April 17, 2017, © Leeham Co.: Buckingham Research Group last week issued back-to-back notes about Boeing. One was a recap of an investors call with Steve Rimmer, CEO of Altavair Airfinance (nee Guggenheim Aviation partners). The other was BRG’s earnings preview, the first off the mark for Boeing’s earnings call on April 26.
I’ll include a summary of BRG’s earnings preview in a subsequent post when other analysts issue their previews.
BRG’s Rimmer note is lengthy and covers industry issues beyond Boeing. Here are a couple of the Boeing-focused points:
By Bjorn Fehrm
April 13, 2017, © Leeham Co.: Last week we finished the sizing of the fuselage for an NMA design. Now we continue with the wing. We go through the key parameters that will decide the performance of the wing and the aircraft.
The NMA is a critical design case. The performance envelope has to be just right. Too high and the economics of the aircraft won’t work, both for purchase price and operational costs.
By Bjorn Fehrm
April 6, 2017, © Leeham Co.: After sizing the cabin of the NMA, the time has now come to size the fuselage. Can a fuselage be designed that gives an NMA “dual aisle comfort with single aisle economics”?
We will investigate the dimensions, the drag and the weight of an NMA fuselage. It will be based on the cabin and design techniques we described in Part 2. We then compare the efficiency of the result with the fuselages of the Airbus A321LR and Boeing 767. This will show if the necessary efficiency can be achieved.
By Bjorn Fehrm
April 3, 2017, © Leeham Co.: In the first part of our investigation on how good an NMA can be, we explored low weight and drag fuselage design. We will now continue with the design consequences for the fuselage construction and the cabin.
What drives whether one goes for an Aluminum or CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer) fuselage?
What will be the typical dimensions for an NMA fuselage and what will be passenger capacities?
March 31, 2017 (c) Leeham Co.: With the likelihood appearing greater and great Boeing will launch a new, middle of the market sector airplane, what’s the name
going to be?
Steven Udvar-Hazy, chairman of Air Lease Corp, already calls it the 797. We agree, though until this is a done deal, we’re calling it the 7M7 while in development.
If Airbus responds with a stretched A321neo–anything but a certain prospect–the working title among the press has long been A322. Airbus officials have occasionally called it the A321 Plus-Plus, a name that will hardly roll off the tongue.
If Airbus were to respond with a new twin-aisle, either smaller than the A330-200/800 (which aren’t selling these days) or about the same size, what would this be called? Skipping to A400 doesn’t work: the name is taken by the A400M, which in any event is a snake-bitten name.
Then, what will the replacements for the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 be called.
For Boeing, the “797” runs out the string of 7 Series choices. For Airbus, folklore says it rejected the name “A360” because of the jokes that would be made about the airplane flying in circles if an issue required a return from its takeoff point. According to the same folklore, “A370” was rejected because the “7” harks to Boeing’s 7 Series.
So: just for fun, let’s have some naming contests.
March 13, 2017, © Leeham Co.: The soft launch of the Boeing 737-10 and the prospective Boeing “797” Middle of the Market aircraft easily were the headline news items to come out of the annual ISTAT conference in San Diego last week.
The “797,” as the MOM-sector aircraft was unofficially dubbed, brought enthusiastic reaction.
The MAX 10, not so much.
March 7, 2017, © Leeham Co.: Representatives of the four major commercial engine
manufacturers have divergent views of the next round of engine development, either for the Middle of the Market/New Mid-range Airplane (NMA) or New Small Airplanes (NSA) coming in the next decade.
Officials of CFM, GE, Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce appeared at the annual ISTAT conference in San Diego yesterday.
PW’s Rick Deurloo, SVP of Sales, Marketing Commercial Engines, had the added task of dealing with the highly-publicized teething issues surrounding its new Geared Turbo Fan engine on the Airbus A320neo.
By Bjorn Fehrm
January 17, 2017, ©. Leeham Co: Airbus and Boeing had completely different views about the product strategy for the “Middle of the Market” sector (MOM), both for today and the future.
The Airbus view is: “We got it all covered”.
Boeing’s view is: “Not so fast, there is more to it than meets the eye.” Read more
Jan. 3, 2017, © Leeham Co.: The New Year is here and it doesn’t look like a good one for commercial aerospace, if measured against previous outstanding years.
There are some troubling signs ahead, piling on to a slowdown in orders from last year that didn’t even reach a 1:1 book:bill.
This year looks to be worse than last. Airbus and Boeing will give their 2017 guidance on the earnings calls this month and next. Bombardier and Embraer earnings calls are a ways off, when each will provide its guidance.
But LNC believes the Big Two in particular will be hard pressed to hit a 1:1 book:bill this year and may even struggle to match 2016 sales.
Boeing’s year-end order tally comes Thursday. Airbus’ comes on Jan. 11.
Nov. 28, 2016, © Leeham Co.: Boeing last week named an outsider, Kevin McAllister, as the chief executive officer of Boeing Commercial Aircraft (BCA).
I think this has the potential to be an invigorating move.
McAllister comes to BCA from his position as CEO of GE Aviation Services.
I don’t know McAllister and have no opinion whether he will be good, bad or mediocre. But I do like the idea of bringing an outsider in to run BCA. (My insider favorites were Stan Deal and Beverly Wyse.)