Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Odds and Ends: Tanker-like redux; Ryanair’s 200 737s; new use for Winglet
Tanker-like Redux: As you read this story, it sounds a lot like Boeing vs EADS, right down to the build-it-in-the-USA element.
Ryanair’s 200 737s: News emerged that Ryanair will firm up an order soon for 200 Boeing 737s. This has been hanging “out there” for some time. We learned of this likelihood a couple of months ago. It was all hush-hush while Ryanair took another run at Aer Lingus.
Pan Am landmark: For those filled with nostalgia, this news is sad: the famed Pan Am Worldport faces the wrecking ball.
New Winglet use: This is pretty cool. Via Steve Trimble of Flight Global.
Odds and Ends: 777X ATO next month, says AvWeek; 787 and the FAA; A318
777X ATO: Aviation Week reports that Boeing’s Board will grant Authority to Offer the 777X at the next meeting, in April.
Emirates Airlines has previously said it will order 100 or more of the X to begin replacing its 777-300ERs. Lufthansa and Air Lease Corp are likely co-launch customers.
Update: The Wall Street Journal now has an article identifying British Airways and Japan Air Lines as possible launch customers.
787 and the FAA: The FAA is expected to green light this week going forward with Boeing’s proposed fixes for the battery issues in the 787, but this doesn’t mean the challenges are over for Boeing. Extensive lab and flight testing will be required, meaning it still will be some time before the grounding is lifted.
A318 Done: Bloomberg has a story about the Airbus A318 and its dried-up sales. It was never a good seller.
NTSB releases preliminary report on JAL 787 incident
The factual findings are here. 48 PDF pages. The NTSB preamble to the Interim Report:
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) notes that the information discussed in this interim factual report is based on initial findings from the investigation of this incident. Because the investigation is continuing , no conclusions or recommendations are being made at this time. Readers are encouraged to access the public docket for this incident (DCA13IA037) for further details about the information presented in this report.
In addition, readers are advised that the information presented in this report could change if new evidence becomes available.
The Seattle Times reports the NTSB plans public hearings on lithium-ion battery safety.
Reuters reports that the NTSB has not found the root cause of the Japan Air Lines incident.
EADS CEO Tom Enders weighs in.
Fallout continues from 787 grounding
LOT wants $$, Norwegian Leases A340s: The fall-out gets worse over the 787 grounding. LOT Airlines says it wants compensation by the end of June. TUI is rebooking passengers on Boeing 767s and will refund a price differential for those paying a premium to fly the 787. Norwegian Air is wet-leasing Airbus A340s to fill in for the 787s it was supposed to get.
Aeroturbopower has an interesting analysis of the Norwegian lease cost of the A343 v 788, including some admittedly speculative costs to Boeing.
In other news:
- Richard Aboulafia, noted aviation consultant for The Teal Group and an occasional consultant to Boeing (last job five years ago), predicts it could be 4-9 months before the 787 is back in revenue service. This is from the start of the grounding, not additional time. The prediction is in this article by Reuters.
- Aspire Aviation analyses the Australian aviation market.
787 “super box” mimics Cessna
We’ve been reading a lot of comments from our own readers and some from more qualified analysts or experts who are constantly criticizing the Boeing proposal to have a containment box for the lithium ion battery on the 787. The gist of the criticism is that this “super box” is a bad idea that doesn’t solve the problem.
While we’ve joked that the box is a fire place, we feel compelled to point out that the Boeing solution is similar to that adopted by Cessna. Readers forget The Seattle Times published this article January 29 describing the Cessna solution, which is pictured here.
This approach, according to The Times article, is well advanced through FAA review.
The aviation industry doesn’t work in a vacuum and clearly Boeing is aware of this approach.
For those enthusiasts and more qualified critics of the super box, keep the Cessna approach in mind.
NTSB 787 preliminary report due this week
The preliminary report from the National Transportation Safety Board is due this week, probably Thursday, on its investigation of the Boeing 787 JAL battery fire.
A lot of information has already been made public by the NTSB in two press conferences. We suspect the root cause of the fire may not be revealed. Recall that the NTSB said evidence had been destroyed in the fire.
We asked Greg Feith, a former lead investigator for the NTSB, what he expects. His response:
“The NTSB will probably issue some Safety recommendations that will put a higher level of scrutiny on the FAA and the certification process, thus the FAA won’t take any chances in prematurely returning the aircraft to service. I think you will see that the FAA will extend their review of Boeing’s proposed fixes and ‘study’ their proposal rather than act on it – and I am willing to bet that it will be June before the 787 is airborne [in revenue service] again.”
Feith’s forecast of the re-entry into service is more optimistic than our readers, a plurality of whom see from August as the earliest EIS. Nearly 47% of the readers say they would wait a year or two before flying the 787 after the fix, but about the same number say they will fly the airplane right away, confident in the fix. (Results are as of 6:30am PST March 5 and may change after this writing as more readers vote.) The poll isn’t scientific but it is a snapshot of the challenges facing Boeing and the operators in restoring confidence in the 787 after re-EIS.
The NTSB preliminary report’s anticipated findings and potential recommendations don’t carry the force of law. The recommendations are just that, and the FAA may accept, reject or accept with modification any, some, all or none of the recommendations.
But given the likelihood that the NTSB findings will also comment on the certification process of the FAA-Boeing procedures (remember that the NTSB said it was looking at this), and that the FAA itself said it would examine its own role and the certification of the battery; and the entire production and design of the 787, we don’t see the FAA leaping in haste to approve the Boeing proposal for the battery fix. We see the FAA moving forward with deliberate speed (a nebulous term to be sure).
- Meggitt, which makes the battery charger through a subsidiary, says regulators cleared its system of any cause to the battery incidents.