The Exquisite Art Of War By DDG1000

The Zumwalt performed exquisitely.

https://bangordailynews.com/2016/01/20/news/nation/navy-stealth-destroyer-performed-exquisitely-during-sea-test/?ref=moreInstate


“We tested a very complex automated boat handling system right after clearing the sea buoy, we brought up the propulsion plant and, by afternoon of the first day, we were doing 32.8 knots and hard rudders,” Gale said. “It performed exquisitely.”

The money spent shows what a few billion dollars will do for naval attitude. The US Zumwalt Destroyer or AKA as DDG-1000, made headway with exuberant platitudes of excellence as suggested by the above quote.

"The “tumblehome” hull of the DDG 1000, which slopes inward as the ship rises out of the water, was designed to reduce detectability by radar, but some questioned the ship’s stability.

Notably, Rear Adm. James Downey said the ship accomplished full rudder swings, demonstrating less than eight degrees of list, IHS Jane’s Navy International reported."

At thirty-three knots equaling 37 miles per hour on land. The possibility of turning 15,000 tons on a dime suggests reckless behavior, but having only 8 degree list off the ocean horizontal is a remarkable feat. Just lean 8 degrees off your own vertical, as it can be done without much notice. The ship past the instability tests in remarkable fashion beating the unknown expectations that suggested it may flounder on hard turns. 

Quite the contrary, in came to life on hard turns.

Build Slot vs Purchase Price (updated)

What moves an airline towards a deal is often marked by when it could receive an airframe in time, more than what price is paid for said aircraft. Delta Airlines recently purchased the A350-900 over the 787-9 because of having a favorable build slot from Airbus over Boeing, as it admitted that an offered Airbus price too, was a winning factor. 

Airbus pushed the price-line downward so it could claim supremacy in North America's air wars. Airbus Accounting might write-off the low sales price to advertising expense rather than a reduction to the A/R account. Boeing's list price and delivery slots failed in the bid, as indicated by Delta Airlines. The right time and the right price brings me to an acquisition award process, which was a part of my former life. 

Airbus will naturally take advantage of any win, as a validation for having the superior product! When infact other considerations were in play for choosing an Airbus product over Boeing product. The Boeing sales team missed the mark over which they had no control with this bid process. Time caused the defeat and Airbus lowballed the bid.

When a complex purchase solution was required with the government, my position required that I must build an acquisition attribute table supporting an award outcome. Much research went into preparing such a table. This example is a "mock" private sector submission.

Keeping it brief, the explanation of this concept will be brief.

First a memo goes out to concerned parties, CEO, CFO and the lot of VP's. On a scale of 1-10 what is most important to the airline. The staff figures this out for each participant and reports upward reaching the exec's. 

Next important question for attribute testing and product award:

What is most important to the Airline when considering the A-350-900 or 787-9?

Please go to your staff for a statistically sound responsive ratings and report back listing in order of Importance you conclusions.

Per example: 

If price has top importance then list it as a "one".

If fleet continuity is slightly less important, then list it as a "two" and so forth.

This mock attribute chart has five components: as Listed in order from an average of fantom response calculation, and here are the fake results for Delta's A350-900 and 787-9 mock purchase competition.

Order of importance submitted from all the Delta Executive Teams before weighted values are assigned by the execs using team analysis:

Mock Results: for Delta Airline in order of importance

1. Delivery Slot 

2. Price

3. Fleet Continuity

4. Fleet Efficiency

5. Passenger Amenity

Many other attribute/priorities could be added, but simplicity is the overarching exercise for the Attribute Weighted Average Awarding System (AWAAS).

A table will be provided for a decision making tool. The table is called AWAAS. Final decision is made on purchase selection summary and will go to the board for its approval and the Q&A's before selection is made with this mock world of Delta Airlines. A press release will follow the decision for purchase.

Legend for scoring and weighted value calculations below only move two numbers into the chart, since there are only two bidders. This exercise has the potential for five bid submissions. However, only two numbers are needed for potential rating numbers.

"Chart Hint for the curious: If Airbus had been rated a "1" for all criteria it would have received the maximum possible points of 1,000 and then Boeing's values equal a "2" by a Default rating and resulting in its points for a total of 800, and losing the bid award. The points rewarded, reflect the alignment with "Airline Vision and Mission emphasis", even through attribute awarding, and weighted values. The resulting number reflects the Airline position rather than most advanced aircraft offered. In other words, "Bang for the buck", meets Corporate time expectations. This mock presentation awarded accordingly from Delta's perceived (press reports) operational position, and not the Manufacturer excellence for product."

In this mock study Delta chooses the A-350-900. Because it's the Delta Airlines analysts setting the criteria, making Airbus the logical choice over common sense reaction, market impulse, or even the venerable 787.

As you may see, an attribute selection process can be designed from what a Vision statement projects or its Mission objective has assigned by having a weight or importance aligned for the purchasing company. The ending result may cause an outcome where the conditions existing for an airline has become more important than the price or the best Airplane available in the market place. It comes down to the condition setting of an airline and its solution for that condition. Delta Airlines choose accordingly.

787-9 Acts Like A Normal Airplane During A Wind Shear In Flight

However, I will give you a Rocky Mountain High on the backside of a 787 wind shear story at 40,000 ft. The only comparison for me was on an L-1011 in the nineteen nineties coming out of Salt Lake going to Jacksonville, Fl. The ride couldn't put trays on the floor like the stage 5 drop this 787 experienced for Air New Zealand (recounted down below).

_{BA 777 Flight scene during turbulence}

My ride had too few passengers on it to matter. The seat belt light came on and the cabin crew implored adherence to the warning, by stating, "the upcoming turbulence will put passengers on the ceiling if not properly belted in. They cleared the bathrooms for thirty minutes. It was just plain fun going through the Rocky Mountain front with a twist. The L'1011 creaked and groaned. Then it shimmed and shook. The elevator ride plunged downward for the appropriate price of the amusement park ticket, we all got the shaft. The turbulence lasted near on 15 minutes, an eternity. "Drinks will be served immediately following the turbulence somewhere over Texas", a voice piped-in from the PA coming from a undisclosed flight attendant at an undisclosed part of the aircraft where passengers can't see. They had first shots at the liquids before serving passengers, but they served liberally and often. Jacksonville, Fl had such a smooth landing, don't know why, it just did.

Here's a good story, even better than my own Rocky Mountain High. The 293 787-9 Passengers and the 13 crew had no warning in this event. They had a massive food fight scattering trays, paper and debris everywhere in the cabin. No worries nine more flight-time hours remained for the clean-up. The aircraft was not harmed, it performed as expected.

Air New Zealand's Food Dump at 40,000 feet Flight NZ90

Photo: Instagram: ayastagrammmm

Otago Daily Times: Date Line Australia: 1/19/2016

“Passengers screamed as the plane dropped sharply twice without warning and starting shaking violently sending wine arcing into overhead luggage compartments and fully laid food trays littering aisles.

A passenger posted on social media site Imgur that an hour into the 10-hour flight the plane suddenly dropped and started "shaking like crazy" sending everything in the air and spraying wine on to the cabin roof.

Falsabaiana said passengers were screaming.

"It was terrifying. I thought that might be the end of me."

He said he was about to tuck in to his meal when the violent turbulence struck.

"I was just about to eat mine and then it was literally ripped from my eager fingers," said Falsabaiana.

Poster Ollieislame described the panic.

"We had a little bump-de-bump at first and then all of a sudden the plane just dropped and started shaking like crazy. Then the second drop came. Everything up in the air, wine on the roof. Quite a few screams and general terror."

According to poster hairway2steven a cabin steward was injured trying to clean up.

"One of the stewards cut his finger pretty badly, but maybe that was from picking up glass afterwards."

Passengers said the cabin crew did their best to make everyone comfortable for the rest of the flight.

Falsabaiana said: "They went through and picked up everything they could but they just weren't equipped to do much more and so many people needed help cleaning themselves up I don't think it was that high a priority."

Posted Ollieislame: "After it all calmed down, one of the attendants let us know that it was a case of severe turbulence and bad weather they didn't anticipate, that the pilots were readjusting course to get around it. Nicely finishing up the information with 'There is nothing wrong with the plane, yet'."

Air New Zealand today said Flight NZ90 encountered unexpected, strong turbulence during a meal service, which caused "some catering items to fall from service carts".

   

Airline Quid Pro Quo Starts With Economy

It all starts with economy where a cheaper price for the seat means a passenger pays for it through some kind of 10 hour torture treatment. The passenger really pays for aviation’s equivalent of "steerage". It's your kind of price, going intercontinental on an airline. The selling to everyone an economy fare, who then can assume the crash position going non-stop. Class is actually based on daily caloric intake. Price is based on lifetime caloric summary. How much you weigh is more of a determiner for what seat you must buy. If you buy a first class or business class ticket with an airline, the passenger must know its assigned cost comes from their recognized stature. 

When weighing closer to 300 lbs than two hundred, a ticket will cost a passenger according to the Quid Pro Quo of physiological configuration with your actual weight. The passenger just looks at price of first class for $1100 vs $199 economy or $500 premium economy most anywhere in the region. However, the human psychic adjust to the shoe store mentality of buying what looks nice, as in low price, even though it doesn't fit the foot.

The airline marketing website always shows prices that derange human sensibility. A passenger seeking a Hawaii fare will always go there in economy, because they can get to Hawaii for only $199. How much does a passenger weigh question goes by the wayside. The failure comes from some kind of mental dissonance. It can be overcome by  therapy where the vacation must start at the airport not at the destination. "For all that's good in the world", at least book premium economy for your own weight's sake.

A three hundred pound passengers must start at first class. An economy passenger starts at... or tops out at One-hundred and fifty lbs. Going to Hawaii, a passenger pays for it, because of one’s own caloric intake. Your vacation starts at boarding the Aircraft (therapy slogan). 

Omission: I weigh about 250 lbs. When buying an economy fare, I really pay for it as my seat mates amaze with my contortionist antics for even two hours. Booking through "Travelocity", I volunteered for shoe store street sales moment, where the $199 economy price washes out my luxuriant vacation plans. I really pay for torture, discomfort and lack of class surrounding me. The ones who are the cheapskates, are sitting next to me bringing their behaviors along for the ride. This vacation mode only “enhances” my torture experience through "the price paid” in economy. Premium economy is my only hope for my mental condition. Weighing-in before buying said fare indicated, and I conclude, I needed at least a business class fare (uh-hum).

When buying an economy ticket a passenger is not allowed to complain how crappy is the airline? It's a forgone conclusion you are sitting in economy because you are not on vacation. Don't complain because you are in the right class of nincompoops who saw $199 as the end of the rainbow, and now you have to pay for it from where you sit. If you go to Hawaii for $199 book a room at the Motel 6 five miles from the beach. It's a $199 for two for just 24 hrs. Then try and complain about Hawaii at that time. Most of the customers at the motel, are the ones you saw flying economy on the flight over. The nincompoops never seem to leave you during your vacation. They were all mesmerized by the proverbial $199 sign. 

I want to rent a car in Hawaii, and I see a $199 per day sign, as the cab drops me off and the driver smiles knowingly; "He doesn't need a car rental, he is only sucked in by the flashing $199 car rental sign. After-all, it’s Hawaii."

There are two means for travel today. Company money or your vacation money. Both suggest traveling at your best. Traveling in economy is not your best. Step up to your weight and fly big. The Quid Pro Quo of a $199 fare is too high of price to pay anywhere!

Giving The KC-46 The Bidness

Bidness.com has summarized the KC-46 program's history aptly. It is time to copy and paste its article to the blog, because it covers and encapsulates so much of the program history. It is a link worthy article, but not without some Winging It oversight first. The much disputed Tanker competition has reached a climax, before it starts matriculation into the military bases. The cost and the efficiency has finally sorted out for the KC-46. What awaits is its operational trial, coming from the ground up with military gloves. The KC-46 Pegasus is first going base-wide for ten stations to places like McConnell Air Force base.

Perhaps the fixed cost program is the way to go. However, it was constrained by the caveat, a commercial airframe was the starting point. This little nuance really affected and enhanced keeping a lid on the project costs. The F-35 and the LRB projects will not be so lucky. They need a military compliant design features from scratch paper. A daunting and costly invisible ceiling exists, which ultimately dictates how many LRB's will be built. The F-35 is too far down the road to turn back from constraining it with an F-22 limit for 179 of its type built. The F-22 has been recognized as a fighter in need, and the US Air Force needs more of its type and it will not (never) receive those extra F-22's.

Bidness Report On The KC-46 Pegasus:

Boeing Co.’s (NYSE:BA) KC-46 Pegasus tanker, the replacement for the aging KC-135 Stratotanker, is designed to aid the US Air Force as well as foreign allies during warfare. The winner of the KC-X program is expected to enter service by 2018, with the first operational aircraft poised to be delivered in 2017.

KC-X Project History

The KC-X program invited aircraft manufacturers to provide the military with 179 tankers by 2027, with the contract worth approx. $35 billion. The proposal request was issued in January 2007. Besides Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Airbus (at the time known as EADS) jointly bid for the project with their A330 Multi-role Tanker Transport (MRTT).

The Northrop Grumman offer was selected in February 2008. However, Boeing challenged the decision and lodged a protest with the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The GAO reversed the decision in June, leading to the Air Force reopening the bidding process a month later. By September 2009, the military was ready to accept new proposals, leading to both competitors renewing their offers.

In March 2010, Northrop pulled out of the bidding process, while EADS elected to remain in the competition. Eventually, in February next year, the Air Force named Boeing the winner.

KC-46 Development

The development of KC-46 was marred with multiple delays and cost hikes with every passing year. In 2011, development costs were calculated to be $300 million above the cost cap of $4.9 billion. By 2014, the figure had risen to $5.85 billion, and in 2015, it stood at $43.16 billion, compared to $35 billion estimated earlier.

Boeing was hit twice with pre-tax charges of $272 million and $835 million, respectively, during the aircraft’s development. The $272 million charge was over redesigning of the wiring on the tanker, as the wires were fixed in close proximity and were improperly shielded, not meeting Air Force’s specs related to redundancy. The second charge was due to redeveloping of the integrated fuel system; many of the fuel components did not meet standards of production.

Initial assembly on the first KC-46 began on June 28, 2013. On December 28, 2014 the first test plane without any military and refueling equipment underwent a successful test flight, followed by a completely equipped KC-46 undergoing its first test flight on September 25, 2015. In November, the plane began its initial tests to get certified for air-to-air refueling, which it successfully passed.

The Winging IT study guide for North America

KC-46 Features

The KC-46 is based on the KC-767-200 Long Range Freighter, with an enhanced version of the KC-10’s refueling boom as well as cockpit displays from the 787, which allow for night vision compatibility as well as plug and play consoles that can be switched around. Aspects of the 787, such as improved technologies used in manufacturing the craft as well as improved electronics, were also borrowed.

The tanker is expected to refuel all fixed-wing aircraft from domestic military services as well as foreign partners. Power will be provided by two Pratt & Whitney PW4062 turbofan engines, with 63,300 pounds of thrust each. The plane has a seating capability for 15 personnel, including the standard crew of three: the pilot, co-pilot, and boom operator.

The jet craft can carry 114 passengers if required, though 58 is the standard number. It can also serve as a flying hospital with a little reconfiguration. In an aeromedical evacuation operation, the plane can accommodate 58 patients; however, six patients may still be housed in a regular mission. The main difference between this aircraft and a KC-767 is the additional refueling and electronics technologies added to the plane at a separate facility at Boeing.

The KC-46 can carry 212,000 pounds of fuel — a 10% increase compared to the KC-135 — of which about 208,000 pounds are transferrable. It can carry 65,000 pounds of cargo in 18 different pallet positions. The maximum weight the plane is able to carry during takeoff is 415,000 pounds. Range-wise, the plane can reach any point in the globe due to aerial refueling, but on a single tank it can fly 6,385 nautical miles. The maximum height it can reach is 40,100 feet.

The jet tanker has multiple refueling systems: a probe and drogue refueling system, as well as a boom and receptacle system allowing for a variety of refueling missions to be executed in a single operation. A change from previously operated boom and receptacle systems is that, instead of utilizing a “boom pod,” which provides visual line-of-sight, the Pegasus will use a 3D video system for control.

The plane is able to refuel three different types of aircraft simultaneously due to its fuel transfer system. It is also capable of conducting limited electronic warfare, and has protection against heat-seeking missiles with a radar warning receiver as standard. The AN/ALR-69A(V) Radar Warning Receiver is provided by Raytheon, and the AN/AAQ-24(V) Directional Infrared Countermeasure system is provided by Northrop Grumman.

KC-46 Future Operations

Initial operations will begin at McConnell Air Force Base in Wichita, Kansas, where 36 tankers are expected to be based next year. As the fleet grows, the number of worldwide bases that will host the aircraft is expected to increase to 10. Training for the crew has already begun at Altus Air Force Base located in Oklahoma.

The KC-46 so far has found only one foreign customer. Japan’s military has ordered three aircraft for delivery in 2020, at a unit cost of $173 million. The plane was bid for two other contracts (Polish and Korean Air Force), but lost both times to the Airbus A330 MRTT.

Air India Hopes The 787 Flies Its Way Out Of Debt

The Boeing 787 is as critical for Air India as the bank itself. The Boeing aircraft in its fleet carries its many passengers as super-efficient cash register. Air India recently pleaded its case for another 4,270 R's Crore or 1 Rs equals a 157,000 dollars US.  A loan of about 670 million as a US Dollar value is needed for Air India. What it will do is bridge Air India debt status until it actually reaches a profit status. 

Low fuel prices, 787's and an efficient management scheme is the promise for loan payback and airline profitability. What underlies such a loan is Air India's' competence for running an airline. They must also it is capable of keeping its aircraft on schedule and on time. This would include passing complaints onto Boeing's money making product. 

Winging IT has long observed Air India propensity for a high number of mechanical mishap for its 21-787 fleet. It was quick to report another 787 problem was encountered. In spite of the reactionary posing, Air India is making money with its 787 fleet and is a key component of the "pending and final" bridge loan until profits flow.

The pending Rs Crore 4,270 loan, is a price equaling the cost of about 3.2 787's on order. The $670 million in US dollars loan, can sew up all Air India deficiencies and allows the 21 in service 787's for operating and mopping up profits and cash for purchasing the remaining 787's on the Air India order book. 

Air India is seeking this opportunity of becoming the leading player in the sub-continent as other world airlines continue circling the continent for an incursion.

Much Like A New Boeing Aircraft Type DDG1000 Has its Trials

Often the aviation crowd continuously reports the glitching on a new aircraft design such as the 787 during its tests flight. There are a myriad of issues in every new design concept during flight testing. Going from the computer to the air is a quantum leap of faith it will all work in flight. Rarely does a perfect flight occur without some notes taken about changes needed for a new airframe airborne.

The DDG-1000, Zumwalt, is no different than a new airplane testing program even like the 777X program which has not flown as of this date. The 777X still remains on the CAD machines in the design shop, awaiting first assembly and first flight. Even though a design freeze is imposed, tweaking on the blueprints continue even after first delivery. The 777X concept is frozen. However, the DDG-1000 is further along than the 777X program. 

DDG 1000 On Track For Delivery In April

The destroyer has entered its "flight testing" phase called, "Sea Trials". In Spite of all due diligence administered during its build, no one really knew what the ship will do! It may sink in rough seas as analogous with aircraft crashing during a flight testing phase.

“There were some lessons learned,” he said in a speech at the Surface Navy Association’s national symposium. “There were some things we need to go work on, but nothing that we can't overcome will prevent us from delivering that ship by 25 April of this year. We've got work to do, a lot of coordination, a lot of teamwork to get that done."

Not to worry, Captain James Kirk is at the "Helm" well at least on the operations deck.

After delivery, the Zumwalt will be turned over to Capt. James Kirk and his crew for training and qualification, Gale said. The commissioning of the ship is tentatively scheduled for October in Baltimore, Md.

The ship has its quirks no pun intended. The quirkiness is what Bath Iron Works people are straightening out before the April delivery date. Does it respond well at full speed full rudder angle? Important questions are tested as it tries having its way in heavy seas. The destroyer was tested out on ten foot swells and did well. Now on for the thirty footers, when the Zumwalt puts out to sea during a bad "Nor'easter". The Zumwalt may have to wait before that happens. If you have a multi-billion dollar ship do you really want to risk it in a gale? The answer is simple, yes they need a big storm, because it's better to know if it survives before you build ten more of its type (two more are scheduled).

"We saw eight to 10 foot seas,” he said. "The ship performed extremely well. We ran up full power and full rudder swings, 35 degree of rudder swings in each direction."

System tests are conducted much like the KC-46 tanker had just completed in 2015. The electrical component of the ship, is as massive as in small town electrical grid, but contained in a relatively small room. The ship Becomes dead in the water and a big fat un-defendable target without the "Electrical Power". The conventional thought on this matter, "the generation of power is deep in the ship and combat protected". If some weapon reaches the power plant the ship would probably sink at that point due to massive structural damage. In other words, it’s substantially protected. The real danger is the risk of critical internal system failures as the bigger weakness. Without the systems functioning, it's a battle dead ship. However, it could maintain speed without some systems not operating. 

Therefore, systems testing is imperative for successful results and made battle ready.

First "real time" unscheduled rescue operation a success:

"We steamed over there at full plant, got some good data on an unplanned two-hour power ride, and we launched our RIB,” he said. “It was 12 minutes from the launch of the RIB until they got to the vessel, got the person aboard and got back."

The Captain Speaks:

Kirk, who was present for the briefing, said the ship “handled marvelously,” comparing the difference in steering a DDG-1000 and DDG-51 as being similar to driving a smaller sedan versus a larger one.

The DDG-1000 can really fly through water, shoot, and defend like no other ship made during this period in naval history. Even since the Dreadnought revolution of over a hundred years ago, this ship needs to be in the US Navy. 

A Very Important Deal For Boeing

Regional airplane warfare is a big deal. Having an anchor order in a region is a bigger deal. Boeing is on the cusp of such an order with PAL (look-up PAL like you know something). The Philippine Airlines who have two players on the edge are just where they want its bidders. Either PAL will tilt in favor of Airbus or Boeing for a half dozen WB's ordered. They are pausing in its decision. PAL knows what it is going to do, but a "pause" as a subtitle of this picture uses a defining study excuse, and makes the manufacturers both nervous. Once signed on a manufacturer wins some valuable turf. A Southeast Asia follow-on order situation would follow, and a fleet requiring the commonality of future type orders from the same manufacturer is the PAL game afoot. 

Boeing could be played at this point also giving Airbus fits on pricing schemes it would have to offer PAL. This order is not about wide bodies it's about PAL leverage.

PAL set to sign $1-b deal for 6 long-range planes

“We’ll make the announcement when we sign the purchase agreement,” he said.  Bautista did not identify the aircraft manufacturer, but he earlier said the company was looking at either Airbus 350 or Boeing 787 Dreamliner. 

Bautista said the purchase contract would amount to about $1 billion, consisting of six long-range, twin-engine wide-body jets, aircraft parts and support equipment.  

“It’s an ultra-long-range aircraft that can fly non-stop from Manila to New York. The airplane can be used to other destinations also,” Bautista said. 

As you can see the tease gauntlet has been thrown down to the manufacturer and "the airline knows" the answer. However, it pauses for more airline bling thrown-in, playing one against the other. The pure order line-up of types by Boeing could suggest a win here as the 787-9 is in the middle of the mix, and also having earlier delivery slots confounding Airbus. This could also give Boeing an advantage for a later 777X order, if this order swings Boeing's way. PAL's heady and important thoughts for the future purchases sets this table.

However, it was tipped from an observation about PAL, and through its pondering for a 787 order type mention against the A350-900 order, the purchase for the six WB's is the lever. Pricing by Airbus and a slow startup of its A350 build rate could swing the gate towards a Boeing order. Then comes the commonality anchor for future types coming into the fleet.

PAL Fleet Cross Roads

So here is the story behind the order is the PAL chart above dominated by Airbus Single Aisles. A possible Boeing/PAL fleet set back for Airbus is where an Airbus price may not matter. Boeing needs the 787 as a win for future Max orders, as it has no single aisle active in the PAL fleet. Boeing may drop a "lost leader" price or provide a 787-9 lowball offering for the airline. If PAL "does take" the Boeing offer, expect a PAL fleet renewal within a few years where Boeing gives PAL a deal it can't refuse concerning single aisle MAX aircraft. 

The 777 and 787 become key in this deal making for the next PAL prize for any single aisles Boeing orders by 2020 flying the Southeast asia region. It's not about six WB's, it's about building a modern PAL fleet family, at the lowest cost.

Boeing is Doing A Big Year In 2016

Jack Black did "A Big Year" by spotting so many birds in so many ways, watch it you will enjoy it. Now Boeing is going to do A Big Year in 2016. Much like the movie "Big Year", no one admits they going after the most airplanes in a year. Boeing is going to do its "Big Year" after capturing 762 airplanes delivered in 2015. They will go for more builds in a silent non-admitting way of saying, "Nope I'm not doing it." Owen Wilson was left forlorn seeking his passion in the movie and loses his wife. Steve Martin finds his new mojo and Jack Black gains back his father’s love. It was a Big Year for the Birds. 

Jack Black Goes Big And Wins his Dad's Love

Boeing will go Big in 2016 with more birds than Airbus can even find in all of Europe. Production and sales will keep at a 1+:1 sales/production ratio as it did in 2015. However, there are a few more surprises in store for the fawning of public investors. The cash cow Boeing generates will enhance future development, pleasing the investor. Look to see Boeing crank in some more wide body orders as potential customers who mulled over the $30 a barrel oil market and says it’s time to place the 787 orders in some quantity. The ratio should go north of 1:1 by two hundred more aircraft than found in 2015, making the Boeing 2016 book coming in closer to a thousand orders than 800, and producing closer to 800 than 750.

World's Largest is.... Boeing (Evening Edition Late Nite is in)

Both in number manufactured and dollar value Boeing reigns Supreme. Here is the tale of the Ticker-Tape.

Or just let me tell you, what all this means? In spite of what Airbus sells, they can't shove them out the door as fast as Boeing is capable of doing. All the selling without increased production will quagmire Airbus customers into a bigger pit of the desperate wait.  Boeing is arriving into the five year happy place for its customers. Airbus will either have to give the sales team a near term furlough or build more capacity which will take another few years to do so.

The five year happy place is the customer's five years plans for fleet expansion and renewal. What if all those Airbus orders puts its customers “Seven Years Out Waiting ”, while they are experiencing a climatic wait-hold period, and an airline's fortunes take a dip when having a huge Airbus backlog. Those my friends, are called cancellations on the Airbus order book. Recession cycles run about every seven years. Since 2008, the world is due another recession.

Not to worry, Airbus single aisle division claims a 60 per month pacing by the end of 2016 for its A320 family. However, as eager as Airbus is about its A350 program it will be another three years of production before it may reach a capacity of ten a month. 

Boeing is already at 12-787's a month production and will soon go to 14. Boeing can stay ahead of Airbus as the World's largest manufacturer until 2019. However, Boeing is not standing on its current production laurels as it will increase its own capacity at all production sites, it currently operates. Both the Everett and Charleston has room for growth without Boeing hesitation.

                        Boeing                                                                Airbus                                                                    

Let's opine on the above head to head charts for Boeing and Airbus. Winging It, used the standard price listings from a reputable source whose business is to report and advise on such price listings to the aviation industry.  Sources can be disclosed upon request, 

Aircraft Compare

But it is consistent that price listings come from the same source so no argument can exist for slanting data in Boeing's favor. If indeed these list prices do not meet your understanding, such as using a Wiki source, then you must concur these prices are consistently approximate from the same neutral source.

• Boeing collected monies to the tune of $111.5 billion dollars for its 762 aircraft delivered.

• Airbus collected monies to the tune of $85.760 billion dollars for its 635 aircraft delivered.

Boeing beat Airbus by 127 Aircraft and then collected about $25.816 billion more dollars than what Airbus could do. Look at wide body and single aisle analysis for a better understanding who's doing what to whom.