When WiLL The 797 Announce

There are several or multiple schools of thought on when the 797 will be announced by Boeing. The mega airplane builder just met with Delta over some 797 plans. Delta won't budge until Boeing commits officially for making the New Medium Airplane (NMA) decision. For those who claim Boeing will only announce during 2020, it seems unlikely or not possible an announcement will be coming from Farnborough in 2018. There are those who suspect a Paris 2019 Airshow announcement is forthcoming.

A "Winging It" view takes an early announcement period approach landing at Farnborough during July 2018 and here is why. 

• What has been taking so long with a new program has been accomplished without publication of the progress. 
• Engine makers were long ago given the Boeing gauntlet for a 45,000 lb thrust engine. 
• Boeing has everything ready including its launch customers which Delta has just signaled its still onboard with the final prototype configuration. 

What would be a show stopper for Delta's want is the offering price the Boeing 797 may require something too pricey. Boeing would sell the 797 to its launch customers at a sizable discount. Boeing would hope it could reduce production costs by the time its launch customers would reorder another tranche of 797's 5-10 years later. 

Does Boeing have its start-up costs controlled?  Boeing is shooting for a $60-70 million dollar 797 for its customers which may be reasoned out to a $120 million dollar list price per unit. Delta may have told Boeing that if it can cut a price for $60 million each they will launch with a hundred units, but Boeing must announce it first before it will buy.

Delta and Boeing will be doing that backroom dance at Farnborough. Look for Boeing establishing a $15 Billion dollar 797 program deferred cost pit in order to make orders appear at the launch. Boeing would hope to build and deliver by 2025, a $50 million production cost copy which it will sell for a $70 million @ a "deal price" while listing it at $120 million for those who care about such things. 

The idea here is that numbers float around the room full of principal players until someone rings a bell on a sweet price. The "787 deferred cost pit" will only have a few billion remaining before the 797 gets into full swing. Its currently approaching the $20 billion level coming down from about $30 billion and that deferred costs reduction slope is steepening each month. By 2025, the deferred cost moniker rolls over to the 797 program.

The 2018 797 launch announcement doesn't have to wait on engine programs to catch-up, it just has to know an engine will be ready by 2024. Boeing at least has one engine maker ready for its engine plan and timetable. Boeing would like another engine proposal as it has also recently called out those who were given a deadline for its engines proposals due last week. Coincidently, it is in time for Farnborough 2018.

Boeing would like to avoid giving Paris 2019 the venue for the announcement since it is home ground for the Airbus effort. This would eliminate a 2019 797 debut. The 2020 crowd expecting a later Farnborough launch are too late in its thinking. Boeing is in a hurry at this time and going early won't affect its, "in already-in-development 797 programs" at all. 

Why say Boeing needs another two years of lead-time when it already has consumed program time on new technology from its other programs? It has already lined up launch customers and it already has the production space. It's ready! 2020 is too late, 2019 is too Airbus, and 2018 is Goldilocks in the Boeing house.

From Sonic To Hype comes The 797

First, Boeing dithered with the Sonic Cruiser in some sort of slight of hand going to the 7E7. Today the Boeing playbook has opened back up using "hype" as in hypersonic cruiser so it seems a 797 is around the proverbial corner. In pictures here comes the trick Boeing will play on its competitors.

Sonic Cruiser Before the 7E7

Hypersonic Before The 797

Max Efficient To The Bottom Line

When weighing-in on efficiency an airplane maker may tout its aircraft engine being 15% more efficient than any previous engine as its lead-in. However, aerodynamics and maintenance costs haven't even been calculated nor purchase price even considered with a statement of "15% more efficient".

Boeing has taken a different road and may have started with its 787 programs. Airplane makers should talk in bottom line numbers. Plane "A" vs plane "B"  is a measurement comparison of an airplane program such as the single-aisle class. Or better compared with one another in the efficiency totality for its investment and operational costs per passenger seat. Boeing said "the 787 would be 20% more fuel efficient and 30% more maintenance effective than previous 767's. Does that mean the engines would be 20% more fuel efficient? No, it doesn't and it takes a reader more care to cipher the advertising scheme by asking the right questions before buying.

A 787 is 20% more efficiently traveling because of the sum of its efficiency, meaning aerodynamics weight, and other technologies contribute as much as an engine will contribute. When Boeing carefully states the new 797  engine will be 25% more efficient than the 757's old engine, questions arise as to what it really means with that type of statement.

Does it mean that airplane maintenance plus technology is not part of its calculation or does that include a 25% improvement from over-all attributes applied to the model? So does the engine becomes 25% more efficient? Many a press naysayer pleads it's not possible to make a jet engine 25% more efficient as Boeing claims in the next five years. The naysayer could be correct in this assumption. However, Boeing may be pleading a 25% efficiency improvement using an advanced engine strapped to an advanced and lighter frame.

The efficiency number becomes a plugged-in number for the program and not just the engine. Comparing a 25-year-old 757 engine to 2018 engine efficiency, it becomes easy to see how an engine maker may close the efficiency gap using new technology and new jet engine designs. After all, the 737 NG CM-56 is 15% less efficient than the 737 Max-Leap 1B from the same company and that's tying one arm behind its back. The Boeing 737 Max constrained the engine diameter when it did not allow a taller ground stance and it left Leap 1B to well, just leap to a 68" smaller than its Leap 1A 79" Airbus sibling. 

The 797 engine will have the ground clearance to make a 25% engine efficiency gain over the older 757 engines. The RB211-535E4-powered Rolls is older Boeing 757 engine.

You can bet Rolls has just a jet engine answer today in its workshop. You can also bet that the makers of Leap 1B are offering a 25% answer with a larger diameter engine than the RB211-535E4 Rolls.

You could also say adding a lighter frame and better wings with computer-driven avionics will make the 797 25% more efficient than the 757 built during 1982. It's just how words carve up your thinking that becomes the 25% improvement.

Delta's 757

Delta's 767

NMA 797 Delta Concept

The B-52 Gets New Pylons, The South China Sea Quakes and Shakes At The Thought

China builds militarized sand dunes out of ocean bottom and corals in a land building grab. The shallows of the South China Seas is China's new empire building. However, a rarely also talked about Geo storm is a possibility and is only witnessed during massive earthquakes or volcanic eruptions. The US has a secret weapon and its called Liquefaction. 



This GEO term arose to prominence during the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and reappeared again in 1989 except this time it turned the now called "AT&T Giant stadium" into quicksand during the quaking. The stadium sits next to the water and is a built-up landform much like what China is doing in the South China Sea. Except China is using sand and coral for a military base for aircraft or ships patrolling the South China Sea. An Island won't sink! Or can it?

The US Airforce is now refitting its B-52 with new 20,000 lbs pylon capability on the B-52 wings. It reminds me of the MOAB used in Afghanistan against terrorist tunnels.  The MOAB destroys square miles of an underground land structure by turning it into a mucky GEO structure. 

The MOAB could be repurposed as an explosive which could take out or sink a two-mile-long sandbar in the South China Sea. The seven-decade-old B-52 is a very special aircraft which has the capability of making a San Francisco Bay area liquefaction event while sinking man-made islands with just one pass of a quake making MOAB.



I guess a new sandblasting bomb weighing 19,500 lbs is now in the US arsenal turning sand into wonton soup.

A Little Of The Old Bamboo Airlines

Boeing Marketing scored a big order today even though it isn't firm, delivery will start in 2020. That alone suggests a Farnborough confirmation announcement next month as Bamboo Airlines of Vietnam has deposited money for an order for 20 787-9's. The Boeing Marketing will display it pleasure in this youtube video leading with Dick Van Dyke as the key promoter. 

The Chitty-Chitty Bang-Bang affair kicks off an ordering binge for the second half of 2020 where Boeing keeps leading in widebody sales of late. It promises to be a big show as Emirates may confirm another 40 of its 787-10 it's already committed.

Or is it I just like Dick Van Dyke and that "Ole Bamboo".  

Darren Hulst, senior managing director of marketing at Boeing Said,

Boeing is asking for buyers in the Middle Eastern Part of the world after 60 customers have been contacted.

and... “I think airlines in the Middle East, in the Gulf, have shown very similar interest to what we’ve seen globally in terms of how this aircraft would enable them to grow in different ways and enable them to expand capabilities,”

Full 797 story Link: Gulf News Aviation:

The Farnborough Airshow Headline "The 797"

I don't see Boeing waiting for Paris because the market window for the NMA is 2018. The 797 has its customers base and waiting for a few more customers to come onboard by the 2019 Airshow is a fool's errand.

The Farnborough Airshow is a slight to the Paris airshow home of Airbus pride. Boeing has been working on the 797 since 2010 or earlier depending industry intel you want to believe. Eight years of development in the paper world has an opus result. 

The result will show at Farnborough next month and not wait another 13 months until Paris. All those waiting for Paris should bring umbrellas because they will be standing in the rain watching the second traunch of 797 orders come into the Boeing fold.

A conservative estimate for a 797 launch announcement is 400 launch units and the follow-on year at Paris will bring another 200 orders. During the months between, 100 orders will be booked totaling 700 NMA's during the twelve months of the Boeing launch announcement. The potential is too much for Boeing just to sit on it until Paris of 2019. 

It has what it needs for next month's airshow and it will launch. Some think it's Paris from what Boeing exec's have hinted with being in the next year before it decides. That sentiment is for an Airbus fan and its leaders to muse about until the official memo is sent leading in with a "Holy Sh** Bateman". 

If I'm wrong with this comment then I think Boeing has a poor sense of timing keeping its customer strung out as 767's and 757's are parked in the desert and A320's and A-321's are the upcoming airshows' main talking points.

I smell a show stopper is coming to England as a direct tribute to our neighbors across the pond. Paris is a no go for a launch announcement because of Airbus and being late in the cycle giving Airbus a response with its own counter. Singapore in January 2019 is no go because a monumental announcement would underwhelm the aviation world unless China comes through with a massive 797 order book. I think China will wait until Paris before it gets on the 797 train. It will have time to play Boeing for a year to get its order price in place for its Chinese strategy.

The orders will come just the same as Boeing has the ingredients for a market "disrupter", which its competition has not an answer at this time. Since Airbus will only have A-320 window dressing and A-321 curb appeal. Cargo will be addressed and is not an Asian factor for sales numbers.

Another 767 Approach Has Landed

The venerable 767 is finding a way to keep alive. Boeing's backlog website shows about 98 767 to be built as of May 31, 2018. Adding the recent 12 ordered by FedEx, the number rises to even 110 frames to be built. No more 767-300ER passenger aircraft have been ordered at this time nor is it expected.  Why do customers keep ordering the 767F such as the US military tanker program, the freight haulers UPS and FedEx?

UPS.com photo

AJOT Quote:

"The 767 Freighter, based on the 767-300ER (extended range) passenger jet, can carry approximately 58 tons (52.7 tonnes) of revenue cargo with intercontinental range, making it a flexible platform for serving long-haul, regional or feeder markets."

Airbus admits it builds airframes for passenger traffic only and a freight version from the same passenger aircraft would have a gross shortfall for freight hauling due to its passenger optimized design. Boeing has designed all its family of aircraft for passenger or freight hauling even though freight is a Boeing secondary goal. The 787 family has yet to reveal a freight market or its freight capacity. 

However, now that the A-330 has replaced the 767 in the marketplace for hauling passengers. The 767 has reared its heavy capacity legs above the marketplace. The 767 frame can haul 58 tons in a conveniently configured frame for which the A-330 won't match. 

The military saw this airframe in a bidding war with Airbus over the KC-46 tanker project. It took two bidding processes to settle the airplane makers differences and Boeing won the bidding war, where it hasn't looked back since then. It just sells 767 freighter models based on the 767-300ER, even though it doesn't have the latest engines nor aerodynamic attributes, the A-330 passenger model is based on. The 767 can haul a semi-truck load of weight including the truck weight itself.

The news has now reported 12 more 767 freight airframes are ordered by FedEx, thus Boeing announces plans of increasing producing from 2.5 units to 3 units a month. The future freight order book may continue to rise as other competitors to FedEx may join the freight battle with more orders. This is the third production increase for the 767 in recent times.

The DDG 1000 Is Just Prototype "A"

The Zumalt DDG1000 doesn't have half its weapons capabilities envisioned. As an example no railgun (too expensive), no advanced cruise missile (under development), and finally, its concurrent adversaries ( the competition changes how it does its business every day).

The plug and play ship is not a destroyer since its bigger than a cruiser. Its invisibility on a radar screen is its chief design attribute as known by anyone paying attention. A new ship class designation should be assigned. A battleship is too big and old, a cruiser is so 1980, and the DDG1000 is just a weapons carrying ghost. Not to mention frigates and LCS, the DDG1000 has its own number sequence. What will really get the ball rolling is a new enumeration and class designation for what the navy has wrought.

The Zumwalt class ship is every ship thrown into a seabag stirred not shaken. Concurrency is plugging whatever works well into its hull. The ship lacks its own class. A class name comes to mind best representing what it is on the ocean. A destroyer destroys everything in harm's way including itself if necessary. A battleship is the main gun in a gun battle. A frigate is just a frigate with some hops to its propulsion system. The Arleigh Burke class is a very effective upscaled WWII Tin Can with everything that has been long since scrapped from what destroyers dream about.

Therefore the prototypical number should be as follows: 100-A,100-B, and 100-C. A new class name should be a Formula-1 class of ship. It goes faster than a cruiser and destroys the competition in a battle and can do it all in the littorals once upgraded for its time and place. A Formula-1 is constantly being tuned and tested not unlike the race car on race day or during track testing. The weather plays into what tire a Formula -1 racer uses not unlike the DDG1000 Zumwalt needs an over-expensive cruise missile for moving targets. The class designation and ship sequence number should be F-1-100A until its dialed in as a warfighter. The Navy has until the letter Z to get it right. The DDG1003 is the third version which should be designated as F-1-100C.

I Will Defend

The DDG1001 is named for Michael Monsoor. He died for his country, his team and most of all for his family. He will not be forgotten, his ship's namesake carries his spirit into battle.  Like most Medal of Honor recipients, he was a vivacious soldier, sailor or an Airman for this country's preservation. Now a ship bears his name. I take time and blog space to re-link this story from "The Drive" and offer the below video in memory of Michael Monsoor, and his dedication to this nation and its defense.

God Bless this ship and its mission 

The Cattle And The Bean Stock

It's not a fairy tale but a real tale chasing its head going in a circle. Cattle, formerly known as airline passengers, is not what's it all about, but becomes a useful tool which all airlines require. A cow must sit in a seat for up to 17 hrs but not exceeding 20 hours as airlines have not conceived of a 20-hour cow hauler, but is trying in some sort of maniacal burst of genius. Of course, the "head" is an airline CEO. Now another head is the airplane builder who can invent and promote how more "efficient" its airplane flies holding cows going east or west. The planemaker has big barns holding its ideas for the airline. The cow is an airplane passenger that gives milk to the airline and the planemaker.

The Belgrade Theatre in association with Imagine Theatre present

Jack In The Bean Stock Just For Kids Below

Chapter II describes the bean who counts things and writes down those things with a pleasing stack of beans. It too needs cows with lots of milk to give. The bean counter is hired to please the stock which will be described in Chapter III. They all love the cow to death and chapter IV will describe that love. Back to chapter II. The bean is the driving force behind every behind. A collective "huh" is heard throughout the kingdom. The whole scheme is driven by the stock and not the cow. The bean counting proves the airplane-maker, is in the business of making beans count more than the cows giving milk, but milk is what grows those beans driving the stock upwards. Let's put cows in its proper seat assignment and make more efficient meat hooks for the cows. Let's compress the meat in smaller and smaller WC's with hand sanitizer coming out of its partition. A sink? I don't see no stinking sink! Cows only need a trough the size of a banana. These were bean counter's ideas, I know, I used to count beans.

Chapter III is about the stock going skyward to the great kingdom of mythological industrial giants. The stock is what bean counters do in its spare time hence the words bean stock. The stockholder has a slang name bantered about as "every man's Jack" or commonly known as common Jack or better known as common stock. The higher the stock grows the more common Jack becomes relevant. Getting more cattle in smaller spaces came from the "doing more with less" paradigm. The guy who called it an oxymoron was fired. Milk was needed to grow the stock since the bean counter said so. The airplane was built for more cattle and meat hooks were allocated hanging next to the very small WC. In fact, "the do more with less" VP's were busy slapping each other on the back when the oxymoron guy left the building unnoticed. 

Chapter IV is an ever ending love for the cow and its milk. After that, the cow is on its own leaving an airport in some sort of yellow conveyance. The CEO's love their milk, hence they love the cow, but will only go so far since the real dependency is on Jack and his common bean Stock. The airplane is built for stock growth and the Airline serves as many cows as can be counted even without having adequate troughs in the WC. The single-aisle "Max" becomes another "oxymoron" and its an American airline idea making the planemaker so very pleased as its stock grows so high and after the bean counters keep counting while the nearby cattle only just moo and low, hanging from its efficient meat hooks for every cow's "comfortable flight"?

The flight attendant read somewhere the latest Max passenger will have a tissue box sized sink fold out of the wall with a push of a red button. It is recommended the passenger should not deploy the sink if standing or sitting in the loo. It could cause great passenger harm if the airplane hits rough air.

The Aggressive Nature of Boeing's "All Hands On Deck"

Ever wonder why Boeing sales have taken off in 2018 which was predicted to be a down sales year? You are not alone. Perhaps 2017 was just an anomaly as both mega builders, Airbus and Boeing booked about thousand airplanes each during 2017, but Boeing was honing its strategic spear. It had a big tent approach to its market. An airplane customer walks into Boeing's tent and asked for military accessories. 



The sales chief offers, "it's on aisle 17 just behind the drone section hanging from the tent beams".

Not only does Boeing have drones it has a whole world-wide customer services campaign. It has established a way for an airline customer to get from Actuators to airplane ZZZ's and that's in the seat department. An airline can hire Boeing to maintain, build and fly your business. The real secret to the Boeing sauce is that all hands are on deck welcoming the buyers and talking the same language with one another. One sales trooper will grab a peer out of ancillary sales department and say, 

"I want the airline customer to shake this person's hand, they can fix you up with a fully automated Boeing product kiosk of your choice"  The ancillary salesperson starts talking how good is the Max 7 and if you can't go big, the Max 7 is just the right size.

Hold on, "I thought we were talking airport kiosks," says the customer?

The sales team looks on with a knowing smile and mutters to the customer, "let's go to dinner".

Over the horderves, "You have no airplane, No ground team, no problem,  we can build your airline for you in this big tent. You say you need a headwind report on a route? No problem it's on aisle 22 just behind the weather balloons which are behind computers and wifi department. Did I mention the Max 7 flies 3,800 miles connecting almost any paved landing strip, anywhere? The headwind wind women can help with your Max 7 order as well before you check out. Did I mention loans?" 

"We have a banking kiosk at the front, making loans, just for airlines needing anything under this big tent, we are currently loaning with favorable rates on the Max 7".

Before the main course is even served the customer is beginning to get it. Every salesperson is on deck with the full suite of Boeing product. Not only on deck, but they can put together the deal and get you the right people to do it! Even as far away as aisle 39  located in the far corner of the "Big Tent".

The DIY airline only wants airplanes and that's it. The Boeing, "no problem team", spurs into action and offers the right airplane for DIY airlines, of course, the Max 7, at a sensible discount.  

The Airbus sales teams are looking for the "Big Tent's" exit, nobody got the memo and they are lost.

and... that's why 2018 is having a great Boeing sales year.

Oder Wars 787/777X VS A350 ULR

There airline carriers all over the map pleading for big RFP's from both Boeing and Airbus. June saw the news about Qantas, New Zealand, and Oman asking for airframe what if's from the makers.  The airlines want to go big in passengers and miles. Project Sunrise is a Qantas tease for either mega airplane maker. New Zealand well entrenched with its 787-9's seeks to provide service across the wide Pacific going to both New York and all destinations possible in South America.

Oman wants a bid with the 787 and A330 much like Hawaiian airlines just held where Boeing won the day. The wildcard is how the 777X can play into the deal-making. The A350ULR is the Airbus hold card for both Qantas and New Zealand deal making. The 777X becomes the spoiler and timing of such an aircraft the determiner. Airframe price is an influencer on those who seek a fleet strategy. Since Boeing already has a foothold on all three airlines mentioned it has a good chance of winning orders from two out of three mentioned. The fleet A-330 is hiding in the background as its models' age so the 787 has to go against replacing those older A330's with a 787 instead of an A-330NEO. Hawaiian went with Boeing in the same circumstance and Airbus may be in the mood of giving away is airframes on the cheap. Its airplane ordering trench warfare and Boeing has the high ground at this time in the A-330NEO battle.

June saw a lot of airplane talk about what airlines are looking for and both makers heard those talking those points.

How Long Is The 797 Vision?

The 797 idea may have started before the 757 stopped productions during the year 2004.  Boeing shelved the middle of the market concept when there was no 757 replacement revealed to the public. It had its hands full with the 787 and other models of 777 and the Max. It was a running battle with Airbus and airplane supremacy. The time has come where years of engineering with other programs and the now apparent 797 program has occurred.  It was stated by another aviation journalist that it takes 10 years to build a clean sheet design before it is delivered. Counting back fourteen years may have signaled a back room engineering design had already hatched for a 797. It depended on the 787, and the 737 Max to make it happen.

A 797 has been a WIP for at least five years as it gathers technology developed by all Boeing's commercial aviation programs. Its been the last three years Boeing has consulted with its customers for the perfect NMA that would fill a 4,000 plane gap between the Max and the 787. Ten years may be a correct estimation for a clean sheet and Boeing has already checked off many of those years pondering its NMA program. It has reached the point of just freezing the concept and announcing the launch customers.  Boeing is further down the launch road than pundits may like to think out of some deduction and logic.

A 797 launch is going to happen sooner rather than later. It has unused plant space or property space for building an immense 797 facility. It makes sense to move the Everett 787  production to its own sole source facility in Charleston, SC. The SC facility can build all the 787 types by expanding on its vast acreage, at that site with more cement and steel buildings erected. The supplier system is in place in SC and Boeing has proven it can build production space very quickly, as in under 18 months. 

The 797 Jumpstart will occur in the Northwest as the 797 is refined into a flying copy while additional 787 production comes with building all the 787's at Boeing's Charleston, SC site. It can and it will deliver 14 787's a month from that site. It has already proven the low country can do what it is tasked to do.

However, Boeing-Everett is up to designing, testing, and building the 797 under a very close watch from its expert engineers who are experienced in the new plane programs. A natural logic would be for having the 777X, 747F, and 767F-Military all occur in Everett, WA. The 797 could and will fit in the production within this Northwest location. It's a natural decision to fold in the 797 on its available floor space since it became open when surge lines evaporated and other programs wound down. 

Boeing has space and has very capable people anchored in the Northwest to do this program starting from its already and current three-year-old design points, reducing its ten years required for a first delivery clean sheet down to seven years, and ending with first delivery in 2025. 

Boeing doesn't have to retest the copyrighted technologies it developed over the last 15 years. It only has to integrate those technologies into the 797. It is what Boeing already has available without using risky testing processes or using any untested assumptions since those technologies were already de-risked from all other programs mentioned from Boeing's family of aircraft.

The unknown 797 engine program is the NMA's biggest hurdle and it seems logic will put Boeing into accepting a 50,000 thrust engine from GE/Safran as its sole 797 source engine offering. Boeing would not improve its market with a dual engine maker choice for its customers. The 797 stands alone and an Airbus counter would most likely be developing an A321 off-shoot with A Rolls Royce engine at the forefront. 

The development engine time at this point from a clean sheet is about five years. The Boeing engine supplier has been working on an engine concept over the last three years. At a launch customers announcement, an offered engine will already have thousands of hours run through its casings.

Boeing Beats Airbus YTD, by 3-1 After May Count Totals

Total order numbers reach a net 306 orders for Boeing's as of May 31, 2018 date as compared to the Airbus tally of 111 units. This is almost a Boeing 3-1 order lead before Farnborough Airshow the chart below recaps Boeings month and YTD totals. The month reported 43 net orders added during May. The big number was the 787-9 and 787-8 orders for a net number of 10 -9's and 2  -8's bringing the 787 net total to 83 for its YTD number.

Rolls Royce Package "B" Is Sent To Detention With Package "C"

Rolls Royce is having one of those years. First its 787 engine Trent 1000 Package "C" started disintegrating its fan blades, then came an inner compressor flaw and now 166 of its Boeing Trent 1000, Package "B", engines have been flagged and will be sent to the penalty box until further notice. 

The Winging Tally shows Rolls Royce has its engines on 273 787's or times two it has delivered  546 engines to its Boeing customers. Package "B" engine review equals 166 as mentioned above. It was reported that Rolls Royce has 380 affected engines for inspection delivered to 787 customers. In total the affected Rolls Royce engines now tally 546 engines under review or needs fixing.  These numbers don't include spares but do address units flying with paying customers. Otherwise, the whole lot of 787 Rolls Royce Trent Engines are now under a review or needs immediate fixing. The FAA has restricted the 787 with Rolls Royce Package "C" from flying 140 minutes away from an airport. The ultimate and prior rating was for 330 minutes from any applicable airport, The 2 hour and 20-minute flying window hobbles Rolls Royce customers to lease older airframes or models as a fill-in while the 787-Rolls remains grounded or under a mechanical fix process. 

The company just announced a 10% across the board lay-off of employees while it halts certain field and production operations until a resolution is completed. A speculation is that Rolls was chasing the GE engine performance and it pushed through solutions within its jet engineering that failed to hold up during airline operations. It also may end up making the Dreamliner a one engine aircraft if Rolls doesn't solve its current engine crises.  A situation GE would love to address with Rolls Royce customers having Dreamliners.

FYI:

Is it possible to re-engine aircraft with different engine options?

The two different engine models compatible with the 787 use a standard electrical interface to allow an aircraft to be fitted with either Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 or General Electric GEnx engines. This interchangeability aims to save time and cost when changing engine types; while the previous aircraft could exchange engines for those of a different manufacturer, the high cost and time required made it rare.

The benefit of interchangeability makes leasing aircraft easier for the lessor, as their fleet would be compatible with all the airlines and their existing facilities.

Denver Mile High Will Go to 150 Gates

It already has 6 long runways. The lengths of 12,000 ft or 16,000 are immense. It is known that Denver could double its runways to 12 if required. By 2021, it could handle a mass aviation exodus from the eastern part of this nation. The addition of 39 new gates was reported by AirlineRatings. 

That means, when completed, in the next three years, Denver could handle another 39 flights every hour for taking-off or landing while bringing the total gates capacity to 150. If an airplane holds 200 passengers, then every hour could see a 30K passenger exchange. 

Immense came to mind, but other insidious thoughts float to the top of my head. In a time of war, Denver is known as the DC of the west. The rocky mountain front holds vast underground facilities only a 30-mile shot from Denver International Airport. Of course, that could transport 30,000 people via interstate or the rumored underground rail system to the Rocky Mountain front. Most of DIA terminals have rail connections in its terminal basements. 

Some tracks lead into cement doors and nobody knows where those lead. Riding a "passenger car" to the terminal of your destination and looking out its window, one can see those track spurs to nowhere. I have and have wondered what's up with that?

Going to internet rumor sites concludes it's not a good idea to investigate too far into your imagination without a good exit plan. However, 39 new gates and the possibility for another 6 runways makes one wonder a lot. 

The situation room is rendered on DIA's massive murals when walking unescorted through the terminals. The tent-like architecture speaks of a nomadic center for people wanting to become lost.

Airbus (May's) Net Order Numbers Lag Boeing's April

Airbus has 111 net orders for 2018. It is in a real dogfight for order supremacy with Boeing during 2018. Single-aisle is 108 and Widebody class is a net 3 orders for 2018. Farnsborough is coming in July and it could all change. The lead could increase for Boeing.

Airbus Widebody thru May 2018 Net Orders

The GAO-18-321 F-35 Fix It !!! Report

“No more bullets” are required by the GAO on the F-35 program. Elmer Fudd says has 111 class I deficiencies of which 47 are under the hood fixing at this time but that’s a lot of untouched class I’s. It also has about 855 class II’s fix it before the 2019 full rate production deadlines are reached. Or it’s a fix it before you buy it call-out.

No more money unless it is fixed says the GAO. 

Here is the summary F-35 GAO Sh** list

Fuel Prices Driving The Airline Business In "The Blue" Period.

An eye trained on the rearview mirror is watching aviation fuel prices going upward. Many years ago (2014) the axiom was established, "The lower the price of crude oil the older the airplane in your fleet is best". In fact, many airline fleets sought after the used airplane market for a lower purchase price thus allowing for a greater fuel burn when Jet A was cheaper.

It was fashionable for airlines to go after inventory from lessors or others who were seeking to unload old inventory to anyone with a fat checkbook. So the axiom grew out of opportunity and Boeing suffered additional sales loss for its super-efficient 787 products due to low fuel prices. In fact, airline fleets had to dust off its opportunity math models considering cash flows and profits while operating older equipment versus buying more expensive equipment like the 787.

Recently it was said by Randy Tinseth, Boeing’s vice president of marketing, 

"Aircraft replacement makes sense for airlines when oil reaches $65 a barrel." 

As of Tuesday morning, the price per barrel of Brent Crude was more than $74.

That all being true, a pent-up energy has grown from old equipment getting older while ignoring efficiency becomes the ban of having higher fuel prices. I'll call the high price of crude the "Blue period", signaling a market shift from having old airframes to having more expensive and efficient new aircraft. The factors to consider is the savings obtained from a more efficient aircraft burning less fuel as compared with an older aircraft burning more fuel. At this time it could be up to 25% fuel volume savings using higher priced fuel. Or a 30% maintenance improvement 

Cash flow models are humming away in some computer under a desk supporting a huge screen for office meetings. The old fuel model may have had $1.99 per gallon fuel price. The new model may have a $3.99 a gallon price for Jet A, worldwide. The old (767-300) aircraft burning 12,000 gallons, going far, with full fuel load will compete against an efficient model that burns 3,000 gallons less than an older aircraft on the same route. At a $2.00 a gallon price variance from old to new fuel price, the new having a 3,000-gallon advantage, therefore, saves an airline $6,000 a trip not counting the new technology maintenance savings found on the ground, or in the avionics. The savings could easily reach a $10,000 in savings going long one-way.

Buying new equipment may make more money than hanging onto older and cheaper equipment if fuel prices rise higher than $65 per barrel of crude oil. The financial performance models in an office building near an airport may scream, " buy new equipment" such as Randy Tinseth suggests in above comment.

Old equipment has the following conditions:

·      Lower capital (purchase price)

·      Lower interest costs (loan costs)

·      Higher maintenance cost per trip

Naming a few 787 costs conditions:

·      Higher Capital outlay (purchase)

·      Higher interest costs (loan costs)

·      Lower Maintenance expense

·      Lower Fuel Costs

·      More efficient operational functions (such as onboard smart routing tools)

If a new 787 goes 500 trips a year saving fuel costs over old equipment then it may save $1.2 million a year in operational costs which would contribute towards an advantage over buying old equipment flying on cheaper fuel which no longer exists at this time. Randy Tinseth, stated an obvious market condition. Airlines will have to buy new equipment sooner which is better than later as fuel prices rise.