The Board Game Part II The A350 On Tour

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

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

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

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

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

• SCOTT ROCHFORT
• THE DAILY TELEGRAPH
• AUGUST 05, 2014 10:53PM

Finally the reveal is off:  The Airbus  The Daily tELEGRAPH

Expect a part three its in the works.

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

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

Stealth and Other Stuff

USS Zumwalt Navy Destroyer
CREDIT: U.S. Navy

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

Article from: LiveScience's

Nikhil Gupta is an associate professor and Steven Zeltmann is a student researcher in the Composite Materials and Mechanics Laboratory of the Mechanical and ...

Aerospace Engineering Department at New York University's Polytechnic School of Engineering. Gupta and Zeltmann contributed this article to LiveScience's Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights.

A typical syntactic foam comprised of glass, hollow particles filled with vinyl ester resin, as viewed by a scanning electron microscope. The particles are on average 40 microns (0.04 mm) in diameter.
Credit: Nikhil Gupta, NYU

The USS Zumwalt, the United States Navy's latest and largest destroyer, is a stark contrast to the ironclad ships of old. The gray angular deckhouse may bring back memories of Civil War-era battleships, but the technology of the deckhouse and what lies inside is anything but old-fashioned.

The Zumwalt, or DDG-1000, is the first of three ships of the Zumwalt class to be completed. This project is a huge undertaking by the U.S. Navy and represents the single largest line item in its budget. But the new technologies being developed as part of the program will make the Zumwalt class years ahead of any other current warship — one profound example is thedeckhouse material 

The Zumwalt makes extensive use of composite materials in the deckhouse structure — not only to make the structure lighter, but also to control the ship's radar profile and achieve a high level of stealth.

One of the most important and advanced composites used in the deckhouse is a material known as syntactic foam, which incorporates hollow particles that entrap air in a polymer. The hollow particles are microscopic, sometimes as small as 10 microns (about one-tenth the thickness of a human hair), and made of stiff materials like glass. The hollow, particle-filled polymer composite of the Zumwalt's deckhouse acts like a lightweight sponge, but one that doesn't absorb water because the pores are enclosed inside the glass particles. The glass shell of the particles also reinforces the voids, and creates a material that is lightweight, but strong.

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

Part I

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

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

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

Comparison Link from Find The Best

                                                       A330-200  767-300 

  Fuel Cost (Per Nautical Mile)               $29.40    $24.02

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

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

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

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

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

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

Its The Three Month Moving Average Day For July

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

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

Goal +/-                          05/2014    06/2014          Projecting      July (actual)  Delta 

Month Deliveries               10               15              10              9                     -6

3 M-M-avg                         7.33            8.33            10.           11.33              +3

Production Goal               10               10.                10            10                    0

Delivery Trend (+/- )       -2.67            -1.67                   -. 0            +1.33 /Target     >                

                                       *PM-Start      **M.A.P.                                   PM-End
*Progression Months
**Moving Average Progression

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

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

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

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

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

McNerney Is Tired And Apologises

His "heart is still beating and the employee keeps cowering", sarcasm is the sign of a war weary General. It was like a slap in the face from General Patton during WWII in Sicily, Italy, where a service man received one when breaking down under a grueling ordeal of battle while recovering the medical ward. McNerney's slip was not meant to be funny nor encouraging. It was an exhale from a long battle from the Airline war with Airbus. Patton, in this example continued on, and lead his troops to victory over many battles after this action on that solder. The General ended his war unceremoniously in a Jeep accident.

McNerney, with all his accomplishment in decision making and leading, let it slip out he is ready to retire. Losing professionalism in a moment like his 65st Birthday contemplation, demonstrates its time to step back and not slap the soldiers. The workforce too says things on a daily basis while on the work floor, as they continue to grind out aircraft. Its part of the job and makes those paychecks tolerable. However, coming from McNerney it becomes a symbol of the corporate mentality from those who writes the checks. Now this apologetic leader affirms corporate cynicism in one statement. It fell flat, as it should.

How expensive is that McNerney exhale? That remains to be seen when labor negotiations comes up next. By then McNerney may sit on a board in an advising role. The workers are only as good as instructed by the chain of command. They don't cower and McNerney has a tired heart by making a tongue in cheek comment.  At my former work it was always known that a humorous statement was the conveyance of true thought. A form of communication is joking your message allowing a speaker flexibility for falling back into a position of "just joking". McNerney's just joking apology slips out from a tired heart. His sentiment is both a recognition of corporate hang-over and his own cowering struggles with the giant airline framer.

A lot can made from this slip of tongue, if reviewing his own company history and tieing it to his cowering statement.  Boeing needs fresh legs in the game for both its employees, and for its vigor towards advancements. The corporate attitude will always infect decision making, like the common cold. Labor restlessness will always be an inflammation of  its corporate muscles where it will need an analgesic application of benefits. Boeing will need a new found energy from its leadership that has the courage, strength and understanding. This combination of attributes is needed to continue its progression steps forward, and for a validation of the journey it just traveled.

McNerney's most recent exclamation is a career sigh and exhale guised within the frame work of sarcasm. There is a lot of corporate truth found within that McNerney sigh.

IS Boeing's Correction Complete?

Many of the leadership principals at Boeing  during 2003 have retired or moved laterally to other industry, such as the likes of Allan Mullaly going to Ford. He happened to lead it resurgence on company money and not the Government. He "focused"  Ford. He also was part of Boeing's "Moon Shot" leaders when the 787 was introduced. Mullaly and others were present during the 7-8-7 roll-out of the first all plastic shell of an aircraft. This was the moon shot.  Seven years later Mullaly  has retired from the Ford Motor company. McNerney is at the controls in 2014 facing a mandatory retirement rule for Corporate leaders. Is Boeing retreating under leadership of new Generals in charge. Will it just play it safe on innovation as so many former leaders did when Airbus seized its strong position. Risk and reward is is the clever balance for Boeing at this time.

Will Boeing sit on its hard fought and gained position as Airplane innovator and builder or will rest on its achievements while solidifying its market place. I think McNerney and others feel its time just to cash in on the Boeing innovation dividend and makes its family complete with all the 787 attributes spread amongst the family members. The 787 is Boeing's Opus.  The other family members will pick its DNA bones for relevancy over the next two decades.

787 Dividends found in the following on aircraft design:

• The Max: Engine advancements and 787 like avionics
• The 777X Engine advancements, plastic wings, Laninar Flow Technology systems, 787 commonalities
• The 747-8i  787 Engine designs, advanced wing technology, 787 like avionics,

Boeing is now like those great pastry bakers of the world preparing a fine desert or roll. Its letting the dough of ingredients rest over-night under refrigeration. Its also time to see what the competition can do. So far its been a hap-hazard response. The A350 is shrinking back to a role player not a leader. The A320 NEO has launched out well during a time where the 787 had gathered the attention of industry with 787 uncertainty, and the MAX was not yet announced. Airbus continues to reel in orders on the A320 NEO, even though Boeing continues to break ground with first time customers for its Max. Its good news for both on the single aisle market. The fact that Boeing has turned several customers toward the MAX during  head to head order battles with the A320 NEO, suggest that Boeing MAX specifications and performance measures meet and exceed the NEO constructs. Those new customers look at both aircraft makers without bias and then choose what makes sense for themselves.

The future of aviation in now under contemplation. Looking what each maker has done defines what may become for the next generation of aircraft. Will it become an incremental change over the next 20 years or another Moon Shot. The second moon shot could be taken by the company with the most certain ability backing it.

Concerning Boeing, I can speculate that with its current temperament from leadership, they will will seek risk taking once again on the military side of projects with its drone programs. In truth, Boeing is developing a platform for future commercial aircraft but would like to secure this knowledge through the military side. Currently fighter type drones are able to take -off and land on aircraft carriers. If Boeing can do this today, it very possible and feasible for massive blended Wing Bodies in 30 years will have made its entrance into aviation. Think about suites on board like the A380 is currently installing. A blended wing body aircraft could easily carry 600 passengers or provide a massive cargo holds accepting irregular sizes and shapes. The technology to do this project already exist in engine development, plastic body process and advanced electronic avionics. Moving all these capabilities into the military arena for the next 20 years is a safe haven for this advancement. Going into the commercial would be a progression of technology as in steps applied in non commercial programs. At some point, Boeing will necessitate another moon looking shot when it isn't that kind of program. Something so different will come out from Boeing that people will think its a quantum leap, when actually it will be a natural progression forward with consistent results and proven advancements before it appears into a perceived moon shot. Boeing will execute such an advancement as a part of its output proven technology portfolio. The 787 project could not gracefully migrate from an Idea to a flying copy without numerous glitches, which Airbus attempted not to try.

Incremental steps will occur from Boeing on the military project side. When those benchmarks are cleared up handling a Blended Wing Body concept or other drone flying bodies are accomplished, then Boeing will bring that technology rather quickly over to the other side of its vast commercial complexes in full scale.. The concluding thought Boeing is doing step technology behind the scenes, and no moon shots for the future. Its doing that step technology in the form of space exploration applications and military systems which can be readily applied to the commercial side after the next 20 years.

CargoLux, The Initiator, Gets 10th 747-8F

Cargo Lux loves it when a plan comes together with its Air Freight team. Air freight doesn't get much love on this blog. Because most readers are love to fly and freight does not like going above the airline floor unless firmly strapped or netted in. Cargo Lux received its 10th delivery out of 14 ordered. Its the new type of course, the 747-8F. It also holds onto 11 more 747-400F. The cargo version is a proven performer since its first delivery in 2011.

Number 10 and counting for Cargo Lux

 

Even if its cargo, it remains a beautiful airplane today. Here stands an example of what the A380 can't do. Haul freight efficiently and in all configurations within the hold. New avionics settles the beast in a composed orderly fashion no other can do in its class.  The second best freight hauler is the 777 class with its own enormous hold. However this one above has more dimensional space. It is the life blood of the 747-8 building project. The 747 lives because "nobody does it better" (James Bond reference).

From equipment to food this hauls it all. Recently, the 777 freighter filled it to the brim with Washington State Cherries to China. However, a 747 is best suited for irregular loads and anything you can image that will fit in its space. The 747 and 777 control the air freight world decisively. Neither model has been militarized. It has the C-17 and older C5A`s. The world freight business is just emerging out of a long slump from that last world recession. Boeing is counting on a pick-up in freight trade. The 747-8i is waiting for second large order during this interim time of the A380 order dominance. It may too late for that, as the 777X will breach the market and cause the A380 sales to completely stagnate. It most likely the 747-8F will be the Boeing bench mark for four engine configurations. The next phase promises to be gigantic blended wing bodies in 30 years. I won't be here to see it.

While Dithering With The A350, Boeing Built A Family Of Aircraft

Airbus dithered its opportunity, capital and pride on the A350 concept, soon after saying the 787 is "inconceivable", it won't work and will cost too much. However, its a good idea just the same, to stick on some plastic panels on an airframe and make an attempt as a good sport with the A350. For that matter, we could build an "All New" A330NEO call it an A330-800 or 900. Rolls Royce is game for a Trent 7000 because the 7000 series number is available. We (Rolls) can take what we did for the 787 and stick it on the A330 NEO. You know it, as what Airbus claimed,  a 787 failure back in 2004.

Ten years later Airbus has relegated itself to reinventing the A330 and canceling the A350-800. The world wonders, "what's that suppose to mean after castigating the 787 as non-doable, going forward and coming out will a knock-off A350-family of aircraft, and then after-all, returning its youngest child, the A350-800, back to the drawing board?" Airbus goes and  re-adopts back into its family, the A330 step child, which was destined for the aluminum recycle bin late last fall.

Its the all new A330-never mind. Let's borrow 787 engine technology from Rolls Royce, because we can. Keep peddling the ghastly sounding "snarklets" and cram more people in it than makes any sense. Just because we need bragging points going 6,000 miles.

The A330 NEO Is....

• Cheaper
• Comparable to one of these 787-8, 787`9, 787-10
• Cheaper
• Rolls 7000 engine technology stolen (/transitioned) from the 787 TEN project
• Cheaper
• Has "cool looking", "Sharklets ?
• It must be mentioned, CHEAPER (per John Leahy) Its priced only at 279 Million US.
• Compared to The over priced 787-9 at 249 Million US

Here Comes The Motley Fool  Quotes: (vetted and researched by the Winging It ace reporting team)

"The mid size wide-bodied aircraft of Airbus would be available in two variants -- the A330-800neo seating 252 passengers, and the A330-900neo seating 310 passengers. It would compete with three variants of Boeing's Dreamliner -- 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10 -- seating 242, 280 and 323 passengers, 
respectively.

 It will come with the latest fuel-efficient Rolls-Royce engine, the Trent 7000, that would enhance the plane's range by nearly 740 kilometers and will be much quieter than its predecessor. In fact, this engine derivative is based on the TRENT-TEN (Thrust Efficiency and New Technology) that is powering the Boeing 787-10, and Airbus claims that it will lead to 14% fuel savings per seat over the aging A330."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1957 Chevy Nomad move over the A330 has "snarklets" on its points just like the fins on that 57 Chevy. "Fly Me To The Moon, Frank" The A330 has arrived again.

What would Boeing say about Airbus "Snarklets"?

"Don't bother me we are busy with another 10 787 this month." 

Airbus just introduced the brand new, all equipped, 1957 2017 A330NEO Nomad, built to save face from its A350 ms-adventures. Hurry, Airbus is slipping and doesn't have time catching-up its dithering campaign from the A350 slump project. 

The Airbus Board Of Directors have all agreed that dithering is in the dictionary, and it must be stopped before the A350 and A380 slips more investor billions into the money pit. They complained about the 787 "inconceivability" status in 2004, and then bragged about the A350 mastery of XWB size in 2007. Which we all found out, it was significantly smaller than the 777 family of 1990's aircraft. The XWB subterfuselage is astounding, it has deceiving lake of real size. 

What can you believe about the A330 NEO? The Rolls Royce Trent 1000 7000 will come quickly, off the engine racks straight from Boeing's testing regimen for engine building. What Boeing has not locked down as proprietary engine parameters, will show up as modification's on the Airbus 7000 Engine Block at Rolls, as will some other deviations coming from the Boeing 787 engine advancements. Rolls Royce holds an exclusive position for the A330 NEO, and must produce a new engine in 24 months, leaving one to think it will grab everything from its playbook, and quickly insert it into a exclusive Airbus Engine option for the A330 NEO.

Boeing couldn't even work out all the 787 glitches in three years, yet Airbus will roll out the NEO in less time than glitch time. Airbus couldn't produce a A350-900 in five years. However, Airbus needs a quantum leap of catch-up subterfuge, since it dithered away the last ten years with an A350 bluff charge. Its game on for Airbus, or just go home and lose. Airbus is in a very nervous position, using a 20 year old scheme for an answer to the 787 family. 

The A350-1000 is a lost leader. The A350-900 is a role player without help. The A350-800 was that help, and it was fired from the line-up. 

Play Ball

The pinch hitter is the 20 year old A330 where it was issued a new glove and uniform.  The A330-NEO will play well for one season, just for its own season ticket holders. These fans will go to the game, because of the stadium concessions provided. The management will see its profits margin slowly deflate, "most unnoticeable". Then it will find itself having to rebuild its business model with a "game changer". The A330 is not the "Game Changer" anymore or a "Difference Maker". It is a stop-gap  player until plan "B" develops out of the minor leagues.
 
The A3330 NEO is the same semi retired pinch hitter you find sitting on the bench at a Baseball game. All the old fans know how that hitter is, and will cheer as it steps up to the plate. The A350-800 is sitting on the bench and knows it too. Its out of the game and Airbus is behind Boeing in a Score of 5-1. The pinch hitter has to swing for the fences as the A380 and A350-900 are left on base. The next swing is game over.  

It sold 121 A330NEO (from season ticket holders, and renters) copies at its introduction. Nearly the same number of 787-10's sold, (Boeing airline customers in waiting, where 132 units of those types which are reserved) even so during a ballooned wide-body market. The stop gap account has been filled for Airbus. Now the test of time will reveal schemes, plans, and hype for who has the best airplane lined up after ten years of Airbus dithering around the 787 with its A350.

New Airbus Taunt From Its Advanced Wing Design Team

• Snarklets

Comes from the slang word Snarky, Snark. Being obnoxious, and overbearing with simple things such as obvious new ideas (sarcasm intended) that are not original. Hence the wing tips from Airbus have Snarklets. Those snarky geniuses have it done again.

Boeing's Micro Stock Market Vs The Macro Stock Market

Its not a new economic term nor is it a deal breaker when the market reflexes on real conditions. The Micro Market serves those stock market players who hang on relative stock position in the day to day market or on quarterly report, leveraging its capital inputs by moving money around on a periodic maintenance plan. The Macro investor put in substantial investment for the long haul and throws the paperwork in a safety deposit box only to read during a last will and testament reveal.

Boeing this quarter has new adjustments to its military arm, as the KC Tanker program has significant write -offs. The investor has noted, Boeing is fixed into the new military procurement program, where Boeing bears a greater portion of project risk than prior procurement programs. The have bid with a fixed price and few loop holes on the KC-46 tanker program. If Boeing errors on the side risk, they would have a better chance of winning the bid for the KC-46 Tanker project, since its built on established commercial frame, the 767. Boeing from its military side of operations brings to the plate new technology as it stuffs its airframe with a series of military applications. In this case known, as an add on risk factor. The military applications coming from Boeing, per Air Force requirements, must merge with Boeing's commercial side. This adjustment is the high risk side of the fixed cost model. Boeing just recognized a huge write-off towards that end on the KC-46 tanker project.


Blogging The Blogger Link:

Why Wall Street is fretting over Boeing’s latest report

Article Quote Below:

"RBC Capital Markets Analyst Robert Stallard offered this take: “Although the headline EPS result looks impressive, we think investors will look through this and note a couple of things. The most obvious is the tanker charge of $425 [million] —  to us it is worrying that Boeing is booking a charge of this magnitude at a relatively early stage in this long-term program, particularly given recent assurances from management that everything was going to plan.”"

Quoting an old Reagan philosophy term of "Trickle Down Economics", the government or "We the People" are 18 trillion in debt", this too trickles down to industry. The number one expense line on the federal debt is the military, hence the new world order of paying for military acquisitions completed with Fixed Cost Procurements Installations. The military can only afford 186 KC-46 without a cost over-run. That is why they chose the low ball route of existing airframes from commercial aviation. The 767 beat the A330 from Airbus in a much contentious bid war, where Boeing ultimately won. The military oversight is holding Boeing's feet to the procurement fire. The old adage, "you break it you pay for it", applies here"; The foreseeable escape clause for Boeing is if the military requires a variance from the original bid plan, then they will pay for it. Sounds reasonable. The 425 million write -off on Boeing's books comes from the KC-46 project as it adjusts its program expenditures that are greater than its bid allows. In essence, Boeing will eat cost over-runs from this point forward, unless the military wants a change order on the aircraft development. This over-run write-off is early in the program. Boeing has some pad in its own bid price, which ultimately erodes profits for the program. This lump number, is a bench mark investment point. The Micro Stock Investor is now moving its position away during this news cycle. They can make money on other stocks and they will come back when programming triggers it.

The program, however, needs a better picture of what lies ahead. It will need to assure investors that this is a stage adjustment during initiation phase of the project. The second stage which it has now entered with flight, systems, and applications testings. All sub stages with inherent high risks of failure. When the rubber meets the flight line is sometimes messy. Boeing has a lot riding on the flight line. They are doing its due diligence to mitigate risks as we speak. The only projected thoughts offered for the investor, is this 2nd phase contains the nebulous or abstract inputs from the Air Force as systems are refined. Boeing could have additional funding as it modifies what they don't like or what doesn't work as ordered. However, Boeing will foot the bill if it doesn' t perform as promised. The second case is Boeing's financial risk. The first case will be on the Air Force tab. This is the New World Ordering or Procurement Process. A dicey game is played in phase II for who pays for what. That is the real risk that lays outside of failure. Phase I was infrastructure adaptations and program installments, or the set up of the whole process under R&D's over site. Hence the 425 million US write-off that scares away the micro investors for a month.

KC-46 Risk Stages:

• Phase I: Program Establishment and initial build (-425 million risk cost paid)
• Phase II: Military applications and Air Force Refinements installations (Shared Risk)
• Phase III: Testing, and Evaluation, Change Delta (70/30 Boeing/Air Force Risks)
• Phase IV: Entry into service (Nominal risks)

The Art Of (WAR) Blaming The Other Guy For MH17

The Evil shot was taken, bringing down the innocence on flight MH17 over Eastern Ukraine, where the Ukraine army has vacated. Russian troops are amassed on the Ukraine boarder by the thousands with its equipment, including Buk missile launchers. These are the same ones photographed deep in Eastern Ukraine on the day MH17 was shot down with 298 passengers and crew, all perishing. The chorus has been loud and long, "it wasn't me".  The love/hate triangle claims a no fault. Russia Putin says "Who-me?". The separatist, cry "here is the flight box" (wearing no mask). The Russian trained solders who wear masks, so as not to be identified, "no comment". Bingo, the mask wearing Russian soldiers did it under the orders of someone east of their position.

But what about the Ukraine Army who owns BUK launchers stored far to the west in reserve? That answer is a Ukrainian strategic military response they are ready when Russia launches its jets over the Ukraine. The Ukraine wouldn't want to sneak one into separatist territory when the separatist own no aircraft, unless Russia "lends" a few piloted jets and helicopters by its masked Air force. Russia could train the separatist over night to skillfully shoot down a 33,000 FL commercial aircraft, couldn't they? Russia claims the scarfs over the face is some kind of Crimean fashion statement spread to Eastern Ukraine. Meanwhile the separatist on the ground grumble,

"I didn't join the Russian missiliers to wear a scarf over my face just go to the Ukraine and kill innocent people. We already shot down a Ukrainian military cargo plane and a few other targets. Blame the separatist, Blame the Ukrainians, but don't blame Russia."

...This is insane!

I apologise to people who lost loved ones on MH17, for anything that may seem insensitive in this blog. It is not meant to be humerus or an over simplification of facts, it is meant to illustrate how stupid and horrendous an act of murder is, under the guise of war. When I heard the news, I felt grief for the those innocent people and wanted answers or a way to right the wrong.

No one wants to take responsibility, for a any reason, since it is not an act of war, but an act of mass murder for no apparent reason. When the facts are born out and the guilty are sought out this war will end, because it will have long lost any noble idea of its right in the first place. Russia may want to try and keep the Crimea or the Ukraine will want to restore its Eastern Frontier, but the Separatist who gave up the flight recorders will get stuck with the blame even though they don't know how to launch missiles on a target. Russia is too big to fail in the world scheme of things, and the Separatist are just pawns for the the big guys, like Russia, "who do no wrong"!

I will pray to God for the families that lost loved ones on flight MH17. It still grieves me.