By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
08 March 2015, c. Leeham Co: In the third part of the article series around the need for a more capable solution for 180-240 seats and 5,000 nautical miles, we compared different clean sheet single and dual aisle aircraft to the Airbus A321LR and Boeing’s 787-8, the two aircraft that form the border to the segment.
We could see that a single aisle aircraft started to have trouble with weight at around 220 passengers using our normalized seating rule set. This would with normal OEM seating rules be around 230-240 passengers. At the same time the dual aisle aircraft becomes stronger the more seats one assumes. The reason is their thicker fuselage, Figure 1, lends itself better to aircraft which passes 50 meters/160 feet in length.
Figure 1. Cross sections for our studied clean sheet designs; NSA6 (New Single Aisle 6 abreast), NLT6 (New Light Twin 6 ab.) and NLT7. Source: Leeham Co.
Their advantages in boarding and deplaning then starts to outweigh their disadvantages in weight and drag. This trend is explored further in this part where we add Cash Operating Cost, COC and Direct Operating Cost, DOC, to the analysis.
Summary
March 8, 2015: Boeing cracked open the door March 5 to a production rate reduction on the 777 Classic, the first time since launching the 777X in 2013 that officials have publicly deviated from their insistence the current rate of 8.3/mo can be maintained to entry-into-service of the 777X.
At least that’s how I see it. Boeing sees it differently. Boeing says nothing has changed in its messaging.
In an appearance at the JP Morgan Transportation Conference, Greg Smith, EVP of Business Development and Strategy and Chief Financial Officer of The Boeing Co., Smith appeared to back away from the Boeing messaging to-date that has been all (to paraphrase) “We’re confident we’ll bridge the gap,” “We have three years of backlog and six years to bridge the gap”, “We’re confident we’ll maintain production at the current level,” etc, etc.
At least that’s how an aerospace analyst for a New York firm expressed it when he called me. After listening to the event, I agree with the analyst.
In the recorded playback of the JP Morgan event, here’s the report of Smith’s comments starting at 9:36 into the presentation.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
04 March 2015, c. Leeham Co: In the first and second part of the article series around the need for a more capable solution for 180-240 seats and 5000 nautical miles, which we have labeled the 225/5000 Sector, we went through the derivatives we have analyzed as competitors to Airbus A321LR and showed why none of them are effective as a Boeing solution.
We also looked at the wetted area and weight for our common single and dual aisle aircraft. These parameters are the principal components that determine an aircraft’s efficiency given a certain engine efficiency. We also developed the market picture, outlining a substantial market by the time of entry into service of a clean sheet design by 2025, given that certain market requirements could be fulfilled.
We will now project different solutions to the requirements, thereby utilizing the preliminary design part of our proprietary aircraft model. We will look at three different cabin configurations in four different size classes between 180 to 240 seats and calculate size and weights and the resulting efficiency of the different variants. Against the key data for these different aircraft and their operational efficiency we will be able to postulate what will be the next move from Boeing and Airbus in this segment.
Summary
The findings in this our third article include:
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
01 March 2015, c. Leeham Co: In the first part of the article series around the need for a more capable solution for 180-240 seats and 5,000 nautical miles, we went through the derivative aircraft that Boeing could field as competitors to Airbus A321LR and showed why none of them are effective. We also established the market requirements and the likely market size for aircraft that shall cover this segment and the required efficiency and overall cost improvement needed.
We will now look at different solutions to the requirements, first by analyzing what key characteristics does single and dual aisle aircraft have and what consequences will they have for the aircraft’s efficiency parameters like weight, size and drag. Once we have these characteristics we can design adapted aircraft types and calculate their economics such as fuel costs and other costs and we can also establish their operational ground handling times and thereby the consequences single or dual aisle will have on the aircraft utilization.
Having developed and presented these facts it will be possible to forecast what will be the most likely results of Boeing’s New Airplane Study, NAS that we presented 2 November last year. Boeing now uses the name, Middle of the Market (MOM) in place of the NAS.
Summary:
Our second article shows:
By Bjorn Fehrm
Munich 27 Feb. 2015: The team from Airbus Group that met the press in Munich today consisted of Tom Enders, Airbus Group Chief Executive Officer, Harald Wilhelm, Airbus Group Chief Financial Officer and Marwan Lahoud, Head of Airbus Group strategy and M&A.
It was a team in good spirits that met around 150 on-site journalists from mainly Europe, with both Tom Enders and Harald Wilhelm clearly at ease with the groups improving results and giving Marwan Lahoud compliments for his restructuring work in the groups remaining problem areas.
Before we go into the areas with work in progress, lets focus on why these gentlemen felt at ease with presenting the state of Airbus Group after its first year operating under the new name. Read more