JonesNL wrote:If Emirates is really in need of metal they can order A350 or A330's with early delivery slots.
As I understand it, the E-4B platform was procured because the VC-137C models serving as Air Force One (SAM 26000 and SAM 27000) lacked the communications suite, the floorspace and the endurance to serve the President effectively in the event of a major nuclear exchange between the US and the Soviet...
Jump to postWait, WIKI says the E-6B is a Navy plane. So would they be limited to coordinate with the Navy assets only? I believe the E-6A could only communicate with the SSBNs. When the fleet was updated to the E-6B standard, they could also communicate with USAF bombers and the ICBM silos so they can now con...
Jump to postOn a meta level, the E-4B prosecutes a nuclear exchange and the E-6B carries out the engagement. So the Battle Staff on the E-4B decide which OPLAN to employ and then the E-6B issues the launch orders to the bombers, missile silos and SSBNs to execute. I expect both missions could be integrated into...
Jump to postMore importantly though, the -8I seat tracks are more efficient ways to attach all the stuff you you need to attach to the floor. The freighter floor may be stronger, you either need to remove the cargo handling system which forces you to set up new mounting systems, or design adapter plates to be ...
Jump to postFrankly I would think a 747-8 freighter might be the better option since they can just front-load all the equipment bays and such in through the nose door rather than trying to shoe-horn it all in through the passenger doors. And not having the window belt might make it a bit easier to shield agains...
Jump to postNoshow wrote:This might be a good moment in history to announce a future products roadmap.
Probably not. I would expect the existing 777-8 orders to be converted to the freighter or the 777-9.
Jump to postAgeing is undoubtedly beneficial for wines and certain liquors but I doubt this applies to aircraft :crazy: While said fluids "mature" and get better over time just imagine buying a car that has been left standing around unused for 7 years, hardened and leaking seals, smells developed, ag...
Jump to post12 for EK alone. IIRC a total of 21 overall. By the time 2025 rolls around, will those already built B777x's be marketable. As STC commented, those are 7 year old used aircraft!! Considering none of the production frames have been flown it's a bit rich to call them "used". :cheeky: And it...
Jump to postscbriml wrote:Is there any confidence that this is the end of it, or will we see further charges?
As with the KC-46, signing a fixed price contract has come back to bite them in the ass.
"Boeing blamed the most recent $660 million loss on 'higher supplier costs, higher costs to finalize technical requirements and schedule delays.'"
If the 777X is at the certification stage of testing, how are those staff members going to assist with the 787 backlog which has a production problem? I can see them assisting with the MAX 10 and possibly the MAX 7 as they are more similar to the 777X. Do I assume that the 77X staff are all multi-p...
Jump to postPushing the 777X back is probably not be a bad idea, considering. All the widebody sales action right now is in the sub-300 seat market (A350-900 / 787-9 / 787-10) so getting the 787 delivering again should be the priority for Boeing's widebody program over pushing the 777X across the finish line AS...
Jump to postMy point is they must sit partly idle without the X-ramp up happening for another two years? Boeing reduced the 777 production rate significantly (from five to three and then two per month) by 2020 due to COVID and the certification delays for the 777X. Strong demand for the 777 freighter has allow...
Jump to postWell if the design was finalized in 2020, they could have planned for 747-8 operating weights.
Jump to postJust a wild guess on N458BJ. I know there's been mention of a replacement program for the E-4B Nightwatch. Maybe they could use it for that? I'm not even sure if there is a record of program for that replacement. Like I said, just a guess. I would expect the USAF would want more than one NAACP fram...
Jump to posttexl1649 wrote:So Boeing is off the hook now, but USAF still has to finish reviewing it around June.
I wouldn't read too much into this besides publicity. There is no mechanism by which people can submit engineering systems to Congress for the FAA to then enforce on a manufacturer. True, but Congress can write laws requiring the FAA to enforce things Congress wants enforced - the 27 December 2022 ...
Jump to post1. The MAX7 isn't in service yet, right? I notice flightaware has six B37M's flying around for AeroMexico. For example, AMX899. The MAX-7 has yet to receive FAA certification so no airframes have been delivered to customers. How is the MAX10 main landing gear extended 9"? Is it hydraulic? What...
Jump to postSo, given the empty shell configuration of N458BJ, what would account for the 527,500 lb OEW? That's a good 45-50,000 lbs overweight compared to the -8I Does it have integral airstairs, or extra fuel tanks, or other equipment that a VIP would need? Extra purification systems for on-board water or s...
Jump to postThe MAX 10 will need the 3rd AOA sensor to fly from the start, the other models are not subject to this. This is correct per my reading. What I don't understand is why does the -8/9 need the third sensor if the -10 gets it? If its that important EASA would not have ungrounded the current max's? As ...
Jump to postSo what's the scenario here?? FAA inspects the planes, signs ok, then what?? My assumption is that Boeing will have a pool of 787s that they deem ready for final sign-off and delivery and will poll those customers to identify which ones are ready to take frames. They will then communicate this list...
Jump to postNothing yet. Early 2Q 2022 was rumored, but that looks to have slipped.
Jump to postIs there any showstopper with the MAX 10? Something that might prevent any certification ever? EICAS might be, depending on how difficult it is to implement it on a flight deck that was never designed to have it. And even if it is surmountable, if the uncommonality it introduces in crew training an...
Jump to postPresumably if Boeing obtains approval for the 10 without improvements, then by default, the same improvements proposed to flow back to the 8 & 9 can't / won't happen. Massive $ savings for Boeing / possible global airworthiness authority discord. The 737-10 will not be approved by EASA without ...
Jump to postI’m aware that flight testing hours is not entirely an indication of certification progression, however with the program sitting at the amount of hours that is now and considering that the a350 program took 2600 hours, do you think the FAA is nearing the commencement of the certification program? I...
Jump to postYour thinking of the MAX 7 situation, that's only waiting on the FAA. The MAX 10 is not even done with its test flights, that's on boeing, so your point is a wash. If it was purely on Boeing being behind, I would not expect the FAA to be publicly accepting at least some responsibility for the MAX-1...
Jump to postMaybe I should have clarified it, they should have developed it for the whole MAX family just to have it ready so commonality would have been given. Together with a retrofit for already produced ones. Yes the MAX would have been a different type rating than the NG (and early MAX) but at least Boein...
Jump to postRequiring it for just the MAX-10 at this point is, IMO, just being spiteful to save face and not because of a genuine concern about passenger safety. I am glad that Congress passed the original bill and I wish they had the foresight to pass it earlier so that entire MAX family would have been requir...
Jump to postIf true, Boeing probably won't have any trouble placing those white tails. One imagines they will go to another Chinese operator since standard practice for Chinese orders in the past is to list them as UFOs and then once CAAC makes the frame allocation, Boeing assigns them to a carrier in their O&...
Jump to postYou’re speaking of force extension, but although it’s a great idea for a large tanker to be force extended by a smaller one - e.g. a 135 dumping 125K into a KC-10 - it doesn’t make as much sense for two smaller tankers to do so; the other tanker might as well just take the formation ala an air brid...
Jump to postPerhaps for long drags have additional KC-46 sortie as part of the group so the primary KC-46 can offload as much of their fuel as possible for the fighters and then get topped off from the secondary KC-46 to complete the trip themselves (somewhat similar to what the RAF did for Operation Black Buck).
Jump to postIn terms of AWACs platforms, they don't really have another option (the E-767 was just an E-3 in a 767 instead of a 707 and I would expect the E-7 is a more advanced and capable platform). As for LMXT, if all you want to do is carry a lot of fuel for offload, just put main-deck tanks on a KC-46A (ca...
Jump to postwhywhyzee wrote:Apologies if this question has already been asked/answered. What is (if any) the current production rate while deliveries are frozen?
It actually might be a bit more difficult, depending on how many aircraft, especially 77Ws are comming off lease, EK has to replace them with something to keep frequency up. What that means is, that if the 779s do not arrive EK will have to shrink the fleet or extend the leases but then they do not...
Jump to postConsidering Congress agreed to the original date specifically to allow the MAX-10 to be certified without needing to meet the certification, I would expect them to agree to the extension. That was 4 years before the MAX crashes and ensuing debacle. Much different political climate now. That said, t...
Jump to postWould be a big blow to the orderbook if they don't get it certified ASAP as Sir Tim Clark is running out of patience. I expect he is happy the plane is delayed because I don't see EK needing scores of them anytime soon considering their traffic is still depressed and it's not like they have any oth...
Jump to postLooks like the BMAX10 will not make it's December 31 certification. This is according to a letter sent to Boeing by the FAA. They can ask Congress for an extension, like they did in 2014, but it's not guaranteed. Considering Congress agreed to the original date specifically to allow the MAX-10 to b...
Jump to postWith four test aircraft, flight testing can be done relatively easily despite the FAA's stringent regulations isn't it? IIRC the fleet of test aircraft have accumulated over 2,000 flight hours as well! The issue for Boeing is that the FAA has not yet granted the 777-9 Type Inspection Authority whic...
Jump to postSo we do not know whether it is Boeing or FAA delay? With certainty? It appears not. What we do know is Boeing is pointing the finger at the FAA and the FAA is accepting the pointing of said finger and saying they are working hard to address said finger-pointing. To me, this implies the FAA is the ...
Jump to postIt seems never to be fair to penalize Boeing. The point to the delay can also be, that Boeing did not get all the necessary test information and data in a timely manner to the FAA, still expecting to manage the consequences rather than the process. True, except if that was the case, you would think...
Jump to postIf the agencies agreed on an end date for the exemption to EICAS, why should everybody agree to extend it? If one of the agencies that agreed to the end date is now the reason why that end date could result in one model of a multi-family model works fundamentally differently than the others, why sh...
Jump to post(The) conclusion is, that the delay is at the FAA. What if the delay is Boeing not getting it's ducks in a row? That Boeing is "expressing concern about the schedule for the FAA’s certification of MAX 10" and the FAA is “pulling people from other projects to come help” on MAX 10 certifica...
Jump to postDoes somebody know if there will be changes to the tanker procurement seeing the threats from Russia and China getting more attention on the political agenda? An air and land war in eastern Europe would be something the KC-46A could handle. A trans-oceanic war with China is why LM and Airbus are pu...
Jump to postI believe they have a synthetic on the 787 already....see wiki link below.... I think Boeing just does not want to deploy on the MAX... I was under the impression there were concerns how the 787's AoA would integrate with the 737's avionics suite and Boeing was therefore developing a unique synthet...
Jump to postPerhaps the Chinese, that still have not ungrounded the 737MAX, are also waiting. The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) reissued the airworthiness certificate for the MAX on 2 December of last year. Chinese airlines are still in the process of returning their fleets to service, which is...
Jump to postIn this case what does "mature enough" mean, if they are using modified versions of either the 777W or 787 system, does it mean those modified systems should have been in testing or running in a simulator for a number of months or years? All I know is what I have read in the aerospace med...
Jump to postIs this some administrative delay by the FAA not getting required new specialist units hired or working or is there any technical squawk or glitch that prevents TIA or does Boeing wait for something like some final configuration equipment, modification or similar? The FAA believes neither the airfr...
Jump to postNoshow wrote:When will the certification phase begin and what is still delaying it?