parts sourced from Middle Eastern manufacturers and supplies to airlines in the region.”
—
“The conflict, now in its third week, could be felt for months to come even if it ended quickly. In particular, it could slow demand for new commercial aircraft purchases in the Middle East.
““What I’m really more concerned about is long-term demand for jets in the region,” Richard Aboulafia, managing director at US consulting firm AeroDynamic Advisory, told Reuters.”
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/iran-war-will-delay-commercial-aircraft-production-boeing-warns-ps-031926
Easily ship parts ( mostly aileron related) made in UAE by road to Saudi Arabia and then air or sea cargo to their destinations
> Reuters reporting delays in transporting aircraft parts to* Middle East carriers
FYI
Flights to Middle East are suspended and canceled.
Supply dries up. How many companies are willing to send inventory into a semi-“war zone”? Insurance coverage? Sustainability of demand? Do prices go up to compensate for risks taken?
Wow! Another unhappy customer. I wonder about the timing, why both reports were broken so late, not before Tuesday?
FG: USAF pauses contract for 75 KC-46 tankers until Boeing fixes deficiencies
> The number two officer in the US Air Force (USAF) says the service will not ink a new contract with Boeing for an additional 75 KC-46 tanker aircraft until the airframer has addressed longstanding mechanical deficiencies with the twinjet.
While the air force remains committed to the ongoing procurement of KC-46s under the service’s original 2011 contract with Boeing, vice chief of staff General John Lamontagne says a separate deal for even more of the aerial refuellers is on hold until outstanding issues with the 767-based jet have been fixed.
Where ;have we seen that before.?
What broken scored, record, red cor, record.
Groundhog day? Why didn’t BA/BDS learn its lessons?
Once again, BA moves its “expectations” to the right…is anyone surprised?
“Boeing sees profit for commercial airplane division in 2027, later than expected”
Reason given: higher-than-expected costs associated with Spirit acquisition.
https://m.economictimes.com/markets/us-stocks/news/us-stocks-boeing-sees-profit-for-commercial-airplane-division-in-2027-later-than-expected/articleshow/129636979.cms
For the record, the following is as posted by Boeing on its web page (we can compare the result of 1Q26 when it comes out next month):
Q1 to Q4 / full year Earnings (losses) from operations – BCA
2025
Program Accounting (537) / (557) / 5,353) / (632) / FY (7,079)
Unit Cost Accounting (2,933) / (1,523) / (1,264) / (1,341) / FY (7,061)
2024
PA (1,143) / (715) / (4,021) / (2,090) / (7,969)
UCA (1,644) / (934) / (1,900) / (1,548) / (6,026)
2023
PA (615) / (383) / (678) / 41 / (1,635)
UCA (1,871) / (919) / (1,148) / (521) / (4,459)
2022
PA (897) / (219) / (622) / (603) / (2,341)
UCA (1,245) / (503) / (1,144) / (1,812) / (4,704)
BTW BA stock fell like a stone today, I don’t think it’s normal, more inclined to believe there’s something happening behind the scene.
> Honeywell, Boeing share losses, lead DJIA down almost 600 points
I’m circling back to my above post about the A220-500.
As United revised its plan to account for oil at $175/barrel and wouldn’t get back down to $100/barrel until the end of 2027, how long will it take for more airlines to adjust their assumptions for Capex plans and fleet plan: higher fuel costs and warm up to thr A220-500?
When will there be more clarity about the 777-9 — its backlog status?
I’m surprised Ron Epstein didn’t ask BA CFO tough(er) questions like this.
The A220-500 EIS won’t be till 2031-32 at the earliest