Connect With Us

Aviation Week & Space Technology

Discuss this Gallery 6

on Dec 27, 2017

They announced yesterday MC-21 launch customer will be Iraero instead of Aeroflot !

on Dec 27, 2017

A huge boost for Russia.
I guess this will allow the world to soon see how this aircraft compares with the Superjet and the C-series / 320NEO.
Sad for Boeing and Airbus (and all those who work there).
We can assume these will be delivered with the Russian engine and not PW GTF?

on Dec 29, 2017

BA was the top performing stock of the Dow Jones 30 in 2017. When the time is right, they will have to produce a clean sheet design to compete with the MC-21 and A321.

on Jan 3, 2018

Happy New Year, Arizonan
Thanks. I do not intend to argue about Boeing's stock-market ID & the "real" British Airways ID in the international world.

And I do not aim to be flippant, or provocative, here, about your other sentence : 'When the time is right, they will have to produce a clean sheet design to compete with the MC-21 and A321.'

Indeed, there will have to be a clean-sheet design for Boeing's MOM / NMA.
But it is the "When-the-time-is-right" aspect that bothers many observers.

There is a perception, especially in the eyes of potential client-airlines, that Boeing is late, leaving it too late, and may well have "missed the boat".

on Jan 3, 2018

To back up the preceding message, are one or two pertinent references (some historical ; some absolutely up-to-date).

As Theadmiral has written, elsewhere : 'If Boeing do push the NMA back it shows they are locked into GE. Specifically, GE can't introduce a new architecture in the 2024-2025 timeframe. So either timescales are pushed back or GE are not on board. Gives Airbus time to make hay. …’

Here is an extract from one of my own messages : ' -- When this MOM / NMA, or whatever, is ready for EIS, how far behind the times will it be ? This is not just a wild, personal reaction ; Willie WALSH (CEO of IAG, a Group which, along with the ‘oneworld Alliance’ airline companies, could be highly interested & a potential acquirer of such aircraft) has raised that very question.
--‘To-day, Airbus is sitting pretty, watching, biding its time & getting ready to pounce, with an adapted, modern rival, once Boeing commits itself. At present, Airbus is racking up A321-LR orders, which help to erode MOM / NMA future market potential. And there is a strong possibility that the wide-body A330-800 (Neo) could accompany A321-LR in this action.’

Here is one of my reactions to Theadmiral’s “spot-on” message above : ‘Good point, Theadmiral. "Locked in to GE",... yes. But not on an exclusivity-basis. Boeing do not need to grant exclusivity to GE ; they probably need GE's cash, for the MOM / NMA launch & ramp-up (you know : private sector launch-aid).

‘Boeing have been talking every bit as much, if not more, to RR, because they know that RR will have appropriate power-plant offerings, whether geared or not, and on time, for 2025.
‘GE is reportedly on record as having said that if it were to bid to supply power-plant :
-- it would only be with a view to a position of exclusivity (but that would turn away Willie WALSH & IAG, and a whole batch of 'oneworld Alliance' airlines, who supported WW's fairly recent, strong public stance against engine exclusivity) ;
-- it would NOT be supplying a "Leap-type engine".

‘The longer Boeing waits, e.g. till beyond 2025, into 2027 / 2028, the more interest in the its MOM / NMA may wane.’

I cut here to avoid this message’s becoming too long.

on Jan 3, 2018

This repeat of an earlier message has its relevance here.
'-- Boeing’s thinking on its product lines is currently perceived as muddled.

Arguably, Boeing does not know whether it’s coming or going with MOM / NMA / B797 or whatever it is going to call it. Boeing’s continued prattling on about this aircraft, at this stage, is no more than the acknowledgement that, during phase-down of B757 activity, it failed to anticipate & think through what it should / would best do after stopping B757 production.

To have been really relevant, this aircraft should be able, at this moment, already, to see its EIS on a fairly near time-horizon (I add here : such is NOT the case).

Boeing kept messing about with B737, which had no chance of being a true B757 replacement. It allowed itself to be pushed into the B737 MAX distraction, by the Airbus launch of A320-family-Neo.).’

Some comment-providers write of Boeing’s product-line intentions.
Arguably, Boeing had NO relevant intention because it had simply lost the plot, as we have all seen. When Boeing woke up to the need for a true B757 replacement (or "B757-cum-B767 replacement), its Leaders thought some B737 would make a good equivalent stop-gap, to tide Boeing over in its ill-thought-out meanderings.
When that revealed itself as a "no-no", Boeing began talking about MOM / NMA etc. as if it were the best invention since sliced bread.

Is Boeing still just jawing ? Whatever its thinking may be, it really is time to give GE something of a wide berth, as an 'automatic-first-choice engine partner'. No-one, except the Boeing –GE tandem, really wants any more contrived / concocted Boeing-GE civil engine-exclusivity situations in a putatively world-market, unless there is a crying need for them (that has NOT been the proven case to date).

Of course, If Boeing & GE were to wish to get deeper into ‘playing it parochial, to keep “America First”….' , that is their choice. In that case the rest of the world could see to it that they stay at home.

And where would that get us ? Not far, and not into a good place.

We need a Boeing that rediscovers the plot, … a robust, open Boeing, that stops seeking any sort of perceived protectionist measures in its favour.

Please or Register to post comments.

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×