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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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,
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?
