Boeing Books Both Norwegian and Qantas On Website

Boeing makes it official and now we all can adjust our own tracking charts. Boeing has started its end-of-year push before November. It posted 19 787-9 for Norwegian and five 787-9 for Qantas. Additionally, Qantas converted three 787-8's from sibling Jetstar, into three 787-9 for Qantas. This brings the net total 787's in 2015 for 50 787's ordered with Boeing. However, it has not yet posted "the 24 for EVA 787-10's" yet, as it still remains circling the Boeing paper-work airport until gains landing fees. This should reach a paper shuffle conclusion before year's end.

I still have hopes for a few trickling-in orders plus the Dubai Airshow in a sweep up posting of another total additional 25 orders meeting an over 100 net 787's ordered this year.

Not listed on the Boeing website is the 9 trickling-in 787 from El Al firmed up. It also has leased 6 more not booked, pushing the 787 order book towards 100 for 2015.

Not Yet Booked:

El AL  15 787's both outright purchased and leased through others.

EVA   24 787-10's

Dubai ???

Total  39 yet to be booked, but having a 99% booking certainty

Total net 787 Roundup For YTD 2015 = 89, 787's and still counting

Orders through October 27, 2015: Boeing.com :<<<Link

	737	747	767	777	787	Total
2015 Net Orders	334	-	48	54	50	486

Customers	737	747	767	777	787	Total
AerCap	100	-	-	-	-	100
Air Austral	-	-	-	-	2	2
Air Tahiti Nui	-	-	-	-	2	2
Alaska Airlines	6	-	-	-	-	6
All Nippon Airways	5	-	-	-	3	8
Atlas Air	-	1	-	-	-	1
Australia P-8	4	-	-	-	-	4
Business Jets / VIP Customer(s)	3	-	-	-	2	5
COPA Airlines	51	-	-	-	-	51
Enter Air Sp. z o.o.	1	-	-	-	-	1
Ethiopian Airlines	-	-	-	-	6	6
EVA Air	-	-	-	5	-	5
FedEx	-	-	48	-	-	48
GECAS	2	-	-	-	-	2
GOL Airlines	9	-	-	-	-	9
Jet2.com Ltd	27	-	-	-	-	27
Korean Airlines	-	-	-	5	-	5
Norwegian	-	-	-	-	19	19
Oman Air (SAOC)	20	-	-	-	-	20
Qantas	-	-	-	-	5	5
Qatar Airways	-	-	-	14	-	14
Ruili Airlines	30	-	-	-	-	30
Ryanair	3	-	-	-	-	3
SilkAir	6	-	-	-	-	6
Silk Way Airlines	-	3	-	-	-	3
SMBC Aviation Capital	10	-	-	-	-	10
Sriwijaya Air	2	-	-	-	-	2
Swiss Global Air Lines Ltd	-	-	-	3	-	3
TUI Travel PLC	-	-	-	-	1	1
Unidentified Customer(s)	91	-	-	17	36	144
United Airlines	-	-	-	10	-	10
United States Navy	9	-	-	-	-	9
2015 Gross Orders	379	4	48	54	76	561
Changes	-45	-4	-	-	-26	-75
2015 Net Orders	334	-	48	54	50	486

Boeing Has To Play Smart With The Military, And Pick A Bid for The Long Haul

Boeing just recently lost the battle for the LRB for approximately 60 Billion as it will hurt. Northrop won the bid as it will not result in closing its doors. The military tries to defend the industrial complex from extinction if the bids are a wash. Northrop was saved from extinction. Boeing lost, because it insisted on winning a 179 tanker order against Airbus. Lockheed won the F-35 and is endowed with Pentagon Billions. Boeing bid against Lockheed with its F-32 rendering. It lost from a STVOL consideration as Boeing wasn't quite yet ready for prime time on its presentation, but latter got it down solid.

The Boeing bid process has become victim with its own energy of bidding on everything big on the military, ignoring Government penchant for preserving the complex, as a necessary balancing act for the nation's defense. It needs manufacturing from multiple sources in order to achieve optimal results from competition. Boeing needs to court the military, and pick its battles rather than bid everything and insist on complaining when it loses. Boeing doesn't endear the military plans as they give one to Northrop as part of preserving its Military Industrial Complex health meter. Keeping Northrup around for the next decades is Job one. Don't worry Boeing you were tossed a Tanker bone away from the Airbus complex.

That is why Boeing needs to do a careful approach to the award process. The first objective is to identify what upcoming program will make Boeing Defense industry for three next decades. They should have approached its F-32 bid more seriously with its vast committed intelligence, engineering and capital R&D. Lockheed no longer builds commercial airplanes so it was a do or die effort for them. The military appreciated its attitude for do or die and gave Lockheed the F-35 bid. Boeing was doing well with its commercial realm and its offering was very close in the competition. However, Boeing could have done better during the award process and would have won it if wasn't so arrogant of an industrial base. They lacked humility and lost.

The F-32 should have been the Marine Bird period. The F-35 needed some beefing up but it gave it away when it had to accommodate three F-35 types from one design concept. Lockheed could have built a Navy deck launcher with an advanced Air Force Fighter frame. However, somebody had an outcome based education resume and insisted on everybody wins having one frame and Boeing you lose because you got the gold star last time. In a perfect world the DoD biffed it. They should have grabbed the Boeing design in a heartbeat for a dedicated STVOL fighter. However, the outcome based nerds with all the Gold stars awarded Lockheed the award because it was its turn. Then comes the LRB project and it's Northrop's turn.

If the Military was really interested having the best concept flying it would cherry pick the best concept from any manufacturer and not insist on playing like a bunch of first graders giving out bid award stars. The system really makes America weaker and it doesn't actually save $$Tax Dollars. The cost over runs are proof of that during JSF program. The old axiom is true: "good at all things, master of nothing". The Marines are a special group of people and they need an ugly jump jet on Steroids. The F-32 was that Jump Jet.

Wow, I digressed again, back to Boeing bidding strategy: 

• Boeing needs to pick only one bid program for a long term continued production run.
• Boeing does not need to go after every program, but it need to bid every program.
• Boeing needs to prepare for "a feature bid program with R & D behind it" with a do or die mindset
• Boeing needs to woo the Military by not complaining or objecting during bid losses
• Boeing needs to complete a bid development beyond expectations and eliminate mishaps (KC-46)

Bombs Away Its Northrop

Northrop Wins Air Force Long Range Strike Bomber Contract  <<<Link

Just in off the wire: Northrup beats Boeing, Lockheed for LRB contract more news later

Here's another look at the deal from Defense World <<<Link

Boeing-Lockheed may challenge award like they did in the Tanker award.

Boeing may need to lick its wounds and go big on its next bid up. If they do challenge the award it would be to its own detriment, because it becomes a big waste of time and money for everyone plus creating some DoD bad will it can ill afford. as big a fan of Boeing that I am, I am glad Northrup gets the award as it keep the competitive DNA working in our military defense complex. Northrup built the B-2 and its an awesome aircraft. Despite the naysayers coming from Boeing saying they have only built a handful of military aircraft recently. Boeing quickly forgets its own risky adventures in military building. The Lockheed F-35 program as hot as it has become is replete with setbacks. So Boeing -Lockheed, don't call the Northrop secret ops black when executing a contract as if it were a blank check.

Orders Building For The 787 Is Causing Airbus Some Worry

Recent ordering by EVA air and Norwegian Air for both the 787-9 and 787-10 should have caused Airbus marketing a recoil. In fact the low numbers of A350 orders of only a minus 29 A350 in the last two years during 2014-2015 should worry Airbus, as the market game is gaining tension for some of its executives in France. Looking at the Airbus' "-29 net order for 2014- 2015" is a strong reflection something is not adding up for Airbus. They just lost a competition with an EVA Air purchase straight across the Board against Boeing's 787-10 order for 24. 

Even though Norwegian Air is already a staunch Boeing wide body customer, it was expected they would order Boeing going forward for any new 787-9's and they did just that.

However, to the delight of Boeing it was for 19, 787-9's with an option for 10! Using the new math a fourth grader would determine 43 wide bodies are on the Boeing production docket from these two customers just mentioned. Airbus has only three added and 32 subtracted for its show in almost 24 months of pushing and shoving its customers towards buying the A350. 

Lest we not forget the 26, 787's net orders already for 2015, it brings the Boeing tally in late October to include 69 787 wide bodies ordered as compared with the -29 A350s net ordered in the last two years. Combining Boeing 2014 (41 net) with 2015 (69 tally), as it currently stands, it will total 110 787's during the two year period, as opposed to the Airbus -29 sinking sales with the A350 during the same time period! Either Airbus has run out of steam on its A350, or Boeing has figured out they have a pretty good product which may be better than what Airbus is pushing.

Boeing spent millions on market analysis as did Airbus. Boeing stuck to its guns on a 7,500 mile 787-10 where Airbus made its A350-900 an extended range route machine comparable to the 787-9 range. Key factors stalling the A350 offering as listed below.

• One hundred and forty 787 production units a year for Boeing shrinks Backlog immediately
• Bang for the Buck value on the 787 family is greater than the A350
• The A350 is five years away from reaching production capacity nearing Boeing's
• Boeing can sell 400 more 787 in the next five years while keeping the backlog equal to Airbus'.
• Airbus is done with large orders greater than 10 at a time going into the future.
• Boeing has more large orders coming, greater than 10, with the 787-family
• Fleet expansions comes from 787 operational leveraging (Norwegian Air is the Example) fuels the sales.

None of these factors mention efficiency or aircraft dynamics, and only address market positioning and customer opportunity. However, if you rely on the tale of the tape with side-by-side comparisons, Boeing has bracketed Airbus into a corner with its 777X family, a grave concern for Airbus as the A350-1000 is orphaned by the 777X proposition. The A350-9 becomes a stand-alone answer to all of the 787 family of aircraft. Airbus is faced with having customers fly the A350-900 within a region experiencing risk for diminishing load factors, where a 787-8 could do the mission better with an increased load factor for the customer. 

The 787-9 meets and beats the A350-900 in efficiency for long legged routes of 8,000 miles. The A350-900 is too much airplane for reflexing on any operational changes encountered when a competing airline has all three Boeing 787 types, where they will slide around a deploying roster of 787 according to its routing distances, needs, and actual market load factors. The A350-900 becomes orphaned as a  tool for fleet requirements not adjusting to what is needed.  It becomes an over built aircraft where someone like EVA air orders 24 787-10's just fitting within its operational dichotomy. The A330 NEO is not the answer on the cheap for beating the 787.

The 787-8 is slightly over built for regional markets of under 3,000 miles, but can adequately do the job well, however in the A350-900 case, it has to go big or not at all, just as it was designed by Airbus pomp. Airbus keeps building too much airplane for any customer flexibility.  

A two year lull in Airbus A350 orders is a grave worry. An Airbus A380 order would be surprise. The A320NEO is going very well, but the profit margin is thin, where Airbus risks tumbling into becoming solely a single aisle company within ten years.