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 5. January 17, 2025
- What’s the future of the Boeing 787-8? January 16, 2025
- FAA understaffing affects air operations oversight; NTSB falls short, too January 13, 2025
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 4. January 10, 2025
- The market is ready for a 787F. But is Boeing? January 9, 2025
Seventeen new, derivative aircraft to see EIS through 2020
Subscription Required
Introduction
Delivery of the first Bombardier CS300, to AirBaltic, next week kicks off entry-into-service for 17 airplanes through 2020. Bombardier photo.
Oct. 20, 2016, © Leeham Co.: The past decade was a hive of activity as the Big Four OEMs launched new airplane programs and put the aircraft into service.
Airbus launched the A320neo, A330neo and A350 families. The A330neo is under production; the other two entered service early this year.
Boeing launched the 787 in late 2003 (outside the decade mark), rolled it out in 2007 and entered service with it in 2013. The 737 MAX was launched in 2011 and is in flight testing. The 777X was launched in 2013; components are in production.
Bombardier launched the CSeries in 2008; it entered service this year, after three years of delays.
Embraer launched the E-Jet E2 om 2013. Flight testing began this year.
New Entrants
These were supplemented by new entrants into commercial aviation: COMAC with its C919; Irkut with the MC-21; and Mitsubishi with the MRJ90. Of these, only the MRJ90 is flying. After more than two years of delays and several false starts, flight testing began in earnest this week at Moses Lake (WA) with FTA-1 (Flight Test Aircraft 1).
Development and new program launches have slowed, but the next decade is hardly going to be idle.
Summary
- Seventeen new aircraft or derivatives are scheduled to enter service through 2020.
- Five potential derivatives might see EIS through the same period.
- Three to five new or potential derivative aircraft might see EIS 2021-2025.
From zero to 10,000 in 50 years; can COMAC duplicate this achievement?
By Bjorn Fehrm
October 19, 2016, ©. Leeham Co: Airbus delivered its 10,000 aircraft last week (Figure 1), an A350-900 delivered to Singapore Airlines.
Delivering the 10,000 aircraft after 50 years of start of project is impressive, especially as the competition, Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA), the late McDonnell Douglas Corp and Lockheed Co, fought Airbus every step of the way.
Figure 1. Airbus 10,000th aircraft for Singapore Airlines. Source: Airbus.
We have a new player starting its 50 years, Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, COMAC. It’s on its eighth year and the competitions’ sentiments are: “It will take long before they can compete, decades!”
Let’s compare with the rise of Airbus and see what can be learned. Will COMAC deliver its 10,000th aircraft in 50 years? Or in a shorter time? Read more
Bjorn’s Corner; The Engine Research Institutes
By Bjorn Fehrm
October 14, 2016, ©. Leeham Co: In our Corners on East bloc aeronautical industries, we will now look at the role of the Research Institutes in Russian and Chinese civil aircraft engine development.
The Russian engine industry is organized similarly to the aircraft industry. It has a powerful research organization which has a much larger role than research organizations in the West.
A large part of fundamental design work and testing is done at the research institute and not at the design bureau level, Figure 1.
Figure 1. PD-14 engine altitude testing at the Central Institute of Aviation Motor Development (CIAM) in Moscow. Source: CIAM.
The Chinese organization of the engine industry is similar, the difference being that the research organizations are organized within the giant AVIC (Aviation Industry Corporation of China) grouping, rather than reporting to the state via a research organization path. Read more
Airbus, Boeing agree on NMA–for now
One concept of the middle of the market airplane.
Oct. 12, 2016, © Leeham Co.: It’s rare when Airbus and Boeing agree on product strategy, but officials of the two companies seemed in almost perfect alignment in separate interviews by LNC last week.
Barry Eccleston, president of Airbus Americas, and Mike Sinnett, VP of Product Strategy for Boeing, each said there is no consensus yet among customers for the Middle of the Market airplane (MOMA), also known as the New Mid-range Airplane (NMA) at Boeing.
Eccleston was interviewed on the sidelines of the annual Seattle conference organized by the British American Business Council Pacific Northwest. Sinnett was interviewed on the sidelines of the annual Governor’s Conference organized by the Aerospace Futures Alliance, a lobbying group in Washington State.
Bjorn’s Corner: The Chinese aircraft engine industry
By Bjorn Fehrm
October 07, 2016, ©. Leeham Co: In our Corners on East bloc aeronautical industries, we will now look at the Chinese civil aircraft engine industry.
The Chinese engine industry is closely modeled after the Chinese aircraft industry that we looked at last week. It is organized as divisions and later subsidiaries to the major aircraft companies. Contrary to the Chinese aircraft industry, it has had major problems in gaining the necessary know-how to start developing and producing its own designs.
The industry has built Soviet designs on license since the 1950s and only recently managed to present functional own designs, after many failures.
Looking 15 years ahead for Airbus, Boeing
Oct. 5, 2016, © Leeham Co.: The next 15 years won’t bring any relief to crowded airports and airplanes but nevertheless there are warning signs for the likes of Airbus, Boeing and the supply chain.
Michel Merluzeau
Looking ahead to 2030 will see aircraft production peaking early in the next decade but begin to fall off or the Big Two Original Equipment Manufacturers as new entrants begin to be felt, predicts Michel Merluzeau, an independent consultant.
Merluzeau presented his forecast yesterday to the British American Business Council Pacific Northwest chapter’s annual one-day conference in Seattle.
“I’m pretty comfortable about the next five years. I’m comfortable in the next five years. The five years after that,” Merluzeau said his confidence level declines because there are so many variables, ranging from issues within the industry to large ones outside it.
Bjorn’s Corner; The Chinese civil aircraft industry
By Bjorn Fehrm.
September 30, 2016, ©. Leeham Co: In our Corners on East bloc aeronautical industries, we will now look at the Chinese civil aircraft industry.
The Chinese aero industry has similarities with the Russian industry in its overall structure. From the start of the industry in the 1950s, it was structured after the Soviet model of research institutes, design bureaus and production companies.
The difference to the Soviet Union was that its own Chinese aircraft designs only started in the 1970s. Before that, the industry built Soviet designs on license and then modified versions of licensed designs.
The first own aircraft designs were presented in the 1980s with a focus on military designs for the first 20 years. Read more
Russian-Chinese wide-body: Program responsibilities
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
September 29, 2016, ©. Leeham Co: We will now finish our series about the Russian-Chinese wide-body with looking at who will have what role in the program.
Figure 1. Concept for new wide-body airliner. Source: United Aircraft.
As we described in the initial article, “Background and outlook,” Russia and China have vastly different competencies when it comes to making a state of the art wide-body aircraft.
Russia has made airliners since the 1930s, including wide-body jets. China did not design its own jet aircraft (military or civil) until the mid-1980s. Most of the aircraft produced still today in China have their origin in Russian designs.
At the same time, we saw in the article about the market demand for the aircraft that the Chinese market is 90% of the home market. This makes for China demanding important parts of the aircraft’s production, and China has the money to invest in production facilities.
All this will influence how different parts of the project will be shared between Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) and Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC).
Summary:
- Russia and China enter the wide-body project with widely different knowledge bases.
- Russia has long time knowledge on how to develop and produce aircraft and their engines.
- China on the other hand has the market for the aircraft.
- China also know a lot about serial production and have money to invest. Read more
Pontifications: Hypocrisy and illegal subsidies at the WTO
By Scott Hamilton
Sept. 26, 2016, © Leeham Co.: There are two airplanes under development that are in the 150-220 passenger space.
Both are under development by companies that get state aid and make no bones about it. The aid would likely be found in violation of World Trade Organization (WTO) rules.
But the most vociferous opponent to illegal subsidies hasn’t said a peep about it.
Neither has the opponent’s rival—although this company publicly recognizes the irony of it all.
I call it hypocrisy.
Russian-Chinese wide-body: Aircraft performance
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
September 19, 2016, ©. Leeham Co: In Part 4 of the article series, we put together an assumed complete Chinese-Russian wide-body aircraft with fuselage, wing, engines, etc. It is now time to understand what kind of performance that can be expected, given the data we have from the wide-body partners, Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) and the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC).
Figure 1. Concept for new widebody airliner. Source: United Aircraft.
We will combine these data with the ones we have deduced as plausible to fill the gaps, given the time frame and technology level that UAC and COMAC intend to use.
Out will come a first estimate of what kind of performance such an aircraft can have in terms of efficiency and payload versus range capability.
Summary:
- We can use all the data we have gathered to make a first estimate of the efficiency of the Russian-Chinese wide-body.
- We also have enough information to do a first payload-range diagram and to compare that with the diagram for Boeing’s 787-9.
