IAE launches Pure V engine plan for V2500s on A320 family and MD-90s

International Aero Engines has launched

Jon Beatty, President of International Aero Engines

Jon Beatty, President of International Aero Engines

a program called Pure V program for the V2500 engine used on the Airbus A320ceo and the Boeing MD-90, leveraging OEM-provided maintenance and parts that will offered extended warranties and potential better residual values.

The announcement was made at the Dubai Air Show 17 Nov. local time.

IAE president Jon Beatty said the project was driven by customer input, particularly that of lessors, who own a large number of A320s powered by the V2500. Lessors in particular are concerned about residual values, which affect lease rates as they re-lease the aircraft after short-to-medium terms at lessees.

“Engines with 100% IAE-approved parts and repairs enhance the on-wing service, fuel economy and residual values,” Beatty told us in an interview.

Beatty said that qualifying in-service engines—and 60% will immediately, and the rest may be retro-fitted—will see improved on-wing time by an estimated 20% after going through the program. A Pure V engine will also see a return to original fuel burn specifications after normal degradation, and these will have about a one-half percentage improvement over non-IAE maintained and serviced V2500s not using IAE OEM parts.

More than 50% of V2500 owners and operators are already signed up to IAE’s power-by-the-hour program, called Fleet Hour Agreement (FHA). Beatty said 80% of the new customers choose FHA.

Non-OEM parts under the Federal Aviation Administration’s Parts Manufacturer Approval program won’t qualify for the Pure V program, extended warranty or other benefits.

For lessors, who own more than 50% of the V2500-powered A320ceos, expect to benefit from higher residual values by being able to pass through this value in their lease rates, Beatty said. Appraisers, who forecast RVs, need to become familiar with the program, and IAE plans a data base they can consult.

Odds and Ends: 787 teething; IAM-777X continues; Boeing in Puget Sound; Dubai Air Show

787 teething issues: Flight Global has this report from the Dubai Air Show in which it quotes Boeing as saying there will be another six months of teething issues on the 787. We hear it will be longer than this.

IAM-777X: These stories will continue for some time. The latest: Reuters has this exclusive interview with IAM International President Tom Buffenbarger, posted Friday. But a Boeing official later denied Buffenbarger’s claim.

Buffenbarger said the IAM won’t make a counter offer; Boeing previously said it has “no plans to re-engage” the IAM. As we noted in our posting Thursday, both sides retreated to their corners in a testosterone posture. Buffenbarger screwed this up. It’s up to him to come up with a counter-proposal.

This from the Dubai Air Show via Twitter:

4h

Boeing exec’s lament quick timing of IAM vote on 777X labour deal, believe members did not “digest” all info completely.

This is more evidence of the completely botched effort. If Boeing is lamenting, then it, too, ought to come back to the bargaining table.

Reuters has this article from Dubai, quoting Ray Conner, CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, saying the ball is now in IAM’s court.

Boeing in Puget Sound: After the IAM vote debacle, the Tacoma News Tribune has a long article (picked up in the Everett Herald) about the future of Boeing’s Frederickson plant, which makes stuff for a variety of 7-Series airplanes. It would have been a participant in the 777X program.

Dubai Air Show: This opens tomorrow; follow on Twitter at #Dxb13 and @Dubaiairshow

Some key articles:

Odds and Ends: Volcano protection; Airbus trims guidance on A350; More on Boeing

Volcano protection: No, we’re not talking about any eruptions from IAM 751. Instead, Airbus and Europe’s easyJet created some man-made volcano ash to conduct tests for detecting the real thing.

Airbus trims guidance: EADS/Airbus trimmed its financial guidance on A350 development costs, according to The Financial Times (free registration required). According to The Times, the entry-into-service of the A350–slated for 3Q2014–“is at risk.” We have EIS in 1Q2015. EADS for now is sticking with the 2014 EIS.

Boeing 777X: As might be expected, there continues to be a lot of news on the 777X.

The implications of the American-US Airways merger for OEMs

The agreement between American Airlines, US Airways, the US Department of Justice and the states suing to block the merger to settle their lawsuits clears the way for AA-US to merge.

This has implications for the Big Four airframe and the engine manufacturers who have been living in some uncertainty. Here’s the rundown:

Airbus

American and US Airways have large orders with Airbus: American for the A320ceo and neo family and US Airways for the A320ceo family and A350-800/900.

American is taking delivery of the A319ceo and A321ceo. The neo comes several years into the future. American has been taking a large number of A319s, while US Airways have been up-gauging its Airbus single aisle orders, passing on the A319 in favor of the A320ceo or A321ceo. US Airways management, which will take over the New American Airlines, may elect to change the mix within the 18 month lead time limitations.

The more interesting question is what US Airways will do with its A350-800 order. US Airways, along with Hawaiian Airlines, is now the largest customer for the -800. Airbus has been shifting customers from the -800 to the -900 and the -1000, in part to de-risk the program and in part because the larger models are more profitable for Airbus. But some customers elected to switch because the economics of the larger capacity -900 are better than the smaller -800 while operating costs are about the same.

Now that AA and US will combined, the -800 seems surplus when the large order held by American for the Boeing 787-8/9 is considered. The US Airways management could elect to drop the -800 in favor of the 787. Such would unlikely be a total loss for Airbus, however: New American would likely up-gauge to the A350-900 or even the A350-1000, or order more A320neos to keep Airbus “whole.”

Boeing

US Airways hasn’t ordered a Boeing airplane since the days of the 737 Classic or 757/767, and the current management has been retiring all of them as fast as they could. Now they’re solidly back in Boeing territory. “Old” American has a large order of 737NGs and 737 MAXes in addition to the 787 orders. Old American is only taking the 737-800 and the New American will continue this type and probably select only the 737-8 MAX to fulfill that commitment. But we don’t look for any burst of new orders.

Read more

Odds and Ends: Right to Work; Middle East influence; latest on Boeing-IAM

Right to Work or Right to Worse: One of the more controversial issues in the relationship between Boeing and the IAM is Boeing’s continuous threat of removing work from union-heavy Washington and putting it in Right to Work states. South Carolina, of course, is at the top of this list.

KIRO Radio (CBS-Seattle) has a story about a Seattle transplant to Boeing’s Charleston plant who finds some interesting differences between the two locations.

As the IAM prepares to vote Wednesday whether to accept a contract extension that includes significant give-backs in exchange for landing the 777X Final Assembly Line and wing production, Boeing holds the prospect of locating the work in Right to Work states. These have been assumed to be or identified (though not by Boeing) as South Carolina, Texas and Utah. Boeing has facilities in each of these states.

WA Policy Nov2013

As Readers know, we have suggested Washington needs to become a Right To Work state, which labor characterizes Right To Worse. It’s not that we favor RTW per se (though we do but not dogmatically), it’s more driven by the fact that Washington’s competition is RTW–and Boeing is very effectively using this as leverage over the Washington unionized labor force, and to extension, over the Washington Legislature when it compares our state’s cost of doing business with other states.

Meantime, Boeing has launched its website with its view of the contract proposal.
This is the letter Ray Conner, CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, issued last week.

Middle East Influence: Aviation Week has a good piece about the evolution of the influence of the Middle Eastern airlines on aircraft design. Flight Global has this analysis of the Airbus A350-1000 vs the Boeing 777X in advance of the Dubai Air Show (free registration required).

Boeing IAM-Update: The Seattle Times has the latest from IAM 751 and from Boeing pending the vote tomorrow. Ray Conner, CEO of Bo9eing Commercial Airplanes, said Boeing is “under siege” from foreign competitors, including the Japanese, Chinese and Russians.

Maybe so, but Boeing has been helping these countries and their aerospace industries by outsourcing to them.

We also find it difficult to have sympathy for Boeing at a time when it is posting record profits and undertaking billions of dollars in stock buybacks instead of plowing the cash flow back into research and development instead of designing derivative airplanes.

Airbus lowers range of A350 on increased capacity assumptions

Airbus this week quietly lowered range for the A350 family on increased capacity assumptions.

The range changes appeared without fanfare on the company’s website. When we inquired, a spokesman said,Seat figures in our public documents have been changed from typical three-class to two-class layouts, as it’s turned out to be a more realistic scenario for most of our customers.  Consequently, as passenger capacity has gone up, the new pax numbers and their calculated weight give lower range figures.”

However, as of Thursday’s close of business, the website still refered to three-class configurations:

A350-800 landing page:

The A350-800 is the shortest fuselage version in Airbus’ new A350 XWB all-new family of mid-sized widebody airliners.  It accommodates 276 passengers in a typical three-class cabin configuration, with a flight range of 8,250 nautical miles.

A350-900 landing page:

This jetliner typically accommodates 315 passengers in a three-class configuration, while offering unbeatable economics in high-density seating and true long-haul capability with a range of up to 7,750 nautical miles.

The A350-900 Specification page still contained this statement:

The A350-900 offering a typical passenger capacity of 314 seats (in a three-class layout) and operating range 8,100 nautical miles.  

A350-1000 landing page:

In a typical three-class configuration, the A350-1000 seats a total of 369 passengers.  Combined with a range of 8,000 nautical miles, this represents a significant revenue-generating advantage for operators. The aircraft also can be configured for a higher-density layout to accommodate up to 400 passengers.

The ranges were previously 8,400nm, 8,100nm and 8,400nm respectively. The previous three-class seating configurations listed were 250, 301 and 350 respectively.

By Friday morning (PST), these landing pages had been fixed, and these now refer to two-class configurations with the capacities as listed above: 276, 315 and 369.

Bombardier CSeries in focus

Bombardier’s CSeries is one of three new or derivative airliner to take to the skies, along with the Airbus A350-900 and the Boeing 787-9. But its flight test program is going at a pace far behind the Big Two. Only a handful more flights occurred since its first one on September 16, with a full 27 days between the third and fourth flights.

.

The latter occurred on October 30, the day before Bombardier’s third quarter earnings call. Thus it was with great anticipation that aerospace analysts who follow BBD, and the media, hoped for some clarity about the pace of the program and whether entry-into-service would be delayed.

.

Those listeners and participants on the earnings call were disappointed. Pierre Beaudoin, president and CEO, said the testing program is what Bombardier laid out from the beginning and that the paucity of flights isn’t of concern or indicative of anything amiss.

.

But aerospace analysts weren’t convinced. Stock traded down 10% and a few analysts downgraded the stock. It must be noted that there were other factors: aircraft and train deliveries were short of target, contributing to the disappoint. And Embraer, which reported earnings the same week, also missed targets and suffered similar stock declines and some analyst downgrades.

.

Beaudoin continued to maintain the target for EIS is 12 months from the first flight. With 2,400 flight hours required, even with five CS100 and two CS300 Flight Test Vehicles, Bombardier will be challenged to meet this target.

.

The CSeries Flight Test Vehicle #1 has had a dearth of flying compared with the Boeing 787-9 and the Airbus A350-900. So how does BBD, so far, believe it can stick to its entry-into-service timeline of 12 months from first flight on September 16?

Because it will have seven FTVs (five CS-100s and two CS-300s) in the flight test program instead of the five for Airbus and the initial plan of five or six for the Boeing 787. This, plus the ground time in the CIASTA iron bird.

Beaudoin left plenty of wiggle room for an EIS delay. He said conversations were underway with customers. He said some customers wanted to swap the 110-seat CS100 orders for the larger, 135-seat CS300. He said a program assessment in a few months would tell what the timing will be.

.

Even before the earnings call, analyst consensus concluded that EIS will slip from September 2014 (the 12-month target) to 1Q2015 or later. We concluded several months ago that a first quarter 2015 EIS was likely.

.

Should this timeline emerge to be correct-or even if it slips to 2Q2015-these delays will still be a far better performance than those of Airbus and Boeing on their A380, A350, 787 and 747-8 programs. But a slip to 2015 will narrow the advantage Bombardier had over Airbus with its New Engine Option, which was a direct response to Bombardier’s clean-sheet CSeries design.

.

The Airbus A320neo, who is the next size up from the CS-300 and not truly a direct competitor, is planned to enter service in October 2015. The A319neo-which is the direct competitor to the CS-300-is slated to follow by six months. This, of course, assumes Airbus doesn’t have a delay on its NEO program, but nothing we’ve heard suggests one is in the offing.

.

How serious a threat is the narrowing gap to Bombardier? We don’t believe it is much of one. Airbus and Bombardier are already sold out in the near-term, so customers are locked in. There have been on 45 A319neos ordered; we have to wonder whether customers will swap these for the larger A320neo. The A319neo, which is heavy for today’s standards, is a question mark whether it will be built. If so, will it be the next A318, a poor sales model that proved so unpopular that there is no secondary market for this sub-type and it’s already headed for the scrap heap.

.

Nor is there much of a threat from Embraer’s E-Jet E2. The E-195 E2, which is sized midway between the CS-100 and the CS-300, doesn’t enter service until 2019 (if on time). The E-190 E2 is the first planned for EIS, in 2018, and this is somewhat smaller than the CS100.

.

Nor is Boeing’s 737-7 MAX a threat, despite Bombardier’s EIS slip to date and likelihood for an additional one. The 7 MAX EIS is planned for 2019. Only a handful of these have been sold to two customers, WestJet and Southwest Airlines of the USA. Like the question looming over the A319neo, we wonder if the 7 MAX will be swapped for the larger 8 MAX, or whether the 7 MAX becomes Boeing’s 737-600, another poor-selling sub-type.

Odds and Ends: Lufthansa on Airbus plan; Lion Air; Boeing statement on IAM deal; CSeries test flights

Lufthansa on Airbus’ 18-inch seat plan: Nein! Runway Girl Network (Mary Kirby’s new venture) reports that Lufthansa’s fleet planner doesn’t think much of the Airbus campaign to make coach seat width an 18-inch standard for the industry.

Lion Air: Aviation Week has an article that falls short of a full profile of Lion Air but one which discusses some of the thinking of those huge airplane orders.

Boeing on IAM deal: In the crush and rush of the events yesterday, we didn’t see this Boeing statement on the tentative agreement for extend the IAM contract for eight years in exchange for building the 777X in Seattle.

CSeries: It looks like software upgrades, vibration and shimmy tests are done and flight testing in back on track. Yesterday Bombardier’s CSeries had its fifth flight and its sixth appears coming today, according to Fliegerfaust, a blog mostly dedicated to CSeries news.

Assessing the 777X events for Washington State, IAM, Boeing

Update, Nov. 6, 10:00am PST: A summary by IAM 751 of the contract details is here.

Original Post:

Here’s our take on the news that the IAM and Boeing reached a tentative agreement leading to the selection of Washington State as the assembly site for the 777X, contingent on contract ratification and the Legislature approving an incentive package:

  1. IAM 751 is both a winner and a loser. Members lose the defined pension plan benefits and pays more for health care benefits. But they keep jobs assembling the 777X, and the siting of the composite wing production here reinforces the expertise of composite development in the Seattle area. These wins outweigh the loss of the benefits.
  2. Washington State is a winner. This is self evident. The fact that a transportation package is a must–one has been stalled for a long time–not only benefits Boeing but it benefits the state as a whole. Let’s hope the “no new taxes under any circumstances” Republican Party finally wakes up and votes for this thing. These extremists could kill the entire deal.
  3. Boeing is a winner. It gets labor peace from the IAM through 2024. It gets an experienced, high quality workforce instead of gambling Boeing Charleston–which remains problematic–would be up to the task in five years, when assembly begins. It gets cost reductions on the pension plans and health care benefits.
  4. Customers are winners. See number 3 re: Everett vs Charleston.
  5. SPEEA is probably a winner. With the wing and airframe coming to Puget Sound, SPEEA engineers here will certainly get its share of the work, despite the recent announcement that Boeing was putting engineering everywhere but here.
  6. Boeing Charleston and South Carolina, the presumptive alternative site, are losers. No explanation required.

A big question mark:

As we previously wrote, extending the 787 tax breaks to the 777X through 2040 (with a value of $8bn, more or less) is problematic. These were ruled illegal by the World Trade Organization in the US (Boeing) vs Europe (Airbus) trade dispute claims and counter-claims. The finding is under appeal, but what happens if the finding is upheld? Then what?

Lots to do:

The IAM membership has to approve the tentative contract; a vote is planned next week. Members will have to get past the benefit reductions, offset to some degree by a generous signing bonus and additional benefits for early retirees.

The Legislature has a lot of moving parts to look at in the next week. The challenges are daunting.

Recommendation:

IAM: Although perhaps painful and anathema, ratify the contract.

Legislature: Approve the package, including the new transportation taxes.

Odds and Ends: Looking toward the South; Lion Air updates CSeries interest; 787 fuel advantage

Looking toward the South: As a follow-up to our previous post, Implications of the IAM-Boeing talks on 777X, here is a commentary from The Wall Street Journal about the migration of US industry to the South, were unions have a more difficult time.

Lion Air and CSeries: Indonesia’s Lion Air, which made news a few months ago with the prospect of a large order for the Bombardier CSeries, poured cold water on the prospect of placing one any time soon, according to this article in Aviation Week. Seeing actual flight test results from the larger CS300 is key, the airline’s head told AvWeek.

We previously raised our own doubts about the prospect of another large order because of the prospect of over-commitment of existing orders from Airbus and Boeing.

But Lion Air told The Wall Street Journal that an order for 50 CSeries could come by the end of the first quarter. A key piece of information in the AvWeek and WSJ articles is this, from the WSJ:

Mr. Kirana said Bombardier claims the larger of two CSeries models with 160 seats will be able to fly with the same economics as much larger Airbus A320neo jets, which carry around 160 to 180 passengers. He said the Bombardier CS300 jet’s range and economics makes it attractive for new longer international routes to smaller cities in China.

787 Fuel Advantage: In the never-ending war of words between Airbus and Boeing, readers know we always connect with airlines to cross-check what the OEMs say.

As readers also know, Boeing promotes its 787 as being 20%-25% more fuel efficient than today’s airplanes. With the (also) never-ending prospect of Airbus proceeding with an A330neo, the question arises over what the delta is between the A330 and the 787. We asked a fleet planner. The answer: 10% in favor of the 787, a gap that an A330neo could narrow considerably (but be unlikely to close altogether) with new engines and sharklets. So how about that 20%-25%? These figures compare with the 767 and A340 respectively, the fleet planner tells us.