Almost Five Years Ago I Had a Boeing "Told You So", Moment

The 787-300 Lost But Not Forgotten

It came to my brain box a long time ago, long after it was first thought off. The time was probably when Boeing was pushing forward on three 787-3-8-9 model types in 2010. A lot of water has been flown over since then and my imagination was stuck on the 777X program at the time. Please read the link below for how wacked I was about the 777 airplanes. For those who have been following this blog for a long time, there will be a link supplied just below to see the early beginnings of this blog.

The 777X Project Is Going Underground Call It Project X

Boeing had already gone several years into a big body airplane known as the 747, and it was dead as a market player. But Pride cometh before the fall. Stop whipping a dead horse. The 747-8i, and 737 Max are all dead Boeing horses by 2012. This revelation should have made Boeing move in a great way, but instead, it ripped the opportunity apart Just as Nancy Pelosi ripped apart Trump's State of the Union address. The nation may heal but Boeing may not since those Golden Parachute VP have already bought a Puget Sound Yacht.

Boeing Strategic Review

The first point to make is: 

• Commercial aviation product must match its strategic plan

Boeing has failed to complete its aviation product line when it had the opportunity from 2015 until 2020. The long road to catching-up has begun it may take 10 years to complete its product line.  The important items are beginning to matriculate out of its strategies like the 777X program and a relationship with GE jet engines through this 777X process. The prior strategic plan did not match where the industry is going while its main competitor strived to become a customer hound by building commercial jet with more room. Those roomier jets are not technologically better but are more popular for ticket-buying customers to ride somewhere.

• The 737 concept must be eliminated:

Long ago, the runway standing of the 737 was too shallow making engine builders build around the low clearance on the runway, while making the engine move forward, and finally, the low airplane standing at take-off required an inadequate MCAS system that would fly the 737 MAX to its doom. Get rid of the 737 as its clearance on take-off is too limiting of the 737 engines and safety issue as the airplane is now out of balance with engines too far forward on the wing, and its poor center of gravity put the Max into flying peril as to what could be described as unsafe. The 737 should have been canceled before Airbus would build its first A300 series airplane. If it had changed the 737 to a baseline single-aisle by 1980. it would of not be in the situation today it now finds itself. The 737  is killing Boeing and collapsing stock-holder value. Its bold Max move did not solve the 737 problems at all. Now the strategic move must include huge risk and expenditure beyond investors want. It must strategically change aviation to win. It must build a smaller market airport plane using the 783-300 or even a 787-200  using smaller dimensions.

• The Twin/Twin is a concept worth pursuing. 

Here's the premise for this gap plugger starting a step down from the 787-8. here are a few rules. Twin aisles/Twin engines or a better achieving twin/twin airplane. Keep building the 737 because you are stuck with that concept, but use what you have already paid for during the 787 programs. Start with the 787-300 design and then size it for 200-270 passengers. Go seven ago with a reasonable body width. Twin-aisle means fast-on and fast-off and big windows for everybody! Partner with Embraer having them bring forward a respectable single-aisle starting at 75 seats up to 175 seats according to a model both Boeing and Embraer can build. The strategic goal is for Boeing to make The NMA and Embraer make the single-aisle family of aircraft. It a big headache to do a sea change but so is it a bigger headache to crash airplanes and lose the market from greed. It's going to be a long time before Boeing recovers from its current greedy mistake shoved on the flawed 737 Max, but in order to regain the lead in the industry, it must rethink its family of aircraft from the top (777X) to Bottom  (E's 170- 200).

The Boeing 777X Order Backlash

Why doesn't Boeing have 1,000 777X orders for both the 777-9X and 777-8X aircraft since so many 777-300ER's are in existence?

The answer is the loss of Boeing confidence on new technology as it has proven to be a risky business to buy a new Boeing technology as found in the 737 MAX since its two crashes. 

Only 309 777X orders demonstrate this fallen confidence since no new orders have been placed recently. But the hope remains that after successful fight testing and entry into service that will change if Boeing can win back customer confidence it had lost during the 737 Max debacle. The order backlash is comprised of loss of customer confidence and a tighter financial economy existed back when it was first announced. Below are Boeing objectives:

• Error-free testing of major systems advanced on the 777X in 2020
• Successful entry into service during the first 18 months through 2021
• Customer success with 777X Family of aircraft
• The Max crash "recovers" by "big" steps taken by Boeing
• Finally, the 777X storms the market, by selling another 300 aircraft after entry into service through 2022.

Boeing Has A 777X Test Plan

Test Plan Link

The 777X test plan is found in the above link if only someone would put on the mantle of logging flights, time, and other sundries associated with the 777X. let me know via email at :

Trapperpk@gmail.com

I will make it a link for me if you blog the data. Thanks in advance!

Hey Boeing!!! "What about a 787-300 TYPE For The NMA?"

Boeing, it's in your face but you can't see past your nose after the Max crashed. You could have a twin/twin continental buster using lessons learned from the 787 projects, especially the 787-300 before it was unceremoniously dropped. If they rolled out the 787-300, it may catch Airbus flat-footed, as they wouldn't be able to respond with its A350 or A320 families of aircraft. After-all this is your new passion, stop the Euro insanity emitting from Airbus. Go PW or GE but not Rolls engines and make an NMA narrow twin/twin from 200-250 seats and "bam!" 

"Airbus is not your uncle!" FLIGHT GLOBAL

Flying The Big 777-9X "Pilots Said", read on for response.

The snippets from the first flight from the 777 9X suggest success for normal airplane model first flight. The pilot did what they were paid to do praise the newest airplane of the Boeing fleet as the most advance airplane when making progressions forward over its competitors. The first flight is meant to be a debutant moment when the "Queen" starts the ball. It had done so with the 747 with that ball many years ago in the seventies when there was no other to compare with the 747. Then came to the 737,757, NG, 787, MAX  and finally this family of aircraft, the 777X's. 

Boeing did not mess with Max MCAS  and other blocks of ideas coming from the 737 MAX program. It won't duplicate the MCAS used on Max by installing MCAS system computers and systems driven by flying out of flight trim. However, Boeing will fix all miscellaneous function errors and replace accordingly all those systems and parts from other systems found failed during testing of parts. Pure and simple the Max failure was of a single-aisle airplane that should have never been made during the 1970s, Design feature was not addressed with an opportunity of a remake of its design. The Max is just a workaround for fixing the single-aisle low engine wing station shoved forward. MCAS would have to control the 737 with only one sensor protecting the flight. Once computing from the one MCAS sensor failed the plane literally fell out of the air with a fail system reading data in an inappropriate manner. The 777X program has more on track than any other program Boeing has at this time. Live long and prosper.


This Article is available for a further comment @ GEEKWIRE

• “It was awesome,” 777X chief test pilot Van Chaney told reporters at Seattle’s Boeing Field, where the nearly four-hour flight test ended at 2 p.m. PT".

• Chaney said he would have stayed up longer if he could. “The moment we lifted off and got into the air, I thought, ‘Man, this is amazing.’

•  "Amazing” was also the word that co-pilot Craig Bomben, who serves as Boeing’s vice president of flight operations and chief test pilot, used to describe the landing.

• “We came in under fairly tough conditions,” Bomben said. “Bounced around a little bit, took turbulence [but] the airplane went right through it.”

First and Most Successful Landing From First Flight 777X

The NMA From Boeing Pressed INTO Service

Boeing has long pondered a New Medium Aircraft but has delayed due to moderate success with its big body and single-aisle aircraft, namely the 737 through the 777. But the Max has crashed twice not due to weather nor pilot error or mechanical failure. It crashes because of engineering sloppiness. Max is more of a flying skill than what the pilots are even prepared for, hence it crashed.

The single-aisle bookend to its family of airplanes is gone! It must now focus on an NMA single-aisle blend, An airplane that Airbus will copy because it can and Boeing can't afford to not build(double negative for effect). 

Winging IT has already hinted at a 150-270 seated affair where it must go twin-aisle and bigger engine to accommodate efficiency and twin-engine technology to a frame for the future growth of an airplane concept. Boeing is forced to change gears on the hill it attempts to climb. One airplane can do it while dropping the 737 Max and dropping the NMA on a rethink. 

My two cents worth should propel Boeing forward in one move for which Airbus can't respond well forcing a drop of its A321 and others. Boeing needs to play hardball and stop its sophistry from the design board or executive level stockmarket thinking.

It must build an NMA which causes Airbus to rethink its march on the market. Boeing's top-end WB  is solid but it has a MAX bottom end making it pay for its sloppy long-range strategy on the cheap. Now it must go back and rethink what it must do from old fashion values of work hard and be honest with its customers. It must sell its customers on a new vision in order to succeed.

The NMA must succeed in two regions. The single-aisle-replacement mode and the dual aisle gap filler mode as a segway to its 787 and beyond. A twofer for one is the objective of hard work and honesty, a 757 NMA. A short twin-aisle aircraft with taller legs is the beginning. Bring Embraer forward in the single-aisle end of a family by going down to regional distances from the smaller airports and smaller seat counts. Capping the market segment will stretch 757 twins/twin from 150- 270 seats in the continental configuration of up to 5,000 miles. Bigger than 737 engines are brought to from a new clean sheet. Twin-aisles and twin engines name it the "twin-twin". Airbus would only be able to knock off a twin-twin concept. Doing so would make it a fart wider than Boeing's concept, but Boeing's marketing is left to fight that battle. Or better-stated, twin X twin makes it four times better than the one aisle coming from Airbus' A321.

Air Current Proposes

The Air Current Link agrees with Winging IT in so much as uses its great detective skills regarding Boeing and say "clean Sheet" and let the Max fade into oblivion while bringing on a new aircraft doing it the right way, which they can and will!

Boeing Needs To Build A Clean Sheet from 175 Passenger to 270 Passenger Seating

In order to do that, it must snuff out the 737 Max and enhance the NMA line idea first up is a seven across seating regimen and lengthening the 737-NMA  depending on row capacity of 2-3-2 dual aisle seating. Fast on Fast off having dual-aisle configuration. It must have a 15" wide interior capacity for seven across seating.  The stretch goes as follows:

• NMA 175 is 24 rows of the premium economy (PE)
• NMA 200 is a stretch out for 30 (PE) rows using the same engines slotted on the 150
• NMA 250 is a stretch out having 36 rows of 7 across seats maybe a "34" pitch.
• NMA 275 is the same stretch-out length as the 250 models but with 31" pitch or whatever, it takes having 275 seats.

Gone are the 737 Maxs and gone are the low clearance landing gears, With longer clearance stretch, it may allow the most efficient engines with the diameter it needs to beat the competition.  Okay, Boeing engineers do your stuff and snuff the 737 Max.

Will Broncos Nett Tanner From Borah

Tanner Nett is and plays center being 6'6" for Borah High in Boise, enough said that he can block. Is he a Boise State recruit?

Democrats Are Doing Their Best To Elect Trump

Donald Trump is on a roll having Democrats pushing his way to a second term during 2020 voting. Here how they are doing it. 

• Demonstrating "political idiocracy" is another way of promoting impeachment by a Democrat plank in its platform.

• Promoting a 500-year plan at a myopic dystopia young democrat learning center 
• Foremost is the impeachment of a nothing exampling high crimes and misdemeanors not defined with even with a probable cause indictment. 

Go Democrats force people to vote and for Trump!

January 2020: The 7779X Will prove Its Worth

BOEING 777X OUT OF PAINT SHOP BEING PREPARED FOR FIRST FLIGHT

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/boeing-777x-paint-shop-prepared-first-flight/

By

 Geoffrey Thomas

January 11, 2020 

He suggests that taxi tests will start “very soon.” OR FIRST FLIGHT

F-22 and its Secret Radar

Take a jet with superior maneuverability. speed and stealth. And! then add a no-budget line new radar system, then Iran will lose it's airforce and missile emplacements to the US. Say good-bye to Irans F-4 and medium/short-range defensive missiles. Yes, the F-22 is more expensive than you know. 

It has technological features without any budget assigned to it. That's why the F-22 is the badest fighter in the sky. Talk radar, I can't. Talk missile loads, I can't. Talk about the F-22's stealth, I somewhat can!

The F-22 is really bad and Iran only has a few workable F-4's from the Vietnam era that can't hide. It will scavenge parts from the nonflying copies or make their own parts for a maintenance hole created by "old" era jets They are just flying practice targets for the US Airforce. Back to the F-22 radar, it's more secret than the F-22 itself for which the F-35 will have in some form.

As in WWII it wasn't the Weapon

It was the making of that weapon in great numbers without any harassment applied to its making process. The US was set in relative separation position could build in great numbers what Europe needed. Soldiers, planes, munition ships and so forth while Germany's genius was bombed into dust from 44-45. The F-35 is the newest player from America. Even if Russia could build fleets of war implementations could they stay pace with quality and quantity both are needed for any war effort? The F-35 is nearing 500 flying examples the Su-57 about 12 test version for its stab into the next generation. By the year 2025, the US and its allies will have 1,000 flying F-35 copies embedded into the war front and maybe china and Russia can answer with 500 5th generation at best. New drones, missiles and energy weapons by the year 2020 are more game-changers emerging from a military defense ramp-up. It is the culture of the US from this point forward or until losing the military complex high ground.

How Bad Is The Boeing Death Spiral? Muilenburg Bad!

Boeing just fired Dennis Muilenburg, Its CEO. It was bad when Dennis took the top chair and now he bears the brunt of a sloppy corporate philosophy. Jump out with Boeing money and damn the torpedoes. Now Boeing lets him go and thinks it needs a change before it gets SERIOUS.

CNN Business Reports:

Orlando Sentinal Muilenburg Fall from grace

"Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg was ousted on Monday after a tumultuous period in which the company faced a series of setbacks, including two fatal crashes, delays and numerous issues with its 737 Max airplane. Boeing continues to struggle to get its most important product back in the air.

Chairman David Calhoun will take over as CEO, effective January 13, 2020."

Boeing is falling on its sward and this admits to its folly when canning Muilenburg.

Please review prior Winging It news opinion.

When Will The F35 Fight?

A prediction of a first fight against the F-35 is set in the next ten years. It will involve the F-35 against Russian technology in the Middle East. Look to see the Russian missile system compromised during this type of conflict in the region and then using a Naval contingent back-dooring Israel from the Mediterranean and using supporting Russian players from Muslim nations as the means for its end of battle.

Israel's Adair will need a fleet of 35 units and neutralize adversarial ground assets to counter an assortment those same adversarial combatants and its equipment. Like most of Israel's wars it will be not elongated in time because it has mostly a first punch take the high ground philosophy. If Israel cannot get it mitigated in a fortnight the US will have to deploy within the region on its own behalf. The fortnight could look like this. A mass of all muslim assets in the region with a Russian game changing involvement. Particular a liberal use of Russia's S-400 missile system on Turkey's behalf. 

Israel will keep a short game within five hundred miles of its borders. Tactical nukes cannot be ignored in this scenario. The conflict battle minutes are as if they were days comparing from past conflicts like WWII. The five year conflict will compress into less than a month of time to exhaust military resources before more can be brought into a regional conflict. If this spreads to hemispheric conflict then it will last six months because military productivity is slower than a battle progress and destruction. War efficiency will name the winner.

In other words, how fast can a super power get to the battle space and commit will affect war duration and outcome. In a week three phase of battle Israel will be reduced to ancillary role using its self defense assets to preserve itself if it cannot deliver a capitchulating blow within the first 14 days. Outer Space becomes a new and crucial factor. Push button technology will determine the final outcome. Those nations with the best military toys and most will prevail. The world will be reshaped at the end of this cyclic escapade as measured through history of wars and how often. It is periodic and predictable and China will stay out unless it sees opportunity to rule over weakened powers.

The F-35 will fight until there are no more. In this prediction it bring almost a thousand to the front. It will harness all military assets from ground to orbit to defeat an adversary in an overarching display of technological dominance.

Turkey In The Short Straw

What is Turkey's play? The S-400 Russian Missile or the American made F-35? There are many talking points for both systems such as cost, management and military functionality for the nation but it appears Turkey has drawn the short straw for its military position by buying the S-400 missile instead of the F-35.

That tells me the complexity of the US system is much more affecting the Turkey's defense strategy from the costs, training and maintaining of the Lockheed F-35 system than the S-400 Russian system. It seems Turkey went the cheaper route when stumbling NATO over its own S-400 purchase. It will be soon where Turkey's S-400 buy-in will be nullified by a combination of drone, special forces and various aviation tools including the F-35 for disabling those same Russian made Turkish systems. Turkey is taking a big risk on the missile system doing by what is reported about it. It can and will be neutralized by NATO assets and Turkey will find itself well beyond  the political intrigue Erdogan is now levering against its allies in NATO by buying military weapons from Russia. The current solution is to cut the cancer out today by blocking any sales, then chemo the political will Erdogan holds over Turkey before eradicating the region with radiation before the patient is pronounced dead.

Turkey is drawing the short straw on bad advice at this time in history and its people are unaware of what is happening to its home.

Profit Dollar Crashes Both Governance And Max

Long after the two Max crashes it has trickled down there is an imperfection in what makes modern jets stay flying. Is it from the factory floor where assemblers are tired of build process and leave workmanship for the next shift. Is it execs who love floating about in Golden parachutes, or is it government governance overwhelmed to even check it twice and then depend on Golden parachutes and workmanship to take care of  air devastation? A good question is raised from those with clipboards walking about asking who is responsible for the broom leaning up in the corner of a big production floor building?

FAA is overwhelmed, execs search for profit dollars and workers seek how efficiently they hid the dirty parts and saved the corporation from spending money on due diligence once the production floor. Passengers want a cheap ticket and airlines too want a fat paycheck after discount fares are offered. The spiral down is complete waiting for planet earth to gather up another airplane. Airbus is not exempt from a catastrophe. Airbus is just lucky, it too has a multitude of near misses from crashing. In a perfect world, craftsmen and women catch engineering errors. Execs look for the best pathway forward and sometimes it cost more to be safe than sorry. The US government must not spend billions of dollars every day until it can properly staff the FAA with leading experts in the field of aviation. All problems cannot be solved all the time but it can mitigate the sloppy nature aircraft are made and delivered to the various profit makers.

2019, Meh!

Boeing is doing over the year 2019 during 2020. It will re engage the Max to service and fly the 777X to Farnborough on a big hop across the Atlantic. Sales for its 787 have slowed but expect a few 787 order surprises at Farnborough aviation show. Boeing wants to show off safety and technology as its theme but it wants to secretly  demonstrate market strength as its devoted single aisle customers re energizes the 737 Max offering thus blunting an Airbus order rout during the last 12 months from Farnborough's show date. 

Boeing is quietly clearing the mishap cobwebs and fixing its 777X problems at it has already taken a delivery on GE9X engine fixes. So tweeks were needed on the 777X program development.  Where that is now completed and where it remains to fly and fly a 777X all the way to Farnborough. It will carry "testing bodies" along with that endeavor. It's not too early to say Boeing is quickly coming back in 2020 and putting 2019 aviation news pundits to bed by year's end.

Deferred Costs And Boeing's Dreams

Deferred cost is a noted Boeing contrived concept in program accounting. It takes so many billion to develop an airplane. In Boeing's case it spent about $30 Billion more developing the 787 than it had, so it programmed how many 787's it needed to build in order to pay-off that 30 $$ billion debt it had incurred. It also adjusts the number of production models it needs to build to pay for an ever expanding production debt as technology is developed and introduced to that aircraft. Kind of like a line of credit on its credit card.

Boeing needed about 1,100 of its 787 delivered to pay off this deferral of debt. Where each airplane it delivered was more efficiently built thus allowing more money available to pay down deferred 787 cost with each airplane it had built. However, the 787 incurred more debt greater than its production efficiency, so it had to increase the projected 787's it needed to deliver to reduced the deferred cost to a theoretical zero balance when delivering oh let's say 1,200-1,300, or 1600 hundred 787s. 

Each of those deferred costs broken down into units delivered while its benchmark kept increasing as the aircraft matured as the production cost increased because technology improvements were added as its development costs increased for those improvements. It's like a dog chasing its costs tail. Is 1,600 units the ultimate deferred cost benchmark? That answer remains to seen as Boeing has not yet sold 1,600 units and for what price going forward. I would speculate to say Boeing will sell enough 787 to past 1600 units but it will also take another five years to extinguish its 787 deferred development cost for the 787. The year 2025 is a more doable time frame for investors unless Boeing gets more significant breakthroughs on build costs through material efficiencies or equipment development.

Always improving is a cost factor that can be derived from from historical data. It can be a cost component factor turned into a quantifiable number as a forecasting component. Also sales or commitments is a number in the same position. It can be factored in a forward looking estimation from global history and commercial trends. Somewhere in between lies the fact. So a computer guess is needed to surmise where Boeing will reach its deferred costs nervana of zero balance after the (nth number) of units are delivered and revenue is realized for each unit against its actual current production cost.

There are two costs before the margin is establish. One portion goes towards the deferred balance and one towards the actual production of an aircraft. Once the aircraft is delivered, the accounting flows can continue through the accounting programs at an actual rate where deferred costs are actually reduced and a profit margin outside the deferred cost is applied. It becomes a tangled view of when
real value is recognized for the 787 program by investors. It is probably safe to say, investors must make money with Boeing during the near term investment cycles of stock values and during value increases or decreases. Investors may wait another five years for making money on the long term program completion from program Investment cycles. 

I am not a stock analyst and do not make recommendations for stock purchasing. I only guess like the next person what may happened in the "market place". So invest at your own capability, means or risk. 

Boeing Oust Muilenburg As Chairman

Another Max crash at the top of Boeing is a long awaited Max purge has begun, Muilenburg is no longer board chairman but has been relegated to CEO. Boeing must reinvent itself as a renaissance kind of corporation and build something flawless and immune from the critics looking for dust balls floating about Boeing fortunes.

Dennis Muilenburg looks ahead

Chairman to CEO is a preliminary round to spending more time with "your family" rather than "spending more money in time". Boeing has finally cried "UNCLE"! The time has come to start the journey down the beanstalk picking off golden parachutes hanging like low hanging fruit off its limbs. Boeing is making a turn away from headwinds and now will run with the aviation surge if one can be found.

Boeing must have one keystone aircraft to build a new perception about its ability to provide an aircraft everyone desires. Two crashes of the Max has brought Boeing in a face to face confrontation with its maker. Its customer and not the stockholder. Boeing is to big to succeed! It must reach for its trim control and now fly its aircraft like a seasoned pilot before it too crashes.

Boeing Blinks: Reengine Recycle 767

The US military chose the 767 for it tanker model going against the A330 so there was something in the sauce Boeing provided the US Military tanker program that goes beyond the A330 than just money and convenience the A330 couldn't offer.

The 767 is a good airframe. Now it is considering rengining the 767 with GenX type engines leaving PW behind to sort out what happens next. The PW engine is listed Two Pratt & Whitney PW 4062 with 62,000 lbs. However, GE has been developing its own class of engine for the 777X and 747 8 projects thus pumping billions into R&D into its behemoths for sometime far outpacing PW expenditures on similar class jet engine like the PW4062.

Now come the 797 proposition from scratch white paper. It's too expensive and late to compete with the A321 class of extended range gap filler. Boeing sees something out of the Airbus playbook that has quickly made it more powerful than Boeing's marketing effort. The NEO is working in the market as we speak. Boeing may divert using the 767 frame and attaching GE engine technology to its frame. It would use the 767-400 configuration and perhaps call it the 767-8i and 8F. It would be bigger than the 797 and fly further but could fit into continental market places well when flying to LA to NY as an example. Boeing needs to make it efficient for 1,000 - 5000 mile range and it will compete with the A330 and buy time for the 797 concept to evolve monetarily. 

What must Boeing do: 

• Improve 767 build technology. Done that! 767, (KC-46 program)

• New GEX engine. Done that!  (GE can provide a scalable engine  from its GEX program

• Have a short development cycle for minimal costs. Set up for that!

• New 767 wings. Done That! (It has a new wing plant in Everett, Washington awaiting more work in its space and a 767 wing could be slotted in in a short amount of time. It already has wing designs ready to go based from its 787 and 777X programs.)

• Plane Size: Done that!

• Passenger amenities. Done that! (from all its family of programs and supporting suppliers eager for expanded business.)

• Commonality. You complete me theme from its family of aircraft.

• Customers. A Works in progress! It is the tipping point for making this business case. Does Boeing have a strong and risk-averse business case for its customers? Can Boeing make 1,000 orders from the NEO 767 idea? That all remains to be seen.

Job one. (Win customer trust back and kill the Boeing Golden Parachute mentality.)

Best Fighter Worst Fight The F-35 Argument Continues

I'm in no position to take a side until a war is fought using the F-35. Most military heads think the F-35 out flies sliced bread which is our culture's best invention. We are all watching how the F-35I Adair fares against the Su-35 and S-400 combo in the Middle East. this proxy demonstration is watched by all talking heads of consequence having some military expertise. Can the F-35 beat the S-400 Russian missile battery Turkey opted for instead of a 100 F-35's it had on order? Turkey's F-35 order was canceled because the F-35 was too secret and advance to let the Russians have a crack at its technology when delivering the S-400 missile Turkey had bought. I'll say the S-400 is a poor man's answer to the F-35 capability.

What about the Russian Su-35 which will show up on a regional radar? Can the F-35 take it out? Yes and no and that is a financial answer. If users can guarantee an outcome then it will risk a 100 million F-35 against 40 million Su-35. However, if the Su-35 has a slim chance a nation will fall back when a SU-35 arrives in F-35 airspace as Israel has demonstrated. Short of all-out war the risk is too much to for an F-35 to strike the SU-35 with an S-400 missile battery within two hundred miles. Israel has rightly become prudent with its 18 F-35's on hand. Even with an Israel Adair load out and strategy an all-out war will bring on its F-35 beast mode which could decide how good the F-35 can be used against advanced adversary counter-strategy. 

Somebody has an educated guess how a conflict would turn out but there is a chance there would be losses on both sides. It all depends on how the military hand is played. Israel needs a full contingent to guarantee a win with 50 F-35's flying out of Israel's Nevatim airbase. The S-400 systems need neutralization early suggesting covert actions in play. Without the S-400 the Su-35 does not have a chance against the F-35 in a conflict. The risk factor of 100 million per airplane is mitigated. Israel's 5 billion American investment will have another 100 F-35 in play during an extended action thus guaranteeing an outcome is America's favor. I suspect S-400 secrets are now known at this time by western intel.

When Pigs Fly

The electric airplane will be an indicator that the battery has arrived for ground transportation. If a commercial airplane can fly 500 miles on a battery then a car can travel the same distance on the same battery. Technology creep is making a better storage battery for electrical motors with a quick recharge cycle making the battery a competitive alternative to fossil fuel engines. The world is only about 20 years away from an electrical storage solution for electric motors. Needed is a significant weight reduction in that battery and a short charging cycle for storing electrical power. The chemistry in theory has been found but the practicality  of making the alternative cheap enough has not been found. But a promise has been made it can be done so a forward push for an all electric powered aircraft goes forward.

The electric plane isn't just a far fetched idea it is what is needed to come and the necessity is the mother of the electric power travel. Elon Musk and Tesla is pushing this need in a awe inspiring journey but has it advanced far enough to entice "others" to try a concept at Universities across the world?

Cambridge start-up claims breakthrough electric car battery that can charge in 6 minutes

We’re working on methods to make powders that are scalable and where 1,000 tonnes could be made quite easily in factories. We have a prototype now, and are moving toward commercialization early next year. The tests have to be validated beforehand.

It's a matter of time and 20 years seems about right to drop fossil fuels from the Scheme of Things (SoT).

The SoT gauntlet has been thrown down and that is where we are today. Many ideas are pouring fourth and the solar system's sun is the key to unlimited electrical energy to power the planet in its endeavors.

The earth only has to supply plant based lubricants/plastics to make it all work. I'll be dead by the year 2040 but you may enjoy the change to save the planet from global warming.

Peregrine Missile Bang For Buck

Back in the day it was noted a 150 million dollar missile taking out a 40 million fighter is a bad trade-off. Well things have changed in the war strategy. Hence, the Peregrine missile by Raytheon as a medium range missile  taking out relatively inexpensive drones is the trade-off. This missile is not what it cost versus the cost of the target but the value of what it can do. If it can sink a $100 million in potential value or eliminate a billion in risk from drones, then the Peregrine missile is a great value when it strikes a drone. A drone is a poor man's sword and the Peregrine is a rich man's cane for a beating to be given. The F-35 can hold more Peregrine missiles than a AMRAAM held in a 4+ fighter. A silver bullet is better than a less expensive drone that can stop an oil field from delivery of world economy.

The Peregrine missile from Raytheon is such an investment. A million here or million there pretty soon terrorist are defanged and the defense of this nation is intact. Its cost will come down as thousands of Peregrines are produced in mass for a revolving delivery system at a jet near you. The versatility is the key. It can take out weapons from a drone or an adversary's attack jet on the same dime and with everything in between no longer in play on the battle space



It's six feet long and 150 lbs.

Flightglobal:

"The missile gains its manoeuvrability through thrust vectoring technology that is similar to what is used on the AIM-9X, says Noyes. He declines to say the missile’s exact range. The AMRAAM has a range of more than 17.4nm (32km), according to the USAF."

What Lies Beneath, The Max?

What is really underneath the Max's skin troubles the aviation world, Some old school stuff, cables and wheels could be what Boeing is passing for airplane scares sensibility into a corner. Come 1950 and the 737 is revolutionary. Come 2017, it crashes.  That is the Max problem in a nutshell. It merges the Wright Bros with the computer age. Boeing is paying everyone to pass its ideas through the gauntlet of scrutiny as it will get it flying sooner rather than later. Boeing has dithered its concept out there long enough to start the political round as the European governance is now seizing the FAA high ground away from them in the aviation realm.

The FAA took some Boeing money and now European influence can dominate the FAA. However, not so fast. This is just round one with aircraft disasters. The pendulum will swing back as greed and power always seems to dominate the human nature. It's a common element through history man has gone to the Max when money and power are at stake and Boeing or Airbus is no different with this matter. The great airplane crash will continue until man's bent towards optimal power continues.

Who Blinks First Boeing Or China?

It is not certain who has the upper hand Boeing or China. Boeing needs China badly and China needs airplanes from the duopoly of Airbus and Boeing. However, Boeing builds the best heavies flying when considering the 777 line of aircraft. But the duo aisle segment can't save an manufacturer alone in its quest of being number 1 in the world it needs its Max sold to china and there is the log jam for Boeing. No Ma and no money in asia and China can pressure Boeing in a trade war so to speak. It becomes a blinking game of who will give in first. Boeing must gets its single-aisle airborne again before it can start its manufacturing engine up to full capacity and China must buy airframes to supply its ever expanding market place. Boeing must move its single-aisle backlog Max 737 when established to fly again.

Who blinks first in this deadlock? Both will blink at the same time benefiting both Boeing and China mutually during the year 2020. China will order 200 airplanes from single-aisle to WB at a fire sale price as Boeing seeks to regain some dominance in aviation's world marketplace. The later half of 2020 is the target area in time for blinking at each other. Everything until then will be posturing and gamenship. China needs airplanes and Boeing is making it difficult for them to get them with all the mishap and development problems Boeing has experienced. Out of this should come some pretty nifty product for the world and China would like to show case a leading edge approach which should cause them to order Boeing in late 2020. The 777 will have completed testing by then and the Max should have taken off by then.

The caveat is Airbus is lurking behind the Boeing mishap draft waiting to pounce on opportunity. A little publicized fact is Airbus has its problems too with its family of aircraft. It has been lucky so far as it hasn't crashed one or two of its products through Airbus faults. Airplanes have become way too complex to assume they will fly without hiccups. The Boeing lesson is profit over safety is not a good path in this new era of aviation. Safety is the gold standard to profits and will remain so for some time to come. In the meantime, who blinks first has the greatest need to win the aviation war.

If The 737 Flies Fault Free For First Year In Service

Fault Free Flying is defined as no mishaps from a new architecture airplane since the Max groundings.

The sales on the Max should resume at a robust pace by 2021. Currently 5,000 Max units are in the que for order filling. Boeing must make a dent with Max production and delivery during 2020 in order to resume new sales and stop bleeding of its single-aisle bookings for the model type through cancellations.

Data supporting approval from governing bodies allowing the 737 to fly remains  the last hurdle to pass through its testing flights and ground validations for meeting governing body standards for any safe aircraft.   Particularly, the Max must demonstrate it has met and exceeded those contributing conditions as no longer existing which led to the recent two crashes during a six month period during 2018/2019.

If can do all this, then the Max should take-off as a remarkable airplane worthy of any fleet in the industry. However, a propensity of trained Max pilots must lead the resurgence. Flying an NG is not good enough to slide into a Max seat. A pilot must spend the required time training with a Max because of those crashes not because it flies like an NG. Once that standard is installed, Boeing is free to move the single-aisle market forward with abundant orders as the safest commercially sold airplane flying.

Flex Wings,Tweak Airframe, Pop Back Door, Check

Boeing has room to excuse as back door blows out during flex test on 777X wings. Oh well, another thirty days and a cool billion spent on the 777X before delivery. Boeing has run the gauntlet of time and money on its wild ride through the incompetent world of airplane development. It will fly once all the checkboxes are checked. Thanks Max for all your confidence shattering escapades of corporate greed payback is here.

Boeing's Ambitions Flies South During Its Winter

The 777X was supposed to have first flight in the fall of 2018. It is now a year late and no sign of a 777X first flight. The Max was to be long in service it still remains grounded! The result is a massive shift in Boeing resources and extending schedules further into the future. Result is customers grow impatience and must be motivated to hang-in there thinking kindly of Boeing's reputation and promise. Has Boeing out flown it technology, thus causing a corporate meltdown? "Ah, Yes", so says the industry.

Being a Boeing fan is tough to do today but the horizon is beginning to arrive as a morning dew refreshes the grass. The 777X will have its giant GE 9X sooner rather than later. The extra time on the 777X will make it a great airplane and no one will easily touch its over-all performance. The fewer heads working on the project than earlier in its progression has allowed order to return to the reality of building something totally new. The Max is a cooperate correction as it dumps all its Golden Parachutist out the building who lead the charge for having more with less and equaling a Puget Sound retreat and BBQ pit overlooking the sound.

The Max must be replaced with a clean sheet single -aisle starting yesterday. The resource scramble must end and putting out the 777X is job 1.

Boeing is suffering from a glutinous corporate addiction of making more with less when abandoning "the more" when ambitions has always worked well and now the middle of corporate hierarchy has trapped itself in its own puke on the less, (Max). The whole mess affects everything, resources, investing and competition. Boeing is in a fight for its corporate life and should act accordingly and abandon traditional corporate smugness during its operation for the next ten years.

Will The Max Come Back?

Yes and no! Yes it will to save Boeing, and no it won't pave way for its future. Originally, Boeing built a flawed 737 design from the sixties it was too low slung to the ground to allow flexibility and its been a mess to get the body in balance and now we have  a Max as its opus from the problem bin for which Boeing refuses to let go of. Perhaps this last episode is its last episode of problems. Can't tell how deep corporate stupidity will inhabit Boeing thinking out of its pride.

The time is now for Boeing to start its new single aisle campaign for 2030 and peddle the Max as a gap filler of technology and advancements over its family of aircraft. The Max or single-aisle family needs new geometry, engines and capacity for innovations to come. You can't keep painting lip stick on a pig and call it Max. Boeing broke the single aisle concept back in the 1960's and it just is now fifty years later expressing a need for a clean sheet in its class.

Boeing is searching for  a special single-aisle name going forward for which it can hang decades of marketing upon. Max the pig won't cut it, but but evolution says it all.

Critical Decision Slow 777X Progress

Qantas had been on the cusp of announcing its Project Sunrise winner and the lean was towards a Boeing product. But the 737 Max has choked Boeing into re-prioritizing its ventures and hence the 777X is at a crawl back in the shop. Boeing will fix the Max in 2020 and it will fly the 777X in 2020 but the 797 has become only a Boeing dream since the Max has been its market loss in service and it will take a "successful venture" to change this perspective.

There you have it, Boeing has flummoxed itself by lining its pocket with money before making a complete product. It forgot its main function as an aircraft builder. Build it right for the customer and the money will follow. Don't follow the money when building an airplane! Boeing will become viable as a major airplane maker when its commercial widebody division succeeds and by not waiting for the single-aisle to fix itself in the meantime.

The 737 Max is not dead but it needs a resurrection. Boeing may as well go ahead and build a clean sheet single-aisle as it has lost the market single-aisle parity. Shoot for 2028 for entry into service for a Max killer to dominate the single-aisle segment. This would include a long-range two hundred seats configured A321 killer. Boeing has already thought this through but it may have trouble convincing its stockholders on a 2028 single-aisle build risk but Boeing has put itself into a precarious defensive position and it will fight rather than delay indefinitely while fixing its problems. 

Saving Boeing Must Recall Single Aisle From The Start

 Embraer will become the way Boeing must now name its aviation place in the sun. Boeing will need two distinctions for its aviation presentation. A dual aisle family having both military and commercial configurations and a single-aisle concept using seats from 50-175 complimenting landing in all conditions and then again a dual aisle prospect which could deliver over 1 ,000   forces having just two quick and dirty air assaults.

Boeing must make the change in the next twenty years. Landing a hundred planes using an  open door theater night could bring in war firefighting brigade in just minutes, hence the 777 and  787 capacity features.

Gone will be the 737 Max line of aircraft and in its place the Embraer while Boeing widebody becomes the Boeing military punch.

The 737 has a commercial crash reforming the company into two aisle type offering for both its commercial and commercial offering,  Eliminating the Max gives Boeing the flexibility to go small with a sizable payload and the go as large as it needs to go with Boeing's WB line-up from the 767 up to the 777 10X when configuring both the military and commercial class of aircraft. Fighter jets and bombers will remain a one off development, cargo does have a natural one off separation and can be interchanged with one another during the course of war.The US could be preparing for a massive war,

Effective and Efficient F-35

When the F-35 reaches 80 million dollars a copy US, then it could be called effective. But what about efficient in boardroom jargon. Both words are used together in a resounding blow broadsiding board room decision making. The F-35 becomes efficient when it its effects can be delivered at a nominal cost of $80 million per plane and having an operational up keep cost comparable to current fourth generation fighter types like the F-16. 

The"radar coatings" are a big cost component. If the US military industrial complex finds a way to keep the F-35 invisible to radar without having to slobber copious amounts of radar absorbing coats of paint on the F-35's hull and wings after it flies in combat, then it will become efficient and a winner.

The F-35 may soon leave its fighter aircraft associates in the dust and its not from speed but from technological advancements. A super fast computer core here and there and pretty soon the fighter thinks at the speed of light  and does its fighting with a "light saber" from Star Wars fame. It just has to get up to battle space first where the other "flying bricks" are found to play. The F-35 will become effective when it becomes efficient or is it the other way around? 

A decision Was Made

Turkey has opted for the S-400 Russian missile over having the F-35, its partners and technology. Is the S-400 that good? A quick answer is "are you kidding me!". In that Turkey wants access to everything Russia can build going forward over US made implements of war. Turkey is now on an Island where Russia is stationed. The war is now being fought in the manufacturing arena and Turkey is playing its card rendering it as defenseless from NATO with Russian aspirations. Turkey's gain  with the US closing its military  door should be a short term impact. However, "pride does cometh before any Turkish fall". 

A change has occured and the battle is lost by the US military complex. The war is what really concerns all those participants on the US side of things. Russia cannot sustain a military weapons  surge. The SU-57 is good to up towards 100 of its type way less than the American F-22 and far far less than F-35. Turkey may get 60 5th generation aircraft and only forty S-400 packages in a Russian deal. Military technology will languish under a Russian plan into oblivion. It can't even make a successful car at this time because South Korean can and will do that much for its own industrial path.

The US needs Israel more than it needs Turkey as a military trade partner. Every pro Turkey S-400 comment is over-shadowed by a Russian brag about what it wants to do but not about what it can do. The US gave up on Turkey too easily because the S-400 missile was a "system in the bag" even by US standards and Russia could not meet Turkish expectations in the first place. While political theater has cost Turkey its independence from what it will never recover from during modern warfare. Turkey is done and is ready to be served.

Will Max Fly By Christmas American Thinks So! and GE 9X news

American Airlines Believes The Boeing 737 MAX Will Be Ready To Use Again By End Of Year

The Max has had it rough these last few months groundings and re-groundings and just now after what was obvious several months back Boeing announced a change at its leadership's Max top when it removed key leadership this week.

Gulf Times Reports

"Boeing’s 737 program manager, Eric Lindblad, will retire in a matter of weeks after roughly 12 months on the job, McAllister told employees in the memo.

Lindblad, a respected engineer who had also run the 777X wide-body program, has been with Boeing for about 34 years and had mentioned retiring last year, McAllister said.
Taking Lindblad’s place as the lead of the 737 program and the Renton, Washington, factory will be Mark Jenks, who has been leading Boeing’s potential new mid-market airplane project, McAllister said.

Jenks faces daunting challenges, including untangling a backlog of undelivered planes, getting production back on course for planned output increases, and finishing development of the 737 MAX 10, the largest Boeing single-aisle jet, sources said. The stakes are high as the 737 is the backbone of Boeing’s profits and must generate cash for new projects like the NMA. Described as a “quiet, get-on-and-do-it” engineer, Jenks spent half of his 36-year Boeing career on the 787 and an earlier alternative that was never launched, the Sonic Cruiser."

Boeing is finally shifting its efforts to what works for the airline maker and quietly letting loose of what is becoming a disastrous lack of decision making. Look for a December 737 Max relaunch as a stop gap single aisle offering.

The GE 9x had set a world's engine thrust record of 134,300 lbs thrust. Meaning it can set engine thrust with a reasonable thrust range for all flying conditions and make the GE 9X the most efficient big engine alive.  The GE 115B is rated at maximum thrust at 127,900 lbs. The G9X beats it by 6,000 lbs of thrust at 134,300 having a 10% fuel economy advantage over the GE 115B former engine.

The record-breaking test was done in 2017