Miscellaneous Items

February 1, 2013 on 9:24 am | In Airline News | No Comments

AA 777 Livery

Terry Maxon at the Airline Biz Blog of the Dallas Morning News has photos of the new 777-300ER in the new livery colors introduced by American a couple of weeks ago.  It isn’t quite as jarring as that of the 737-800 we’ve already seen.  That said, I still think it’s a very ugly tail and in conflict with the logo now in use.  I still like the silver and I still think the stylized eagle implies a star more than an eagle.

Alaska Airlines

Alaska Airlines had a captain faint while in the cockpit on a flight over Oregon.  The first officer declared an emergency and landed the aircraft on a priority basis in Portland.  Another captain ferried to Portland and flew the flight the rest of the way.  The captain who fainted was an industry veteran with a current medical certificate.  He gained consciousness in the cockpit and removed himself from the cockpit to the back of the plane where he was tended to by an onboard doctor.  The only real problem here is if Michael O’Leary of Ryanair gets wind of a 737-800 being landed by a single pilot.

All Nippon Airlines

All Nippon Airlines (ANA) says that its losses due to the 787 grounding are now up to just over $15million.  Once the final effect of the grounding is known, ANA (and other airlines) will likely enter into discussions with Boeing over compensation for their losses.  No doubt Boeing will see this an opportunity to book more orders for aircraft.

 

 

 

More comments on the 787 problems.

January 18, 2013 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development, Airline Fleets, Airline News | No Comments

With the temporary grounding of the 787 and the program review kicking off on the design and certification of this airliner, there is more and more fear of it.  I agree that the battery failure looks horrific.  Some (Christine Negroni is sounding particularly shrill to me.) are derailing into what, to me, seems like hysteria, over the battery failure in Boston.

The battery issue in Japan was not a fire.  It was found to be “swollen” and that it had leaked electrolyte.  An important issue but not a fire.

Facts are important in this situation and there is one hell of a lot of speculation going on.  So let me join in:

I find it very curious that these problems have cropped up suddenly and, so far, on one airline’s aircraft.  I keep wondering if there is something being done incorrectly in the operation of the airliner to cause this problem.  I would have expected more failures to occur at this point than what has occurred it was a fundamental flaw in the design.

It’s possible the quality assurance for the battery manufacturing is not very good.  It’s possible that the battery design itself is flawed.  It’s possible that the pilots are operating the aircraft in a manner that is overheating these batteries because of an unanticipated design issue. It could be a battery protection circuit issue or a design flaw in that circuit.

We’ll get the answers.  The problem will be solved in one way or another.

I even think the comparisons to the DC-10 and AA Flight 191 are a bit amusing in one respect:  Flight 191 happened because someone was performing an unapproved procedure to maintain an engine.  In other words, the aircraft was being handled incorrectly during maintenance.

But to run around shrieking “Danger! Danger!” is really kind of foolish.  Wait for facts, then make judgements.

Hawaiian Airlines and the A321NEO

January 14, 2013 on 1:00 am | In Airline Service | No Comments

Hawaiian Airlines has made an order for the A321NEO which, I think, causes trouble for Boeing.  It’s a validation of the A321 as a 757 replacement that, I think, Boeing didn’t need showing up given its desire to sell the 737MAX-9.  It is increasingly clear that the new A321 isn’t going to be the dog that the current A321 has been.  Good on Airbus.

Hawaiian is clearly going to make trouble for a couple of airlines with this purchase.  The first is Alaska Airlines.  When Hawaiian takes delivery, it can start to compete with Alaska on the smaller routes such as Bellingham to Hawaii.  Hawaiian succeeds quite well in this area when it goes up against other airlines with its Airbus A330 and Boeing 767 aircraft.  It knows how to attract the right passengers at the right fares.

The other airline that, I think, will be a surprise to some is Southwest.  It’s clear that Southwest has been eyeing the Hawaiian markets for some time and it has even talked about its need to gain ETOPS experience in order to do this.  I think Hawaiian is responding to this threat by bringing its games to the kinds of markets Southwest might be tempted to enter.

And that brings me to a criticism I have for Southwest:  This airline isn’t responding in a very agile way to opening up new markets and opportunities.  By the time it studies and prepares for new flying outside its comfort zone, the opportunity is often gone.  Witness its vaunted codeshare deal with WestJet and Volaris as more evidence.  Southwest could have been flying those Hawaiian routes as soon as this year but the conventional wisdom is that Southwest won’t have itself ready for this challenge until 2015 or about 2 or more years from now.

2 years is an eternity in the airline business.

The Dreamliner

January 12, 2013 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets, Airline News | 3 Comments

There have been a series of events with respect to the Boeing 787 over the past several days culminating in the FAA announcing that it would do a priority review of the 787’s design and manufacture.  This has people asking if the 787 is dangerous and I wanted to address what I think is already incorrect information being disseminated out there.

First and foremost:  I would fly the 787 tomorrow.  With regards to safety, I believe this airliner is as safe as any other relatively new airliner.

Fuel leaks have been found as a result of incorrect manufacturing installations.  That isn’t a design problem, it’s a manufacturing problem.  And manufacturing problems arise in new airliners.

Engine problems in the GEnX engines used for the 787 have been found in a few of the airliners.  These appear to be truthfully isolated in nature and appear to be getting addressed by GE.  That said, I’ll also concede that there hasn’t been as much visibility on this engine as one would ordinarily like to see if you watch this industry.  In fact, these engine problems have typically been described as a problem on the Boeing 787.  They’re not.  They are a problem for the GE GEnX engine.

The battery fire in Boston is alarming and needs quick and sure investigation.  So little is known here that it, alone, shouldn’t prompt a design review.  It should, however, prompt a quick and sure investigation and it has.

I’ve seen reports of windshield cracking from Japan being cited as a problem cropping up with this newly designed aircraft.  That would be incorrect.  Windshield cracking happens frequently and particularly so in the wintertime.  Temperatures get unbelievably cold on the outside of the aircraft while temps in the cockpits are a comfortable 70 degrees.  There can be as much as a 120 degree temperature differential between the outside of an aircraft and the inside.  Windows, even the best ones, periodically crack because of these temperature stresses.  That’s why cockpit windows are heated:  It prevents cracking.

There have been the odd mechanical issues showing up on the 787.  This is extremely normal and nothing approaching the boundary of “normal” for a newly introduced airliner.  It takes operational time to weed these things out, put fixes in and raise the reliability to the measure its expected to meet.

The best contrast I could offer today is this:  I believe the 787 is a safer airliner than the old MD-80s being flown by many airlines today.  It has the best of the best in technologies and an aircraft company behind it with a safety record that is second to none.   If I just took the number of engine shutdowns, rejected takeoffs, engine mechanical issues causing returns to airports for American Airlines MD-80 fleet, I could create a media scare that would dwarf the 787 perceived issues.

The Airbus A380 went through some very similar times in its first few years as well.  We in the United States didn’t notice them much at all because the A380 wasn’t being flown in the US (and still isn’t) and the safety issues weren’t cropping up in our newspapers and on our TV news shows.

So take these reports with a large grain of salt.

Emirates wants more

November 9, 2012 on 9:39 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

Emirates wants more from Boeing and they want it in the form of a very long range, large capacity 777-X.  Boeing has been holding meetings with customers regularly to survey needs and find a solid definition for the next iteration of the 777 and reportedly all are very excited about what Boeing has except the Middle Eastern customers such as Emirates.

Emirates wants both the capacity and a bit more range.  Likely it’s interested in seeing enough range to fly from Dubai to Los Angeles with a full load.  Notably, this is what it really wanted to see out of the 747-8i as well.

No airliner ever failed from having too much range, that much is true.  Range can translate into 2 things for a customer:  the ability to serve long, thin routes and the ability to service slightly shorter routes with a full load.

Current ultra-long haul, high capacity airliners available are:

  • A380 with 500 passengers (plus or minus about 30) for 8300nm of range.
  • 747-8i with 400 passengers (plus or minus about 40) for 8000nm of range.
  • 777-300ER with 350 passengers (plus or minus about 40) for 7900nm of range.
  • A350-1000 with about 300 passengers (plus or minus about 30) for 8300nm of range

The Dubai-Los Angeles route is just a hair over 8300nm in distance and therefore really needs an aircraft with about 8800nm of range.  Boeing could give this to Emirates with the addition of a fuel tank or two, I suspect.

But both Boeing and now Airbus seem to be resisting going much past 8000nm because only a tiny handful of airlines need this range.  The rest are doing missions with these aircraft that are significantly less than 8000nm in distance.

There is also the issue of range costing more fuel than it might be worth at some point.  Each gallon of extra fuel costs more gallons of fuel to carry it.  There is a point of diminishing returns.

I think we’ll see the next generation of long haul, high capacity aircraft get performance improvements that may boost the range just long enough for the 8300nm mission but they won’t be here today or tomorrow.

Ultimately, I strongly believe that the ultra long routes will be better served by aircraft more in the style of the 787, 777-200LR and the A350-800/900.  I kind of expect Airbus to come up with a LR version of those A350 models for their treasured Eastern customers.

Will Boeing do it?  If Alan Mullaly were at the helm, I would say yes.  No airliner ever got harmed by additional range capability and just because it is there doesn’t mean the airlines have to use it all of the time.   Today, I think probably not.  Boeing’s board is increasingly cautious about spending money to build class winning aircraft.  They are mostly focused on derivatives and James McNerny, CEO of Boeing, seems content to have 90% solutions for Boeing customers.

Should they do it?  Yes, I would.  I would work very hard to get enough weight off the aircraft to allow a near 9000nm range in the large and smaller capacity versions of the 777-X.  Why?  Because airlines like Emirates will potentially buy a few hundred of them and no other airliner is going to complain about having more potential if it needs it.  In short, they’ll attract more customers and sales.  It isn’t Boeing’s job to figure out how an airline wants to operate.  It’s Boeing’s job to build and sell aircraft that customers want.

United Studies A350-1000 to replace jumbo jets

November 1, 2012 on 1:48 pm | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

United Airlines is in discussions with Airbus about the A350-1000 as a replacement for aging 747 and 777 aircraft in the United fleet.  A significant portion of the United 777 fleet is comprised of very early build 777 aircraft (-200 series) and their 747s are particularly old as well.

United already has 787 aircraft on order (both on the Continental and United airlines sides of the house) as well as the A350-900.  While Continental executives are largely in charge of the airline today, I would suggest that Boeing pay attention.

It would be tempting to say that this is United rattling Boeing’s cage to get going on the 777-X.  I would agree that it has the secondary purpose of that but I also think United wants to know what it can get its hands on fairly quickly to replace a fleet of fuel inefficient aircraft that will begin to cripple profitability in a few years.

We’re not talking about replacing already old aircraft today, we are talking about replacing them in the 2018 to 2022 time period.  By then, these aircraft will be extremely fuel inefficient compared to other US fleets and time is of the essence.

When your capital costs for such an airliner are greater than $200 million for a single aircraft in that class, you want to buy the very most efficient aircraft you can get.  You want the best technologies because 20 years later, that is what you’ll be stuck with.

Whether Boeing thinks the current 777 lineup is still competitive on a spreadsheet, it is ignoring that it isn’t competitive in perception.  I’ll put it simply:

A350-1000:  New, efficient, modern, new

777-300ER:  Older, somewhat efficient, somewhat modern, not new.

Boeing needs the 777-X and it needs it today and airlines are signaling to Boeing that if Boeing doesn’t build it, they’ll buy it from someone else.

Curiously, Boeing already got this message handed to them over the A320NEO.  You would think that they had learned their lesson (again) and would be paying attention to airlines over the jumbo issue.  US Airlines can’t afford to be just loyal to Boeing anymore.  They must buy the best of the best and Airbus is the equal of Boeing in all categories.

If Boeing wants to sell some aircraft, it’s time to get authorization to offer and build a new range of 777 aircraft for its customers.  Customers who’ve plainly said “If you build it, we’ll buy it.  If you don’t, we’ll buy it from someone else.”

United and its 787 / Boeing

October 1, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

United Airlines CEO Jeff Smisek has recently made some comments about the airline and its fleet with particular attention to the 787.

Smisek notes that the range, efficiency and passenger capacity opens up new point to point routes for the airline such as Denver to Japan.  These are the kinds of routes we can expect from US airlines who take on the aircraft and the 787-9 will be used to upgrade service on those routes originally developed with the 787-8.

Smisek also reiterates that United doesn’t see the A380 as an airplane for them (and I agree) and does acknowledge that the 747-8i is being looked at (but likely not very seriously) and notes that it has a lot of airliners on order.  I strongly suspect that United would rather purchase the 777-X rather than buy either the 747-8i or A380.  In addition, I think he sees a lot of aging 777 aircraft that would be better replaced with a 787-10 or 777-X as well.

But Boeing has slipped its authorization to offer plan for the 777-X to late 2013 or early 2014.  Most think that Boeing doesn’t need to offer the 777-X now and that waiting to see the final definition of the A350-1000 will help them.

I think that you can’t lead in an industry from behind.  Waiting too long for to see what your customer does leaves you playing catch up and if that customer delivers on its promise, it doesn’t matter what you can do to better the situation, people will buy what’s available.

If you think I’m wrong . . . just look at what Airbus pulled off with its A320NEO against Boeing who is still lagging behind and who has a “me too” offering at best.

ANA says “We’ll take more, please.”

September 26, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

ANA airlines of Japan has upped its order for the 787 by 11 more aircraft.  The airline has exercised options for 11 more 787-9 aircraft based on its operational experience with the airliner to date.

Great news for Boeing as it is, I believe the first “top up” from an airline operating the 787 and given that it is ANA, it’s a great blessing for the aircraft.

I expect that we’ll see more airlines asking for more aircraft over the next 12 months with a strong focus on the 787-9 and a strong demand for an announced 787-10 (with appropriate range.)

Aboulafia gets it.

August 27, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development, Airline Fleets | No Comments

Airline industry analyst, Richard Aboulafia, gets it.  He’s written his monthly letter and addresses almost exclusively the mis-steps that Boeing has been engaged in.  You can read it HERE.

Even if they seem like me too’s, I want to dig in here.  The 787 and its launch was a signal event for Boeing in that they managed to not really do anything innovative for nearly 2 decades prior to that.  The 777 did embody some innovation, yes, but it also had a lot of roots in evolution too.  The 787 signaled that Boeing was to raise the stakes considerably.

The effect was to make the market start responding to Boeing rather than see Boeing react to its competitors.  That was a very good thing.  Even despite the 787 problems, Boeing managed to command the attention of both customers and its competitors.   Admittedly, that has been diluted somewhat by Boeing’s “McDonnell Douglas” approach to the 747-8i.

In the narrow body race, Boeing barely got on the train.  It got on but barely and even today there are things we just don’t know about the 737MAX that we already do know about the A320NEO.  It’s taking a bit too long to reveal the 737MAX, in my opinion.

The market response to the 777-X concepts was an unqualified “We want it!”.  You could not have had a more positive response to the ideas being floated and those responses were notable both for Aboulafia’s reasons as well as one other:  They came from just the right mix of airlines.  The kind of airlines that are near ideal as a mix of customers.  You should never, ever ignore that.

More importantly, not only is the defection important psychologically and within the market.  Here’s another problem:  When these customers defect, you may not get a chance to address your mistakes with them for 20 or more years.  That makes a defection very, very bad in terms of impact to a business like Boeing.

Finally, a capital intensive business such as Boeing doesn’t win by tossing rewards to its shareholders.  It wins by being brave *and* right, over and over again.  To be right in a business that requires engineering innovation to provide the gains that airlines want in performance, YOU MUST BE BRAVE ENOUGH TO TRY.

Boeing just signaled that its losing its courage.  Not good.  Not good at all.  Aim for excellence, execute to get to that goal and you will win and thrive.  Wait to see what the other guy is doing in order to provide something just 1% better leaves you exposed to being a has been.

United orders Boeing: The best unkept secret from the air show

July 13, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

United Airlines and Boeing have announced the United purchase of the Boeing 737 finally.  This hasn’t been much of a secret for almost 2 months but it does contain a small surprise.

United is buying 50 737-900ER aircraft immediately to start replacing older 757-200s which really wasn’t on the radar screen based on the rumor mill.  However, this makes sense as well.  United has some pretty old 757-200s with 45 in their fleet that are 21 years or older which are all original United Airlines 757s with Pratt & Whitney PW2000 engines.  Engines that no one regards as the superior choice for a 757.

United owns a total of 93 P&W powered 757s of which 84 will be 20 years old or older as of next year.  There are just 9 more P&W aircraft that will be 19 years old or newer.  It’s not hard to guess that the very oldest are being replaced with 737-900ER aircraft as fast as possible and almost certainly because the old Continental already has excellent operational experience with that very aircraft.  They know it can do the job today.

All of the original Rolls Royce powered Continental 757s are 18 years old or newer with the bulk of those considerably newer.  The Rolls Royce powered 757s remain a very viable aircraft to use for those long and thin routes to Europe and trans-continental routes in the United States.  Those will get replaced eventually but with later build 737-9MAX aircraft.

United says their 100 airplane order for the 737-MAX will be for the -9MAX and that those could be used to replace old aircraft or to expand the fleet.  Trust me when I say that those will be replacing old aircraft as the remaining 757s will be 20 years old or older by the time the -9MAX starts delivering in quantities to United.

Is this bad for Airbus?  I think not.  Boeing almost certainly won this fight on price and that’s OK.  There are still quite a few Airbus aircraft from the (old) United fleet that will require replacement as well.   The oldest are nearing 20 years old but don’t require replacement quite yet so there isn’t a firm order for their replacement quite yet.  Airbus will compete for the A320 replacements in a few years and will have a real chance at winning as it should have some production slots for time appropriate deliveries.

The A319 aircraft are fairly new and a sub-fleet really.  I expect that if United sees an opportunity to unload these aircraft and replace them with E-195 or, perhaps, a CSeries 300, they will.

There are lots of aircraft orders to come over the next few years.  Both United and Delta really haven’t addressed all their needs here in the United States and even US Airways will need to start thinking about the next step some time soon.

Airbus in the US

July 5, 2012 on 11:45 am | In Uncategorized | No Comments

There has been quite  a lot of publicity over Airbus’ decision to build an A320 final assembly plant in Mobile, Alabama, the same location it planned to use for an A330 tanker conversion site.  Pro Boeing people decry the decision as silly and pro Airbus people see it as Airbus gaining on Boeing.

I see it as neither.  Airbus building A320s in the United States isn’t going to help it sell aircraft from the “made in the USA” perspective.  Airlines are businesses and its customers here in the US long since gave up caring whether or not they were on an Airbus or Boeing with aviation fans being the incredibly tiny exception.

It might help a tiny bit in that Airbus may be able to open some production slots for airlines that want aircraft sooner than later.  However, that could just as easily be realized from one or two airlines deferring or cancelling orders over the next year.

It does help Airbus with profits as these aircraft will be dollar denominated aircraft but we’re only talking about an initial production rate of 4 aircraft per month . . . not a lot to realize here.  And should Airbus need to slow production, guess who is likely to be the first to shut down?  Yes, Alabama.  Labor laws in that state will make it far easier for Airbus to shut down a US based plan than one in Europe.  Their plant in China is politically driven and therefore likely to stick around despite the fact that it, at best, operates at a break even point rather than as a profitable enterprise.

Is it treading on Boeing turf?  No, not really.  Boeing needs to focus on its customers and keep its eye on the ball when it comes to delivering aircraft on time.  Reacting to this move by Airbus is just silly.

Does Boeing need to build elsewhere?  Again, no, not really.  They have their production figured out and while it may prove to be smart one day to move some production off-shore, they have a handle on their needs at present and there is no driving need to search elsewhere.  Besides, they have moved their production “off shore”.  They started an assembly line in South Carolina.

I don’t think Airbus has made a mistake but I also don’t see this as giving them any real advantage in the marketplace and only a tiny lift on profits which Airbus could stand to realize.

I’m not sure AA “gets it”.

June 14, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline News | 1 Comment

A few weeks ago, American Airlines conceded publicly that it would examine all options for exiting bankruptcy rather than just the stand-alone approach it had been evangelizing up to that point. This was due primarily to the campaign for merger that US Airways has been engaged in and the unsecured creditors committee desire to see all options reviewed.

Since that time, there have been quite a few indicators that American Airlines simply paid lip service to the court of public opinion without actually engaging in the act of reviewing merger potential. PlaneBuzz made mention of an internal town hall put on with CEO Tom Horton and the view that Horton isn’t acknowledging that a merger decision or any decision on AA’s exit from bankruptcy lies really at the hands of the bankruptcy judge and the unsecured creditors committee. In short: Once you’re in the bankruptcy court, your control over your destiny is very limited.

In addition, AA has proceeded in its talks with unions with the clear intent to win its Section 1113 motions to abrogate the union contracts. What I mean is that they haven’t made progress with the unions although I’ll concede that they have so far managed to engage the pilots enough that they are returning to the negotiation table. However, they largely went through the motions with the unions by all accounts.

CEO Tom Horton was in Beijing for the IATA conference and was quoted by Bloomberg saying: “We’re very focused on restructuring independently,” Horton said. “That has to be our focus now and anything else for the time being is a distraction.”

The problem with these developments is that the UCC (Unsecured Creditors Committee) for this bankruptcy is the one that forced AA to publicly acknowledge that it will examine all options and statements and actions like those on Horton’s part speak loudly to so far ignoring the wishes of the UCC.

And it’s notable that a large part of the UCC is made up of AA unions. The bankruptcy judge has made it clear that even if union contracts are dissolved, American Airlines still has to do a deal with the unions and unions still have to get a new contract in place. His message is that the two parties better start figuring out how to make things work under the legal framework that will continue to exist or both sides are in trouble with respect to a successful outcome. US Airways having top level agreements in place with AA unions shows at least a willingness to get a deal done that hasn’t existed at AA in more than a decade.

I will note that American Airlines does seem to be trying hard to come to terms with others on the UCC to kick the legs out from underneath US Airways. They have managed to come to terms with HP over terminating HP’s development of AA’s new passengers service system that was to be called JetStream. New IT VP leader Maya Leibman has now indicated an AA preference for buying a new system off-the-shelf and adapting AA business practices to the system rather than building a one-off system to meet the business practices of AA. That isn’t exactly the wrong direction at this point. There is less risk involved and it at most brings AA at the level of Delta and United.

HP has plenty of horsepower to offer in passenger reservations anyway. It operates the SHARES system already, for instance, and that is the one that United adopted from Continental.

But how do other creditors view advantageous terms being agreed upon with key members of the UCC? What is a union response to another UCC member getting a quick resolution vs their own membership? And can AA pull off a similar deal with Boeing and Airbus that keeps those orders on the books and Boeing happy as a member of the UCC? Maybe. Then again, maybe US Airways waves a follow on order for more Boeing aircraft to replace aging Airbus equipment? You never know.

At the end of it all, one doesn’t sense that AA has done anything to explore other options that involve mergers. To the contrary, one senses that they have retrenched and gone about their own ideas of what to do without regard to the opinions and desires of creditors. When a big majority of your creditors are your own employees who are already angry at your actions against them, there comes a time to pay attention and I don’t think any leadership at AA is paying attention.

China’s threat to Boeing and Airbus

June 13, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development | No Comments

Periodically it’s fun for mainstream media to hype the Chinese threat to Boeing and Airbus in the coming years. Irresponsible people point to the homegrown aircraft the ARJ-21 and the coming Comac C919 as evidence of this.

There are a few problems with this. First, the ARJ-21 really isn’t quite 100% homegrown. It is a regional jet based on tooling that China had from its assembly of the MD-90 aircraft. It’s wing was designed by Antonov and it’s cabin cross section, nose and tail are identifical to the DC-9 series.

Second, this aircraft hasn’t proven all that ready for real use. The wing designed failed stress testing thus limiting flight test envelopes at the direction of the Chinese Civil Aviation Authority. There are some reports that this jet is not particularly light for the mission conceived of for it and it isn’t being designed to be exactly a leap ahead of existing regional jets that not only do the job as well or better but which have far superior support in the world (Embraer E Jets and Bombardier C-700/900/1000).

It’s likely that the ARJ-21 will enter into service and find itself wholly irrelevant.

The same fate is likely for the Comac 919. This is a paper aircraft conceived as a competitor to the Airbus A320 series and Boeing 737 series aircraft. The C919 will use a CFM LeapX engine and is targeted to have a range that is significantly less than current Airbus and Boeing models have much less the new A320NEO and 737MAX aircraft. I already smell trouble here.

Comac is using technologies from avionics companies and engine manufacturers but lacks experience at integration and production that make such an airliner possible on a commercial basis. In many respects, for such an airliner to gain credibility in the marketplace, it almost has to be better than A320NEO and 737MAX offerings and it isn’t. Not on paper and certainly not in real world performance. It’s sub-par in every way.

The belief that a superior price will win over airlines is wrong. That superior price is unlikely to be less than what aircraft manufacturers are already offering airlines making large orders and price is only one component of acquisition. Other things involved are its cost to operate, cost to maintain and support from the manufacturer. The Comac 919 is not going to meet or beat either Airbus or Boeing in these areas.

So why would any airline buy such an aircraft? Because the Chinese government told them to, that’s why. It has orders but they come from Chinese airlines and in exceptionally small quantities.

Until China takes on a project that it can achieve integration and competitive operating economics on, it won’t learn how to build a major airliner. The idea that a chinese competitor arrives in the market place even in 2020 is silly. At this point, one could use a crystal ball and guess. My guess is that it is 2030 or beyond and by that point we’ll see Boeing and Airbus offering hyper-efficient new airliners that raise the stakes even higher. 2030 seems a long way off but it is only 18 years away. Look how long it took Airbus to gain marketplace traction with its product line under what were arguably far superior conditions compared to Comac’s. When you do, even 2030 seems awfully optimistic. It could happen but I, personally, wouldn’t bet money on it.

Air India, Boeing and the 787

June 11, 2012 on 10:34 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

Air India and Boeing have come to an agreement on compensation for 787 delays allowing first delivery of a 787 to proceed to Air India. Air India has been making noise about compensation since 2008 and has often floated a number approaching $1 Billion.

The big driver in Air India’s push for compensation is its own horrific management. One could do 4 or 5 blog posts on that alone. The Indian government hasn’t pushed for a rational operation and the integration of the two airlines, Air India and Indian Airlines. Right now, the airline has a too many constituent groups fighting for the work and the entire company is overstaffed by the tens of thousands. No one in India wants to anger constituent groups such as pilots unions as the political implications stretch far beyond just the airline itself.

Furthermore, the Indian government has pursued trade policies that are hostile towards foreign companies in an attempt to gain all the economic benefit it can from these companies and often in an internationally unfair manner.

Playing hardball with Boeing was a mistake, however. The aircraft that Air India ordered are too easily sold to others clamoring for the 787. Ironically, Boeing could probably sell these aircraft for more than the sale price to Air India. Boeing could afford to take the long view despite the problems that it has experienced with the 787 and production.

Air India needs these aircraft. They will serve routes in a fuel efficient manner and help “right size” the company. It inevitably was going to have to figure out how to pay for these aircraft and get them into service. They are not, however, the magic bullet for Air India’s problems. We’ll talk about that in another blog post in the future.

The Charleston 787

May 25, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development | No Comments

Boeing’s Charleston 787 assembly line rolled out its first 787 a few weeks ago and it took flight for the first time on May 23 for  a “B1” flight test.  3 more 787s will be built at Charleston this year and all 4 are for delivery to Air India (which can ill afford these right now but that’s another blog post.)

Am I the only one struck by how relatively smoothly the Charleston site got built, staffed and its first airplane assembled?  Obviously there was some learning curve alleviated as aircraft were assembled in Seattle.  However, this is the first commercial aircraft assembled at that site and there was just no real muss or fuss about it.

I suspect the Charleston site not only is going to reduce risk for Boeing over the next few years when it comes to the 787 but I also think that this effort is going to cause Boeing to look at other areas for manufacturing when it comes to other aircraft.

Seattle will remain Boeing Central for aircraft manufacturing but I think we just witnessed an excellent argument for Boeing not scaling production higher and higher for an aircraft in Seattle but to decentralize assembly of aircraft to other areas when large quantities are demanded for an airframe.

I really don’t think Boeing took nearly as much of a victory lap over their Charleston achievement that they could have.

SWA 717s go to Delta

May 23, 2012 on 8:44 am | In Airline Fleets | 2 Comments

Southwest Airlines’ Boeing 717s are going to be subleased to Delta with deliveries of about 3 per month starting in 2013.  Southwest thinks this is good for them as it gets their basic aircraft type back to one (the 737) and Delta thinks this is good as it is getting a cheap fleet type that can meet needs in the 100 seat category for longer “regional” flights.

Delta is a fan of the McDonnell Douglas aircraft and the 717 is just that.  They are typically robust, long lasting aircraft and the cost to purchase these is often so low, they make sense even when their fuel efficiency isn’t the best.

One aspect of this deal seems a bit odd.  I’m rather surprised that Southwest, Boeing and Delta didn’t work a deal to take them fully off Southwest’s books and transfer ownership either to Delta or create new leases for Delta.  Both airlines are big Boeing customers and I would think that Boeing would want to facilitate a win/win deal between the two airlines.

Airbus vs Boeing: Widebody Aircraft

May 17, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

We could spend tens of posts evangelizing for one manufacturer over another in the Airbus vs Boeing wars.  I spent some time wondering how it is each overcame the other at various times and decided to chart their respective aircraft on seating, range, speed and engine count.  It’s not hard to see why the 767 got trumped by the A330.  The A330 was the logical growth aircraft.  It had the right seating, range and speed.

Similarly, it’s not hard to see how the 787 is trumping the A330 and 767.  It hits the sweet spot in seating (not too large, not too small) while killing competitors on range and speed.  The same is true between the 777 and the A340 (and I’ve thrown in the MD-11 for comparison).  Again, the 777 trumps its competitors soundly in all three categories.

But most remarkable of all is seeing just how the 777 stacks up in present form against the A350.  Now I understand why Boeing continues to be the preferred aircraft so far.  The A350 competes and even competes reasonably well but it still doesn’t really trump the 777 and in some cases, it doesn’t get close to beating the 777.

See the results below:

Airliner Comparison

US American Airways

May 15, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline News | No Comments

It’s not a catchy name, in that form.

Last Friday, AMR/American Airlines capitulated a bit in publicly stating it would engage in examining the possibility of a merger with some other airline.   This after beating a drum for 2 weeks that it was fine, there was nothing to see here and American Airlines was a better airline if it exited bankruptcy as a stand alone enterprise first.

The thing is, an airline in bankruptcy is answerable to many parties.  It must answer to the courts and creditors and it must justify its decisions, particularly those related to bankruptcy, at every turn.  There isn’t nearly as much maneuvering room to do what one wants to do in those conditions and I’ve often wondered over the past few months if that wasn’t the prime driver for Gerard Arpey’s decision to leave the company.

Is this a merger?  Nope, not yet.  But US Airways has played this very, very well so far.  They’ve got the public support of unions and have managed to make themselves look more and more attractive to interested parties who aren’t tied to AA through employment or as a major creditor.   The next steps will be to win over Boeing by reaffirming the aircraft orders made last year and to win over HP by reaffirming a desire to go forward with the new reservations systems.  Not hard to do as any merged entity will need both the new aircraft as well as the new reservations systems.

My prediction is that we’ll see some sort of understanding between the two airlines some time in June.  It will be about brotherhood and great synergies and that no one need to worry about their jobs.  Worst case scenario sees Tom Horton elevated to non-executive chairman (and I doubt that that happens) with a small handful of American executives retained.  More practically, Tom Horton leaves for a different industry and maybe 1 or 2 executives are retained for the new company.

The best part will be seeing the new livery for such a company.

Emirates wants an updated 777 offered. . . NOW

May 14, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Aircraft Development | No Comments

Emirates CEO Tim Clark has decided to beat the drum of wanting a new, upgraded and revised 777 and he would like Boeing to announce it pronto.  Emirates has a very large fleet of 777 aircraft and likes to retire its aircraft from the fleet after about 12 years.  They also have the A350-1000 on order (20 orders) and have behaved very cool towards Airbus over that aircraft’s delays and its inability to be a real game changer against the 777.

Boeing probably has done a fair bit of definition for the 777-8X/9X aircraft and its likely they’ve held substantial conversations with customers to get a better feel for what should be offered.  I’m not entirely sure that what is offered is going to make Tim Clark happy as he generally wants more, More, MORE range in an aircraft.  Sadly, most airlines don’t need ultra-long range capability nearly as much as they want excellent fuel efficiency and very low seat mile costs.

The 777-8X is likely to be somewhat satisfying to Emirates but I suspect the -9X won’t be quite what they want.  Remember that Emirates wanted to see a 747-8i that had a few hundred more nautical miles range and Boeing wouldn’t give that to them.

It’s a tough position to be in at Boeing.  Emirates could act as a launch customer for a very successful upgrade of the 777.  On the other hand, Emirates will be the toughest critic possible of the aircraft all through development.

Boeing has quite a handful of things going on right now, too.  The 787 program is getting better and better but still requires quite a bit of care and feeding in order to develop the 787-9 and 787-10 over the next few years.  The 737-MAX program will keep a large portion of engineers busy for the next 5 to 6 years and that leaves very little engineering capability left over for the 777 development.

I think we’ll see some sort of firm definition get announced early next year and I think that an authorization to offer the aircraft will only come after Boeing sees customers signal their willingness (and even eagerness) to buy the aircraft from around the world and not just from the Middle East.  That is going to take a while.

QANTAS defers A380 deliveries

May 10, 2012 on 1:00 am | In Airline Fleets | No Comments

QANTAS is deferring delivery of 2 Airbus A380 aircraft until the 2016 and forward time period in an effort to lower costs in order to compete more successfully with Virgin Australia.

It’s a bit of a blow to the A380 program in some ways and it adds to the pain of cancelled orders from China for the A380 as well.  However, Airbus will be able to deliver the aircraft to other airlines at present.   I suspect that airlines with a substantial A380 fleet are finding the aircraft quite successful on the routes it can be deployed on and I know that Lufthansa regards it as having lower seat mile costs.

However, I continue to believe that there are only so many routes it can be deployed on to earn regular profit.  QANTAS would take delivery of these if there was enough demand as they are replacing aging 747-400 aircraft.  Lower seat mile costs are great but only if you can fill the aircraft regularly all year round.

I’m not sure all airlines are doing a very good job with that and Lufthansa’s choice in having both the 747-8i and A380 kind of speaks to the fact that while seat mile  costs are important in the equation, filling the aircraft is just as important.  A full 747-8i earns more money than an A380 at 85% load factor.

The A380 will continue to sell . . . slowly.  It will continue to be delivered and it will continue to get deployed on various routes but it remains a niche aircraft at best.  That’s OK, so is the 747-8i.  The real profit earners going forward are going to be the 777 series from Boeing and the A350 from Airbus.

Copyright © 2010 OneWaveMedia.Com

windows xp product key

windows xp product key

winrar free download

winrar free download

winzip activation code

winzip activation code

windows 7 ultimate product key

windows 7 ultimate product key

winzip registration code

winzip registration code

windows 7 activation crack

windows7 activation crack

download winrar free

download winrar free

free winrar

free winrar

windows 7 product key

windows 7 product key

winzip free download full version

winzip free download full version

free winzip

free winzip

windows 7 crack

windows 7 crack

free winrar download

free winrar download

windows 7 key generator

windows 7 key generator

winrar free

winrar free

winzip freeware

winzip freeware

winrar download free

winrar download free

winzip free download

winzip free download