If Cebu Air (Philippines) Buys the 787 Then,

There is more than meets the eye. The 797 may be in play with a fleet renewal bid by Boeing. Cebu already has the A320 and 8 of the older A330's in its stable putting Boeing on its heels in this bid process. The 330 Neo can meet fuel efficiency goals Cebu may have but the 787 family offers more flexibility for customers through 787 8's -10's. If the 797 is in play there enough lead time for the Boeing manufacturer to slide more 787's into Cebu's growth expansion and still optimize a fleet renewal plan after 2025 with 797's replacing any A320 in a one for one basis starting in 2026 as an example.

It isn't so certain what Cebu Air will do as it ponders Airbus and Boeing proposals for its fleet. If Cebu Air goes 787 then expect follow-on orders pinning the 797 to fleet renewal and expansion. 


Cebu has this fleet:

• 32 A320's 6 years old
• 8   A321's 1 year old 
• 8 A330's    4.5 year's old, order 8 new A330's

No Boeing product in its fleet;

What could a Boeing counter do?

• 8 787 -9's/10's by 2025 with options
• 12 797's by 2030 with options

This dichotomy of Boeing orders would bend the Airbus fleet outward from Cebu Air's hangers, providing a rebuttal that does not include the 737 Max. Because the 737 Max is in limbo until regulatory agencies resolve the Max issue, the 737 Max is a nonstarter and Boeing has to approach a customer with a 797 model sooner, rather than later. At this time, timing is everything for the makers and Cebu Air has both makers by the wing struts when hoping for a slam dunk order. It looks like it's tipping in Airbus' direction for this order. Even though the A350 is too big and the A330 NEO is not as efficient as the 787 families. The breaking point for Boeing is once again, the 737 Max as a nonstarter. Watch for the Cebu Air order breakout and then analyze what it means for Boeing for a trend indicator.

Provisionally Speaking, The 777X Has A June 21 Date For First Flight

O Simple Flying has come out with some timeline points for the 777X first flight and other 777X stuff. Kudos for O Simple Flying!

The June 21, 2019 date for the first flight of the 777X is a provisional date, but Boeing should make the date. The only thing that may hold the first flight into July would be Max 737 issues that may have infected the 777X program or a 737 Max draw of Boeing resources away from the 777X program when fixing the 737.

This is a much-looked forward event and has not formed up with its media look at this time. The meeting remains open whether Boeing invites a full public blowout or it will keep the first flight of the 777X close to its vest out of fear that something may go wrong in light of the 737 Max crashes.

Those accidents or mishaps as often remarked, has changed how Boeing structures its fanfare close to those recent 737 Max incidences. I would like to see significant 737 Max progress reported, for a return to flight, coupled with the 777X first flight event.

It is what's necessary if Boeing hopes to regain some public face after these two epic fails from its new single-aisle aircraft. Confidence has been lost but confidence can be regained with the 777X first flight. 

If the 777X first flight creeps into July, then the 737 Max situation would be a strained responsibility towards requiring a later first flight date of the 777X. Boeing is hesitant towards first flight until after checking three times that it will be a success. However, the provisional date of June 21, 2019, for the first 777X flight, represents an exhaustive review of the 777X program milestones.

A June 21 first flight date tells more about Boeing from many levels, it is ready for its counter-offensive in the aviation world, the 737 Max program has returned to stability and the 777X will fly.

Boeing Max Physics DH=Momentum

When D=dick and H=head a momentum forms the decision-making paradigm which ignores common sense and thus allowing top-down decisions bypassing engineering sense but enhancing parachute performance that floats above sense equaling Boeing's single most important question Why? 

An Idea, "Wet Lease the F-35 To Turkey"

The US and Turkey have found themselves in a diplomatic conundrum. If Turkey buys the S-400 missile system the US cancels the F-35 from Turkey, thus diminishing the American footprint in the region and so forth.

However, wet leashing the F-35 may protect the F-35 in Turkey when certain conditions are met. A wet lease is taking equipment in without a purchase and it requires the equipment leashed to be fully manned or staffed for its operations by the lessor, or in this case the US.

Turkey gets its 100 F-35's while the US maintains its property out of the country but in Turkish airspace. A wet lease is defined as:

"Wet lease. A wet lease is a leasing arrangement whereby one airline (the lessor) provides an aircraft, complete crew, maintenance, and insurance (ACMI) to another airline or other type of business acting as a broker of air travel (the lessee), which pays by hours operated.

However, a military term could be written-in, by having the lessor, maintaining complete control of the property while under the military control of the lessee, Every time an F-35 flies and is painted by an S-400 missile system suggest a study is being conducted on the F-35, the US could "deactivate" such a system since it is an implied a threat to wet-leased F-35's

Harsh yes, but the reality is demonstrated how vulnerable program secrets are held while the lessor insures its "proprietary secrets". In this case, Turkey has the F-35 asset but can not expose its secrets while defending Turkeys airspace in peacetime and is allowed to strategically protect its region in wartime The lessor through a "wet lease" protects and manages the asset against loss of its advanced secrets. Who would man the F-35? Why the US military as it would supply the crew for such an endeavor as NATO partner. Practical No! and that is the point of the s-400 missile system. It is consistent with Turkey's prior treaty commitment with NATO.

A wet lease suggestion points how ridiculous is Turkey's buy of the S-400 missile system from Russia. It is falling from any sound decision making and all that is left to fall is Erdogan's pride.

F-35 Is Moving From Dodge Ball To Base Ball

In keeping with springtime, the baseball season is upon us. The F-35 is not a premium dogfighter in an airshow capacity. It is an overachiever in an MIT sense. It just out thinks its adversaries. "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear", so goes the saying. The F-35 is improved not from an acrobatic perspective but with a "dirty harry" type of 44 magnums called Sidekick. It is a rack that fits internally to the F-35's weapons bay, adding two more missiles to its armament. "Make my day" to the juggler, utters the F-35 pilot. 

Defense Connect

Do a double gainer inside reverse move and I'll shoot before you can dazzle. Side Kick brings extra punch to the fight enhancing the stand-off capability with two extra missiles under the cloak of stealth. 

Enhancing the F-35 does not include more aerobatics or speed but it uses what it's given, more options for the supercomputer bolted onboard. 

The F-35 has the horsepower for the additional weapons stored inside on a sidekick rack. Those aerobatic tricksters are already dead if vectoring left or right 50 miles from an F-35. Dogfight? I see "no stinking dogfights",  painted on the side of the F-35 in this picture. If there is a dogfight then training failed for the pilot of an F-35 when getting that close to a SU 57. 

Expect no aerobatic enhancements going forward with the F-35. Expect weapons added like a laser or a longer range AA missile and some more satellite programming.

Has The F-35 Become a Cultural Thing For Canada?

Canada has long wanted a replacement for its aging CF-18, an old version of its primary fighter model. The conservative party a long ago set up the F-35 to be the CF-18's successor. Then a culture change occurred in Canada. It voted a Liberal Trudeau into power who immediately sided with a populist bent of having an "open" fighter competition amongst the worldwide manufacturers of such aircraft. 

Sounds reasonable but this is a contest for the defense of Canada, not a marketing campaign! Trudeau wanted a good profile photo shot in the newspapers so he tweaked the marketing blitz for a new fighter that made it difficult for those he did not want to be rewarded with a solid Canadian dollar contract. Hence Boeing and Lockheed had trouble and the Euro groups found the door ajar in the Canadian do-over round for a new fighter bid.

The Canadian culture shifted when it elected Trudeau its leader, and now the liberal forces are holding his stances to the fire from the promises he made when wanting to own the Canadian power grid. The F-35 would not come to Canada! The Lockheed product was a synonym term for conservative ideology.

"Canada is out for just wanting independence from its owns cultural skin and wanted nothing to do with the F-35 concept," implied Trudeau. 

Meanwhile back at the big Ottawa barn, The CF-18 got a little older, and Canada became less, rather than greater defending itself. The problems of the F-35 progress became the reminder that Trudeau may know what he is doing when in fact it is just his plain dumb luck. The Canadian culture will live to fight another day but will they win? Having bangers could turn into Caviar overnight and that's just the tundra part of Canada. 


Polar bears become more endangered because of the indefensible liberal policy of having the same "I don't care attitude" towards nature as a conquering adversary to the west of Alaska threatens Canada with Caviar. The US has not often shown compassion for Canadian Culture. There are no Canadian drive-through restaurants in the US as one big example. Russia doesn't care, it just wants expansion over the northern tier of the globe. It already has half of the northern tier from the Polar bear perspective. Ice is Ice and Oh Canada is losing Ice faster than the Siberian express and the Polar bears are starving near the Hudson Bay, "so let's buy the Euro fighters" to save the bears from Russia! 

Spoken like a true Canadian eco-hugger. Yes, the culture has changed in Canada and has its thought patterns. "So we'll have a luxury tax affixed to thoughts with a Canadian dollar value to boot. The F-35 after-all is an American idea and its south of Canada.

The Canadian culture has no intention of selecting the F-35 for its CF-replacement. Lockheed tried to make it Canadian by installing a business footprint in Canada with $700 US millions in spending. Boeing complained about Bombardier deals with Airbus and it cost them a cultural way out from Canada so far, the Canadian sentiment bought 20-year-old F-18's from Australia to replace Canadian 25-year-old C-18's like some kind of strategic move that would make Polar Bears safer. Once again, Canadian cultural thinking rose to the top of the heap at the bear dump near Hudson Bay.

After carefully thinking through the Canadian decision-making paradigm, I came to these bullets points. Everyone who is anyone knows bullet points makes the writer look smarter and its really neat in a Canadian kind of way to include them.

Here are a few points at the bottom for your quick thinking urge:

• Critical Thinking is not a degree program in Canada
• The F-35 costs were quoted in US dollars
• A 25-year-old F-18 from Australia is better than  a 25-year-old CF 18 it replaces in Canada
• There are no Canadian food take-outs in the USA
• Polar Bears are endangered from Critical Canadian Thinking
• A CCT scan does not exist North of Detroit or Wisconsin, "we think!!"
• Trudeau is Canada's leader, thus he preserves Canada's new culture.
• And finally, French-speaking made for a successful Canadian Beaver trade over the last 200 years.

Is the F-35 the answer, "no", the answer comes long after the last ice age.

Wack-A-Mole vs ISIS Resurgence

ISIS has just lost its last physical ground station in Syria, hence the map of occupation in the region has changed in favor of the allied forces. What will ISIS do as it no longer "owns" turf unique to its purpose? The US will remain frustrated as the scattered units of former ISIS organized bands resemble gang like units of retribution on innocent people who happened to live in ISIS harm's way. The US and its allies have a long time to think this problem through.

There are millions of households in the region and many of them have varying degrees of loyal ISIS fighters living in them. The new occupational area of ISIS is defined by when and where enforcement is lacking, and sometimes rearing its ugly head up in a world controlled by organized military doctrine. How will the organized fare against the gangs,  individuals or ISIS "sleepers" who lay in wait for opportunity without the fear of one's own loss of life? Treating it like an urban gang suppression is simplistic. Going after every household in some kind of shakedown becomes a drain on resources that will bound an organized government which settles into a quagmire which it will never escape The solution is complex and the virus is embedded into our planet.

 The game of whack-a-mole is a never-ending pursuit of insanity. Spraying a Round-Up like substance on the lawn kills everything and is not a solution to the problem. Elimination of religions is a fool's errand. Behavioral science has more merit as a weapon than cluster bombs. Learning to get along without shoving a bias down another throat is the goal. Religion becomes a by-product. 

Doing God's work on earth by killing unbelievers insults God's power over humankind. God does not need men to do his work. He created us in the first place and insulting the creator by killing his creation is a flawed idea. Talking terrorist down from the piety of a Jihad is a difficult road. The human spirit and mind can become shattered easily. 

Christianity has a lot to account for and crawling up stone steps before an assigned location for God is just as ridiculous as someone walking around a big box in some secluded location on earth thinking it is pleasing religious angst against humanity. Religion can be a solution but proving righteous by eliminating your neighbor is not the answer. Those with faith are on the right path but paying attention to another's belief and acting on behalf of God exposes a lack of trust in our creator to do the right thing for mankind.

No matter how much one rationalizes about taking the initiative for destroying evil using religious belief, the only target should be in yourself needing destruction of a superior ego. Blowing yourself up with others around you who may be both be a believer or an unbeliever fails to impress God at all. The solution for this war of terrorism does not have a religious solution as a group. It comes from a solution from within yourself, one person at a time.

If you don't have a belief then look inside yourself for a position to take before killing others. No matter what religious simulation one takes the basic life axioms to emerge on the same page of life. Existing is God's plan whether, for good or evil, God will solve man's problems. 

The military cannot change one life at a time with a bullet because other lives spring up from that example hating everything that a military represents. It is a very long road changing one life at a time but it is also exponential growth in its progress when measured against the beginning of acceptance for human flaws in comparison to one's own belief.

Su-57 and Turkey

Now that Turkey has sealed a deal with Russia for S-400 missiles it now approaches Turkey with a yet incomplete Su-57 advanced fighter jet. Knowing how difficult it is to bring a program to maturation as the F-35 continues to be plagued with lack of spare parts and wear and tear concerns the SU-57 has a more dubious pedigree to follow. Can Russia make the Su-57 whole in its respective economic environment?

The historical graph for Russian sustainability shows a bumpy line instead of a straight line its customers would hope to have for its forces. Turkey will buy the S-400 but the caveat with this purchase suggests Turkey is going down a bumpy road it now realizes it has chosen. Turkey losing the F-35, Turkey's loss of F-35 supporting role will have a vast impact for the man on the street in Turkey. The Su57 cannot fill that gap nor can it be sustained over the long haul as other defensive systems evolve based on what adversarial combatants offer against the F-35 plug and play platform.

Russia nor Turkey have the chops (industrial complex) competing in an arms race with the western powers for technological advancements.
   

Boeing Backed To The Max

A group of professionals, albeit a smaller group of people says, "the 737 Max program produced a flawed product". Boeing took risks to push through its single-aisle offering in a more rapid manner, ignoring the usual new airframe vetting process because the assumption it was built on the prior and successful 737 NG lessons learned would not come into play. However, there were a few new tricks built into the new Max which did not have an appropriate vetting process because of its own imposition of short time constraints for getting the Max into the market. The just good enough strain of thought took over the program. The second questions were not asked regarding it MCAS process or possibly other systems not exposed because a 737 Max has not fallen out of the sky yet from those other under-examined processes. The "What-ifs" on the 737 Max outnumber the "It-does". Flying the Max like an NG isn't a critical improvement.  It became a critical issue for those passengers who went down with the respective Lion Air and Ethiopian crashes on a 737 Max 8 when the MCAS system failed and overwhelmed unsuspecting pilots.

Boeing's dismissiveness for pilot training for something as small as an MCAS upgrade is a shocking response for protecting stockholders more than the passenger. The current condition for Boeing and its Max product has become an "all hands on deck" moment, as it now realizes this is a failed element in Boeing's own fiber. "We're just good enough and on the cheap" kills corporate aspirations. What comes out of all this is a face-saving new single-aisle model restoring confidence with its passenger and airline base. Of course, the course correction will be completed by 2030. That will be a clean sheet design rivaling the 787 or 777X progress Boeing will offer the 797 in this lineage changing operation with Embraer 100-130 passenger capacity, 737 140-200 seat capacity and a transitional 797 dual aisle 220-270 seat capacity. Boeing has lost its market punch over its sloppiness. It can only immediately get back in the game if its chief competitor has a meltdown both in the air and on the ground.

The biggest takeaway from this Max debacle is a safer airplane development process for the passenger and not the stockholder profit portfolio. Boeing forgot who it was building its aircraft for, the passenger or the stockholder. The top of the Boeing heap should have new faces once those golden parachutes are fitted for outgoing heads of the company. Once mentioned before, this is a necessary step for the healing process. There are no do-overs for those in charge when corporate philosophy produces a problematic Max for the sake of company profitability when pushing out a remake on the cheap. Yes, it costs billions to produce and make the Max 8, but it would have cost more if it went with a clean sheet effort for a new single-aisle. Now Boeing finds itself losing billions on the stock value it could have had even as the value climbs and then it will need to spend more billions with a clean sheet to right its ship in thus current aviation storm. 

Expect a new Boeing attitude out of these corporate mishaps. Moving too slowly after letting the 757 productions ceased was a big mistake. But pushing out a flawed-designed Max is a bigger mistake.

Leaving Turkey and Breaking Up Is So Hard To Do by Neil Sedaka

Neil Sedaka: Breaking Up Is So Hard To Do

The fly in the US military strategic footprint is the Turkey example. It is buying S-400 Russian missiles that can do much harm to the US F-35 program for which Turkey has become a key contributor to the program. "Think Tanks" have already a long time ago queried the question of what ifs? What if Canada drops out what if Turkey goes Russian or any other contributor to the F-35 program? Australia might want more vodka in its lunch program and will allow Russia in amongst the F-35 program it now hosts for Lockheed. All these types of scenarios have been vetted by American Think-Tanks a long time ago and now Turkey is playing its hand against NATO and the F-35 family of participants because it wants to assure a national defense at the lowest price. 

It has the US over a barrel so Turkey assumes. However, Think-Tankers have already written up a plan B when ignorance happens. Politics and defense make a strange bedfellow. Turkey wants the S-400 so bad it wants to save face in light of dishonoring its already established defense partners. Oh my, Turkey has a leader who takes a populist stand of showing up American resolve by purchasing the S-400 missiles from Russia. Cheers Turkey, you have come of age defending your turf with what your neighbors already have, Russian equipment. It is the third rate strategy while putting the US in its place as the bazaar cheers on Erdogan's mantle.

Surprise and disappointment have struct the US military complex right between the eyes. However, the Think-Tankers have already thought this awkward situation through. Close the F-35 program in Turkey costing its nation thousands of high-end jobs and redistribute this technology loss to other subcontractors through its vast network of players. 

Great Britain would like a bigger share of the tech work using its Thales or BAE customers or Lockheed. The question then becomes how long can Lockheed do without Turkey's contribution? The question long ago asked by thinkers caused a ramp-up of what-ifs with these scenarios. American resolve has allied with many of a subcontractor wanting more F-35 production. The Turkey deal was a quid pro quo, anyway. If turkey buys a 100 F-35 Lockheed then the US government will hire Turkish technology to do the work from Lockheed design and engineering work.

The F-35 is at the parts is parts stage at this point. A bad part happens and the F-35 program has its arms around the issue. Turkey is at a crossroads and it can't act clearly which is a danger for the whole F-35 program. It must "go" as an F-35 weak link. The decision was already made last year when the S-400 missile question came up! Find a replacement for Turkey's contribution to the F-35 program. This I assume is either far down that road or completed with a redistribution of F-35 work orders. I can't guess details of how the US/Lockheed has accomplished this change but the US wouldn't be talking so strongly about Turkey since the situation has changed in the F-35's favor. A production delay is probably down to six months if Turkey is booted out and no F-35's leave the US bound for Turkey.

The loss of a 100 F-35's sales to Turkey is an external problem not directly related the US aspirations. It was a quid pro quo deal in the first place. However, it is a big inconvenience already worked on for the last year. Erdogan's ship has already sailed. The F-35 will never return to Turkey and the F-35 already has the S-400 number before the first one even launched it its direction. The gain for Turkey is US inconvenience and saving Turkish face. The loss for Turkey is Nato, economy and its Turkish defense. The S-400 is no F-35.

Adjunct Bomb Truck Or Stealth?

That is the question. Boeing is keeping alive a serendipitous idea that an F-15X could force multiply the F-35 going into contested battle airspace during a conflict. 

Youtube Video of F-15's Tankers and F-35

F-35 foreground  F-15 background

Isreal is looking at replenishing its aging fighter wings of 30-40-year-old F-15's with either the F-15i-x   or a fleet of F-35's. The limited battle space around Isreal could be flooded with F-35's in an AWAC's capacity or with limited bomb loaded F-35's. With a Boeing F-15X on the board, it would and could partner with the F-35 both as a fighter interdiction model and bomb truck. It could take its cues from an F-35 somewhere in the limited battle space, but have unparalleled performances against Gen 4 attacking aircraft.  Remember, an F-15 has never lost a fight as of today's combat record.

Impressive at least. A new F-15i could fill a gap as a strategic weapon platform utilizing F-35 smarts over the wifi in the battle. If Israel does buy some F-15's then it has a big plan to bomb and fight its Meditterean counterpart into submission quickly and saving the F-35 for more technologically endowed targets like the S-400. Isreal does have a plan in place and its next fighter jet purchase will tell the observer what it will do going forward. 

The F-15x could and should make an F-35 everything it isn't. Fourth Gen aircraft is a participating reality over the next 30 years at least. A new F-15(i or X) now will be used. Israel can and will buy about 70 of this type and another 70 F-35I saturating its defenses with awesome firepower and battle management taking out Russias clients at will. The next Israeli buy is not a negative response to the F-35 program. The F-35 is so good Isreal does not need an exclusive fleet of F-35's it couldn't effectively use. It needs more tools than a Swiss Army Knife type of fighter. It is looking at a hammer during this go-round of buying defense equipment. Saying this much indicates about an order for 25 F-15X's or (i's) and another 25 F-35i's as mentioned at the top

Question? What's Boeing Next Big Thing?

Boeing was running rampant in the aviation world until the wheel flew off its juggernaut. Two 737 Max's crashed inside of six months and put the 777X project behind closed doors staying well out of sight. Having select Boeing employees doing the finalization to test flight work. It also caused the 797 into a dithering tailspin as no one then knew if the 797 projects would launch until Boeing got back on its feet and off its heels from the Max crashes. It looks like the 777X project, the 797 intended projects, and the 737 Max were all in some kind of "No Man's Land" in a short time span. Nothing is certain when its big plans will get back up and on Boeing's feet.

The FAA is doing its own damage control over the Boeing Max accidents as it delegated a usually nominal installation of an MCAS system on Boeing's shoulders before the accidents occurred later in service. Ouch, it looks suspiciously like a colluded relationship between the FAA and Boeing. There are other investigations needing clearing before Boeing can restart the 737 Max program for all its customers having grounded aircraft just sitting and not making the revenue for anybody. The problem presumed will take until Christmas to fix and resume business under new procedures. The 777X program will go off later in 2019 without having any setbacks. The Boeing inventory keeps flying without any mishaps and finally, the 797 is announced before year's end.

One big loss is Airbus will outproduce Boeing in 2019 making it the world's largest airplane producer. It will take Boeing two more years to reclaim the title of world's biggest when it will bring the 737 Max, 777X and the Embraer 190 to the market in 2021. Boeing will have to replace 737 Max sales canceled through uncertainty and production delays the upgrades are causing. Boeing may recover lost sales during this period if it can absolutely mitigate the MCAS problem as a noncontributor for future flight safety. Boeing's confidence in the market place and industry has reached its lowest point in the last 40 years. It has set back fully auto technology coming forward by about ten years.

Below are steps Boeing may be taking to regain the aviation high ground it once had.

1. Commit all hands on deck fix for the Max.
2. Win project Sunrise with the 777X and 787-9 as specializing for the mission
3. Bring the 797 to public reality once the 777X flies successfully during the first flight.

Boeing is now forced to bring the 797 into play with an effort for regaining any new and current customer's confidence for future sales consideration. While summarizing this year's tragic mishap that had occurred after both Lion Air and Ethiopian both lost their respective 737 Max 8's. The mishaps suggest a faulty MCAS sensor giving data inputs to automated control services for which pilots were unaware. 

Boeing has to establish that every system installed has a huge safety margin using duplicity of system controls, allowing the pilot never to be out of flying context from an automated system interaction. In other words, always allow functionality back to the pilot when systems can't work as intended.