Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- Bjorn’s Corner: New engine development. Part 4. Propulsive efficiency April 19, 2024
- Boeing unlikely to meet FAA’s 90-day deadline for new safety program April 18, 2024
- Focus on quality not slowing innovation, says GKN April 18, 2024
- Boeing defends 787, 777 against whistleblower charges April 17, 2024
- Dissecting Boeing CEO’s statement next new airplane will cost $50bn April 15, 2024
Boeing showing 737-8ERX concept in response to A321LR
By Scott Hamilton and Bjorn Fehrm
March 12, 2015: Boeing is showing some airlines a concept it calls the 737-8ERX, a long range version of the 737-8 MAX, in response to the Airbus A321LR, Leeham News and Comment has learned. Sources within Boeing confirmed the concept but Boeing Corporate Communications did not make someone available for an interview. A spokesman said in an email, “Boeing studies many advanced concepts, innovations and technology. However, just because Boeing studies a particular concept or technology does not necessarily mean that we will be introducing that airplane or concept in the near future. Boeing makes decisions based on market and customer demand.”
Figure 1. The Boeing 737-8ERX concept. Boeing photo, modified by Leeham Co., based on information from Market Intelligence. Click on image to enlarge.
In our article series around A321LR we concluded that Boeings 737 MAX 9 was not a good base from which to launch a long range 737, it could not be stretched in take off weight due to rotation limitations. Better would be to upgrade the take-off weight of MAX 8 for longer range, it can carry the extra fuel tanks needed and is not rotation limited in the same way.
As happened with the A321neoLR (we pointed to the possibility of the concept and Airbus was indeed working on it) Boeing now shows selected airlines a higher gross weight 737 MAX 8, Figure 1. In contrast to Airbus, which beefed up the A321neo to form the A321LR, Boeing is apparently using a concept they developed for the Navy 737 derivative, P8 Poseidon. They grab in their LEGO box of 737 components to form the 737-8ERX with minimal additional development.
Redefining the 757 replacement: Requirement for the 225/5000 Sector, Part 5.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
11 March 2015, c. Leeham Co: After having analyzed the different alternatives which would be available to Boeing for its Middle Of the Market, MOM, studies and having singled out the most competitive configurations, we will now add revenue to the equation. In the work to establish Cash and Direct Operating Costs for the aircraft, we saw which variant had the best cost for a certain capacity and utilization. We could not see which aircraft would be the most profitable however; this requires that we bring in the revenue side.
Revenue management analysis of different aircraft types on an airlines network is a science in it selves. Sophisticated fare class strategies with connected marketing activities makes such studies elaborate and beyond the scope of our analysis. Our primary goal is to understand the difference in operational efficiency of a single versus dual aisle aircraft with the same seating capacity. For this, a simpler average margin concept will work that shows us the effects of single versus dual aisle for aircraft margins in the MOM segment.
Summary
- We select based on Cash and Direct Operating Costs the best aircraft for the different market segments.
- To understand the revenue earning capability of the different alternatives we introduce a revenue model which takes into account aircraft utilization.
- With the costs and the revenue side represented we can develop a good understanding for the cross over between single and dual aisle for MOM.
- We will use this knowledge as we subsequently look into Airbus response to what Boeing would bring to the market.
Redefining the 757 replacement: Requirement for the 225/5000 Sector, Part 3.
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:
- Aircraft capacity and size for 12 different possible aircraft, named NAS6, NLT6 and NLT7 each in the variants 180, 200, 220 and 240 passengers.
- With this collection of characteristics it will be possible to compare the efficiency and costs for the different sizes and to see how competitive a wider dual aisle aircraft will be in this segment compared to a single aisle.
- In a subsequent article will be compare the operational characteristics of these aircraft thereby also covering the increased revenue potential with a dual aisle aircraft compared to a single aisle.
Odds and Ends: Tax breaks and job guarantees; New airline analysis blog
Feb. 17, 2015: Tax breaks and job guarantees: Boeing’s two largest unions in Washington State appear to be making headway this legislative session to get a bill on the floor for a vote that would retroactively tie 2013 tax breaks to a guarantee of jobs.
It’s less likely that the legislation will include a minimum wage component.
The tax breaks, hastily approved by the Legislature in November 2013, provided for $8.7bn in tax breaks to 2040 in return for Boeing locating the 777X assembly line and wing production in Everett (WA). The tax breaks are not only for Boeing, but available across the supply chain.
But there were no job guarantees, SPEEA and the IAM 751 warned legislators, and without them in the bill, they predicted Boeing would move jobs out of state.
That’s exactly what happened.
Boeing 757 MAX: why its operating economics does not work
By Bjorn Fehrm
Introduction
Feb 12, 2015: In a series of articles during the autumn we covered the replacement scenarios for Boeing’s 757-200 when used for long haul passenger operations. The series also included an interview with Boeing’s head of new airplane studies, Kourosh Hadi, director of product development at Boeing where he outlined what Boeing studied and why.
This week The Wall Street Journal published an article portraying that Boeing seriously considered launching a re-engined 757 as a response to Airbus A321LR. Boeing has since vehemently denied the story and we have given the reasons why it does not make sense for Boeing.
As a complement we show the operational economical analysis that we did at the time of our 757 articles, now updated to the exact modifications suggested by The WSJ, a new engine and new winglets paired with modern avionics.
Regional operations with the Turboprop, prop-jet or Jet
- We examined the future of turboprop airliners Jan. 5, 2015, analyzing the backlogs of Bombardier and ATR–and the ATR overwhelming dominance of the current turboprop sector. This is the second of a series looking at this sector.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
08 Feb 2015: Passenger traffic is growing the world over on a regional, domestic and international level. For domestic and international airlines the choice of mainline transport aircraft is clear today: there are only two vendors, Boeing and Airbus, and they produce similar products.
For regional transportation there is more choice. First of all, one can chose type
of aircraft, turboprop or jet. Within jet, there are several OEMs that are active. The choice in turboprop is more restricted. In practice, the choice stands between the classical turboprop with ATR and a faster type from Bombardier, the Q400 “Prop-Jet” as it is called, as its speed lands between the classical turboprop and regional jet.
The question is, what are the real differences between them in terms of design, passenger comfort and economics and what is the right choice for a market segment? We will take a deeper look into this by analyzing the ATR72 as the classical turboprop, the Bombardier Q400 as the Prop-Jet and CRJ700 as the regional jet.
Summary:
- The ATR72-600, Bombardier Q400 and CRJ700 are all about the same size, around 70-80 seats single class or 60-70 seats dual class.
- They offer different comfort levels, and it is not all about speed.
- In developing the economics in two steps we seek the crossover points between the different types.
Odds and Ends: Real-time flight tracking; LEAP-1A testing
Real-time flight tracking: At last, the airline industry is adopting rules to require real-time flight tracking. ICAO, the international organization governing rules and regulations, approved one to require real time tracking next year. The action is long overdue.
Singapore Airlines has made the decision to begin installing the system sooner.
Initially data will be transmitted at 15 minute intervals but if a flight anomaly occurs, transmissions will occur at one minute intervals. While the system won’t prevent real-time accidents (or hijackings), locating airplanes sooner could save lives if an accident is survivable or accelerate recovery of flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders to solve an accident sooner and potentially prevent accidents in the future from the results.
LEAP-1A testing: The CFM LEAP-1A, destined for the Airbus A320neo family, is now in flight testing, reports Flight Global.
Redefining the 757 replacement: Requirement for the 225/5000 Sector
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
25 Feb 2015: Speculation continues to ramp up during the last weeks and months about what Boeing is up to in the 180 to 250 seat sector and what might be Airbus’ response on top of the A321LR. The segment is not well covered today within production aircraft where 737-900ER and the forthcoming MAX 9 cover up to 210 seats and A321-200 and A321neo up to 220 seats. Both fly their passengers up to a realistic mission of 3000nm, i.e. transcontinental USA.
The next in production aircraft are 787-8 and A330-200 at 240 to 280 seats. These are long range dual aisle aircraft with empty weights more than double of the former pair. The 787-8 and A330-200 per seat economics on shorter missions are therefore in another ball game.
The only aircraft that currently bridges this gap is the out-of-production Boeing 757 and there has been much debate how this shall be replaced. We have covered this question in a number or articles focusing on in turn:
We also covered the study work underway at Boeing to cover this segment. We will now dig deeper into this corner after Boeing has unequivocally stated it does not see a re-engine 757 covering this segment and any aircraft that the airlines want should be a bit larger than the 757.
Summary:
Over a series of articles we will cover:
Read more
Leave a Comment
Posted on February 25, 2015 by Bjorn Fehrm
Airbus, Airlines, American Airlines, Boeing, GE Aviation, Leeham News and Comment, Premium
737 MAX, 747-8, 757, 787, Airbus, Boeing, KC-767