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
CFM LEAP-1B enters flight testing
May 7, 2015: The CFM LEAP-1B has entered flight testing on GE’s company-owned Boeing 747. The engine is for the Boeing 737 MAX. Aviation Week has a story and one section in particular caught our eye, as it relates to the controversy over the test results of fuel consumption.
“When we build development engines they are heavily instrumented and built to accomplish extreme test conditions and durability,” he explains. “They are intentionally deteriorated and have open clearances because they are built for the ‘corner point’ in the test effort. We do pre-test predictions and we are within 0.5% of every one, so we are right on track. We fully expect to be right on our commitment as we enter into service.”
Aspire Aviation reported last month that the LEAP-1B was coming up 4%-5% short, a huge number that Boeing immediately denied; CFM declined comment at the time. Airline Economics later reported the same figure. Our information from our sources was conflicting: we were told by one that the shortfall was 2%, a figure we had been hearing for some time and which was characterized as not unusual at this stage; and one other that reported the 4%-5% figure. There it sat. We did a “what-if” analysis of the effect on the MAX at the 2% and 4% numbers.
Last week, we received a clarifying explanation that appears to track with the Aviation Week article and the excerpt above. We were told that the 4%-5% number came from a test stand test in which the tolerances of the engine were much looser than the optimal performance engine. The clearances, we were told, were not to specification–and the result was the 4%-5%.
The higher level game
By Bjorn Fehrm
Introduction
May 4, 2015, c. Leeham Co. The other day one of our readers asked something along the lines, “now that Airbus has the A320neo 20% more efficient than today’s A320, how shall Boeing’s 737 MAX fair in the market? It is only 15% more effective and there are question marks around the LEAP-1B?”
This made me realize that marketing works. I decided to write about the phenomenon that the OEMs seem to find further improvements all the time and how these continually higher improvements seem to work beyond the physical laws as we know them.
The answer boils down to the fact that there is more than meets the eye around how much fuel an aircraft uses to transport people from A to B. In fact, the OEMs’ marketing departments excel within the complexity of the task and can always find a way to say “my mousetrap has now improved another x% and is therefore Y% better than yours”.
To cut through these marketing moves one need a bit of background and first grade math. Let’s see how they do it. Read more
Boeing MOM airliner; market coverage
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
12 April, 2015: In our study of the options for Boeing’s market study called Middle of the Market (MOM), we could conclude that the most likely aircraft to cover their 200-250 seat 4750nm range requirement would be a seven abreast twin aisle aircraft using their patented new oval construction, thereby saving weight and drag.
After finishing the series, Readers requested that we conclude the work by showing what market segment a family of such airliners would cover and how they would relate to the Boeing 787-8. As it is pretty straight forward to see with our aircraft performance model how much of a range of aircraft variants one can make from one base development of aircraft and engine, we decided to fulfill the wish from our Readers.
We have therefore looked at how far the concept MOM airliner could be stretched and what segment in the market would be covered by it. We also studied how much such a family would encroach on Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner market.
Summary
- A base design such as our proposed MOM dual aisle airliner can typically cover a market of 30-40 seat increments per model.
- Limiting factors are the base models wing area and span, together with engine sizing. Much depends on the engine’s stretch capability.
- A MOM airliner family would compete with the 787-8 for short- and mid-haul traffic, there presenting a more economical alternative. The Dreamliner would have long-haul for itself.
Bombardier CS300 analysis vs A319neo, 737-7
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
March 29, 2015, c. Leeham Co: Bombardier’s big bet in the aeronautics sector, CSeries, is well into flight testing, now more than half way toward the 2,400 hours required by Transport Canada before certification can be granted. The first aircraft to be certified will be the smaller 110 seat CS100 but the market is most interested in the larger 135 seat CS300, which has 63% of present orders and commitments, Figure 1.
Figure 1. Cseries largest model, CS300. Source: Bombardier.
Bombardier’s new CEO, Alan Bellemare, told reporters last week that the CS100 would be certified during 2015 with entry into service slipping into 2016. The CS300, which is a direct challenger to Airbus’ A319neo and Boeing’s 737-7, should follow six months after CS100. With the CS300 in flight testing and going into service next summer, we decided to have a deeper look at CS300 and its competitors.
Summary
- A319 and 737-7 are shrinks of the market’s preferred models, A320 and 737-8, and as such not the most efficient models.
- The CS300 is the series center-point and it shows. The modern design beats the Airbus and Boeing designs on most counts.
- Part of the modern concepts in CSeries is the well-conceived Pratt & Whitney PW1000G geared turbofan.
- PW’s 73 in fan version of the PW1000G for CSeries is slightly less efficient that the 81 in version for A319neo but CS300 lower weight makes sure this is more than compensated for.
Leahy gets lifetime achievement award; CSeries could be delayed again
March 23, 2015: John Leahy, Aviation Week Lifetime Achievement Award: John Leahy, the chief operating officer-commercial for Airbus, received the Lifetime Achievement Award from Aviation Week. It’s a well-deserved award.
John Leahy. Airbus photo.
As the AvWeek write up details, Leahy has been instrumental in bringing Airbus to the market position it is today. We’ve known Leahy nearly the entire time he’s been at Airbus. He’s one of those love-him or hate-him kind of guys (or, in my case, like-him). Whether loved or hated, his industry accomplishments deserve respect and admiration. Joe Sutter, who is still around in his 90s as a consultant to Boeing, would be Boeing’s counter-part for the impact of his influence on the industry. We certainly can’t think of a Boeing salesman or any other contemporary in the front office who would match Leahy’s tenure and influence. In his day, Bill Allen, the long-time CEO, certainly would qualify.
Bjorn’s Corner: Intro, LCC long range and CFM’s LEAP
By Bjorn Fehrm
March 19, 2015: This is the first version of my Corner where I will comment on the aeronautical world as I see it. It will be a mix of tech things (I am an engineer) and my view on things from my European vantage point. Enough on reason and style; lets get started.
LCC goes long range: After AirAsiaX and Norwegian, now Ryanair is going long range, according to Irish Times (or not; the latest news from Robert Wall of The Wall Street Journal is that the board has not approved a long range business plan).
Be that as it may with Ryanair, the key thing is that what happened to the majors on short haul is about to hit them on long haul as well. Short haul LCCs brought about a change in airline economics and in single aisle aircraft. The LCCs, followed by Ultra LCCs, started the trend to denser and denser configurations where the latest trends are sub 29 inch pitch slim-seats and lavatories that started at 37 inch getting slimmed to 31 inch. It has also brought about changes in galleys and emergency exits configurations, all leading to aircraft with higher and higher capacities.
Odds and Ends: CS300 first flight delayed; PW GTF; Boeing enters MidEast fray
Baby, it’s cold out there! Bombardier delayed the first flight of its CSeries due to the cold. Click on image to enlarge. Source: Sylvain Faust.
CS300 first flight delayed: When Bombardier says it’s too cold for the CS300 first flight, you know it’s cold up in Montreal. It’s -21C at Mirabel (-6F) and partly cloudy, but that was too cold for the guests, according to our man on the scene, Sylvain Faust. Canadians know how to dress for this cold but visitors don’t. A rescheduled time hasn’t been definitively announced.
Bombardier doesn’t have an open-faced tent and outdoor heaters set up, according to Faust.
PW GTF: Flight Global has a report about Pratt & Whitney’s “new aggressiveness” in competing with CFM International in the battle of the Pure Power Geared Turbo Fan vs the LEAP-1A. These engines power the Airbus A320neo family.
Boeing enters MidEast fray: American, Delta and United airlines want Open Skies revisited in order to curb competition by the Big Three Middle Eastern carriers. Boeing, FedEx and JetBlue, have entered the fray, opposing any such action. Here is the story.
787-3, “737-10” no replacement for 757
Feb. 25, 2015. c. Leeham Co. When Boeing CEO Jim McNerney last year suggested that a replacement for the 757 could be based on the 787 or the 737 MAX, the statement conjured up visions of resurrecting the 787-3 (the short-range version of the 787-8) or further developing the 737-9 into a larger “737-10.”
We were skeptical then and remain so now.
The idea of a 787-3 resurfacing into a 4,500nm airplane to replace the 757 is a dog that just won’t hunt. As Nico Buchholz, the fleet manager for Lufthansa Group, told us, the 787-3 is just “too much airplane.”
We couldn’t agree more, and the idea of a “787 Lite” is a simplistic suggestion that doesn’t fully think through all the issues.