Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- Boeing wants to remarket China’s airplanes. It’s costly and time consuming. April 28, 2025
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 19. April 25, 2025
- How good is the C929? Part 2. April 24, 2025
- Boeing First Quarter Results Update: China is 10% of the backlog, with 500 in “Unidentified” April 24, 2025
- Boeing First Quarter Results: Tariffs, Return flights, $10.55bn asset sale April 23, 2025
Bjorn’s Corner: What did we learn in 2015; engines
By Bjorn Fehrm
15 January 2016, ©. Leeham Co: Last week we looked back on what happened in 2015 on the airframe front. We finish the retrospective by looking at what turbofan engine technology came to market in 2015. New engine technology is vital, as it is on the engine side that the quest for higher fuel efficiency has the largest successes.
While advances on the airframe side might bring an additional 5% per generation, the engines typically increase their efficiency per new generation with up to three times that value. Fuel efficiency per delivered thrust unit was improved with a whopping 15% over the engine it replaces for the Pratt & Whitney Geared Turbofan (PW GTF). It was certified for use on the Airbus A320neo in Q4 2015
The competing CFM LEAP-1A shall deliver the same improvement level to the A320neo once it is certified in the summer of this year. This engine has a smaller sister that started ground tests last year, the LEAP-1B, which is developed for the Boeing 737 MAX series.
The engine that is easily forgotten is the Rolls Royce Trent XWB. It entered service on the Airbus A350-900 during the year. It brings an improvement level of around 10% compared to the engines of the aircraft that the A350 replaces (Airbus A340/A330ceo and Boeing’s 777-200 range).
Airbus annual press conference 2016
By Bjorn Fehrm
Introduction
12 January 2016, ©. Leeham Co: Airbus held its annual press conference in Paris today against a backdrop of record 2015 deliveries. The year that went past was consequently a good one for Airbus. Orders were at a record high for the third year in succession and deliveries exceeded previous years for the 13th year in succession.
But the Airbus sky wasn’t totally cloud free; the large A380 only got sales by having ANA mop up the mess after Japan’s Skymark bankruptcy and production of the new A350 was hindered by a sole source lavatory supplier.
The result was that Airbus missed two 2015 delivery targets, the 15 per year for A350 (delivered 14) and the 2016 delivery of the first A320neo. The latter was because of “paperwork issues” related to certain things being “late to finish” ahead of certification. Read more
Bjorn’s Corner: Engine efficiency revisited
By Bjorn Fehrm
18 December 2015, © Leeham Co:Part of the discussion following last week’s article around quad or twin engine airliner designs was about engine efficiency and specifically around the engine’s thermal efficiency as a function of Pressure Ratio, PR.
I got the question, if an engine working at a higher pressure ratio was therefore working at a higher thermal efficiency. I knew enough on the subject to know I did not have a good answer without doing a bit of checking; jet engines are no simple contraptions.
I have previously written about turbofan efficiency in a Corner. The article was focused around propulsive efficiency. Now we will have a look at the other part of overall engine efficiency, the thermal efficiency or the efficiency of the core.
Bjorn’s Corner: Twins or quads?
By Bjorn Fehrm
11 December 2015, ©. Leeham Co: The debate over two or four engines for long range aircraft is as old as the jet airliner. A number of myths have been pedaled over the years over the virtues of the one over the other. The myths have even been presented by airline CEOs as “facts that are known in the industry.”
Having done several in-depth comparisons of two-vs-four engined long range aircraft, we can’t find the patterns that these myths propel: that a quad is less efficient than a twin and should have higher maintenance costs. What we see is that it is all dependent on what one compares and to what technology generation the one or the other aircraft belong.
When we didn’t get the same results as the myths on a number of areas, we started to wonder what could have created the myths in the first place. Looking at what four engined airliners could have been the source of the rumours, we started to see a pattern. It was a pattern of apple-and-oranges being compared and wide ranging conclusions being drawn.
Here is what we found. Read more
737 MAX to roll out to Boeing product strategy challenges
Subscription Required
Introduction
The Boeing 737-8 rolls out tomorrow to challenges to Boeing’s product strategy. Image via Google images.
Dec. 7, 2015, © Leeham Co: Boeing rolls out its first 737 MAX tomorrow to no press fanfare. Today there is a limited press tour of the assembly line, but, according to reporters who were invited, there will be no press briefings.
It’s an inexplicably low-key event for what Boeing otherwise touts as a major evolution of the venerable 737 line.
As good as Boeing claims the airplane will be, and as much spin as Boeing’s marketing department tries to put on the rivalry vs the Airbus A320neo, the 737 MAX clearly is second fiddle—and it’s not going to get better.
Summary
- Airbus holds a commanding market share: 60% to 40% of the family comparisons.
- Airbus holds about a 55% share of the A320neo vs 737-8 comparison.
- The A321neo outsells the 737-9 by about 4:1.
- Boeing faces cash flow challenges in 2020 decade.
Used B777-200ER or A340-300, Part 2
Subscription required
Introduction
By Bjorn Fehrm
Dec. 3 2015, ©. Leeham Co: Last week we started our article series around acquiring used twin-aisle aircraft to start new long haul services or boost an existing network. We focused on Airbus’ A340-300 and Boeing’s 777-200ER, two capable long haulers, both with a capacity of around 290 seats, using our normalized two class cabin. We wanted to understand which one would have the lowest operating costs over a network which has flights up to 12-13 hours.
We analyzed the Cash Operating Cost (COC) of the aircraft in their standard configuration in Part 1. We could see that their COCs are similar. We now study the aircraft’s capital costs. These will include a necessary cabin makeover where we will use the chance for the 777-200ER to convert it to a 10 abreast aircraft in economy. We aim to amortize its higher acquisition cost by spreading these over more passenger seats.
Summary
- The 777-200ER and A340-300 are very close in Cash Operating Costs in their base versions.
- The 777-200ER has a market valuation which is more than double that of the A340-300. Recently this level has declined but the acquisition cost of a -200ER is still higher than the A340-300.
- We use the potential of 10 abreast in economy to see if we can even the per seat cost of the two by spreading the higher costs of the -200ER over more seats.
Used B777-200ER or A340-300?
Subscription required
By Bjorn Fehrm
Introduction
Nov. 26 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In recent articles we have latched on to the debate around the prices for used Boeing 777-200 aircraft. Contrary to the market appraising companies’ ideas about second hand values, our surveys show that not only the Airbus A340-300 is cheap in the market but the Boeing 777-200ER is also available at interesting prices.
This, coupled with sustained low fuel prices, makes for interesting opportunities. Charter destinations can be reached which were not possible with less competent aircraft and it is possible to lease or purchase these long range aircraft to backfill an expanding route network while awaiting or even postponing delivery of the latest technology aircraft.
We decided it was time to take a look at which of the two would be the better choice as a long hauler of 300 passengers to destinations of up to 5,000nm. We use our proprietary model to find out which one is the most suitable given different conditions, such as cabin makeover or not. We will also introduce aircraft deterioration to the calculations to map the reality of an older aircraft.
In this first article, we will establish the base values for the aircraft and find their cash operating costs. In a subsequent article, we will add capital costs where we will look at different purchase scenarios and refurbishing options and how these affect the overall direct operating costs.
Summary
- The 777-200ER and A340-300 are very close in most dimensions.
- The 777-200ER is the slightly larger and heavier aircraft. Thanks to more effective engines, it can compete on fuel costs.
- When the other costs are added to make up cash operating costs, the higher weight and more expensive engines start to eat up any fuel cost advantages the 777-200ER has.
Bjorn’s Corner: Aircraft systems, the real nuts to crack
By Bjorn Fehrm
06 November 2015, ©. Leeham Co: COMAC’s C919 was rolled out in the week. We got to see a new shiny aircraft which looked ready to fly. The nicely curved fuselage and wings were immaculate, the paint was shiny and the CFM LEAP-1C engines were ready to go.
Yet many ask, when will it fly for the first time? It used to be that when the airframe was finished and the engines ran reliably it was time to fly. No longer! Today the most challenging part of an aircraft program is the integration of all the complex systems which hide under the skin. This is what kept the Bombardier CSeries on ground longer than it should and the Boeing 787 and Airbus A380 had the same flu (the latter also had to short wires).
It is the part of the aircraft which takes longest to get to work reliably. The A380 is known for its long period of nuisance warnings from the complex avionics system after entry into service and the reliability work for the 787 has to a large extent been one of software tuning of its system side.
As the system function of modern aircraft has grown more complex the whole architecture of how it was built had to be changed. Here’s how.
No fear of C919 for a generation
Nov. 4, 2015, © Leeham Co. The first COMAC C919 was rolled out of the factory over the weekend, China’s mainline entry into the fiercely competitive arena now “owned” by the Airbus-Boeing duopoly.
COMAC C919. Click on image to enlarge. Photo via Google images.
Although the two giants each has said China is the next competitor they will have to face, the Big Two have nothing to worry about for a generation to come.
Here’s why.