Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- The Boeing 767 Cross Section, Part 1 November 24, 2022
- Movie Review: Devotion November 21, 2022
- China will accelerate development of its commercial aerospace sector November 21, 2022
- Bjorn’s Corner: Sustainable Air Transport. Part 46. eVTOL comparison with helicopter November 18, 2022
- The economics of a 787-9 and A330-900 at eight or nine abreast November 16, 2022
737 MAX to roll out to Boeing product strategy challenges
Subscription Required
Introduction
The Boeing 737-8 rolls out tomorrow to challenges to Boeing’s product strategy. Image via Google images.
Dec. 7, 2015, © Leeham Co: Boeing rolls out its first 737 MAX tomorrow to no press fanfare. Today there is a limited press tour of the assembly line, but, according to reporters who were invited, there will be no press briefings.
It’s an inexplicably low-key event for what Boeing otherwise touts as a major evolution of the venerable 737 line.
As good as Boeing claims the airplane will be, and as much spin as Boeing’s marketing department tries to put on the rivalry vs the Airbus A320neo, the 737 MAX clearly is second fiddle—and it’s not going to get better.
Summary
- Airbus holds a commanding market share: 60% to 40% of the family comparisons.
- Airbus holds about a 55% share of the A320neo vs 737-8 comparison.
- The A321neo outsells the 737-9 by about 4:1.
- Boeing faces cash flow challenges in 2020 decade.
Used B777-200ER or A340-300, Part 2
Subscription required
Introduction
By Bjorn Fehrm
Dec. 3 2015, ©. Leeham Co: Last week we started our article series around acquiring used twin-aisle aircraft to start new long haul services or boost an existing network. We focused on Airbus’ A340-300 and Boeing’s 777-200ER, two capable long haulers, both with a capacity of around 290 seats, using our normalized two class cabin. We wanted to understand which one would have the lowest operating costs over a network which has flights up to 12-13 hours.
We analyzed the Cash Operating Cost (COC) of the aircraft in their standard configuration in Part 1. We could see that their COCs are similar. We now study the aircraft’s capital costs. These will include a necessary cabin makeover where we will use the chance for the 777-200ER to convert it to a 10 abreast aircraft in economy. We aim to amortize its higher acquisition cost by spreading these over more passenger seats.
Summary
- The 777-200ER and A340-300 are very close in Cash Operating Costs in their base versions.
- The 777-200ER has a market valuation which is more than double that of the A340-300. Recently this level has declined but the acquisition cost of a -200ER is still higher than the A340-300.
- We use the potential of 10 abreast in economy to see if we can even the per seat cost of the two by spreading the higher costs of the -200ER over more seats.
Used B777-200ER or A340-300?
Subscription required
By Bjorn Fehrm
Introduction
Nov. 26 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In recent articles we have latched on to the debate around the prices for used Boeing 777-200 aircraft. Contrary to the market appraising companies’ ideas about second hand values, our surveys show that not only the Airbus A340-300 is cheap in the market but the Boeing 777-200ER is also available at interesting prices.
This, coupled with sustained low fuel prices, makes for interesting opportunities. Charter destinations can be reached which were not possible with less competent aircraft and it is possible to lease or purchase these long range aircraft to backfill an expanding route network while awaiting or even postponing delivery of the latest technology aircraft.
We decided it was time to take a look at which of the two would be the better choice as a long hauler of 300 passengers to destinations of up to 5,000nm. We use our proprietary model to find out which one is the most suitable given different conditions, such as cabin makeover or not. We will also introduce aircraft deterioration to the calculations to map the reality of an older aircraft.
In this first article, we will establish the base values for the aircraft and find their cash operating costs. In a subsequent article, we will add capital costs where we will look at different purchase scenarios and refurbishing options and how these affect the overall direct operating costs.
Summary
- The 777-200ER and A340-300 are very close in most dimensions.
- The 777-200ER is the slightly larger and heavier aircraft. Thanks to more effective engines, it can compete on fuel costs.
- When the other costs are added to make up cash operating costs, the higher weight and more expensive engines start to eat up any fuel cost advantages the 777-200ER has.
Bjorn’s Corner: Aircraft systems, the real nuts to crack
By Bjorn Fehrm
06 November 2015, ©. Leeham Co: COMAC’s C919 was rolled out in the week. We got to see a new shiny aircraft which looked ready to fly. The nicely curved fuselage and wings were immaculate, the paint was shiny and the CFM LEAP-1C engines were ready to go.
Yet many ask, when will it fly for the first time? It used to be that when the airframe was finished and the engines ran reliably it was time to fly. No longer! Today the most challenging part of an aircraft program is the integration of all the complex systems which hide under the skin. This is what kept the Bombardier CSeries on ground longer than it should and the Boeing 787 and Airbus A380 had the same flu (the latter also had to short wires).
It is the part of the aircraft which takes longest to get to work reliably. The A380 is known for its long period of nuisance warnings from the complex avionics system after entry into service and the reliability work for the 787 has to a large extent been one of software tuning of its system side.
As the system function of modern aircraft has grown more complex the whole architecture of how it was built had to be changed. Here’s how.
No fear of C919 for a generation
Nov. 4, 2015, © Leeham Co. The first COMAC C919 was rolled out of the factory over the weekend, China’s mainline entry into the fiercely competitive arena now “owned” by the Airbus-Boeing duopoly.
COMAC C919. Click on image to enlarge. Photo via Google images.
Although the two giants each has said China is the next competitor they will have to face, the Big Two have nothing to worry about for a generation to come.
Here’s why.
Bjorn’s Corner: Engine ratings
By Bjorn Fehrm
02 October 2015, ©. Leeham Co: After the article about the role of bypass ratio on a turbofan’s efficiency, we now look at other aspects of civil turbofan engines that are worth some light. It’s about how the engine OEMs create different versions of the same engine to cater for different aircraft variants.
The aircraft OEMs create different size variants from the same base model of aircraft by means of stretches. There is no better example of that than the Boeing 737. Over the years it has had more than 10 major versions. For the present in-service series, 737NG, there is three official variants, from the -700 to the -900ER. Originally it also had a smaller -600 variant.
These require engines from 20klbf to 27klbf. How this is achieved and what it means for engine characteristics and reliability is the focus of today’s Corner. We will also compare it to a typical long range engine, the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000/7000, which powers the Boeing 787 and Airbus A330neo.
Assessing the China market
Subscription required.
Introduction
Sept. 30, 2015, (c) Leeham Co.: The Boeing deals announced last week with China put the country into the spotlight about its commercial aviation ambitions.
For many, the various deals announced by Boeing raise alarm bells. For most, that fire horse already left the fire station. The smoke has been billowing out of China (or maybe that’s smog) for a long, long time.
Summary
- Boeing announces 300 orders and commitments for China, though the company was vague about the details. We try to dissect what’s real and what’s smoke.
- Additional deals announced by Boeing are driven by China’s pay-to-play approach to business.
- Other OEMs, suppliers also have to pay-to-play.
- China’s deals with Airbus and Boeing are only two elements of a national goal for commercial aerospace.
- IP theft and technology transfer big concerns.
Evaluating airliner performance, Part 2
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Sep. 24 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In the second part of our series about comparing and evaluating economic and operational performance of airliners, we look at the parts beyond fuel that make up the Cash Operating Costs (COC) for an airliner.
While fuel consumption, crew costs and aircraft maintenance costs can be evaluated in a way which closely resembles reality, other costs in the COC are too complex to model in their true form.
This is the case for underway or airway fees, landing fees and station fees. Here, just about every country/airport in the world has taken the liberty to invent its own charging principles and formulas. With several hundred different formulae for these charges, the way out is to use industry-accepted approximation for these costs.
Summary:
- We establish how crew cost are modeled for our evaluation missions, taking into account the complex world of work time regulations for pilots and cabin crew.
- We also describe how we handle airframe and engine maintenance costs and how these get allocated to our missions.
- Finally, we describe how the complex underway and landing/station costs are modeled with the accepted approximations these require.