Update: 8:00am PDT June 27: The Seattle Times has a detailed story, including indications why Albaugh chose to retire.
Original Post:
In shocking news, Boeing announced that Jim Albaugh is stepping down as CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes and retiring Oct. 1.
Albaugh is just 62. He had been a candidate for CEO of The Boeing Co. when Harry Stonecipher was fired, a job that went to Jim McNerney. McNerney later tapped Albaugh, who was CEO of what was then known as Boeing Integrated Defense Services, to head Boeing Commercial Airplanes when BCA CEO Scott Carson was largely forced out following yet another delay in the 787 program.
Conner was widely assumed to be one of two candidates–Pat Shanahan was the other–to succeed Albaugh, who was assumed to be the CEO of BCA until retirement at age 65–three years from now.
787 fuel burn: Aviation Week has this story about the early fuel burn results for the Boeing 787 beating expectations (which admittedly were tamped down because of the program difficulties). Some of this has been reported before. What caught our eye was the detail about the GEnx engine. Why? Because the CFM LEAP-1B derives much of its technology from the GEnx, including the higher temperatures fleetingly referenced in the AvWeek piece.
CFM is relying on high temperatures to achieve the fuel burn required by Boeing’s 737 MAX. This is hotly debated (pun intended) between CFM and Pratt & Whitney in the competition between the LEAP and the PW GTF.
CFM advocates that its hotter-running engine, equipped with advanced technology ceramics and other advanced materials, gives it the advantage over PW’s Geared Turbo Fan technology. PW argues that the hotter CFM engine will require more maintenance. Engineers that we ask generally agree that the hotter temperature approach will be a challenge for long-term maintenance but fall back on CFM’s sterling reputation of reliability as a measure of comfort. At the same time, these same engineers–who have no connection to either CFM or PW–like the GTF technology but want to see it proved in service.
Steven Udvar-Hazy said it best. It will be five to seven years after the engines are in service before the industry knows the reliability and performance of either engine’s advanced technology.
MAX EIS dates: Aviation Week has this story that lists the planned MAX EIS dates: 737-8, 2017 (we previously reported 4Q2017); 737-9 in 2018 and 737-7 in 2019. AvWeek also reported the bypass ratio for the LEAP-1B is 8.5:1.
Eulogy for the 747-400: Bloomberg has this interesting piece about the current status of the Boeing 747-400.
McNerney on US business climate: Boeing CEO Jim McNerney has these comments on the US business climate.
Airbus Tianjin plant only breaks even: so says this report in Aviation Week.
US Air’s 1549 A320 now in museum: It’s a tribute to the flight crew and to aviation safety.
UBS Securities issued this note today:
Boeing is accounting for its 737 NG (Next Generation) program over a large number of aircraft with roughly 2,200 remaining in its block as of Q1, reflecting production into 2016 at planned rates. Across its block, we estimate Boeing is booking margins on 737 NG around 20% on a pre-R&D basis. With the launch of its re-engined model, the 737 MAX, Boeing will need to either account for MAX as part of its existing 737 accounting block or create a separate block. We think Boeing is most likely to add 737 MAX to its existing 737 NG block given fairly limited design changes on the MAX relative to the NG that wouldn’t appear tojustify a separate accounting block.
We expect initial MAX production to come through at lower margins than Boeing is currently booking on NG, diluting BCA (Commercial Airplanes) margins. The inclusion of lower margin initial MAX production in the 737 block will also negatively impact EPS relative to expectations as Boeing will need to book a lower average (program) margin on its current 737 deliveries. We expect MAX costs to improve at a fairly rapid pace with our assumed breakeven program quantity at 200 implying that unit margins approach 737 NG type levels near the end of our assumed 1,000 unit accounting quantity (two years of production).
Here’s the next round in the continuing debate.
Bernstein Research published this chart detailing how Airbus and Boeing differ on the performance improvements they predict.
There is, of course, no way to know who is correct until the airplanes enter service.
We hear the A320 sharklets are performing better than advertised (Aviation Week actually reported this a while back as well). If the figure we’re hearing proves correct, the neo and MAX should have parity.
Boeing is delaying activating the 787 surge line in Everett (WA), while rework on the first 65 787s continues. Steve Trimble of Flight Global has this report. Meanwhile, Bernstein Research, in a note issued today, says the surge line will be where the 787-9 is produced and that the launch of the 787-10 is a near-certainty:
Boeing management described development work on the 787-9 as being ahead of plan at this stage. The 787-9 will go into production in 2013 on the surge line, where change incorporation is being done today on earlier airplanes. First delivery for the 787-9 is planned for early 2014. At this stage, Boeing also sounds optimistic about the 787-10. We have seen the 787-10 as a natural derivative, given the size of the wing.
But, success involves getting weight down sufficiently on the 787-9. Boeing appears optimistic on this
point, but we will wait to see progress. We are conservatively assuming first 787-9 delivery in late 2014. Although Boeing does not intend to announce a 787-10 launch until it is farther along on the 787-8, it appears that a launch is all but certain at this stage.
Bernstein also expects Boeing to deliver 595 aircraft this year vs 581 for Airbus, returning Boeing to the top spot as the world’s #1 airplane maker. With the 787 and 747-8 now being delivered, Bernstein forecasts Boeing will remain #1 through 2016, the outside of Bernstein’s current forecast.