Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- RTX Q1 2025 Earnings: GTF Talk Takes A Back Seat To Tariffs April 22, 2025
- Tariffs Tumult Takes Over GE Aerospace Q1 2025 Earnings Call April 22, 2025
- Boeing reports mixed results of latest employee survey, but middle management and officers remain key obstacles April 22, 2025
- Hopes for 1Q financial progress turns into bumpy ride for Boeing April 21, 2025
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 18. April 18, 2025
Airbus’ and Boeing’s Payload/Range for VLAs
- Bloomberg reported this week that Airbus is now offering the A350-900LR to Singapore Airlines to reopen ultra-long haul US direct routes. We predicted July 14 that Airbus would offer the LR. We offered some high-level analysis about how Airbus could achieve a long range version of the A350-900; the Bloomberg piece confirms our analysis.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Aug. 19 2015, ©. Leeham Co: We will now finish our series over Boeing’s changes to its configuration rule sets by looking at how this affects the Very Large Aircraft (VLA) segment.
Airbus and Boeing used to describe the VLAs in their line-ups using three class cabins, albeit with different standards. Now Boeing has changed its standard to a modern three class seating while Airbus has changed to a four class cabin, including premium economy.
We have enough information of the A380 equipped with a three class cabin to be able to make a comparison using three class rule sets. We will therefore apply a three class cabin to the A380 and 747-8 that will have modern seating standards and pair that with Boeing’s tougher payload weights and enroute reserves.
Summary:
- Boeing’s new Standard rules three class cabin and our normalized three class cabin for A380 and 747-8i are close in their configurations.
- We use our knowledge of these standards to create a level playing field on the cabin side.
- We also apply the new tougher passenger and bags rules + the tougher reserves policy that Boeing’s new Standard rule set prescribes.
- It used to be that A380 had a range advantage at max passenger payload. We check if this remains under the new rules.
Airbus’ and Boeing’s Payload/Range for Dual Aisle.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Aug. 17 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In our series over Boeing’s changes to its configuration rule sets, we will now continue with the dual aisle aircraft. Here the differences between Airbus and Boeing are larger. Boeing used to be specifying a three class cabin and Airbus two class. Now Boeing has changed to two class and Airbus is just changing to three class.
There is a bit of difference in the Airbus change to three class and the three class that Boeing had until now. Airbus changes from modern two class to a modern three class with Business, Premium Economy and Economy. Boeing’s change was from an outdated three class with old style First, Business and Economy to a modern two class with lie flat business section.
The new Boeing two class and historical Airbus two class are close in configuration. These end up within a seat or two of each other and also within our normalized two class cabins. As these cabin rules are similar, we use our normalized cabin data to compare the payload range of the aircraft when all apply the new, tougher passenger+bags weight rules and an equalized reserves policy.
Summary:
- Airbus’ two class rules and Boeing’s new two class Standard rules are close in their configurations.
- They are also close to our Normalized rule set. We use our normalized rule set to level the playing field on the cabin side.
- We can then apply the new tougher passenger and bags rules that Boeing’s Standard rule set prescribes for the twin aisle aircraft and see how they compare.
- We also use the same reserves policy for the comparison. Read more
Airbus’ and Boeing’s Payload/Range for Single Aisle
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Aug. 13 2015, ©. Leeham Co: Boeing this month changed the way it presents its aircraft in important areas like seating, weight and performance configurations, in short its “rule set.” After using a standardized but old rule set for 20 years, it updated all data around how far its aircraft can transport a standardized payload.
Airbus at the same time is also changing how it presents its aircraft. Right now the dual aisle wide bodies are going from a two class to a three class cabin in its rule set. While Boeing is leaving three class for two class, Airbus is going in the other direction.
Why these movements and are there any common themes in these conflicting changes?
We go behind the scenes to decipher the changes and decode what it all means when one want to compare Boeing and Airbus products. We start with the single aisle aircraft this week.
Summary:
- Airbus and Boeing had rather small differences in their rules and how they characterized single aisle aircraft up until this month.
- From now on Boeing is using higher average passenger+bags loads and have added additional equipment to the aircraft’s empty weight specification.
- We show what these changes mean for the aircraft’s performance. We also use our model to show Airbus single aisle aircraft’s range should they use the same rules as Boeing’s aircraft.
C Series: challenges ahead
Subscription Required
Introduction
Bombardier CS300 (L) and CS100 (R). Click on image to enlarge. Photo via Google images.
Aug. 10, 2015, (c) Leeham Co. Bombardier came away from the Paris Air Show with positive reviews after finally displaying its new C Series. The CS100 was present in launch operator Swiss International colors and the spacious interior installed. The larger CS300, in house colors, was also on display and performed flying maneuvers, impressing the crowd with the quiet of the Pratt & Whitney P1000G Geared Turbo Fan engines, also a new product. Once airborne and circling around the runway, the engines could not be heard over the loud speakers of the show’s announcer.
BBD officials came away encouraged by response to the airplanes and they said potential customers were stopping by the chalet with new and renewed interest in the program.
But there remain formidable challenges ahead for the program. There were no sales announced at the Air Show, although BBD officials were clear in advance none was expected. None has been announced in the six weeks since the Air Show. Whether there will be any of substance by year end, and to whom, remains to be seen.
Focus is on execution: getting the aircraft certified by year end and preparing for delivery to Swiss in the first half of next year.
But the customer base remains of iffy quality and a number of the deliveries scheduled 2016-2018 fall into Leeham Co.’s Yellow and Risk Risk Assessment.
Summary
- Of nearly 200 deliveries scheduled 2106-1018, more than half fall within our Yellow-Red risk assessment.
- Country and region risk are concerns.
- A major customer has a changing business plan that puts deliveries into a Risk Assessment.
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.
Follow the suppliers
Subscription required.
Introduction
July 28, 2015: © Leeham Co. Trying to decipher what the airframe Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are going to do is a sporty game that is often analogous to Kremlin watching, especially when it comes to Airbus and Boeing.
The OEMs are naturally circumspect about most everything they do: product development, aircraft pricing, sales campaigns, etc.
They also often are like lawyers when it comes to promoting their products in the public domain: cherry-pick the data that supports your product and which puts your competitor’s product in the worst possible light.
Aerospace analysts, consultants and media (as well as the enthusiast) look anywhere and everywhere for information to discern what the OEMs are up to or how the airplanes are performing or whatever the soup de jour is.
There is more information in the public domain than you would think.
Boeing 777X heading towards design freeze a bit heavier than planned.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
July 12, 2015, © Leeham Co. As we reported from Boeing’s Paris Air Show briefing, Boeing’s 777X project is progressing to a design freeze later in 2015. At the briefing everything was presented as being on track with no changes of key data. There have been signs that this in not fully the case. The 777X program is suffering the same disease that hits other aircraft programs, weight gain flu.
To understand it better, we compiled the many indications that points to weight increase and ran them through our proprietary model to understand why and see what it means for the aircraft’s performance.
Summary:
- Weight increase is an evil that all aircraft programs battle with. Our analysis shows that 777X is no different.
- Engine thrust is one of the areas which will be increased to mitigate increased weight. We give the latest status of GE9X thrust development, now beyond 105,000 lb.
- A number of airframe changes have been made. We analyze their consequences and make predictions for future maximum weight increases.