Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 25. June 6, 2025
- New RISE powerplant benefits from decades of GE research and development June 5, 2025
- Engine makers emphasizing durability, reliability June 4, 2025
- Boeing CEO: Lessons learned are key to certification of 737-7/10 and 777X June 2, 2025
- Digital twin is a key to JetZero’s hopes for Blended Wing Body entry June 2, 2025
France “protectionist,” says Boeing
We wonder what took Boeing so long to make this obvious point: France is protectionist in its defense purchases and should quit complaining about the KC-X competition in the US. See this Reuters story.
Airbus annual press conference
Airbus held its annual press conference today, with several news items coming from it:
A400M
This program remains a financial disaster, with Airbus now acknowledging it threatens the well-being of the entire company. This New York Times article sums it up best. This Reuters article also has great detail. This 14 minute podcast by Innovation Analysis Group with the A400M chief test pilot talks about the flight testing.
Outlook for Airbus, Boeing in 2010
Introduction
2009 has faded into history and 2010 is here. Last year wasn’t kind to Airbus or Boeing—though it was worse for the latter than the former. How will this year be?
We’ll get right into how we see things lining up for the two largest airframe OEMs for this year.
Why US transport producers failed
Defense analyst Loren Thompson picks up the old refrain about Airbus subsidies running McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed out of the commercial airliner business. We add our thoughts at the end of his article.
By Loren Thompson
Airbus subsidies have destroyed thousands of US jobs
Monday, December 21, 2009
In a few days, the world’s two major producers of commercial transports (jet airliners) will release their order and delivery results for 2009. The results will show that European champion Airbus delivered slightly over 50% of all planes built, while greatly exceeding American champion Boeing in the number of new planes ordered. It’s been going this way pretty much since the decade began, because after 40 years of subsidies from European governments, Airbus now has a complete family of transports that can aggressively compete in virtually any capacity/range category with Boeing.
Airbus, Boeing nearing re-engining decision
Reuters has this report saying Airbus and Boeing will decide, probably next year, whether to re-engine the A320 and 737 families.
The AirInsight team of The Arvai Group, Innovation Analysis Group and Leeham Co., published the report below earlier this month that decisively predicted this will happen. The report may be purchased here.
COMAC chooses LEAP-X, Russians pick GTF
China’s COMAC selected the CFM International LEAP-X engine to power its new challenge to Airbus and Boeing, the C919 150-200 seat jet, two sources tell us.
Now comes news that Russia’s Irkut selected the Pratt & Whitney P1000G Geared Turbo Fan (GTF) to power its 150-200 seat jet, the MS-21. Both planes have a projected EIS of 2016.
This has implications for Airbus and Boeing. Both companies are pondering whether to re-engine the A320 and 737 families and are holding talks with CFM (Airbus and Boeing), PW (Airbus and Boeing), International Aero Engines (Airbus) and Rolls-Royce (Airbus). We firmly believe Airbus and Boeing will decide next year to re-engine the airplanes.
AirInsight is about to release a report on the re-engine prospect.
United splits wide-body buy
United Airlines today (Dec. 08) ordered 25 Airbus A350s and 25 Boeing 787s with options for an equal number.
It’s clear why UA did this: the A350 is too big to replace the Boeing 767-300 and the 787 is too small to replace the Boeing 777 and 747-400.
A conference call with UA is to begin shortly. We’ll provide a running log.
USAF used criteria GAO rejected in new DRFP: KC-30 backers
Update, December 8:
Bill Barksdale, Boeing KC-7A7 spokesman, emailed us with a response to this column. We have posted his note in the Comments section below.
Original Post:
The USAF used criteria in the current Draft RFP for the KC-X competition that had been rejected by the Government Accountability Office’s review of the Boeing protest last year, an analysis by prepared by EADS North America and Northrop Grumman asserts.
This unfairly tilts the current DRFP toward the Boeing KC-767 and is the basis Northrop why said it will not submit a bid unless major changes are made with the Final RFP.
No KC-30 means no A330 plant in Mobile
Airbus has said it before but it is worth reminding people that if Northrop Grumman follows through on its statement that it will not bid the KC-30 in the KC-X competition unless significant changes are made to the Draft Request for Proposals (DRFP), Airbus won’t build an A330-200F assembly plant on its own in Mobile (AL).
We checked with Airbus immediately after Northrop’s announcement and a spokesman confirmed that the company’s position has not changed: there is no “business case” for an A330F final assembly line (FAL) without the KC-30 tanker contract.
Northrop says no bid on tanker unless…
Update, December 2, 3:00 pm: DOD Buzz reports that Rep. John Murtha, a powerful House member, says there has to be competition for the KC-X and doesn’t rule out Congress stepping in.
This is something we forgot to mention in our Update below. We fully expect an effort on the part of some Members of Congress to renew the effort for a split buy. As we have written many times before, we can think of many strategic reasons this makes sense, let alone the political solution. But this also only makes sense if the procurement is doubled from the 12-18 per year proposed by DOD to 24-36 a year. We also believe the KC-777 is the best replacement for the aging KC-10.
There is enough strategic need to go around for everyone. That this continues to be a political football should be an embarrassment to all concerned.
Update, December 2:
(See Original Post below the jump for background.)
The prospect that Northrop Grumman won’t submit a bid unless the Final RFP is changed to allow for the different sizes between the KC-30 and the KC-767 is very similar to what happened with the 2006 competition.
The USAF then initially did not plan an “extra credit” for larger capabilities exceeding the minimum requirements of the airplane. Northrop threatened to withdraw from that competition unless the FRFP allowed for extra credit–and prevailed.