Reviewing Boeing's NMA Timing

It has been talked about for the last few years or longer with those who know what is up with the Boeing plan for an NMA aircraft. Boeing got the message a long while ago that Airbus was here to stay until put down by some economic maelstrom or a worthy competitor. Boeing prefers the competition option over economic devastation because that too would close Boeing's vast doors.

Hence, Boeing has a plan for timing its 797 inaugural announcements of who, what and when the 797 airplanes come. The timing can't come too soon or too late. Coming soon will strap Boeing with years of trial and error or its building up of plant capability without a firm backlog. Coming too late will increase the risk of market indifference because its competitor may answer Boeing's idea with an NMA creating a divided market. Boeing will avoid 797 deferred costs as it experienced on the 787 program. It has to be spot on from the initial announcement and that announcement must come in 2018. A lot of work is being done at this time by Boeing. It will have to live with its NMA decision for the next 50 years.

The NMA must replace the 757 and 767 at the same time. It must also strike a balance with the Max and the Dreamliner at the same time while not hurting other of Boeing's types share of sales. Most of all it must excite and motivate customers into presenting new business plans for its respective airlines, using the NMA model. It has already achieved exciting its customer base but has not confirmed how it will deal the final 797 look. 

Asia wants freight with passengers. North America wants passengers and its luggage. The compromise is modest between market worlds is having less passenger room and freight space but not to the extent a 767 frame could carry but only to the extent, the Asian market would carry nominal regional freight along with its passengers' luggage.

Boeing will dither with that problem after it announces the 797. It will have North American Launch customers, yes, like Delta. It will have European launch customers like BA or Norwegian and possibly Ryan Air, who may convert some single-aisle orders into a launch customer duo aisle order.
ANA or JAL would be leading candidates for Asian Launch customers. China at this time is a wait and see, "customer", as it finds its way through future business models. The China market has not caught the NMA mission Boeing proposes.

There are enough players to launch an NMA at this time! Boeing hasn't finished dotting the "i" and crossing the NMA "t". The year "2018", is the time and the year is almost half over. An Airshow is needed for this grand announcement. The target is Europe because it suits North America to go and make a splash at Farnborough. Boeing would have seven years ahead for beating deadlines and making advertising headway over milestones reached. The announcement year 2019 begins to squeeze the 2025 delivery schedule. Boeing is already working on the NMA as this is being written. A 2020 announcement year allows Airbus into the discussion and anything after is not doable for meeting a 2025 first delivery.

Boeing is already building the NMA but configuration designs are not firmed. My own crazy take comes into play at this point. Boeing will not build an oval-shaped body but will make a hybrid of an ovoid shaped body. The top half is an ovoid shape for passenger room across starting at the seat level and the bottom half of the body is somewhat circular, resembling current aircraft shapes at the landing gear level. 



The design would allow for some freight and give passengers duo aisle space at seven across. The hybrid change gives both North America and Asia a look at its own business needs without going extreme within its concepts.

Is The A-350 Dying Or Dead?

This question becomes speculative when considering all aspects of the marketplace including. The price of each aircraft as the main driver for this class and followed its advanced technological efficiency. Passengers become an afterthought. The 787 has captured the standard with sure numbers of ordered and delivered 787's. The big view gives a better look at what could be expected. During 2013 both the A350-1000 and 787-10 made an appearance with its respective first orders. Today the order count for both types are at a deadlock with a net  168 A-350-1000's ordered and Boeing's 171 787-10 ordered. There is a subterfuge order for forty more 787-10's with Emirates yet to be confirmed with a signature as negotiations move to a closure.

The above chart suggests an order trend more than an answer for the A-350's future. During 2013 was Airbus last good order year when the A-350-1000 was first introduced with bulk orders. The Airbus order years for the A350 during 2014, 2015 and currently 2018 were disasters where cancelations rue the day. The overall recap of a five year period. Boeing leads Airbus by a wide margin with more 787's awaiting a final confirmation as mentioned before. Boeing stands at 1,365 orders while Airbus stands at 832 ordered the type within respective classes of 787 and A-350. But the real market is the delivered units which Boeing has and will not relinquish to Airbus within the next decade.

Airlines have assimilated its 787's in a massive and effective manner setting the airline industry towards the 787 as the leader. Airbus will take twice as long to reach Boeing's current pinnacle in the marketplace. The A-350 could just die from inability to answer the 777X, 787, (797) charge. It may just recede into a single aisle master similar to what Bombardier and Embraer have done with its regional single Aisle offerings. Bold prediction, but entirely possible if Boeing achieves permanent dominance with its extensive widebody offerings.

The Airbus widebody effort is dying from the A-330 to the A-380 family of aircraft line-up and the A-350 is dead center in Boeing's Bulls Eye.

I'm Guessing I Guess, Etihad will

Currently, Etihad is reviewing its fleet requirements and purchasing commitment with both Airbus and Boeing. The outstanding orders are the talk for both makers. A quick and dirty order round-up show this:

A split fleet with both Airbus and Boeing making headway into the Etihad stable.  Etihad has 62 Airbus A350-900's on order with zero delivered thus reflecting a notation as 62/0. It also has 40 787-9's ordered with 19 787-9's delivered noted as 40/19.

The fleet dichotomy can follow these notations from http://www.etihad.com/en-us/about-us/corporate-profile/our-fleet/

A320- 32/32

A330- 24/24

A350- 62/0

A380- 10/10

787-9     40/19

787-10   30/0

777-ER 22/22

777X's   25/0 

Airbus fleet equals 66 units with 62 undelivered A350-9's

Boeing fleet equals 41 units. with 76 undelivered wide-bodied aircraft

Etihad is stuck with offending one aircraft supplier over the other if it cuts its fleet backlog during its fleet order and reduction mode.

The thoughts on the table have a few questions surrounding those ideas.

Does the A350-900 have an unused range of its current fleet strategy? 

Does the undelivered 787-10 fill the A-350's future purpose?

Can the 787-9 backlog fill the remainder of the A350-900's purpose if it were introduced into its fleet?

There are more questions than plausible answers at this time, but it has already received 19, 787-9's, and that makes it harder for the Airbus A350 portion of its back orders to be delivered when it hasn't taken even one delivery for its type. It can be "assumed", Etihad will trim its widebody backlog with only one airframer. If it does, it will order more frames from the other unaffected airframer who has already delivered. Both Airbus and Boeing have delivered A330 and 787 types. There will be no new A380 orders. The 777X is the lynch-pin in this discussion. Etihad has both the 777-8x and 9X ordered and it signals the Airbus order for 62, A350-900's may go the way of the Dodo bird?

Having yet added the 787-10 and with 21 more 787-9's on the books makes sense Etihad can cover the Boeing spread of types over the market when eliminating the  Airbus A350 order.

Yet to be received from Boeing are as follows:

787-9   21

787-10 30

777-8X  8

7779X   17

Total: is 76 units from 280 seats to 405 seats per unit with the range and efficiency required by Etihad.

Airbus become the loser in this situation as it will become too expensive for Etihad to have 62 More A350's when the Boeing family already ordered can cover an unfilled order gap if the Airbus order for the A350 is canceled. It still can opt for more A330's until Etihad grows into its orders with the 787-10.

A Pound Of Feathers Or A Pound Of Gold?

A question I have is, why does the new technology aircraft just feature passenger service when the less inefficient aircraft become freighters? In this example, the 787's and A-350's are sold by the passenger trainload where the 767-300F and the A330F's are even being sold at all. Fed-Ex/UPS is building a freight fleet out of the 767's and almost no-one wants the A330-200F unless it's converted from its already built passenger status. There are several reasons for a freight business buying older technology airframes. To name a few below:

A 767 will profitably operate with its:

·      Its deadweight capacity 

·      Its space carrying volume

·      Seats removed

·      Service crew removed 

·      Cup holders tossed overboard

Passengers in this example are a pound of feathers requiring environment, supplies, and amenities so the most efficient 787 freight offering would become a wasteland of extravagance. The 767F has space and thrust for dead weight sans overhead bins. A pound of gold is what it needs to haul as a freighter, therefore, a 6,000-foot cabin pressure is not needed. Fuel costs on a 767 are its most deadweight it may carry on any particular trip which is factored into its freight bill of lading costs. The buy price of a 767 freighter must be significantly less than a passenger jet to make the whole scheme work well for the profit-minded.

Boeing's 767 offering for freight commerce seems to be the best choice at this time in the industry because it has space, thrust, and range charging the customer the appropriate amount for the fuel burn. Fuel economy is not listed above because dead weight doesn't complain much about fuel prices. The 767 purchase price is a bargain not requiring electronic window shades. The US military saw an opportunity to make it a freighter-fueler even when the A330 was bidding against it. The A330 was already sold as a military tanker at that time.

Cargo Facts Chart Below:

 

The freight business is becoming back in vogue as we write. Fed-ex and Amazon are the usual suspects with its respective movement of fleets with 767's. The A-380 was built for passengers and not freight. The A330 was built likewise engineered towards passenger service. Boeing always had a duopoly in mind with its aircraft as it built in tandem a 737, 747, and 767. Including those fabulous 777 freight versions. Only the 787 is not destined for the freight haul because it has a $30 billion deferred cost pit it can't climb out of until enough passenger models are delivered. 

A prediction may be coming for a 787F when its program debts are paid-off. However, Carbon Reinforced Plastic process is way too expensive for dead weight. The 767F has just got its freight legs in the meantime.

The ABCVNLHA's of the Navy

Here is an interesting video of what's next for the Navy.

Boeing's 1st QTR 2018 Earnings Call

Caution with optimism as typical as a stockholder wants the long-term stockholder to hear with an early this year pronouncement.

Recap: from The Motley Fool

·      The 777 production is covered without Iran's order.

·      The 797 announcement remains a pipe dream.

·      Boeing lands the 767 KC-36 tankers just over the Rainbow near Seattle (Oz).

·      China who?

·      The Boeing 787-8 becomes plug and play in Boeing's assembly flow.

Winging It, Counter Points:

·      777X development Irons out its stuff slowing its process by six months

·      The 797 will blow your mind at Farnborough

·      Dorothy does land her first tanker at McConnell Air Force Base, Ks.

·      China Buys More 787 because it can.

·      More 787-8 orders emerge as Boeing's rate production increases to 14.

Could Rising Jet A Price Begin A...

... An onslaught of new widebody orders? Low fuel prices became the premise for large older generation airframes for the industry back five years ago thus suffocating buying large wide-bodied aircraft like the 787. Using an opposite rationale could start a surge for new general widebody orders, specifically the 787 families of aircraft in 2019.

The old thought said buy, lease or borrow low priced inefficient aircraft because fuel cost became so low. Now that fuel is rising, a pent-up demand for the 787 could explode on the market scene by 2019 because of airline profit need. Fuel prices are going higher therefore, it is required to own efficient aircraft like the Max or Dreamliner?

Boeing has already considered this market paradigm and it has many orders options on hand just from fuel efficiency demanded with operations from fuel prices climbing.

Boeing's Big Bite, The 797

Boeing has started then stopped and then started the 797 talk over the last several years. Western sensibilities want an aircraft centered on passengers and it luggage requirements. Asian wants are centered on both passengers and freight. The Boeing Company first researched a viable mid-range middle of the market aircraft that became everything the 787-300 was supposed to be but had not enough takers for the concept. That was back in 2010 when the 787-300 went up in smoke.

Now comes the 220-270 type mid-range aircraft were Asia or China holds immense clout over Boeing's design parameters. The 797 is in a holding pattern while Boeing engineering is trying to please both western and eastern sensibilities. China wants the freight function and Boeing wants its 797 design motif to remain intact of a smaller hold than typical. 

China wants passenger density that the 797 concepts is offering, but is squeamish over the Boeing conceptual freight capacity from Boeing's first designs having a smaller freight space than what western sensibility desires with Boeing's initial proposal. This brings the matter to a head. Having a two-body model type 797. One called the "E" and the other called the "W" type 797. 

If Asia can commit to a 250 seat dual aisle 5,000-mile range holding enough freight space they will get an "E" ticket 797 for any Eastern type. If American and United have influence with Boeing (I think they do) then expect a 250 seat slim bodied 797 type called the 797-W for western sensibilities. If Boeing can easily build both types sharing 797 commonalities using same technologies for both types then both types could be built by snapping together its barrels according to the work order submitted at its assembly plant. 

What's taking so long for Boeing to announce the 797? Well, it's going to commit to building what the customer wants or needs first and they must assure themselves it can do it without costing another money pit like the 787 program created with its deferred costs of almost $30 billion. 

The west is west song comes to mind when thinking about this matter. Asia would have to order at least 400 797-E's before Boeing gives in while having a like number 797-W's also in the books from "other" customers like United. Plastics and computer modeling is the answer and that is what is taking Boeing so long. It can and will do the 797 but the order book it has collected on the 797 is governing the manufacturing headache it now faces.

Winging It Made A 787-10 Case Back in 2012

2012: Paraphrased, "The program will start when Boeing books at least 150 orders". They made that number with 171 units booked and have delivered two units six years after the Winging It prediction, to Singapore Airlines.

Winging It has made another prediction true.

150 Breakeven for the 787-10 back in 2012.

View From The Top: of a 777X Flight Deck

Boeing inches closer to the first flight of its proposed 777X airframe and here is proof its design is firmly in engineers hands with a "Go" card pinned to the 777X engineering door. 

Okay, let's go!!!