Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:36 pm

keesje wrote:
brindabella wrote:
morrisond wrote:
That is why it makes sense for NMA to be 7W and then you can reuse Fuselage/Nose/Systems on NSA with different Wingbox/wing/gear/tail. A lot of the work will be done on NMA and you can then optimize NMA before building NSA at 60 per month.

There is not enough time before MAX orders dry up to do a clean sheet 8W NMA and then a clean sheet 6W NSA.

As NMA would probably arrive 2026-2027 under this approach - NSA following 2029-2030 brings it into the time frame when new engines would be available.


I am intrigued - what signs do you see that such might be on the horizon? MAX orders seem, if anything, to be accelerating. :confused:

cheers


The issue is, that when you would see orders stalling, margin deteriorating, some cancellations and your backlog is shrinking, you are working to fully understand the market & discussing a new aircraft with 2 dozen interested customers, you are probably 3-4 year too late..


You didn’t answer his question.

  • Orders aren’t stalling (737MAX outsold the A320neo last year)
  • Margins aren’t deteriorating. They appear to be getting better based on financial reports
  • Backlog is growing, not shrinking

Nothing you said indicates it is on the horizon.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:54 pm

No - but under this approach Boeing is under no pressure to launch NSA based on NMA now - If I were them I would wait as long as possible as most of the work will be done on NMA- a scaled down wing/wingbox, tail and gear for NSA shouldn't be that hard for the team once they are done NMA - they will know the structure and where to cut. It won't take 7-8 years from the go decision. They could possibly do it in 5 - which means not launching until NMA is almost done (2024-2025) and the structure is fully defined/designed.

By almost all reports NMA will be 7W - just like the Boeing Patents for the Oval NSA that was possibly going to be launched instead of MAX. I can't see them throwing that work out. That Oval 7W fuselage was a lot smaller than some of the 8W ideas floating around Anet. If NMA hopes to compete with rewinged A321's it needs to be tight and light.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14118
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:52 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
brindabella wrote:

I am intrigued - what signs do you see that such might be on the horizon? MAX orders seem, if anything, to be accelerating. :confused:

cheers


The issue is, that when you would see orders stalling, margin deteriorating, some cancellations and your backlog is shrinking, you are working to fully understand the market & discussing a new aircraft with 2 dozen interested customers, you are probably 3-4 year too late..


You didn’t answer his question.

  • Orders aren’t stalling (737MAX outsold the A320neo last year)
  • Margins aren’t deteriorating. They appear to be getting better based on financial reports
  • Backlog is growing, not shrinking

Nothing you said indicates it is on the horizon.


It is were you put your horizon. Is it 3-4 years, or 7-8. It probably has to do with corporate culture, ownership, stock markets, how you pay your executives. If you see your NB portfolio deteriorating after 2025, better not wait for 2022 to launch a solution. Unless e.g. short term cash flow and stock option packages are the bigger drivers for people in charge.
Last edited by keesje on Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
morrisond
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:14 pm

Although it will take a lot of orders to sustain MAX production at current and shortly higher production rates to 2030 - unless Airbus does something to make the Max uncompetitive it should be fine. It does well against the A320 and the -10 seems fine at shorter ranges against A321.

Boeing's biggest risk is if Airbus launches A220-500 soonish and can ramp production to significant levels by 2025 to challenge the 738 MAX - which probably won't happen. The industry seems like it will probably need at least 100+ NB a month 2025-2030 - so Boeing should get there fair share of those orders.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14118
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:33 pm

morrisond wrote:
Although it will take a lot of orders to sustain MAX production at current and shortly higher production rates to 2030 - unless Airbus does something to make the Max uncompetitive it should be fine. It does well against the A320 and the -10 seems fine at shorter ranges against A321.

Boeing's biggest risk is if Airbus launches A220-500 soonish and can ramp production to significant levels by 2025 to challenge the 738 MAX - which probably won't happen. The industry seems like it will probably need at least 100+ NB a month 2025-2030 - so Boeing should get there fair share of those orders.


I think it would be realistic of Boeing to assume the world keeps turning :

:arrow: Airbus will continue developing it's A320 range with additional types when the opportunities arise.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4117/34883213114_5bf94f6234_c.jpg

:arrow: Airbus is setting up a second FAL for the A220 for a reason, ~ 15-20 / month around 2025.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbus-alabama/airbus-spends-300-million-on-new-alabama-plant-for-a220-jet-idUSKCN1PA29H

:arrow: It takes 7-8 years to deliver a new aircraft in numbers from launch.
https://www.wearefinn.com/media/1765/china-arthur-litte-3.png?width=491&height=349

If you wait for solid confirmations to take a deliberate decision, you're 3-4 years too late.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Elementalism
Posts: 608
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:39 pm

With the info presented the engines are targeting 50-52K thrust. This has to be a 767-200\300 sized plane right? I had my hope this would be a 757-200 replacement. But it seems to me Boeing wants to make this truly in the middle between 737-10 and 787-8. If those thrust requirements are true.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:51 pm

keesje wrote:

If you wait for solid confirmations to take a deliberate decision, you're 3-4 years too late.


The deliberate decision could simply be do NMA based on a 7W Oval that you can reuse for NSA - you just don't have to tell anybody that fact yet or launch NSA at the same time. The work can be going on in the background (on NSA).

Your too late if you do an 8W NMA and then have to start from scratch on NSA.

If NSA is based on NMA it could be sooner than 2029-2030 - but probably the determining factor will be engines which may not be ready until then with a big enough step change in efficiency.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 5:10 pm

morrisond wrote:
keesje wrote:

If you wait for solid confirmations to take a deliberate decision, you're 3-4 years too late.


The deliberate decision could simply be do NMA based on a 7W Oval that you can reuse for NSA - you just don't have to tell anybody that fact yet or launch NSA at the same time. The work can be going on in the background (on NSA).

Your too late if you do an 8W NMA and then have to start from scratch on NSA.

If NSA is based on NMA it could be sooner than 2029-2030 - but probably the determining factor will be engines which may not be ready until then with a big enough step change in efficiency.


By far the more interesting question he won’t ask is why Airbus won’t do all these models of the A320 if they make so much sense? People have been asking for stretched A320’s since at least 2004. But it isn’t here. Why? Everyone wants to whistle past the industrial issues such pretty picture of planes would cause. It seems like the French plants can’t build anything but the A320 in its current size. You could invest more to fix that I am sure but how much more and at what level of disruption?

You want to invest to put a new wing on the A320neo? Why? Even if I build 70 a month you have 7 years of backlog without selling another plane. You can’t deliver a new wing in significant numbers until what...2026-27 or so? How far are you from just replacing the A320 at that point?

NMA is a logical first step towards NSA. The transition out of the 737 trap for Boeing will be insanely difficult and doing a program even of marginal profitability that sets the stage to do that smoothly makes a ton of sense. The A320neo trap at Airbus is even worse because I see no logical area for them to deploy new technology on a commercial platform to ease their transition to whatever replaces the A320.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24851
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 5:57 pm

keesje wrote:
There will be two Airbus FAL's extra in few years pushing out 15-20 A220's while Airbus plan 70 320 series deliveries per month.

Calm the bleep down with your use of the word "will" and "few years".

For A220, Airbus says they are shooting for 10 per month at YMX and 4 per month at BFM by the mid 2020s "if supported by demand":

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... d-2-455029

As for A320, 63/month is confirmed for 2019, with goals of 70 or even 75 in the future, but with concerns about being throttled by engine suppliers.

Ref: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... SKBN1HW1Z2

It's far from a done deal that such rates will be hit never mind sustained.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
morrisond
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:00 pm

Instead of rewinging A320 they could launch a brand new Fuselage Cross for an NMA competitor. In fact Airbus could really benefit from a 7W Cross section - then they would have 5W (A220), 7W (A320 Series replacement) and 9W (A350).

They could then put a smaller wing on there 7W as well - there is nothing stopping them from the same approach Boeing might take.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1870
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:02 pm

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
There will be two Airbus FAL's extra in few years pushing out 15-20 A220's while Airbus plan 70 320 series deliveries per month.

Calm the bleep down with your use of the word "will" and "few years".

For A220, Airbus says they are shooting for 10 per month at YMX and 4 per month at BFM by the mid 2020s "if supported by demand":

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... d-2-455029

As for A320, 63/month is confirmed for 2019, with goals of 70 or even 75 in the future, but with concerns about being throttled by engine suppliers.

Ref: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... SKBN1HW1Z2

It's far from a done deal that such rates will be hit never mind sustained.

Well, you basically confirmed what kessje said:
- the A220 FAL's will push out 14 A220 per month (14, 15, similar number);
- Airbus plans 70 A320 series deliveries per month, even more per your link. That's currently the plan for the future; whether that future happens or not is up for discussion, but the plan is here right now.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24851
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 7:25 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
Well, you basically confirmed what kessje said:
- the A220 FAL's will push out 14 A220 per month (14, 15, similar number);

Yet the claim was 15-20 so a 30% overshoot.

And the timing is mid 2020s even according to the updated link https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... SKCN1PA29H

Airbus plans to build 4 A220s a month in Alabama with the first jet to be delivered in 2020. The Montreal base for the aircraft is running at some 2.75 A220 jets a month with plans to raise capacity to 10 a month by the mid-2020s.

So there's no plan for 20 and even rate 14 won't happen till the mid 2020s.

WayexTDI wrote:
- Airbus plans 70 A320 series deliveries per month, even more per your link. That's currently the plan for the future; whether that future happens or not is up for discussion, but the plan is here right now.

"My" link said:

Looking beyond 2019, Airbus is studying long-term plans to raise output of its best-selling jet to as high as 75 a month, said the industry source, who is familiar with the company’s planning.

Studying plans is far from "will".

It also said:

However, one of Airbus’s leading engine suppliers declined to endorse the new production plan publicly, saying it was too early to make such a commitment amid a switchover between engine models taking place as assembly lines run at record speeds.

“As of today, we are not in a position to commit ourselves to higher volumes,” Safran (SAF.PA) CEO Philippe Petitcolin said.

“We understand the needs of our client and if we are able to respond favorably we will do so, but we don’t want to start discussions on a commitment beyond what was agreed 18 months ago, (before)...early 2019,” Petitcolin told reporters.

It was not immediately clear whether a higher Airbus target of 63 jets a month, which has been circulating for some time, had already been anticipated in those previous discussions.

So the vendor for roughly half the engines won't commit to increasing volume at this point in time.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1870
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 7:51 pm

Revelation wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Well, you basically confirmed what kessje said:
- the A220 FAL's will push out 14 A220 per month (14, 15, similar number);

Yet the claim was 15-20 so a 30% overshoot.

Again, 14 or 15 is extremely similar, even if not the same number.

Revelation wrote:
And the timing is mid 2020s even according to the updated link https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... SKCN1PA29H

Airbus plans to build 4 A220s a month in Alabama with the first jet to be delivered in 2020. The Montreal base for the aircraft is running at some 2.75 A220 jets a month with plans to raise capacity to 10 a month by the mid-2020s.

So there's no plan for 20 and even rate 14 won't happen till the mid 2020s.

kesje wrote:
two Airbus FAL's extra in few years pushing out 15-20 A220's

Last I checked, mid-2020's is roughly 6 years away, which is a few years away. So, where's the bickering about?



Revelation wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
- Airbus plans 70 A320 series deliveries per month, even more per your link. That's currently the plan for the future; whether that future happens or not is up for discussion, but the plan is here right now.

"My" link said:

Looking beyond 2019, Airbus is studying long-term plans to raise output of its best-selling jet to as high as 75 a month, said the industry source, who is familiar with the company’s planning.

Studying plans is far from "will".

kesje wrote:
while Airbus plan 70 320 series deliveries per month

So, Airbus is studying plans for 70 a month, which means that they are planning for it.
Whether their plan materializes is a whole other story; but the plan is there.

It seems you like bickering about details; but in the end, keesje and you are basically on the same page of the book (even if a few lines apart).
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24851
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 7:58 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
Again, 14 or 15 is extremely similar, even if not the same number.

And if that was the original statement I might not have objected.

Yet the original statement was 15-20 with no corresponding evidence, and that represents a 30% overshoot.

And I'm not confident the A320 engine suppliers will agree to 70+/month.

They have concerns about over exposure.

Peace to you, WayexTDI
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
texl1649
Posts: 1498
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:13 pm

Why is the A220 of all things being the crux of a debate about Boeing's NSA/NMA duo possibly being co-developed (clandestinely) together? The A220 for goodness sakes is a nice little plane, but it's obviously a 2000-era tech plane, and the 737RS is going to be at least 20-30 years more advanced, and it won't be in the least bit impacted by this aircraft, or it's 2030 delivery capabilities.

The question could eventually be what will Airbus do in response: it won't be a variant of the A220, lol. Well, there's 30 seconds I'll never get back...
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2299
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:25 pm

PW has already been in a huge production increase, from almost none to 50-60 engines a month on the GTF. Probably at max capacity, it would take a huge investment in equipment and training to increase further. A similar thing is happening with the LEAP, but less dramatic. A new engine is already needing to hit 160 engines a month to support all of the 737 production and around half of 320. Existing plant capacity for the CFM's was never that high for months. Then to invest for both NB producers at over 100/month, will the market drop back in say 6 years to 80/month, leaving all this extra plant idle - not good.

Both A & B have gotten all of the low hanging fruit, production costs are usually lowest per unit in the 80 to 90% of capacity level, above that costs start rising then rise fast as it hits 100% of capacity. For example, going to 50 hour weeks, means at time and a half for OT basically cuts to paying for 55 hours and only getting 50 hours of work. Then productivity starts to fall at 50 hour weeks down to nearly the 40 hour total after a few months of it. Doing 3 shifts solves some of that but they usually only get 7 hours production in an 8 hour shift.

At high production rates when something goes wrong, it really snarls up fast.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:29 pm

Elementalism wrote:
With the info presented the engines are targeting 50-52K thrust. This has to be a 767-200\300 sized plane right? I had my hope this would be a 757-200 replacement. But it seems to me Boeing wants to make this truly in the middle between 737-10 and 787-8. If those thrust requirements are true.



That is the outlying piece of data that argues for a larger plane. However that could be an optional thrust range or to allow for a future -10 stretch.

The 767-200 Ranged from 48-52 and up to 60.6 on the ER.

The 767-300 Ranged from the same 48 up to 61.5 on the ER, a spread of 28%.

52K engines on the ER could be the Hot and high engines or for a -10 equivalent version to be launched after the two initial versions.

Maybe Boeing is just looking into the future and making sure the base engine can accommodate thrust growth.

The NMA could be 40/42-50/52 thrust range and assuming the same wing length as 767 to fit in the same wing box probably means a lot smaller/lighter plane.

The 787 has a spread from 64K to 78K on the -10, a 21.88% spread.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:35 pm

And on the NMA Wiki page it says the RFP last July was for 45K engines.
 
2175301
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:25 pm

Let's take this back to the original question: Could Boeing do the NSA at the same time as the NMA. Not practically. It takes a lot of resources to fully design and certify an new aircraft from scratch - and in reality no aircraft company in the world (not even Boeing) has enough resources to do an appropriate and effective job for more than one at one time.

However, that does not mean that Boeing could not transition the NMA team to the NSA with an overlap (initial design of NSA starting while production and testing of the NMA is going on).

More to point, there is no need. There is a market hole for an NMA now and there is not such a market hole for the NSA now. The real question relates to is it good enough to take the risk; and when do you formally announce it if you are going to proceed.

My understanding is that Boeing actually already has a rough business case that shows a positive return for the NMA; which is why they are continuing with it. However, modern competition has pushed the expected rate of return to about half of what such programs had 15 years ago - and they need to be real sure that they have it right (margin or error in production cost reduced) - and it is high enough for the risk - before they proceed. That is why they have been doing a lot of the initial design and working to negotiate parts and supplier contracts in advance of a formal launch. I believe Boeing has indicated that their launch will be in 2019, or not at all. They did a 2nd round engine bid with refined numbers to support that. The level of "pre-launch" design is such that it supports a 2025 introduction of the aircraft (Final Drawings for key long lead items will essentially be ready at time of launch).

My friend at Boeing involved with this project feels that the NMA is a definite go. He says very little else - more providing concepts of what has been looked at. Boeing has (and may be still) extensively modeling both AL-LI and Composites for the body. I have no idea what the answer is; but, my understanding from his general comments is that the modeling on the other material is expected to provide information for a future NSA (and that they may have pushed modeling of the higher cost material method beyond a normal material decision point to get more such information).

My understanding is that the key revolution for the NMA is in lower cost manufacturing processes and techniques. That the hope is that Airbus - nor anyone else - will be able to compete with a previous generation assembly and manufacturing methods aircraft (a thought I once heard expressed was: what if we can build a new aircraft in this size so cheaply that the A321 is cost irrelevant. He has never indicated if they have achieved that or not --- just a concept they were targeting at least theoretically at one point).

New supplier agreements where Boeing gets future profits from future parts are likely part of this (and key to the long term rate of return). I know that the concept of Boeing partially funding the engine development has been considered - with Boeing then sharing in profits from engine sales for the NMA and to other aircraft companies of same or derivative engines (I have no idea if this will happen or not; but, the engine suppliers were skeptical of Boeing's market size numbers and this discussion came from that as a way to minimize the risk to the engine companies).

Many other interesting thoughts have been expressed that has given me hints. But, my key understanding is that in the end this will be a Boeing Board decision to proceed with a lower than past expected rate of return project - as the old rates of return are no longer possible for any new large aircraft and that the current NMA development team is working to ensure the lowest cost of production so that the NMA can be sold at a low enough price to generate thousands of sales over the next 20 years (and that they believe they have a really good understanding of production cost with only a few % likely variance). It is expected that the market size will be too small for anyone else to directly compete.

I suspect there are less than 20 people who really know what the very top Management and Boeing Board thinks at this point - other than they have continued to fund the development process with an expected announcement for this year. I suspect we will hear by summer if the NMA is go or no go. Either way; Boeing has certainly learned information that can be applied to the NSA in the future.

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24851
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:19 am

texl1649 wrote:
Why is the A220 of all things being the crux of a debate about Boeing's NSA/NMA duo possibly being co-developed (clandestinely) together? The A220 for goodness sakes is a nice little plane, but it's obviously a 2000-era tech plane, and the 737RS is going to be at least 20-30 years more advanced, and it won't be in the least bit impacted by this aircraft, or it's 2030 delivery capabilities.

The question could eventually be what will Airbus do in response: it won't be a variant of the A220, lol. Well, there's 30 seconds I'll never get back...

Indeed. The trolling here is strong. A simple question about Boeing's capabilities gets swallowed up by responses about all the competitor's capabilities. When people point out flawed some posts are, they get ignored. What is hard to ignore is that Boeing makes more money with higher margin than the competitors. Well, at least we get pretty pictures, even if they are mostly irrelevant to the topic.

2175301 wrote:
New supplier agreements where Boeing gets future profits from future parts are likely part of this (and key to the long term rate of return). I know that the concept of Boeing partially funding the engine development has been considered - with Boeing then sharing in profits from engine sales for the NMA and to other aircraft companies of same or derivative engines (I have no idea if this will happen or not; but, the engine suppliers were skeptical of Boeing's market size numbers and this discussion came from that as a way to minimize the risk to the engine companies).

That's a great point. It should be discussed in the actual 797 thread, rather than buried in this NSA+NMA possibilities thread. I'll address it there.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:51 am

keesje wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Although it will take a lot of orders to sustain MAX production at current and shortly higher production rates to 2030 - unless Airbus does something to make the Max uncompetitive it should be fine. It does well against the A320 and the -10 seems fine at shorter ranges against A321.

Boeing's biggest risk is if Airbus launches A220-500 soonish and can ramp production to significant levels by 2025 to challenge the 738 MAX - which probably won't happen. The industry seems like it will probably need at least 100+ NB a month 2025-2030 - so Boeing should get there fair share of those orders.


I think it would be realistic of Boeing to assume the world keeps turning :

:arrow: Airbus will continue developing it's A320 range with additional types when the opportunities arise.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4117/34883213114_5bf94f6234_c.jpg

:arrow: Airbus is setting up a second FAL for the A220 for a reason, ~ 15-20 / month around 2025.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbus-alabama/airbus-spends-300-million-on-new-alabama-plant-for-a220-jet-idUSKCN1PA29H

:arrow: It takes 7-8 years to deliver a new aircraft in numbers from launch.
https://www.wearefinn.com/media/1765/china-arthur-litte-3.png?width=491&height=349

If you wait for solid confirmations to take a deliberate decision, you're 3-4 years too late.


If things are going so much better for the A320 than for the 737, why did the 737 outsell the A320 last year while Boeing maintained stronger balance sheet than ever?

Image

https://marketrealist.com/2018/12/boein ... val-airbus

Perhaps there are areas where the 737 actually is better than the A320

Image

Facts have the ability to get in the way of hyperbole.

Boeing has the cash to go after a segment which doesn’t have an equivalent competitor, since the 737 and 787 are both performing well and bringing in cash.

Image
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14118
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 10:07 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Although it will take a lot of orders to sustain MAX production at current and shortly higher production rates to 2030 - unless Airbus does something to make the Max uncompetitive it should be fine. It does well against the A320 and the -10 seems fine at shorter ranges against A321.

Boeing's biggest risk is if Airbus launches A220-500 soonish and can ramp production to significant levels by 2025 to challenge the 738 MAX - which probably won't happen. The industry seems like it will probably need at least 100+ NB a month 2025-2030 - so Boeing should get there fair share of those orders.


I think it would be realistic of Boeing to assume the world keeps turning :

:arrow: Airbus will continue developing it's A320 range with additional types when the opportunities arise.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4117/34883213114_5bf94f6234_c.jpg

:arrow: Airbus is setting up a second FAL for the A220 for a reason, ~ 15-20 / month around 2025.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbus-alabama/airbus-spends-300-million-on-new-alabama-plant-for-a220-jet-idUSKCN1PA29H

:arrow: It takes 7-8 years to deliver a new aircraft in numbers from launch.
https://www.wearefinn.com/media/1765/china-arthur-litte-3.png?width=491&height=349

If you wait for solid confirmations to take a deliberate decision, you're 3-4 years too late.


If things are going so much better for the A320 than for the 737, why did the 737 outsell the A320 last year while Boeing maintained stronger balance sheet than ever?

Image

https://marketrealist.com/2018/12/boein ... val-airbus

Perhaps there are areas where the 737 actually is better than the A320

Image

Facts have the ability to get in the way of hyperbole.

Boeing has the cash to go after a segment which doesn’t have an equivalent competitor, since the 737 and 787 are both performing well and bringing in cash.

Image


You are on the Boeing CashFlow / Ignore Dept Accounting Method KoolAid :rotfl:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 10:28 am

morrisond wrote:
Although it will take a lot of orders to sustain MAX production at current and shortly higher production rates to 2030 - unless Airbus does something to make the Max uncompetitive it should be fine. It does well against the A320 and the -10 seems fine at shorter ranges against A321.

Boeing's biggest risk is if Airbus launches A220-500 soonish and can ramp production to significant levels by 2025 to challenge the 738 MAX - which probably won't happen. The industry seems like it will probably need at least 100+ NB a month 2025-2030 - so Boeing should get there fair share of those orders.


If Airbus launches an A225 the first victim would be their own A320. I doubt Airbus decides to invest money to hurt their cash cow.
 
2175301
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 10:37 am

keesje wrote:
You are on the Boeing CashFlow / Ignore Dept Accounting Method KoolAid :rotfl:


What koolaid are you talking about: Boeing has no debt accounting issue. They have a rather low debt for the size of company they are. Their cash flow right now is artificially suppressed by the book-keeping pay-down of the amortization of the 787 deferred production cost. However; Boeing owes no debt on that deferred production cost. If that did not exist the reported free cash flows of Boeing would be better than the current reports.

Essentially; Boeing owes Boeing something in the range of $25 Billion for the 787 deferred production cost (an amortized expense fully paid for; that they are appropriately writing off per accounting rules); and likely another $5-10 Billion for all other programs (all Boeing programs have deferred production cost... as it includes in process work).

The free cash flow difference is real... and it allows Boeing to potentially invest in things that Airbus cannot at this time (things could be different if a few years). Will the Boeing Board chose to invest in a new product (The NMA) beyond the current Billion or so they have spent so far "looking" at it, is unknown. They can do other things with that money if they so choose.

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14118
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 12:24 pm

2175301 wrote:
keesje wrote:
You are on the Boeing CashFlow / Ignore Dept Accounting Method KoolAid :rotfl:


What koolaid are you talking about: Boeing has no debt accounting issue. They have a rather low debt for the size of company they are. Their cash flow right now is artificially suppressed by the book-keeping pay-down of the amortization of the 787 deferred production cost. However; Boeing owes no debt on that deferred production cost. If that did not exist the reported free cash flows of Boeing would be better than the current reports.

Essentially; Boeing owes Boeing something in the range of $25 Billion for the 787 deferred production cost (an amortized expense fully paid for; that they are appropriately writing off per accounting rules); and likely another $5-10 Billion for all other programs (all Boeing programs have deferred production cost... as it includes in process work).

The free cash flow difference is real... and it allows Boeing to potentially invest in things that Airbus cannot at this time (things could be different if a few years). Will the Boeing Board chose to invest in a new product (The NMA) beyond the current Billion or so they have spent so far "looking" at it, is unknown. They can do other things with that money if they so choose.

Have a great day,


Looking at what happened over the last few years is that Boeing had to massively invest in the 777X (6-10 billion?) while delivering 737s that were sold in a period of competitive disadvantage. Fire sale and rate 3.5 happened at the 777 FAL. The KC46 absorbed lots with no deliveries and the 747-8 is neutral at best. Thank god the 787 seems to be going well, but the deferred costs per frame from the 2004-2013 period are what they are, massive.

Boeing communication is spreading the good news to a docile public of stock holders that want nothing else. Boeing program accounting helps enormously. Not saying Boeing is in dire straits, but a bit of realism kicking in would be more than welcome instead of only absorbing what you love to hear.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:00 pm

Which Boeing are we talking about?
 
morrisond
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:47 pm

seahawk wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Although it will take a lot of orders to sustain MAX production at current and shortly higher production rates to 2030 - unless Airbus does something to make the Max uncompetitive it should be fine. It does well against the A320 and the -10 seems fine at shorter ranges against A321.

Boeing's biggest risk is if Airbus launches A220-500 soonish and can ramp production to significant levels by 2025 to challenge the 738 MAX - which probably won't happen. The industry seems like it will probably need at least 100+ NB a month 2025-2030 - so Boeing should get there fair share of those orders.


If Airbus launches an A225 the first victim would be their own A320. I doubt Airbus decides to invest money to hurt their cash cow.



I would agree - I just didn't write it that well.

My point was that the 737 should be safe for another couple thousand orders to get them to 2029-2030 when an NSA based on NMA could potentially be ready in volume.

I think with the success of the 787 and it's new production system construction methods and the cash cow it is becoming - as many have pointed out NMA/NSA is almost more about the potential production cost savings than efficiency(almost - I'm not saying it's more important).

That is why it makes so much logical sense to build NMA first at 10-15 per month before building NSA at 60+ per month or whatever is needed in 2030 - which by that time could be 100+ per month to figure out your production system.

Airliners require a lot of labour and whatever you can do to significantly reduce that will be a massive advantage.

It would be interesting to know how many labour hours a 787 takes versus an 767 or A350 vs 330.
 
2175301
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Sat Jan 26, 2019 4:40 pm

keesje wrote:
2175301 wrote:
keesje wrote:
You are on the Boeing CashFlow / Ignore Dept Accounting Method KoolAid :rotfl:


What koolaid are you talking about: Boeing has no debt accounting issue. They have a rather low debt for the size of company they are. Their cash flow right now is artificially suppressed by the book-keeping pay-down of the amortization of the 787 deferred production cost. However; Boeing owes no debt on that deferred production cost. If that did not exist the reported free cash flows of Boeing would be better than the current reports.

Essentially; Boeing owes Boeing something in the range of $25 Billion for the 787 deferred production cost (an amortized expense fully paid for; that they are appropriately writing off per accounting rules); and likely another $5-10 Billion for all other programs (all Boeing programs have deferred production cost... as it includes in process work).

The free cash flow difference is real... and it allows Boeing to potentially invest in things that Airbus cannot at this time (things could be different if a few years). Will the Boeing Board chose to invest in a new product (The NMA) beyond the current Billion or so they have spent so far "looking" at it, is unknown. They can do other things with that money if they so choose.

Have a great day,


Looking at what happened over the last few years is that Boeing had to massively invest in the 777X (6-10 billion?) while delivering 737s that were sold in a period of competitive disadvantage. Fire sale and rate 3.5 happened at the 777 FAL. The KC46 absorbed lots with no deliveries and the 747-8 is neutral at best. Thank god the 787 seems to be going well, but the deferred costs per frame from the 2004-2013 period are what they are, massive.

Boeing communication is spreading the good news to a docile public of stock holders that want nothing else. Boeing program accounting helps enormously. Not saying Boeing is in dire straits, but a bit of realism kicking in would be more than welcome instead of only absorbing what you love to hear.


Ahhh.... another person who believes that Boeing sells 737 and 777 at a loss... They cannot possibly be making money on them... much less a lot of money.

Also; it has been well discussed with figures provided to back it up that deferred production cost are being funded by cash - not by debt. They are not a loss; there are no loans. They are only a book keeping exercise and are a form of amortization. Where are the people claiming that Airbus is in trouble because it has amortized things on its books (buildings, computers, etc) that Airbus has paid the vendor; but, am writing their value off of their books via an amortization schedule. No one.

Your thinking and understanding of economics and financial reports seems to be clear. What are you going to stand on when those old 787 deferred production cost are largely written off...

Have a great day,
 
tontherok
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 2:43 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Tue Feb 05, 2019 11:40 pm

Devilfish wrote:
keesje wrote:
Maybe the NMA should be a bit smaller.

:airplane: Might Airbus launch an all-new, mid-ranged, A300-sized composite airframe with dedicated engines and modernized cockpit in response...considering the A338 is not gaining traction in the market :?:


An NMA too big or too small is really up to the airline that buys one and later has buyer's regret. Airlines are in the business of making a profit, so I very much doubt that an airline would be so careless as to commit to a product that won't deliver a reasonable ROI. Some airlines, for their proven economics, might prefer a smaller NMA, i.e., a single aisle, but able to carry 30 more passengers than the B757-200 up to 1,000 nm farther. Add 15 inches to the cabin width of the B757 with a decent wing size and ample thrust and you have a clear winner for Boeing.. or Airbus.. passengers hardly care. They only want to be treated a little better than sardines in a can.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2299
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Wed Feb 06, 2019 12:21 am

What is amazing is that cash flow is quite positive right as the 777x development costs are at their max, the 78X development costs basically ended 3 months ago, the KC-46's are not paid for, like 25 on the ground, and the 737 ramp up is going on. It could be dreary or disruptive.

It really indicates that B is making huge margins on the 737 and the 787 is above its expected margins. The 747, 767, and 777 lines are all now not generating much revenue. But next quarter the KC-46 could contribute nearly $2B to BDS revenue.

Boeing Commercial posted $ 9.77M per plane average profit in 2018. Not bad for a tired also run firm that has no clue on how to build planes.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14118
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Wed Feb 06, 2019 3:42 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
What is amazing is that cash flow is quite positive right as the 777x development costs are at their max, the 78X development costs basically ended 3 months ago, the KC-46's are not paid for, like 25 on the ground, and the 737 ramp up is going on. It could be dreary or disruptive.

It really indicates that B is making huge margins on the 737 and the 787 is above its expected margins. The 747, 767, and 777 lines are all now not generating much revenue. But next quarter the KC-46 could contribute nearly $2B to BDS revenue.

Boeing Commercial posted $ 9.77M per plane average profit in 2018. Not bad for a tired also run firm that has no clue on how to build planes.


You are right about some of the huge costs the company if making at this stage (777x). At least one Boeing supporter that doesn´t get snowed out by "free cash flow" It all has to do with Boeing unique program accounting, that allows the company to spread out its huge manufacturing costs over time by cutting the cost per plane in the early stages of a project, and smoothening profit margins over time. You can have a big smile at the front door when billions stream out via the back door. https://marketrealist.com/2016/02/what-is-boeings-program-accounting-issue-about

Image


Back to topic : "NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?" It seems increasingly likely, and smart IMO. Conditional would be that the NSA part of the program would have to be ultra competitive around 175 seats <1000NM. Otherwise the growing competition in that segment will outsell an NSA from the start. A shrink 2-3-2 NMA wouldn't stand a chance.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Wed Feb 06, 2019 11:48 am

keesje wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
What is amazing is that cash flow is quite positive right as the 777x development costs are at their max, the 78X development costs basically ended 3 months ago, the KC-46's are not paid for, like 25 on the ground, and the 737 ramp up is going on. It could be dreary or disruptive.

It really indicates that B is making huge margins on the 737 and the 787 is above its expected margins. The 747, 767, and 777 lines are all now not generating much revenue. But next quarter the KC-46 could contribute nearly $2B to BDS revenue.

Boeing Commercial posted $ 9.77M per plane average profit in 2018. Not bad for a tired also run firm that has no clue on how to build planes.


You are right about some of the huge costs the company if making at this stage (777x). At least one Boeing supporter that doesn´t get snowed out by "free cash flow" It all has to do with Boeing unique program accounting, that allows the company to spread out its huge manufacturing costs over time by cutting the cost per plane in the early stages of a project, and smoothening profit margins over time. You can have a big smile at the front door when billions stream out via the back door. https://marketrealist.com/2016/02/what-is-boeings-program-accounting-issue-about

Image


Back to topic : "NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?" It seems increasingly likely, and smart IMO. Conditional would be that the NSA part of the program would have to be ultra competitive around 175 seats <1000NM. Otherwise the growing competition in that segment will outsell an NSA from the start. A shrink 2-3-2 NMA wouldn't stand a chance.


This is a typical mix of half truths here again. Linking a three year old article when the potential impact of program accounting has been covered in much more contemporary articles. Implying that free cash flow isn’t an important metric. Implying that things are somehow hidden.

It’s all accounted for, right there on the statements. All anyone has (or had) to do was look.

Free cash flow is important simply because it is a good measure for your ability to generate cash. Cash to pay for things like NMA and NSA eventually without resorting to asking dad to fork over the money.
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Topic Author
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Mon Mar 18, 2019 5:39 pm

I would like to pose this question (again) but under the current circumstances.

I would argue that Boeing CAN do it. It is perhaps imperative for their own survival that they do NSA/NMA as a tandem development. Probably cheaper to suffer through ONE big cut (cutting the MAX) than to die by a thousand cuts (a MAX that keeps needing small modifications, bandaids, or worse yet, kills more people).
© 2020. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3501
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: NSA+NMA: Could Boeing do them both together (again)?

Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:08 pm

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
I would argue that Boeing CAN do it. It is perhaps imperative for their own survival that they do NSA/NMA as a tandem development.


Easy to say if you don't have to deal with Engineering manpower requirements during times of low un-employment.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos