Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- FAA’s data of accident, incidents, often not shared May 19, 2025
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 22. May 16, 2025
- Services are driving revenues and profits in difficult times, Part I May 15, 2025
- The BWB has a long way to go before flying passengers, freight May 12, 2025
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 21. May 9, 2025
Airbus, Boeing split YTD orders leads
May 10, 2016: Airbus and Boeing split the leads for orders year-to-date through April 30 (May 2), following the monthly total released today by Airbus. Airbus led in wide-body orders by a wide margin. Boeing thumped Airbus in narrow-body orders.
How good is a MAX 7X and why would it replace the original?
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
May 9, 2016, © Leeham Co: Boeing is considering changing the 737 MAX 7 in a rather drastic way. The present model would be hitting the market as the last of the MAX models in 2019. It hasn’t been selling well. In fact, there are only two legacy airlines and a start-up that have ordered the MAX 7.
Right now, there are just 60 orders for an aircraft series which has garnered 3,100 orders in total.
Figure 1. Boeing’s 737 MAX 7 as presently defined. Source: Boeing
Sources have long told LNC that Boeing doesn’t really want to build the MAX 7. But Southwest Airlines needs the airplane for short-runway airports like Chicago Midway and Burbank (CA) and has resisted suggestions to up-gauge. The other airline that has ordered the MAX 7 is WestJet, which has thin markets in Canada that don’t justify a MAX 8. And there is a third customer, a start-up in Canada that has yet to begin operations.
With the C Series gaining momentum, the cancellation of the MAX 7 now seems off the table. Instead, Boeing is thinking about making it better, the MAX 7X project. What is it, and why would it be better than the original MAX 7? We use our aircraft model to answer the questions.
Summary
- The 737-700, and therefore MAX 7, was defined a continuation of the 737-300 at 126 passengers in a domestic two class configuration.
- Bombardier is offering 135 seats in a similar, but more comfortable, CS300 cabin with an aircraft which is lighter and more economical than the MAX 7.
- The already meager order book for the MAX 7 is therefore getting more pressure from a resurging C Series line.
- Boeing is now attempting to convince its customers that a larger MAX 7, based on MAX 8, would be a better aircraft for the customers (and for Boeing). We reveal why.
Pontifications: Big sigh of relief at Bombardier
By Scott Hamilton
May 2, 2016, © Leeham Co.: To say that the order from Delta Air Lines last Thursday for 75+50 CS100s with conversion rights to the CS300s was welcome news for Bombardier is an understatement.
Bombardier has a superb airplane in the C Series. The passenger seats are the most comfortable coach seats of any manufacturers, better than the Airbus A320 and way more comfortable than the Boeing 737. With apologies to Embraer, the C Series is even marginally better than the Embraer E-Jet, which is very good. Read more
Bjorn’s Corner: C Series flight controls
By Bjorn Fehrm
29April 2016, ©. Leeham Co: With the order by Delta Air Lines, the Bombardier C Series has taken the step up to be a viable alternative to Airbus’ and Boeing’s single aisle 130-150 seat aircraft.
In my description of airliners’ flight control and Flight Management Systems (FMS), I have focused on the established mainline single aisle players. Time to change that; C Series has arrived and will stay in the mainline segment.
Why 130 seats as a limit? Because below 130 seats there are a number of additional players (Embraer, Sukhoi, Mitsubishi…) and we can’t describe them all right now.
Now to how Bombardier has implemented the flight controls, autopilot and FMS for the C Series. In fact, we will look at how they have made the C Series cockpit, Figure 1.
Figure 1. C Series flight deck. Source: Bombardier.
I haven’t flown the C Series yet (working on it!) but I have been able to glean quite a bit over time and spent quite some time in the cockpit with the Bombardier test pilots at the Paris Air Show.
So here is a shot at describing the C Series control philosophies and capabilities and how they mimic/differ from Airbus and Boeing.
Bombardier wins breakthrough C Series order, from Delta
April 28, 2016, (c) Leeham Co.: At long last, after years of disappointment for that big, breakthrough order, Bombardier finally got it: a huge deal from a blue chip
Delta Air Lines ordered 75 CS100s and optioned 50 more. This is the breakthrough order Bombardier has been waiting years to receive. Source: Delta Air Lines.
airline, and one from North America: a firm order for 75 C30S100s and options for 50 more from Delta Air Lines.
Delta has conversion rights to the CS300. Bombardier now has more than 300 firm orders, although many of these are iffy, and commitments for up to 500 more.
This is the order that observers, analysts and aviation geeks have been waiting for during much of the development and production of the C Series.
The announcement came concurrently with highlights of BBD’s first quarter results.
Boeing 1Q results reveal “underlying strength”
Dennis Muilenburg, CEO of The Boeing Co.
April 27, 2016: Boeing delivered better financial results in first quarter that reflect “underlying strength” in the company, said Dennis Muilenburg, CEO of The Boeing Co., on the first quarter earnings call.
Excluding charges of $243m pre-tax charges on the KC-46A tanker, earnings per share equaled last year. Charges related principally to engineering change to the completed tankers, required after flight testing began. Muilenburg said the program remains “on path” to meet the commitment to deliver 18 tankers by August 2017. With a potential program of 400 deliveries over the life of the program, Muilenburg said the program should be profitable.
Boeing takes new charges on tanker, 747-8
April 27, 2016: Boeing took new charges on the KC-46A tanker and 747-8 programs, but not on the 787, its first quarter financial results announced.
Boeing took a $162m pre-tax charge on the tanker at Boeing Commercial airplanes. A charge of $80m was taken on the Defense side of the business for the tanker. Another $70 pre-tax charge was taken on the 747-8 program.
Cash levels were lower than that at year end, due to the shareholder buyback, lower deliveries and the “timing” of cash flow, the company said. With marketable securities, Boeing ended the quarter with $8.4bn cash and equivalents vs $12.1bn at year end. Year-over-year, cash and securities were $8.4bn to $9.6bn.
Initial analyst reaction follows.
737-7X, 737-10 studies illustrate Boeing weakness in single-aisle market
Subscription Required
Introduction
April 27, 2016 © Leeham Co.: News that Boeing plans to develop a “737-7.5” MAX, following on the prospect of a “737-10” stretch of the 737-9 illustrates just how weak its single aisle product strategy has become.
The Wall Street Journal revealed last week that Boeing is planning the airplane, which is larger than the current 737-7 but smaller than the 737-8. Jon Ostrower, the reporter, dubbed the plane the 737-7.5. Internally, it’s called the 737-7X.
Summary
- The 737-7 MAX has proved a sales dud. There are just 60 orders from two established airlines, Southwest and WestJet, and one start-up carrier that ordered just five.
- Bombardier appears on the cusp of landing an order from Delta Air Lines for up to 125 CS300s, the direct competitor to the 7 MAX, but this is only one element in Boeing’s consideration to grow into the “7.5.”
- Rather than being a growth of the 7 MAX, the 7.5 will be a shrink of the 737-8. This is a less costly and more efficient method for Boeing, but shrinks are never the best solution for the operator.
- LNC reported in February that Boeing had decided to recommit to the 7 MAX after nearly losing an order to Bombardier for the C Series. Instead, UAL ordered the 737-700 at an unusually low price and other considerations. Ray Conner, CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, called the deal a blocking move to BBD. The 7.5 appears to be the course Boeing has chosen.
- Pursuit of a 737-10, a stretch of the 737-9 that may include a new wing, larger engines and other changes, is an acknowledgement the 737-9 is losing the battle for this size aircraft to the Airbus A321neo. But Boeing’s challenges to develop a 737-10 are vexing. More than a year ago, LNC outlined these.
Airbus deliveries first USA-made A321ceo, to JetBlue
The first Airbus A321ceo assembled at the Mobile (AL) plant was delivered today to jetBlue. Photo from Airways News via Twitter.
April 25, 2016: The first Airbus A320 family aircraft assembled at the Airbus Mobile (AL) plant was delivered today to jetBlue. The A321ceo, which the airline named BluesMobile, is the first of 10 A321s now in production at the plant. Eight more A321s will be delivered to American Airlines. Spirit Airlines gets the 10th.
C Series charge spotlights 787 deferred costs
Subscription Required
May 4, 2016: (c) Leeham Co.: The $500m charge reported last week by Bombardier for 127 recent orders for its C Series resulted in shining the spotlight on Boeing’s deferred production costs for the 787.
As LNC wrote this week, interpretation of the BBD charge was misunderstood. Some press reports yesterday demonstrate it continues to be. We won’t restate what we’ve already written about the true nature of the charge and how it differs from program accounting used by Boeing–this has been well covered by now. The Seattle Times suggested that the per-plane profit required to pay off the $29bn in deferred production and $3bn in tooling costs for the Boeing 787 was greater than
generally recognized. The average figure is about 20% higher than the number widely cited by Wall Street.
The most commonly accepted figure to recapture the record-setting deferred production costs and tooling has been $30m per airplane, a figure most Wall Street analysts believe is too high to achieve. But this number appears understated, according to an analysis by The Seattle Times in the wake of Boeing’s first quarter earnings call.
Boeing’s 10Q contains language that appears to confuse the issue somewhat.
“At March 31, 2016, $23,661 [million] of 787 deferred production costs, unamortized tooling and other non- recurring costs are expected to be recovered from units included in the program accounting quantity that have firm orders and $8,757 [million] is expected to be recovered from units included in the program accounting quantity that represent expected future orders.”
This appears to suggest the first tranche of these airplanes results in a need for a $36m per-plane profit and the second tranche requires a per-plane profit of $54m. Charles Bickers, a spokesman for Boeing’s corporate headquarters in Chicago, told LNC that segmenting out the ordered but undelivered aircraft from orders yet to be received but assumed is not the way to look at the issue.
Read more
Leave a Comment
Posted on May 5, 2016 by Scott Hamilton
Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, Delta Air Lines, Leeham News and Comment, Premium
787, 787-9, A330ceo, A330neo, A350, A350-900, Air Baltic, Air Canada, Airbus, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, Delta Air Lines, Dominic Gates, program accounting, Rob Spingarn, Ron Epstein, Seattle Times, unit cost accounting