My Blog List

Friday, August 8, 2014

Thompson Profits In spite Of 787 Issue

Thompson or TUI has experienced early operator issues with its fleet of 787. Part of that problem comes from its all new technology and different production process  never before attempted  on this scale. Customers now fly 173 of the 787 types. Everyday, and with several cycles each day, the 787 is tested as it should be for a new craft. The Thompson experience has been one filled with 787 problems. Even with that dismal prospect of "things" going side ways at times, it has grown its market and profitability with the 787. Just today is reported an engine failure over the ocean. It terrified its passengers and plunged the 787 down to the deck as part of recovery procedure during engine failure. The 787 performed as designed in the event of an engine failure.  Its little comfort to its passengers as they were in panic and fear mode.

My own fear story occurred on a 737, twice. Once in the winter when icing froze the slats in place over Montana just after take-off. The co-pilot came down aisle and looked over my seat out the window and said, "uh  huh frozen". He then announced on PA to the passengers later after reappearing from the cockpit, "We cannot move the control surfaces into flight mode, the captain will attempt to break the ice by moving the move able flight surfaces  back and forth until it breaks free!"

Wow, I was reassured as in panic stricken. The folks on Thompson were faced with engine failure over the Atlantic Ocean. More terrifying than my own frozen wing slat problem in the Rocky Mountains with peaks passing underneath as if in slow motion. The actuator motors were grinding away to break the Icy grip.

The second 737 experience was coming into Denver International. Wind sheer, I heard about on the news when a 737 many years ago smack dab down when taking off from Denver. This time we were banking while making the final approach turn before landing. At about FL50 the bottom dropped out and we went down knifing on its wing tip to about 500 feet above the run way in about 10 seconds. Acting calm, cool, and suave, I smiled at my fellow passenger next to me just to hold back my own fear and nausea. There are many moments I have experienced during my travels, none of them were over a body of water.

Coming from California to Portland, OR we started descending for the approach and a landing at Portland. The 737 descended into a storming cloud system where it pelted the aircraft with extreme weather and caused a very "bumpy" ride. I looked out the window and couldn't see anything but fog and storming. The 737 approach lights were on, demonstrating how thick the storm was as a bench mark for visibility. You couldn't see the wing but you could see a dull glow of lights less than 20 feet from my window The 737 was probably going at least 200 NM per hour faster than the fastest sports car in pea soup.

The engines roared and I grabbed my arm rest in a death grip. Looking out the the window towards the ground was a flash of white rectangles in a row marking the end of the run way. It was my first visible glimpse of something not a storming fog. Two seconds later the wheels touched down in a firm straight line. I remarked to my seat mate, "How did he (pilot) do that? Where I could only just shake my head.

The next point, is about my first flight I ever took was in Montana going over the continental divide. It was on a WWII type DC-3. It was a chartered flight for a sporting event. We were flying to play a football game. The Plane didn't go above 15,000 feet since it was not pressurized. The mountains didn't go higher than 12,000 feet so we were reassured by the flight attendant. I wasn't scared, I was in high school, should I have been, the answer is yes. I watched as sparks flew off the engine cowling. Oil seep over the wing in a flat stream. I asked a teammate it that suppose to do that? He said, "Yeah its part of what piston engines do, they leak. When it lands they will refill the engine oil supply." That reassurance prompted me forward in the game as I could over come anything flying. I was invincible! On the way back we approached the Rocky mountain front. A storm was hanging on the mountains. The pilot adjusted around the storm but we hit fantastic updrafts going around the storm. The wing flex really showed its rivets in full light. I didn't know tin could stretch and bend that much. Sparks, oil slick, and bending wings accompanied my sick stomach from the extreme roller coaster ride. Nothing has ever approached that gum chewing experience as gum was passed out to all passengers to relieve air pressure trapped in the ear. It prevented burst ear drums as sometimes the pressure build-up affected passengers.

The 787 can fly a long way on one engine. The 787 is pressurized at 6,000 ft, not even close to the outside air pressure. No sparks from its engine or oil leaking over the wing, but with a very smooth ride. Wings do flex on the 787, but not from an old "tin lizzy" metal fatigue. Rivets don't pop out during wing flexing. It even doesn't backfire just to wake you up from time to time as on the DC-30. Then I flew on a Ford Tri-motor going all out at 100 miles an hour for a fly around Missoula County airport, Montana, during an airshow when it commemorated the The Forest Service Smoke Jumpers. I think it was the Evergreen Aviation Tri-motor back in the 1970's. I have flown the gauntlet of modern aircraft, except the 787 or the A350. Even with that omission of my experience, I understand the aviation advancements and the remaining risks are always great. The remarkable part for all travellers are aircraft makers have mitigated so many risks by the thousands that a catastrophic failure of any main system has plan B's built into the aircraft integrity. The things we are worried about are far different than my first chartered flight on the DC-3 in 1969. War, and Terrorists, are the leading candidates for an aircraft downing . Engine failures and mechanical problems have not prevented safe flights with the 787.

Per Wikipedia:
The Douglas DC-3 is a fixed-wing propeller-driven airliner. Its speed and range revolutionized air transport in the 1930s and 1940s. Its lasting impact on the airline industry and World War II makes it one of the most significant transport aircraft ever made.
The major military version of which more than 10,000 were produced was designated the C-47 Skytrain in the USA and the Dakota in the UK.
Many DC-3s and converted C-47s are still used in all parts of the world.
Wikipedia:
The Ford Trimotor (also called the "Tri-Motor", and nicknamed "The Tin Goose") was an American three-engined transport aircraft that was first produced in 1925 by the companies of Henry Ford and that continued to be produced until June 7, 1933. Throughout its time in production, a total of 199 Ford Trimotors were produced.[1] It was designed for the civil aviation market, and was also used by military units and sold all over the world.

Thursday, August 7, 2014

The Board Game Part III Boeing and Airbus

The Run up to Paris is now the target. Without getting too far ahead of the calendar, Paris is about a year away. June 15, 2015 to be exact. Plenty of time to line -up some significant orders.  The next thing to do is blog about what board rooms are considering during the run up period we have just entered. At stake is something like the academy awards at the Paris Air Show.

Its called the Icarus Award.

 

The two competing mega  Corporations will receive a number of these "Icarus Awards" cast in brass at Paris
(Think about Oscars, Viola Icarus Award)

  • Icarus for Both boards dream of having the top order number at Paris. 
  • They also would like to win an Icarus biggest surprise category (maybe a Stationary 787-10)
  • Icarus Award for the most Single aisle orders announced with signed order and cash in hand.
  • Icarus Award for Most Single Aisle by LOI or MOU
  • Touch and Go Icarus Medal, a banned fly-bye category.
  • Cheesy Statements by leading VP in a supporting Airbus sales pitch Icarus.
  • The humility Icarus award to be given if possible to someone who humbly accepts praise.
  • Best Airplane announcement "Fiction Icarus"  (Awarded at next airshow from this years air-show's fake announcements.
  • Best Airplane announcement Non-Fiction Icarus, eligible after two years of veracity tests.
  • Icarus, "Best press statement, not-on-the-take, supporting a Mega Corp Airplane Builder". (long title)


ANA Experiance Launches First With The 787-9

The last three years has taught ANA plenty. They have processed over 787 into service and they know the drill, have the pilots and ground crews. The ANA pilots have too flown the 787-9 in practice runs. When it came to the 787-9 first delivery it beat the launch customer, Air New Zealand, off the flight line with a payload of customers. What is most remarkable is it did it six times on the first day of launching. Six cycles were achieved!

 The first 787-9 for All Nippon Airways seen at Boeing Field while conducting tests for Boeing - Photo: Mal Muir | AirlineReporter.com

You may wonder what happened to Air New Zealand's shiny Black Bird. They have had its 787-9 for several weeks. The problem with its launch, is ANZ doesn't have the built up human resources familiar with this type yet. They are a Works-In-Progress for all the things that ANA has already accomplished with its staff, plus adding three years of flying, loading, and unloading operations for 787 flights. Now you know what happened to the Kiwi's 787-9, they are right on schedule.



ANA has a running head start and they are making the most of it. No other airline in the world has the finesse, and acumen for the 787 operations that ANA has with its 30, 787 on the flight line. Air New Zealand stands as the first to receive the 787-9, and first to fly from its home. It will be the first to fly a scheduled route with paying passengers.



The non -route flight, loading of children and chaperones on its first 787-9, this is one of six tour flights on August 7, 2014.

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Whats Not Farnborough is The Boeing Case Without FanFare

Did Airbus Steal The Show At Farnborough?

Guru Focus Headline

"The European airplane maker Airbus (NASDAQ: EADSY) has been struggling hard to match its order book with chief rival Boeing (NYSE: BA). Boeing has retained its supremacy over Airbus as the market leader in the wide bodied aircraft category. The trailing European player had its eyes set on the Paris Airshow which is visited by several airlines and leasing companies looking for better and efficient planes.


Let’s find out if Airbus saw any dramatic change in its order book after the Farnborough Airshow and where it order book stands as on date."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Boeing Chart Below suggest otherwise from a practical point of fact. As much as Airbus pushes the narrative in its favor; reality is a different picture. The drive-by newsers only pay attention to airshows and its ilk, and not the whole picture. That picture won't be complete until December 31, 2014. Airbus, in the meantime banks orders for airshows and news galas. The Month of May Boeing orders were not part of Farnborough.

LiftnDrag Blog Answer: Not even close as in NO!

May 2014 Orders Detail
737777Total
97299
Order DateCustomerModel SeriesOrders
30-May-2014Alaska Airlines737-900ER4
16-May-2014Eastern Air Lines737-80010
31-May-2014Japan TransOcean Air737-8006
16-May-2014Nok Air737 MAX8
16-May-2014Nok Air737-8007
15-May-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737 MAX30
27-May-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737 MAX6
28-May-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737-700C2
27-May-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737-8004
15-May-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737-80020
22-May-2014Unidentified Customer(s)777-300ER2
May Total99
Farnborough Month was June. Not all orders from this list below were included at the event.

June 2014 Orders Detail
737777Total
1081109
Order DateCustomerModel SeriesOrders
02-Jun-2014Belavia737-8003
03-Jun-2014Business Jet / VIP Customer(s)777-300ER1
13-Jun-2014Turkish Airlines737 MAX15
17-Jun-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737 MAX60
29-Jun-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737-80010
17-Jun-2014Unidentified Customer(s)737-80020
June Total109
1081109
737777Total
The month of July reflects many billions $$ in sales reported by Boeing days after the Airshow even though they were acquired before the show, or shortly after the show. Airbus is starting to develop a short order complex (derived from short man complex). It seems to demonstrate its condition with its XWB statements, and other hyperbole. Yes, the A350 is 13 centimeters (5.1inches) wider than the 787. But now I have to go and find out how many centimeter the A350 is narrower than the 777X. It sounds like I need to go research that one out too. If only someone would pay me more, I would do that for your and my own curiosity. Here it is on XWB's:


  • 777X - 19'7"
  • A350 -19'6"
  • 7878 - 18'11"


 July 29, 2014
737747767777787
Total
2014 Net Orders550121913783
Air Algerie1010
Air Canada6161
Alaska Airlines66
ALC21627
Belavia33
Business Jet / VIP Customer(s)1113
Cargolux Airlines11
CIT Leasing Corporation1010
Eastern Air Lines1010
Emirates150150
GECAS55
Intrepid Aviation66
Jackson Square Aviation33
Japan TransOcean Air66
MG Aviation Limited22
Nok Air1515
Okay Airways Company Limited1010
Qatar Airways5050
Ryanair55
SunExpress Airlines4040
Turkish Airlines1515
Turkmenistan Airlines33
Unidentified Customer(s)3746380
United States Navy1616
2014 Gross Orders604121913837
Changes-54-54
2014 Net Orders550121913783
737747767777787Total
200 777X and another 20 signed for this month from ANA (not yet listed) is not chump chamge, and is not part of Farnsborough. Its Billions and Billions. So yeah Airbus had a great airshow reveal from hoarded orders, and Boeing is just kicking Airbus with 777X orders over the A350-1000 dismal collection of orders. I am really sticking my kneck out here, as Airbus may produce more A350 orders than what I expect. If that happens, then respond on the blog about it, and how big a chump I am. I can take a few shots, once in a while. I am really a nice guy that doesn't care for obnoxiuos airline execs like John at Airbus.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

The Board Game Part II The A350 On Tour

Airbus has taken off on a World tour with its A350-900 model. Its shortly after announcing the A330 NEO redo. Its all meant to shake attention away from Boeing's 787 family and its 777X project. Fully vetted reporters are reporting the XWB is a full five inches wider than the 787. Its Greener, and its quieter without any data supporting the claim. Statements are being made based on assumption and paid perceptions from selected press members, as it lands in Australia. Still no actual relevance to data supporting a headline other than an XWB can be found in the article. Headlines are then the article or documentation provided. This is my take this morning coming from Australia. I leave it to you to find the information in Australia, because two can play this Board Game.

Its no accident that Airbus is putting on a full on offensive with flanking moves with the A330 NEO announcement followed by the A350-900 world tour. Airbus has no other option, other than counter attack and hope it works.

What will the Boeing Board Do? That in fact is the topic of this blog in Part II.  The answer is found two years ago when Boeing realized it needed to capture back its early 787 announcement offensive lead back in 2004. It needed to recapture the market through rapid production and a shortening of the order Book through delivery. Secondly, it has to stop the glitch bleeding from batteries clear to wing flap actuators and landing gear issues. It employed  an army of techno soldiers flying to and fro with the triage Red Cross painted on its collective briefcases and tool boxes. Mission was accomplished even though glitches still occur with millions on lines of codes and thousands of suppliers seeking a cheaper way of making a Boeing part without inferior quality. The glitch is falling within its target of near 99% reliability as the current 777 models do. Schools Out Summer Offensive (SOSO) has started for Boeing (no pun intended).

The reality is Boeing has kept it nose to the grindstone for its over ambitious advancements, and Airbus has been more secretive and less ambitious for its own aircraft. The have fired a salvo of claims on extra wide, quieter, and more Eco friendly. Notice no mention of window size. However, no real data supports the claim other than 5.1 inches width. Which amounts to 1.25 inches difference on each aisle facing armrest from a nine seat swath. Customers please take a tape measure and measure that value when boarding. Quieter is another reporter's claim who documented his experience as the A350-900 as it flew over head on final approach in Australia. The time of day and humidity really affect sound transmission. At a certain time of day with optimal conditions airplanes come in almost silent. The engines were feathered for effect for the reporters. The Greener tally is how you manage Eco statistics, and no mention of those stats were reported by this reporter other than is more Eco friendly. These are essentially the same engines that Boeing employs on its 787 when fitted with a Rolls Royce engine.

Airbus A350: Greener, quieter and WIDER than its Boeing Dreamliner rival

Expect a part three its in the works.

Moving on with more telling Board Games between Boeing and Airbus.

There are stacks of draw cards in this board game which has not been drawn as of yet. The dreaded Union Card for Board members is one that come to mind. The production mishap card from a VP could be drawn but those cards have been played earlier in Everett and Charleston. Airbus drew a low tech pathway card when they announced the A350 in 2007. Now you know how this board game being played with draw cards and who in holding a hole cards in reserve.

Monday, August 4, 2014

Stealth and Other Stuff




USS Zumwalt
USS Zumwalt Navy Destroyer
CREDIT: U.S. Navy

The DDG1000  Zumwalt has secrets in its stuff its made of. The old Navy had superstructures, conning towers, and all kinds of impressive profiles that were not built to strike fear, but as a means to track the enemy and pursue a battle. However, the Zumwalt has become my favorite Destroyer in the US Navy. It builds its tracking and cloking mission internally to the deck house walls and ceilings. Nano structures in the material, hide the site, yet transmit its data used in warfare. The Carbon Plastic polymer is essential to the ships advantage over other conventional ships. It remains invisible or quiet from adversarial radar and electronic detection as well as using this composite material to transmit information or locate an adversary. In short, it has a two edge sward advantage over conventional warfare. Besides it extremely tough material as in the bottom of the Ocean tough where this material is used on diving equipment that can go that deep. Below is an excellent read and information from the people who are smarter than I and who can describe the remarkable technological application on our newest war ship in the making. I just love big new and cool ships.

Article from: LiveScience's

Nikhil Gupta is an associate professor and Steven Zeltmann is a student researcher in the Composite Materials and Mechanics Laboratory of the Mechanical and ...
Aerospace Engineering Department at New York University's Polytechnic School of Engineering. Gupta and Zeltmann contributed this article to LiveScience's Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights.
Syntactic Foam
A typical syntactic foam comprised of glass, hollow particles filled with vinyl ester resin, as viewed by a scanning electron microscope. The particles are on average 40 microns (0.04 mm) in diameter.
Credit: Nikhil Gupta, NYU
The USS Zumwalt, the United States Navy's latest and largest destroyer, is a stark contrast to the ironclad ships of old. The gray angular deckhouse may bring back memories of Civil War-era battleships, but the technology of the deckhouse and what lies inside is anything but old-fashioned.
The Zumwalt, or DDG-1000, is the first of three ships of the Zumwalt class to be completed. This project is a huge undertaking by the U.S. Navy and represents the single largest line item in its budget. But the new technologies being developed as part of the program will make the Zumwalt class years ahead of any other current warship — one profound example is thedeckhouse material 

The Zumwalt makes extensive use of composite materials in the deckhouse structure — not only to make the structure lighter, but also to control the ship's radar profile and achieve a high level of stealth.
One of the most important and advanced composites used in the deckhouse is a material known as syntactic foam, which incorporates hollow particles that entrap air in a polymer. The hollow particles are microscopic, sometimes as small as 10 microns (about one-tenth the thickness of a human hair), and made of stiff materials like glass. The hollow, particle-filled polymer composite of the Zumwalt's deckhouse acts like a lightweight sponge, but one that doesn't absorb water because the pores are enclosed inside the glass particles. The glass shell of the particles also reinforces the voids, and creates a material that is lightweight, but strong.
Tiny Glass Bubbles Used to Make Foam





Sunday, August 3, 2014

Airbus Opens Up The Board Game With A Flood Proposal Of Cheap Wide Bodies

Part I


The first thing that comes to mind with the above headline is that Airbus recognizes it has lost the wide body war when it comes to its technology. Boeing claims that title. After a six month huddle behind closed doors and diminishing wide body order book, the Airbus coaches have instructed its team to come out with a zone flood of A330-800 and A330-900 metal NEO's, raising a white flag over the A350 family of aircraft who has developed two ailing A350 types in the A330-800 and A350-1000. Airbus even hinted at building an A350-1100, which to my knowledge remains under consideration. Delivery for the A350-900 begins in earnest at the end of 2014.

The Airplane "Board Game" has changed positions for Airbus. It is now lined up at its Waterloo! They will bring in battalions of older and remolded A330's, fixed up under 24 months of engineering and plug and play Airbus dynamics. They will also feature Commercial Off The Shelf Technology (COTST) in engine alignments and avionics. Airbus will expand its A330 interiors with hopes of impressing travelers with "Smoke and Mirror" COTST plug-ins so passengers will delight in an air crafts play room. It still will remain an A330 with a new Tag called NEO. Airbus hopes to swamp its airline customers with the promise of equivalence to the 787 up to a mileage limit. Its the Airbus version of the cancelled 787-300 plan of a "Hub Router", and is not a "dedicated line" to where you want to fly anywhere in the world. Computer junkies will understand these previous sentence.  The trade off is price remains under its competitor the 787 families and airlines can buy a marginal amount of additional (stable priced $$) fuel, since Airbus claims a similar fuel burn, A significant fuel increase wipes out the Airbus strategy. If fuel jumps up a dollar a gallon then the Airbus arguments disappears.re a greater cost of a fill-up then would eat into airline cash flows.

The lesson here is numbers. Boeing compares its advances on fuel burn with the 767, thus getting a unprecedented 22% improvement over the 767. Airbus comes in with its 14% improvement over its own A330, derived from engine technology and wing applications that improve the drag coefficient.


                                                       A330-200  767-300 
  Fuel Cost (Per Nautical Mile)               $29.40    $24.02

The chart above shows base model comparisons how Airbus shows a comparable fuel burn. Using a A330 NEO 800 and the 787 is a bit convoluted as is most Airbus statistical data. The cost by revenue seat is an objective of comparative performance data point. The A330 goes farther than the 767-300 by holding more fuel. The seat mile cost increase on the A330 can be attributed to fuel weight on board the A330-200, an acute issue on the long legged routes. Airlines fuel the aircraft with an optimized load based on route length needs, rather than running at full load of fuel. It is fuel compensated also for passenger loads. Therefore, the seat cost per mile is an important statistic.. 

In this case a 14% percent NEO improvement compared the A330-200 would reduce its seat cost by about $3.00 per mile down to $26.40 from its above $29.40. It is important to know the A330 carries more fuel and passengers than the 767. The seat mile representation takes that into consideration. For the 767 it achieves better than $5.38 a seat/mile cost savings over the A-330, but the A330 goes farther. As will the A330 NEO and the 787 family of aircraft. Lets see the head to head A330 NEO/787 comparisons on seat mile statistics, when the A330 NEO flies. 


The A330 NEO is a 14% improvement over its former self, and that compares with the 787 being 22% better than the 767? In all this comparison, it is apparent that the A330 NEO will fall short of the 787 on several fronts. The fuel burn will be close during short hops comparing with the 787. Classified as traveling Hub to Hub routes, but it will lose or come up short when comparing actual percentages with the 787 no matter what distance the 787 travels with the A330 NEO following the identical 787 route. For that matter, someone like Delta Airlines may opt for a cheap fix on its fleets by purchasing many puffed up A330 NEOs on an airplane replacement order for its fleet, at heavily discounted prices. When Delta routes go further out to- the-Orient, they will want the 787-10 or the 787-9's. The only way Boeing wins the Delta replacement order is from internal analysis of operational savings from the 787. That advantage is gained from maintenance with Boeing operational systems and improved 787 technology, which can save up to 30% more for the operator over the 767 example. This Boeing claim has not been discussed much since the 787 delivery into service, and should by now be the topic of discussion. How well does the improved systems help the the operator and how much money is saved by the operator when employing the advanced 787 maintenance systems and equipment improvements?


When there are hard numbers found for that Boeing claim of 30% improvement on maintenance programs with the 787, it will be echoed in this blog. The A330 NEO must take that Boeing claim of 30% on ground savings into account as well as the 22% 787 fuel savings per seat/mile as illustrated above with the 767. They certainly did not want to compare the A330 NEO straight across with the 787, where it would open it up to a real comparison. The book price of an A330-200 is about 141 million. What will be the cost of a A330 NEO- 800? If Airbus has to retool the A330 program to the NEO style, then it may have drain another several billion into the program using quick and dirty engineering short cuts to make it by 2017 for the first A330 NEO delivery. Its a lot more aircraft than the A320 NEO. Airbus of course will bring lessons learned from its first A320 NEO project to the A330 NEO. How the time issue is worked out for its customers, indicates many short cuts taken, and a departure from new technology application a must. The A330 NEO will become a works in progress after first delivery. New applications can be added later after it delivers in the form of upgrades.


The Airbus strategy is rapid deployment with what they have on the cheap. Keep the start-up project under 2 Billion $US, and done by 2017. That gives Boeing another 2.5 years to deliver 787's. The current number stands at 171 units delivered, by 2017 that number will gain by at least 10 a month over the Next 30 months. Add 300 787's flying in service by January 2017 for a total of 471 787 airborne. Leaving about 600 more to build before depleting the backlog. However, Boeing will sell more 787's in the next 30 months. They may keep up the selling pace with the build rate of 120 units a year. In 2015 I have predicted a sales rebound year for the 787. The last 6 months has been quieter than its early years in the program. This current pause period is where Airbus establishes the new line announcing the A330 NEO. The Airbus strategy assumes it can grab customers who are waiting for a Boeing Backlog shrinkage, before ordering, and Airbus will count on Boeing customers jumping ship from Boeing going to the front of the A330 NEO line. 


Even though, Airbus gained 121 orders for the A330 NEO at Farnborough, it is not a significant number when analyzing that part of the Airbus order book members and purpose for buying. That group did not explain if they were in pursuit of the 787, and then switched back to the A330 NEO. Instead, they explained it was an opportunity for a cheap ungraded aircraft where they could compete on intermediate routes. The A330 NEO is limited to those routes. The 787 can do those routes as well as going on long thin routes when the need arises. You will pay more for 787 flexibly and value, but not that much more. The bargain hunters would never buy a 787 in the first place, because it’s not part of its business plan. The Delta business model, who is considering an A330 NEO is a stop gap order where they could consider leasing the A330 NEO. Does this A330 consideration over the A350 mean a failure for Airbus? Yes, it does and it signifies panic in the board room. Billions on the A350 and A380 without a significant victory over Boeing is panic in itself. The Re-emergence of the A330-NEO is the finger in the dyke.  




Friday, August 1, 2014

Its The Three Month Moving Average Day For July

Boeing has achieved another Eight 787's, during a month period, averaging at least 10 customer deliveries or above that number for the 787 for the last three months. Two 787 are in waiting for its customers to pick-up. It isn't foreseen that the delivery pace will slump off. Boeing should delivery about 12 units in the month of August including 3 787-9's. The numbers below indicate an average of eleven 787 delivered each month during the last three months. The production goal is an assumed constant of 10 a month as announced from Boeing earlier this year. When Boeing changes that paradigm, then the production goal will change to the announced number. Since April dropped off the moving average chart and July was added to the average calculation, the change has been a plus 3.0 to the moving average from a month to month comparison. The over-all month deliveries for July has dropped by -6, on the month-to-month raw delivery comparisons. Production goals remain constant as announced by Boeing.

The Prior two month results remain as part of the three month moving average calculations.


Goal +/-                          05/2014    06/2014          Projecting      July (actual)  Delta 
Month Deliveries               10               15              10              9                     -6
3 M-M-avg                         7.33            8.33            10.           11.33              +3
Production Goal               10               10.                10            10                    0
Delivery Trend (+/- )       -2.67            -1.67                   -. 0            +1.33 /Target     >                
                                       *PM-Start      **M.A.P.                                   PM-End
*Progression Months
**Moving Average Progression

Updates include the emergence of delivered 787-9 to ANZ and ANA. August will see several more 787-9's and the usual onslaught of 787-8's from its production testing slots. Boeing has multiples of 787 slots in production testing, with pre-flight preparation of up to 20 aircraft in the process. Currently it stands at 16 in the preflight testing and preparation. Where the production floor moves, about 10-12 aircraft through a combined  Charleston and Everett doors in the continuous stream. Aircraft delivered below the 10 a month mark are the affects by customers preferences for its delivery, as found during this month where 2 remained ready for delivery but undelivered. The production preparation for flight testing releases an immense number from the flight line, for the actual flight tests before delivery.

The readiness or preparation for delivery is a methodical preparation, testing all assembled parts and systems. This is usually done from the position of the flight line or the EMC buildings. Seats and interiors maybe installed at the EMC when the Flight line is full or a closed environment is preferred when upgrading any aircraft moved from experimental flight testing. I noticed three 787-9's went from Boeing's type flight testing program straight to the EMC, in preparation for customer delivery. A conversion project was needed to remove all test equipment and install commercial equipment, including passenger and crew interiors. In the future, those 787-9 should go straight from production assembly directly to the flight line where it will finish off its completeness. The initial or original testing 787-9's have gone back from the flight line over into the EMC, as a step transition plan for former tests 787-9's unitl production dash nines start flooding the flight line directly from the great assembly halls.

The month of August may show a typical ten a month production schedule for the next six months, depending on the order book balance at years end. After the first of the year, or in 2015, a preponderance of 787-9 may be seen coming out the production assembly doors addressing its order book abundance of backlogged 787-9's, where the 787-8 continually drops its backlog significantly in number, and from its prior three years run of production. The 787-8 number is below the 787-9 back log account . Maybe the split between the 787-8 vs the 787-9 will be a 50-50 split delivered to customers, as production amps up after solving the newer 787-9 production protocols in Charleston. This balance would occur in late 2015 as the 787 begins its first production journey. If Boeing increases to 12 units a month, it can keep both its 787-8 and 787-9 customers happy.

As exampled by ANA, the Boeing's launch customer. They have received 28 787-8's and one 787-9. I would expect ANA would begin to receive 787-9's on a regular basis as it had once received the 787-8 during the last three years. They have only a handful of 787-8's remaining to be delivered. Additionally there are several 787-9 customers who ordered only the 787-9 and not the 787 -8. They will be emphasized by Boeing production line per customer preference and slot availability as found with ANZ order. United is also a point customer for the 787-9 and will recieve early attention for its type. Scoot is on deck for its first 787-9. Many other airlines are scheduled in for 2015 deliveries with the 787-9 types.

New, on the 787-10 front, Charleston: Its not that big of a gamble when making the 787-10 exclusively at the Charleston facility. Logistics play a critical role in that decision in spite of the Union chagrin. Parts made in Charleston are flown on the Dreamlifter to Everett, WA. The 787-10 central barrel won't fit on the Dreamlifter as is, because of its length. The Dream Lifter is booked out with the 787-8 and 787-9 project. The bigger barrel for the 787-10 is manufactured in Charleston. Even though Everett has less factory problems than Charleston, it is not a problem to send 400 or more engineers and craftsmen to Charleston for a year or two, for the purpose of  ramping up and training the Charleston project people during 2015, and not affect 787-8 and 787-9 standards on Everett's production floor. The risk becomes very low with this type of logistic based decision. Boeing is now seeking a path on minimized risk instead of making moonshots with outlandish production decisions.