Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Bjorn’s Corner: Engine ratings
By Bjorn Fehrm
02 October 2015, ©. Leeham Co: After the article about the role of bypass ratio on a turbofan’s efficiency, we now look at other aspects of civil turbofan engines that are worth some light. It’s about how the engine OEMs create different versions of the same engine to cater for different aircraft variants.
The aircraft OEMs create different size variants from the same base model of aircraft by means of stretches. There is no better example of that than the Boeing 737. Over the years it has had more than 10 major versions. For the present in-service series, 737NG, there is three official variants, from the -700 to the -900ER. Originally it also had a smaller -600 variant.
These require engines from 20klbf to 27klbf. How this is achieved and what it means for engine characteristics and reliability is the focus of today’s Corner. We will also compare it to a typical long range engine, the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000/7000, which powers the Boeing 787 and Airbus A330neo.
Assessing the China market
Subscription required.
Introduction
Sept. 30, 2015, (c) Leeham Co.: The Boeing deals announced last week with China put the country into the spotlight about its commercial aviation ambitions.
For many, the various deals announced by Boeing raise alarm bells. For most, that fire horse already left the fire station. The smoke has been billowing out of China (or maybe that’s smog) for a long, long time.
Summary
- Boeing announces 300 orders and commitments for China, though the company was vague about the details. We try to dissect what’s real and what’s smoke.
- Additional deals announced by Boeing are driven by China’s pay-to-play approach to business.
- Other OEMs, suppliers also have to pay-to-play.
- China’s deals with Airbus and Boeing are only two elements of a national goal for commercial aerospace.
- IP theft and technology transfer big concerns.
Evaluating airliner performance, Part 2
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Sep. 24 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In the second part of our series about comparing and evaluating economic and operational performance of airliners, we look at the parts beyond fuel that make up the Cash Operating Costs (COC) for an airliner.
While fuel consumption, crew costs and aircraft maintenance costs can be evaluated in a way which closely resembles reality, other costs in the COC are too complex to model in their true form.
This is the case for underway or airway fees, landing fees and station fees. Here, just about every country/airport in the world has taken the liberty to invent its own charging principles and formulas. With several hundred different formulae for these charges, the way out is to use industry-accepted approximation for these costs.
Summary:
- We establish how crew cost are modeled for our evaluation missions, taking into account the complex world of work time regulations for pilots and cabin crew.
- We also describe how we handle airframe and engine maintenance costs and how these get allocated to our missions.
- Finally, we describe how the complex underway and landing/station costs are modeled with the accepted approximations these require.
Bjorn’s Corner: Engine efficiency
18 September 2015, ©. Leeham Co: The debate around the market’s two single aisle combatants is quite heated, with fans of the one side saying “the limited space for a high bypass engine on the 737 MAX will cripple it forever” and the other side saying “the tighter design of the 737 will make it highly competitive against the A320neo, it is the A320 which has a weight and size problem”.
One of the arguments is that each inch of engine fan diameter brings 0.5% in increased propulsive efficiency. Therefore the A320 with up to 81 inches fans will win against the 737 MAX, which has a 69 inch fan. Having all the tools to check out if this is really the truth, I fed our airplane model with all the facts and looked at the result. It’s not so easy, guys…
A320 FAL “good for US aerospace,” says Airbus
Sept. 16, 2015, © Leeham Co., Mobile (AL): The opening of the Airbus A320 Final Assembly Line here
achieves a major set of goals set by the company 10 years ago for its own strategic purposes, but officials are also mindful of the larger impact on US aerospace.
David L. Williams, VP Procurement, Airbus Americas. Photo via Google images.
Top executives point out that the Mobile plant reestablished a second commercial aviation assembly site in the US since the last MD-11s and MD-95s rolled out of the former McDonnell Douglas plant in Long Beach (CA) after its acquisition by The Boeing Co in 1997. Boeing continued production of the MD-11 until the end of 2000 (with deliveries occurring in 1Q2001). The last MD-95, renamed the Boeing 717, was produced in 2006. There were 200 MD-11s and 156 717s produced.
With nearly 10 years elapsing between that last 717 and the first A321ceo coming out of Mobile, Airbus officials say the creation of the FAL is not only good for Airbus and Alabama, it’s good for US aerospace.
New single aisles on home stretch
By Bjorn Fehrm
16 Sep 2015, © Leeham Co.: Boeing released pictures yesterday of the first 737 MAX 8 being on the Renton Final Assembly Line (FAL) having completed the wing-to-body joins. With the Airbus A320neo now flying again with both Pratt & Whitney GTF and CFM LEAP test vehicles and Bombardier completing 85% on CSeries (having passed 2,400 hours of flight testing), one can say the new single aisles are on their home stretch.
737 MAX on the Final Assembly Line at Renton, Seattle. Source: Boeing.
Original planning had the CSeries entering service in December 2013, nearly two years before A320neo (October 2015) and four years before the 737 MAX (4Q2017). With the 737 MAX now on the FAL one can start to review the Entry into Service (EIS) for all three. It will be tighter than the companies have said.
Rolls-Royce and Safran, major European engine OEMs with different fortunes.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
July 30, 2015 © Leeham Co. Rolls-Royce and Safran, the parent company of CFM partner Snecma, released their Q2 and first half 2015 earnings today. It is interesting to compare these companies as they are in different strategic situations in their dominant business segments, civil turbofan engines.
Civil turbofans constitute 52% of Rolls-Royce total business whereas it makes 54% of Safran’s turn over. Rolls-Royce’s focus has been widebody engines to the point where it exited its part of International Aero Engines, which makes the single aisle V2500 engine, three years ago. Safran on the other hand is heavily invested in the single aisle market through its 50% part in CFM through its Snecma subsidiary.
The present situation and the future outlook for these two companies are intimately aligned with this strategic difference. We look at why and how this will affect their immediate future.
Summary:
- Rolls-Royce is experiencing migration problems in its widebody turbofan business. Its bread and butter Trent 700 engine is on its way out and it takes until 2018 for the replacement, Trent 7000, to kick in.
- Other programs are only growing slowly: the Trent 1000 for Boeing’s 787 or Trent XWB for the Airbus A350.
- Safran civil turbofan business Snecma is enjoying record sales and deliveries through its CFM joint venture with GE.
- Despite sharing its revenue 50:50 with GE, the business turnover is the size of Rolls-Royce turbofan business today and larger tomorrow. Profit margins are three times higher.
Airbus ‘confident’ engine makers can ramp up production
Subscription Required
Introduction
CFM makes about 50% of the engines on the A320 Family and has about 50% of the backlog for the New
Tom Enders, CEO of Airbus Group. Airbus photo.
Engine Option version. Pratt & Whitney has about the same market share for the NEO, depending on what month it is, with a large number of orders for which no engine has been selected.
Airbus and Boeing are each studying whether to ramp up production of the A320 and 737 families above the record rates already planned.
In an interview Sunday with Leeham News and Comment in advance of the A320 Final Assembly Line opening here, Enders said studies continue whether to take A320 production rates to 60 a month. Boeing is studying rates of 60-63 a month.
Summary
Read more
Leave a Comment
Posted on September 17, 2015 by Scott Hamilton
Airbus, Boeing, CFM, Leeham News and Comment, Pratt & Whitney, Premium
737 MAX, A320NEO, A380, A400M, air force tanker, Airbus, Airbus Group, Boeing, CFM, Fabrice Bregier, John Leahy, KC-46A, KC-X, Pratt & Whitney, SkyMark, Tom Enders, Transaero, USAF, Virgin Atlantic Airways