April is ending today with Boeing meeting its
projected guidance. The new significant addition is the China Eastern order for
15 787-9's as it now stands with net totals consisting of forty 787 delivered
YTD and a Net of 12 787 ordered during 2016 YTD. See below Fig 1
Fig 1:
The Ninety Day Moving average includes a
partial period of 10 a month rate while a later month rate moves to Twelve 787
a month. However, Boeing achieved a lumpy build rate during this period where
March jumped to thirteen units and April dropped to ten units during April. The
overall result is an eleven unit a month pace during the last Ninety days,
which is spot on for this period of time and Boeing guidance.
Fig. 2
A quick look at the program recap
demonstrates a stable backlog and 403 787's in the marketplace. This bodes well
for both Boeing cash flows and market position for its customers, as the
backlog position becomes equally critical for the customer's wait time priority
as with its competitive pricing priority.
Fig.3
The
strength of 787-9 deliveries and the smaller 787-8 backlog (138) are the key
numbers below. The 787-9 has taken over the program during this period of time
and should become known as, "The Era of the 787-9".
Fig. 4
The
program WIP and Delivery metric for the 787, below, illustrates a similar WIP
inventory (47) than the prior month (45). This is an indicator of better space available
in the process as fewer 787's remain parked outdoors after initial assembly,
and more production efficiency is gained as units flow smoother through
the factory flow. The current percentage of 787-8's WIP is 43% of the inventory, and where the 787-9's equals about 57% of the WIP inventory.
Boeing opens the envelope please and
announces its 400th Dreamliner. A 787-9 to Etihad Scoot from Everett, WA Charleston,SC delivery
center on April 26, 2016. It all started in September 2011, and five
years later the 787 has flooded the airways. Giving a clear perspective with
the Airbus A350, it has only delivered about 20 in over 15 months of
production. Problems though harassing Airbus have slowed its delivery pace. It’s
a supplier problem.
Boeing
had supplier problems as well as technical issues almost stopping the 787
during its initial first two years of production. I am certain Airbus can
resolve its issues as it does not indicate any technical problems. However,
Qatar is upset over the Airbus A350 production woes stemming from suppliers and
they may be all that is wrong as Qatar did not delve deeper into its
displeasure of Airbus. It remains about 72 more A350's to go before it
completes its order with Airbus. Qatar had 80 A350 ordered to start with as its
largest A350 order holder.
Back to
the 400th, it is a significant mid-term capstone for the 787 program where the
787 in numbers are flying everyday stealing a march into the marketplace with
its advanced aircraft. The follow on effect could advance the MAX program with
its customers as the 787 and 737 are a family of aircraft, which can progress
an airlines staffing with the Boeing equipment.
If the
Max does perform as advertised when it enters into market, it will close the
gap has over Boeing in the single aisle market. Boeing got to four hundred 787
delivered, and it will go to five hundred in play shortly after the first of
2017. Where Airbus may have only fifty in service by 2017.
Waiting until the press storm
ceases on the GE engine icing found on half the flying 787 flying has been a
tedious read. I found one article that articulated the problem where the other
99% of the articles were touting the FAA pronouncement. Ainonline photo 2012 GEnex 1B-Pip II However, the fix was in
before the FAA declared the urgency to fix. Boeing had already pushed GE
towards making the engine flaw safe. As is understood by Winging IT, engine
icing occurs with the PIP II GE 787 engines, because of fan blade clearance from
its engine housing by about a 1/10th of an inch around its circumference. The
fix already started before FAA issued its latest engine demand had been
installed on about fifty aircraft.
Photo by Aviexmax: Note the black and silver fan blade almost touches inside diameter wall. FAA directive increases housing diameter by fractions of an inch, allowing a larger blade tip to wall gap which will prevent any known icing.
It is
presumed, this fix is for widening the tolerance by greater than 1/10th of an inch,
mitigates any future icing situations. The current internal procedure is for
the pilot to administer thrust increases every five minutes and blasting out any
ice build up until the "Blade Gap" is open. The technical fix is for making
a larger gap which would diminish performance somewhat, but eliminate the
occurrence of ice buildup entirely.
The fear
is an obvious potential for a two engine shutdown placing a real and imminent danger
under certain conditions. Even one occurrence of a two engine 787 shutdown from
icing, is catastrophic for everyone, so the FAA has pushed out an "all
hands on deck" call (bulletin) for fixing this problem. Everyone is
now aware, and every aviation 787 customer with PIPII engines is demanded by the FAA for making a remedial fix by expanding
the blade gap from the engine wall at a prescribed safe distance. The time slot
for this level of urgency is about 120 days from now. This time allotment for a
fix suggests the 787/GE engine is sound, but has a critical weakness under
random conditions which raises the risk bar too high for the flying public.
The
solution can be completed by two methods.
·The ready
solution is mounting at least one PIP I engine type out of two engines on a
787.
·The
second solution requires grinding down the engine opening casement to
recommended "fix" diameter, giving the blade clearance and ample space for not
allowing any ice build-up.
The "fix" will affect overall fuel performance by a small margin. The problem could have
not been prevented from the usual testing regimen, but any future engine
development will of course test specifically for this condition when finding the optimal performance package for this type of design. The FAA's due
diligence after an incidence is what matters for all the people using, building
and designing aviation as it advances. Thank you FAA!!
First there was the F-22 Rapture
and then came the F-35 Lightning II. Sounds like a plan G-man. However, as
often as G-man plans don't hold together, the F-22 (the world's most advanced
fighter at the time and some say it’s far better than expected) have too few
flying in number. The total comes too only 186 in service. Each has a cost of a troubled Littoral combat ship. The sentiment is not to send the F-22 into conflict
unless absolutely necessary and only upon the survival of this nation.
However,
a funny thing happened. A few of the F-22 did get away to a combat zone
(Iraq/Syria), and surgically lay waste to battlefields. With a few in airshows and
military exercises, a honing of the pilot's skills was mastered for what the F-22
offered. The pilots had just to learn what and how the fighter fit its role.
The engineers at home had to "adjust" its systems. The maintainers
crafted its F-22 skill set. The F-22 became an aircraft the US could not live
without. It is stealthy, it is fast and it is powerful!
Then came
the F-35 as it was scheduled to fill all the military's roles in all fields.
Army, Navy and Marines had skin in the game. There were not enough F-22, but
there certainly would be enough F-35's. The government woke up to the fact that
a much slower F-35 and a less maneuverable fighter may have to fight in a war
while not playing stand-off duty from a hundred miles out. It may have to get
in there and go dirty with somebody in the near future. Some nations may have
the F-35's number. Add 3 and 5 together and it's an 8, and it is somebody's
lucky number.
Now we
come to the main point of this opinion. The government didn't destroy the F-22
tooling, its production capacity or its internal ability for making the F-22. It
kept everything F-22 as an insurance policy. At the end of the F-22 production
run, the G-men and women sought preserving program viability in the file case.
They got it all and guess what? The F-22 review has come out of the file and is
now up for assignment like an Air Reserve Force. The US government has learned
many lessons since F-22 production ceased. New weapons, systems, and a lean
build technique are available that were not available at the close of the F-22
production run. The always improving bug has bit the F-22 program. Congress is
looking at building 197 more F-22's in the next decade. The study is a cash
based feasibility report. How much would it cost if the US Government opens the
F-22 production and what could be enhanced coming from the F-35 program transferred
the F-22 capability?
Important
currency questions. The F-22 plowed the way for the F-35 and now the F-35 can
give back to the F-22 if it reopens its production. The F-22 could do all the
best of the F-35 capability in an F-22 shell. The R&D is almost complete
enough through the F-35 and by the time the F-22 starts a production rerun,
technology transfer back to the F-22 would be a great currency move. The F-22
was scheduled for a 750 fleet of aircraft, but money constraints had reduced it
to only 186 fighters. That is a mere shadow of the original vision. Military
forces around the world have made strides towards the level of the F-22 as the
F-35 stumbles along. The confidence for F-35 fighters slumps to inferiority
fighter rather than superiority fighter. Money has run out long ago for the
F-35 vision and now congress is calling for an F-22 lifeline on its question.
Can the military show this nation it has air superiority chops in close combat
with the F-35?
The
problem arises when the assumption for air battles will be all stand-off
battles. What if the adversary does not achieve a high level of stand-off
capability or does not have satellites in space. It will fight with what it has.
A very capable close-in dog fighter where the F-35 lacks and the F-22 exceeds.
It now comes to the mind of many a planner the US needs the two layers of
capabilities. A fighter for close encounters better the F-16 and a miracle
worker coordinating the battle air space. The US needs a left hook (F-22) and a
hard right Jab (F-22). The only problem at this time is money.
The budget builders of the
military need to convene on how important is the F-22 since it started service
and how long can it wait for the F-35 to reach Initial Operational Capability
(IOC) maturation? Every talking head says the Marines have IOC and the Air
Force will have IOC by years end, and the Navy is coming along just fine.
The
problems for the F-35 are legion at this time. The program is moving forward at
a rate where for every solution accomplished within the program is overcome by
new advancing problems coming from the next block of R&D phases when it has
identified a new set of problems. This will continue to infinity and beyond.
The F-35 needs to demonstrate a block point eliminating all open issues and not
straggle the program like a Napoleonic Retreat from Russia.
If
Congress does decide on the F-22, for two hundred more for production, as it
was always planned from the file cabinet, then it will take 300 F-35's out from
2,400 it now plans. The question for all strategist is... Do you want 300 more
F-35's or two hundred more F-22's? A second question for the producers... can
you deliver the F-35 up to its initial vision when the project was first
initiated?
My own
answers are steeped in a bitter bias for the F-22. It needs about 400 in supply
to use often in theater. Having a 186 unit fleet of F-22’s suggest it should
only be used as a last result because of the few numbers available. Every frame
counts. IF those frames are lost in combat, then the nation is in grave risk.
Having double the number with upgraded technology will keep this country at an
advantage for defending itself. Many may say the F-35 could do it all but the
F-22 can do it at this time at a fast and stealthy pace.
Holly Batman, it's a cow, Robin.
Merrill Lynch proclaimed Boeing's $29 billion money pit, a pit too deep for its
787 program. The analyst have decided a little money here, and a little money
there has become real money. Its analysis of a pit too deep will be impossible
for Boeing to climb out of during the current block of 1300 787's going to
market. Hence, it gives a downgrade. All this means is Boeing is at risk for achieving a
goal of profitability within its 787 program. The limited scope view has consumed
many bullet points leading too few remaining bullet points to do otherwise but downgrade Boeing's 787 program results. Thus
making Boeing stock a "Bear" risk predicated on things not unforeseen, but only on
things foreseen.
Things
Foreseen comes from The 787 Money Pit:
·Not
enough sales for overcoming the 787 Money Pit remain on the book.
·The 1300
787's is a profit no go.
·Boeing
expansion programs for other aircraft types does tie Boeing's financial hands.
·Boeing
sales for the 787 program has permanently flattened.
·Airbus
has absorbed the remaining wide body market before Boeing achieved its 787 sales
goals.
Things
unforeseen may yet to occur:
·The
market's natural expansion expands Boeing's 787 sales portfolio by 500-787's in
ten years.
·Boeing
will manufacture its way out of the 787 Money Pit by upping monthly production.
·There
will be no show stopping glitches on its succession of programs (737 Max,
777X).
·The A350
is way overrated and it loses more orders.
·Boeing
pricing is allowed to increase over the A350 order slowdown.
The truth
is somewhere in between the foreseen and unforeseen. A stock market strategy
may exist for first waiting and then seeing when to sell from one’s own market
position, and then buy again when the light at the end of the money pit is turned
on. Currently Merrill Lynch sees the lights have been turned off in the 787 Money
pit.
As always it becomes a risk and an investor should use best information at
the time of any financial decision. However, there are both positive and
negative points for Boeing stock related to the 787 program at this time. The
Merrill Lynch rating states an obvious stock condition while using its best
information for its conclusions of the Boeing stock valuation. It does not include a rating based on unforeseen conditions as would a Winging It assumption is often made.
Remember when Boeing had parts
issues then battery issues and so forth. Well Karma comes around as a self-predicting
outcome even for Airbus as it houses 24 NEO's and a half dozen A350's within
its vast holdings in Europe. The tight dogfight between Boeing and Airbus
suggest Boeing will once again out deliver Airbus during 2016. The parts
bin and technological development has stumbled Airbus into a P&W standoff
for single aisle A320's as newly run A320's sit idle awaiting its PW engine
upgrades.
The ticking
clock will build its parking lot into a massive headache. Boeing lined up its
unfinished 787's outside on Paine Field until moving some into Change
Incorporation and Re-work warehousing. They have just cleared the last of
those obstinate first builds from the rain swept tarmac since 2011. Five years
later Airbus becomes a lady in waiting and waiting for seats, parts and
engines.
It will
skew the Airbus cash flow and dash another year for its hopes of becoming the
world's largest airplane maker. Two different continents two different results
tests the respective airplane makers on how they handle the hick-ups. Boeing
has cleared its forest of problems from the last decade. Airbus has just
entered into the "issue zone" during a time of critical order making
for both giants. Any delay with delivery can handicap Airbus during this year
and it has already during the first four months of 2016 made it
impossible to catch-up with Boeing as it has already hit its stride of twelve
787 a month production pace. Next time Boeing increases single aisle
production, it will be at a 47 airplane a month rate.
Boeing
has made it the key talking point of its strategy making more airplanes than
its competitor. It realized during 2010 the NG series needed a production change
since it was losing sales to Airbus from a pure backlog point of view. They
sought a level of backlog that would benefit the customer ordering pattern
within a customer's five year plan. Both the 737 and 787 backlog fell outside
this five year window causing the wait time to be a critical part for gaining
additional sales.
Airbus
has already begun a reaction with Boeing's production onslaught and has set its
production goals upward meeting the demand within a relative time frame for its
customers. The problem for Airbus that its own supply chain is having teething
woes, not the Aircraft. The critical moment is 2016. Airbus needs to sort out game
changers like seats and other critical parts in order to compete with a fully
operational Boeing production stream.
The
production forecast is as important as the ordering forecast as it will give
opportunity for its customers if delivery matches market demand. This is a long
held observation in the dynamics of production and sales relationship. Henry
Ford first mass production of its automobile made production the key selling
point for its Ford motor car. A customer didn't have to wait and it could own a
car meeting a superior standard in a short amount of time.
Boeing
referred back to the industrial age early in the 20th century. Build it just in
time, creating cash flows and advancing efficiency at a higher rate than its
competitor. Airbus is struggling at this time five years after Boeing struggled
and now the comparison will be if Airbus recovers faster than Boeing did during
the next five years.
Airbus and Boeing have been
waging a competition for the single aisle market since 2013 with its respective
NEO vs Max Version. Overall, including the CEO and NG backlog for market share
relationships Boeing edges Airbus in the NG category. Airbus hold an undeniable
lead for the single aisle class with orders. Mainly having a huge lead with its
A321NEO model. This chart is not complete as the order intake is very fluid and
data for the Single aisle represents the last known update.
However,
it does show a relative 60-40 market split for which Boeing hopes to narrow
during 2016, bringing the market difference to a 50-50 competition. Boeing
would need to gain about thousand more than Airbus for the program history. I
am going to assume that Boeing will chip away at the Airbus single aisle lead
and will catch them in sales by 2020.
Boeing started delivering the 787 in the fall of 2011. Since that
beginning it has suffered smoke, fire, and groundings. It was stated, Boeing may
have a "Bridge Too Far" for its aspirations in the latest generation
of aircraft. It was often called the 7 Late 7 as a humorous slam towards its three
year late on arrival to the market. The problem was Boeing stuffed the aircraft with a NASA
like technological ambitions. It became the commercial airplane answering all the
checklist items for a dream machine.
Boeing is on the cusp of delivering its 400th Dreamliner by
April's end 2016. What has been validated is enormous. It checked off economy,
environment, and customer appeal in one model progression. The innovations
discovered, implemented and appreciated have become its legend. The culmination
of its journey start is the 395 flying customer versions to date. Even though the
reach forward by Boeing was farther than any aircraft framer has ever
attempted, it pushed through with a flying record of unprecedented safety. Part
luck and mostly innovation has kept the 787 intact and without mishap of a hull
loss. Which is a polite way of saying a crash.
I am not tempting fate by mentioning the word "crash" as
with all aircraft types ever built, there have been incidences that make the
hair stand on end. The Boeing 787 will be no different over time. It will have its
moment or may have already had its moment when something does not go according
to plan.
However, Boeing, and as other makers try for perfection, while using its build
processes through a continuos improving way, in which to prevent any mishaps. The 787 represents a quantum
leap in preventing such an occurrence, other than the things the man cannot
control, and with that even weather anomalies become a fly over. The myriad amounts of data tracking, sensing, and onboard systems
management found on the 787 has allowed it to complete its maturation until the
400th Dreamliner will be delivered by the end of this month. This blog could
have been written last year when it delivered its 300th Dreamliner. But the
400th is a significant milestone because it represents the always improving
model of the 20th century carried into the 21st century.
The 400th 787 also is a benchmark comparing against its rival Airbus.
The counterpart A350 has only delivered about 20 A350's in comparison. It is a
less sophisticated representation with its prolific use of older technology refined
from the prior generation of aircraft. The 787 is in a class by itself, and that
recognition will clearly be found out as time goes forward. The 787 duration in
service will over match the A350 duration in service just from its use of conceptual
vision of best technology applied to a new airframe. Even though Boeing had its
battery problems, it was a risk for something better, and was supported with
knowledge that the 787 was not dependent on the Lithium-Ion battery exclusively.
Someday Boeing's competitor may incorporate "787 like architecture" on
its own aircraft. Having a core electrical system was logical even though no
one had done it before. Electronic window shades was a doable concept Boeing
believed it was ready for this implementation. The E-window shade has evolved since the first delivered 787, and
now the windows will be a more complete fixture for the customer, as it will be able to give
100% darkening for its customers. The "competitor" was risk averse even on the
window shade issue, and still employs window slats for its passengers instead. Even though this was a touch from the 1930's from the curtain era.
Boeing also centered on an all-electric airplane system where it
does not use bleed air bypass energy from its engines, while going with bleed air bypass system it could contaminate the
air. The cabin environment has become one of the big issues today where the prior generation cabin air can
make passengers sick while using the Bleed Air bypass system as it introduces contaminated air
into the cabin. The 787 has the best air for the passenger’s experience period.
Boeing introduce a concept for its flight ride. Sensors determine
rough air and make appropriate trim adjustments for muting the effects of turbulence occurring on the typical airplanes today. It provides customer comfort and peace of mind.
I know when getting off the airplane usually the first thing spoken to
family and friends in waiting is: "it was rough ride going over the
Rockies". The 787 provides an environment where a customer remarks about
the food service rather than turbulence terror.
The 400th Dreamliner will make you smile as it has a continuous
improvement from its first dozen commercial Dreamliners. In fact Ethiopian
Airline has purchased one of the terrible teens assembled in 2010. It is
bringing its next delivered 787 up to a current standard. The only penalty coming forward
is its overall aircraft weight coming from that first run as a heavier than current 787 aircraft coming off the production line. Even having an additional few thousand pounds included from the
"early teens", performance is remarkable for the first 787-8.
Boeing is making number 400 for the airline customer and its travelling customer with the same scale of importance for each category. The
airplane customer is keenly looking for value, and the Boeing value has increased
since its first introduction. The travelling customer wants the experience of flying, as part of its rest and relaxation regimen. Once a passenger leaves the Jet way
and boards the 787, the airport part is in the past. Since Boeing has taken special care and technology fashioned for
the passenger experience.
The only thing remaining is determining who will receive the 400th
Dreamliner. It may be Etihad receiving a 787-9 on April 26, 2016.
Boeing has entered if first 737-800 commercial production type on its line. These are special times where learned lessons from the NG, 787 and 747 projects. They will produce seven production (delivery) models but will not be ready for delivery until the engine maker goes through its testing and Boeing tweaks its test model until satisfied or when they have found a "Seattle Nirvana" replication. Rumor has it, Boeing may be months ahead with its Max schedule. They want a smooth roll out for the 737 unlike its arch rival Airbus who biffed it on the NEO having its engine retrenchments and step backs after it delivered its first single aisle Neo for Lufthansa. It has since re engineered its engine not meeting initial operational specs for its PW1100G needing extended warm-up time. Boeing wants specifically a perfect first delivery to its customers with its CFM Leap engines. If they avoid those NG, 787 and 747 introductory drags, then it will have a leg up on the Airbus offering when selling the Max. The A320NEO has teething woes for its bread and butter single aisle offering. Boeing will hang cement blocks under the first delivery models until all engine testing is complete. The importance is not only for reliability issues but its often quoted 14% fuel increase over the NG. If it does tune the aircraft successfully prior to first delivery it will avoid a similar situation Airbus is now experiencing with its own A320NEO's coming off the line. Boeing will hang fundamentally complete advanced engine technology under its wings. Boeing is ahead of schedule and has its developmental program under control for the 737 Max.
As slow as the market seems to
most observers of aircraft sales, it is suggest a market pause predicated on
what the fuel price will do. The price per barrel of oil will boost or freeze
sales at this junction. A true pause has made both Airbus and Boeing work harder
pushing the respective order books. With Boeing's 122 net sales during the
first quarter 2016 and then Airbus only netting a ten count, the manufacturers must
rely on the foreseeable market trends.
Continued
low fuel prices will grow the industry from the demand perspective. New
aircraft orders for the latest airplanes will go into temporary repose as
currently experienced during 2016. Leasing used airframes is a hedge against
long term capital intensive acquisitions. As, and when fuel prices rise, a pent
up need for new generation aircraft will rise to the top of the firing order
for the market place.
This is
the current position for having all new generation airplane orders flooding the
market from wide body to single aisle frames. The new norm for fuel will have a
steady but modest increase going forward until 2018. The modest fuel price
increase will allow the market to settle with a steady but lower purchase pace. One American Company, Delta, has yet to commit for its MD 80 replacements.
However, because of the used single aisle supply having a robust inventory,
Delta will use the right time-right price strategy for replacing its fleet of
older aircraft. The Airbus NEO backlog maybe too deep for Delta and Boeing's
factory production of NG's may accommodate Delta at the right time for the
right price.
A
transition to the MAX would be made easier for transitioning forward using a
low ball NG purchase and converting some of the single aisle in a purchase
block later on by changing remaining open orders into MAX orders at an appropriate time. The Airbus
book is too far out with its NEO's and the 737 NG is a better aircraft than the
A320 CEO. A win for Boeing would make the Boeing order book draw closer to a 50-50
split with the Airbus offering.
Once fuel
prices begin turning northward, it will signal a much anticipated resumption of
a stable oil market from its current collapse of $40 per barrel price. A $70
per barrel price will begin to move more duo aisle aircraft for both makers.
Boeing has a favorable and smaller 787 backlog at this time over the Airbus
A350, as mentioned in a prior Winging It Blog. The Boeing 2016 book orders
currently lead Airbus' paltry net of 10 ordered. In the coming months Airbus
will have its order day, but it will be important to notice if Boeing continues
its 40 ordered a month pace during the 2nd quarter 2016. If it does, and Airbus
remains relatively quiet, then there is definitely a backlog bias in Boeing's
favor.
Below is a link which will help
those entering summer with a reading report: The KC-46 has spent its time
upfront and has little or no time to get it right before production authorization
is achieved.
Airbus is having a cold shower in the first quarter 2016. It booked only a
net of 10 Orders.
Net ordered per Airbus Reporting:
.
Orders of note is the usual
activity when upgrading already formerly placed classic orders and turning them into Neo orders having a net some gain of zero on the order book when making those types of order book upgrades. Otherwise, those order transactions occurred when
transferring placed CEO orders and converting it to NEO orders. The first quarter 2016 single aisle order totals results ina net of -1.
The duo
aisle class once again show a net increase of eleven A330's as a result of a customer upgrading its original order from a prior period of seven A330-300 CEO's and changing it into seven A330-800 NEO's. Thus affecting the order book for a net
of zero gain within that order classification. In all, only anet elevenA330's were added to the Airbus book during 1st Q-2016.
A
cancellation of two A380's were withdrawn from the Airbus order book and it added two on
the same day. This transaction could be considered a book adjustment from changing customers
in the build queue. It maybe the Air Austral deletion and Emirates addition
netting zero.
Final
Airbus book increase is Net 10!
Final Boeing book increase is net 122!
Perhaps Airbus is seeking out an oversize potato when expressing itself for second quarter 2016.
The Boeing 747-(8?), now has nine
lives. For more unidentified orders were placed and one can assume it's from
one customer who may have a penchant for freight. However, an unannounced
caveat could suggest a commercial passenger intrigue holding some reservations
for the imagination. The venerable 747-8 is out pacing Airbus in orders for the
class of behemoth type orders during 2016. No A380's are yet told. The onset of
the 777-9X is the death of the Euro Jumbo as the 747 seeks its own niche before
customers stop looking for a way for making large frame money.
The 747
has significantly tapped the freight genre for staying alive. So I will assume
it was a freight order, as the A380 won't be a freight hauler loading space shuttle
like freight consignments which goes to the Queen of the skies. A shock would be a
passenger order for this type. But Boeing needs 747-8's like a glass of water
is needed on the Sahara. Simile and metaphors alone can't revive the 747
program but every order from this point forward is a program shock to its
heart. The A380 flat line is pending which is not a good sine wave for any
program.
Boeing since it realized a model
gaff when it came late to the market with the 737 Max now beginning to catch
the, Airbus swagger. An important Airbus note, it has delivered the NEO. The
Max is about a year away and is filling NG orders like it was 2011. Boeing is
already outputting Airbus at a consistent production pace during the first
quarter of 2016. Airbus is late showing its first quarter numbers and no wonder
as Boeing turns a production and a order corner as it already leads Airbus on
both counts so far in 2016.
My own
reason suggests the early to market NEO has lost its potential backlog energy
as its customers are firm with the NEO and does not need the Airbus A320-CEO as
arrivals of the NEO is the prime consideration of the day for all its single aisle customers. If the Max is truly the superior single Aisle a change will occur this year for the single aisle dichotomy of orders. The Max and NG will close the competitive gap with Airbus.
Further
is the sluggish start of the A350 delivery cycle. It’s already into a delivery cycle of 16 months with only one A350-900 delivered to date in 2016.
Remember the Seven Late Seven and all the complaints during the first 16
months. Boeing did better than Airbus during its first 16 months with having a
more complex aircraft then the A350-900. Boeing flat out, out produced and delivered
49 of the 787 in the same first 16 months as compared with Airbus which only made
about 16 A350-900's during its first 16 months of its production.
It has
been mentioned before in a Winging It feature blog and it bears another take.
Even with the grounding of the 787 during 2013 where for about 100 days no
787's were delivered, it will overcome any Airbus charge into the market.
Boeing kept making the 787 during the battery groundings and then delivered it in multiples
of 787’s after the battery solution was followed by FAA approval for that problem.
During December 2018, Airbus will reach a thirty-six month production milestone assuming
not having any Boeing like problems, it will also have little too few
additional orders for its type. In Fact the A350 family has only sold a handful
of A350's over the last 24 months where Boeing has sold about 149, 787’s in the
last two years (or 24 months to date). There is little cheer going on in
Toulouse these days. The A350 is withering under Boeing's orders and delivery,
demonstrating the imminent success of the Dreamliner.
The
Airbus Corporation (EADS) has received a negative (36) orders in the last 24
months. Dropping its book total from 812 to 777. Combining its 16 deliveries in
16 months, it drops the Airbus backlog to 762 as compared with Boeing's total
backlog of 746 while coming down from its 1,139 total orders. The case has been
made and it’s apparent, Airbus is having some bad board meeting days without an
apparent solution for its 787 problem, After all its billions spent and hype
given on the behalf of the A350, it is now crumbling before the order book view
as Boeing keeps outpacing the A350 on both orders and deliveries fronts. In fact, the Boeing order book is positioned for more timely orders than even Airbus can hope to deliver.
The full
report can be downloaded at the bottom of the initial article linked above by giving
your email address and Name. It’s worth the access and a "save" to
your hard drive.
Having an
overarching long view of the F-35 gives the reader a backdrop for understanding
the F-35 is just taking its baby steps and any fault encountered is part of the
build process. The F-35 will make a quantum leap during 2016 for its initial
deployment.
KLM has announced its first 787 flight to San Francisco from Amsterdam this summer. In tribute to this
auspicious and joint effort occasion. People break out in song from the Haight
Asbury district clear to the Amsterdam's walk about. They all will be flying high
over the announcement.
Amsterdam has its lights too and they aren't always white Neon
California, here I come Right back where I started from Where bowers and flowers bloom in the sun Each morning at dawning birdies sing and everything A sun kissed miss said, "Don't be late" That's why I can hardly wait So open up those Golden Gate California, here I come
Fungible is not a term used for
people but for liquid assets sometimes found in an oil pipeline. A barrel of oil found
in a New Jersey pipeline is also a barrel of oil found in a company's portfolio for its nation-wide barrels of oil positioned for trading purposes. Has Boeing's workforce become
a commodity where 4,000 to 8,000 employees are released from its system as working units in some sort of fungible manner?
Boeing
needs to reduce its workforce footprint and still make guidance for its
stockholders and achieve lofty goals needed in its airplane ware with Airbus. A
8,000 workforce reduction is a 10% sock in the gut for those whom are loyal to
the cause of airplane building. Next workforce unit up in this case. Trimming
the fat is a Boeing battle cry, and full steam ahead with less. The President
of Boeing did not explain well what all this meant leaving the likes of this
blogger with an attempt at better understanding the nature of it all regarding
business at hand.
The storm
swirls with airplane costs, workforce fat when competing with Airbus pricing in
the market place. Long gone are the statements referring “bang for the
buck" or "added value". Boeing is just dumping its fungible
workforce. Most people don't even know what I'm talking about and that's just
fine, but you need to use the word fungible in a sentence today as if you know
something when impressing your friends with business school like acumen.
Going a
little deeper on this subject requires a further imagination for what is
occurring with Boeing in the workforce reduction announcement. It isn't from a
thin backlog nor is it from a bad sales year coming up. The real cause for
fungible workforce reduction companywide is the buildup problem occurring
several years back. A time was occurring where Boeing was not meeting its
objectives in a timely manner. It was smarting over the three years late
reputation so Boeing hired more people to throw on the fire of progress for its
multi-layered programs. Boeing had bit off more than it could chew in anyone
program.
The KC-46
problems are in the cusps of finding whether it will be allowed its first
initial production run this year. It has problems too, but not insurmountable
by any means it just needs more hours of tinkering.
·Boeing is
building a building for building an Airplane for which is not ready yet, the
777X.
·Boeing is
building an airplane for which contains an X factor in the single aisle Max
realm.
·Boeing
has just started building a perfect 10 machine in Charleston, SC.
·Boeing
has just announced 4,000 people will leave in this perfect industrial storm?
It
doesn't pass the smell test of reducing cost for the purpose of competitive
pricing against Airbus. Fickle customers who buy aircraft at a clip of $100
million a unit, do look at the price factor. The price factor becomes more fickle
if all things are equal in what is purchased. In Boeing's case it claims
superiority over the other, but it has to lower its selling price at the
expense of furloughing workers.
The
answer to all this confusion comes from analogy. In the cruise ship industry
seasons affect the critical assets, the cruise ship itself. Boeing is in such a
season where its workforce needs repositioning from one ocean to another to
capitalize opportunity. Workforce build-ups in one area will reposition to
another. Having this flexibility will cost Boeing employees up to 8,000 jobs in
the next year while other programs will receive just in time human resources in
another part of production cycle, as if it were a fungible matter.
The
prediction forthcoming and concerning lost Boeing manpower:
"it will need
workers sooner rather than later in other projects it even has already started
or made the commitment".
It can make a shift of its "too many workers" in
one area where production costs are affecting the market. The downgrade of
employee numbers is housekeeping which allows future absorption for the day where a further 8,000 workers are required
and repositioned for its various programs. However for the 8,000 today it doesn't pay the rent.
Matt Damon is making a movie in Toronto.
"Downsizing" is the theme and title. Norwegian Airlines is the cargo
holder for the props. A picture is worth a thousand words becomes the cliche.
SoNorwegian Airphotographs the freight event
promoting its cargo service. In doing so, a bystander obtains the scope and
scale of the 787 aircraft unless a traveler has already flown the 787 from the
ground up. The electric cars come from Norway along with electric bicycles
stored onboard.
What I wanted for Christmas came late. An inside scoop Aboard the Zumwalt. Note that Port is on the left side of the ship facing forward and Starboard is right side facing the Bow (Frontward). My navy ends at these position recognition. However, walking the ship in pictures is the feature below. It's all an inside operation. The external deck is as functional as a submarine's exterior deck. It all happens under the Zumwalt's skin.
ABOARD THE DESTROYER ZUMWALT — “All ahead one third on the starboard shaft.” The order was called out by the Bath Iron Works (BIW) conning officer, clearly heard in the hushed atmosphere of the pilot house. The bridge was dark except for the dim glow of flat-panel displays as the 16,000-ton destroyer moved away from the Portland, Maine, pier.
Perhaps 30 people were crowded into space. The navigating team was led by Captain Earl Walker, the shipyard’s longtime chief pilot, and all the controls were manned by civilian engineers and shipbuilders working for BIW, which owns the Zumwalt until it is formally handed over this spring to the US Navy. Other engineers — from the shipyard, Raytheon, and other manufacturers — looked over the operators’ shoulders.
Unusually for a ship on builder’s trials, the civilians were joined by about 130 members of the destroyer’s US Navy crew, on board to get their first chance to sit down and operate the ship that later this year they will call home.
This was the third night out for the Zumwalt on its second series of builder’s sea trials, the first “alpha” trials having been carried out in early December. The ship, which will eventually go to sea with a crew of 147, was carrying 388 souls, one of the highest numbers Zumwalt likely will ever carry during a planned service life of about 40 years.
The 610-foot-long destroyer moved out slowly from the pier, making a sharp left turn, then a right to come into the channel. As it moved out of Casco Bay into the Atlantic, a slight sea was running, enough to throw spray from its sharp, wave-piercing prow and occasionally spit on the bridge. A slight glow in the darkness ahead belied the white running light on the Zumwalt’s bow — a change from the mast position required on other ships because the destroyer’s stealthy design leaves nowhere else to put it.
Accompanying the Zumwalt was the small US Coast Guard cutter Moray. Coasties regularly escort warships in US coastal waters for security, but the Moray also carried a team from the Naval Sea Systems Command using a variety of instruments to measure the Zumwalt’s signatures. Checking out the ship’s stealth qualities is as much a factor as making sure the ship’s engines work properly. The stealth features are effective — the Zumwalt is very difficult to detect on radar. For safety, reflectors are temporarily rigged in the halyards so other ships can see the destroyer.
The Zumwalt’s stark, angular profile is unlike any other ship on the seas, the epitome of stealth design that seeks to minimize radar cross-sections (RCS) and heat and emissions signatures across visual, physical and electronic spectra. The decks are not designed for people to be out and about, and all the usual topside ephemera is either recessed or moved inside the ship.
The only objects protruding above the flat foredeck are the huge enclosures for the two 155mm guns of the advanced gun system (AGS), the largest naval guns installed as standard equipment to go to sea in decades. Ranged along the sides of the ship on the foredeck and along the flight deck aft are 80 missile cells in a new arrangement intended to use the blast shields of the cells to protect the ship, and keep the centerline free for the gun system. No railings or lifelines are visible, although stanchions can be rigged manually when in port. Those venturing out on deck must latch on to a safety line.
The ship moved out of the harbor with an SPS-73 navigation radar rotating atop a mast on the foredeck, but as it began to sway with the sea the mast was retracted, periscope-fashion, into the hull.
Shipyards use builder’s sea trials to check out all the ship’s features and identify fixes. The Zumwalt is filled with so many new technologies — 10 major groupings and dozens of smaller items — that BIW is running a nonstandard second trial. In April, the ship will go to sea again for acceptance trials, when members of the Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey comes aboard to conduct their own assessment. If those trials are successful, the board recommends the Navy accept the ship, and a subsequent delivery ceremony marks the stage where ownership is transferred to the government and the ship enters naval service.
“The first trial we were out about a week, this time Monday to Thursday,” said Capt. James Downey, program manager for NAVSEA’s PMS 500 office which oversees the DDG 1000 program. He spoke March 23, the ship’s third night out. “The real point is to demonstrate those systems the same way we will do it for acceptance trials. This is a dress rehearsal for that, and to grade ourselves. We’ll collect all the data and go back and debrief and see how we did.”
Downey felt good about the Zumwalt’s stealth qualities. “I’m not worried about the RCS whatsoever,” he declared. “It’s looking good. It’s looking too good.”
Despite his engineer’s caution, Downey was upbeat about the trials. “So far we haven’t had any failures — no equipment failures, no demonstration failures.”
Those on board reported the first two days of the trials were held in relatively rough weather, but the Zumwalt’s unusual, tumblehome hull performed as expected.
“The ship handled well. It’s been an exceptionally stable platform. It handled very well,” said US Navy Capt. James Kirk, who will become the Zumwalt’s first commanding officer.
During the trials, the twin rudders were put hard over at 30 knots. Kirk was impressed. “I would have thought the ship would have significantly more heel” during such a turn, he said. “It was only about a 7- to 8-degree heel.”
Kirk was enthusiastic about the ship’s performance and about having his crew on board to learn to operate the ship.
“The Alpha trials demonstrated about 20 basic tasks and functions on the ship. During Bravo trials, we carried out more than 100 tasks,” Kirk reported.
The crew, he said, “got to integrate with the ship and operate under the supervision of BIW. You can’t beat that. The actual hands-on operation of the actual vessel is irreplaceable. On a class of ship that’s this different, where we have a lot of new technology, there is an exceptional benefit for having this opportunity.”
This was also the first time the Zumwalt had been to sea with a reporter on board, providing an opportunity to get a look at some of the unique spaces and features on this highly classified ship.
The Bridge
Situated on the O-2 level, or the second level of the superstructure, the bridge is a large space that will have only three regular watchstanders. Two positions are adjacent at the center, one for the junior officer of the watch (JOOW) and another for the junior officer of the deck (JOOD). The officer of the deck (OOD) has no seat but is expected to stand and move about. The three positions will be filled by officers, not enlisted sailors. Manual machinery controls are between the two seated watchstanders, while control and computer panels are provided for each position. The ship can be steered by autopilot, keyboard or mouse instructions or by rotating a small black knob that serves as the ship’s wheel.
The positions are nearly enclosed by a circular installation of consoles. From their seats, the JOOD and JOOW look past their engineering and navigational displays out to the bridge windows, while a fairly wide walkway is between the consoles and the windows. Overhead, the positions are nearly surrounded by eight large flat-panel screens, creating one of the most comprehensive bridge information displays afloat. Any display desired — a variety of sensors, intelligence inputs, cameras focusing on multiple areas around the ship — can be dialed in.
Flanking the JOOD/JOOW consoles are separate seats for the commanding officer, to starboard, and a commodore or the executive officer, to port. Those seats each have three large flat-panel displays overhead.
To the rear, two positions are provided for intelligence or mission planning purposes.
At the rear of each side of the pilothouse are “alcoves” where the captain or OOD can conn the ship as it conducts an underway replenishment or docks and undocks. Two large, opening windows are provided, each big enough for two good-sized men to poke outside the skin of the ship to see down to the waterline.
Ship Mission Center
The ship’s nerve center is a huge command and control space two decks high, projecting from the steel-enclosed O-2 level into the O-3 level at the base of the composite superstructure that surmounts the ship. Three large flat-panel displays dominate the front of the room where 19 watch standers man console stations in four rows. The general layout of the consoles is somewhat similar to the latest Aegis Baseline 9 with similar user stations and common displays, although in a much larger space. The first and second rows handle weapons, including missiles, guns and anti-submarine and electronic warfare. Command and control positions occupy the third row, including seats for the commanding officer, tactical action officer, and the engineering officer of the watch. Propulsion, engineering and information technology support personnel man the fourth-row consoles.
Above and at the back of the SMC is a large, glassed-in second deck provided for mission planners, intelligence personnel or command staffs. There, they can function without disturbing the watchstanders below while viewing the same common displays. Port and starboard of the SMC are additional enclosed spaces with more consoles and large panels to allow for specific mission planning or operations.
Below Decks
Down in the hull, a prominent feature is “Broadway,” a very large main-deck passageway running along the starboard side allowing ammunition and supplies to easily be moved to storage areas and magazines. The P-way, big enough for forklifts to drive through, is similar to those on the last generation of US battleships, which used the same descriptive term.
Broadway runs as far forward as the magazines for the two AGS guns. Just aft of the guns the open space is large enough for a number of workout machines to be placed for the crew, near a lounge where sailors can relax.
Amidships on the second deck are the mess areas. The wardroom for officers, goat locker for the chief petty officers, and mess for the crew are all served by the same, all-electric galley.
The two main machinery spaces each feature a power plant consisting of an advanced induction motor (AIM) and an MT-30 Rolls-Royce gas turbine together producing 39 megawatts, for a total output of 78 megawatts. Each AIM is directly connected to one of the ship’s two propeller shafts, eliminating the need for reduction gear. The machinery spaces are designed to be remotely operated.
Aft, a secondary ship’s mission center (SSMC) is installed on the port side. On a smaller scale than the large ship mission center, the SSMC is able to handle the same ship control functions as the SMC or the bridge and will function as the ship’s damage control center.
All the way aft is a large boat bay, big enough to store two 11-meter rigid-hull inflatable boats (RHIBs) one in front of the other. The RHIBs are on rails and launch and recover on a titanium cradle that rises and tilts to connect with a heavy-duty rubber extendable ramp running through stern doors in the Zumwalt’s wide, flat transom. Nearby, berthing racks are installed for a 14-member special operations team, along with space for their weapons and gear.
Hangar and Flight Deck
No nets ring the flight deck, which instead features personal safety barriers. The PSBs reduce the ship’s signature and are automatic, unlike nets fitted on destroyers and cruisers which need to be raised and lowered by sailors. On the Zumwalt, the PSBs will rise as soon as a landing helicopter is trapped by the Aircraft Ship Integrated Secure and Traverse (ASIST) helicopter recovery and handling system. The ASIST latches on to the helo and moves it into the ship’s large hangar, which is fitted with a new, two-piece solid door that could be a prototype to replace doors on other ships.
“It’s very reliable — it’s very hard to get this out of alignment,” Downey said. “The door is very easy to operate — push a button and it operates even if the ship rolls through 90 degrees” side to side.
Crew
The opportunity for a crew to get sea time before a ship is delivered is rare indeed.
“We’ve been waiting for 33 months,” said Command Master Chief (CMC) Dion Beauchamp, the ship’s top enlisted sailor. “It was very important for us to be aboard. The shipyard was gracious to allow us to do this.”
It was the second time the crew had been underway on the Zumwalt. The first was a day trip during the December Alpha trials when the crew boarded the ship in Portland and rode it back to Bath. This time they boarded in Portland but helped operate the ship for about 22 hours before returning the following day to the shipyard.
In addition to the Zumwalt crew, about half a dozen engineers from the crew of the Michael Monsoor, the second unit of the three-ship class, were on board to familiarize themselves with the engineering plant.
Crew members took part in a number of operations and tests, from conning the ship to handling the engines to learning to operate the anchor — placed inside the ship and lowering through the bottom. The high degree of system integration aboard the Zumwalt, Beauchamp said, means sailors aren’t just learning to operate specific pieces of equipment. “This is operating a system of systems.”
Beauchamp, a veteran sailor who has served on an aircraft carrier, a cruiser, and two frigates, said he had to learn 19 new technologies as a Zumwalt crew member, but he had an advantage.
“As part of the commissioning crew, you get experiences other crews don’t. You sit here with the group who designed these systems.”
He pointed out the difficulties in becoming part of the Zumwalt’s company. “All sailors have to have passed their last rating exam and do well at it,” he said. “Only one crew member is younger than 21.”
Chief Fire Controlman Dave Aitken normally operates weapon systems, but it will be another two years before the Zumwalt’s combat systems become operational. With the concentration on the hull, mechanical and engineering areas of the ship, Aitken and the FCS under his charge had other duties during the trials, working often with civilian engineers.
“The sailors learned from the Raytheon folks,” Aitken said, mentioning the prime contractor for the Zumwalt’s combat systems. “On the underway, they sat at the consoles with a Raytheon guy looking over their shoulders.”
“There are no Tomahawks or weapons on this ship,” he added, “but we assist the other half of the combat systems department. We help the IT department with the integrated systems — communications, the total ship computing environment.” The experience, he said, will mean that “after our gear gets installed, the sailors are going to better understand how they fit into the system.”
Kirk, the commanding officer, was enthusiastic about what was accomplished on the trials.
“Every sailor has to share the burden of operations. Every sailor has benefited from this time at sea,” he said. “We were able to get more done than we’d planned before the trip. That was a happy surprise for the crew.”
Embarking the crew on the trials was also a positive for Downey, the program manager.
“They seem to have enjoyed operating the ship,” he said. “From what I’ve seen from the industry and Navy guys who have been working on it, there’s a lot of positive feedback from having the crew here — along with the extra energy and enthusiasm that they’ve brought, having the chance to operate the ship.”
Downey appeared pleased as the ship entered the Kennebec River to return to the shipyard.
“We’ve met all our planned objectives,” he said. “I don’t have any failed demonstrations. We’ve got to go through the data and get ready for the next big test here in about three to four weeks — acceptance trials.”
Those Navy-run acceptance trials are expected to take place in mid-April. If all goes well, the ship will be delivered and the crew will move aboard May 20. Months of pier-side training and certifications will follow, and the Zumwalt will leave the shipyard for good in September. A commissioning ceremony is scheduled for Oct. 15 in Baltimore, and the destroyer is planned to arrive at its home port of San Diego in early December.
Even then, the Zumwalt will be a long way from being ready for service. Under a two-part, phased delivery plan approved in 2007, the ship will begin a six-month post-shakedown availability at a San Diego shipyard in January, and for most of the year, the full combat system will be installed, including weapons, sensors, and programming upgrades. Combat system sea trials will be in early 2018 off California, and only after that will the ship train up to deploy.
Christopher P. Cavas
