No new Boeing airplane in sight...?

Scott Hamilton has it here: chances that we will seen and hear an announcement from Boeing for a new airplane, call it 737RS, call it 797, are getting slim. Buckingham Research now says that they do not expect an announcement from Boeing for a new airplane at the Paris Air Show. An approval to offer would not come before the end of 2012/ early 2013.
As I argued earlier, there is no real technical case for a new aircraft in the 2020 timeframe. And if there is no technical case, there is no business case. No business man will spend $10-15 billion without getting a decent return, if he can get the same return by spending $1-1.5 billion, as Airbus does it.
I don't want to say that Boeing now will do the 737RE - but in my eyes it would do much more sense. And this is one if the rare occasions I agree with Richard Aboulafia, who just today at the Aero Club in Wichita said that Boeing should quickly go forward with the reengining.
If they do not move quickly, there is a real danger that long-time Boeing customers are moving to Airbus.

A problem with reengining for Boeing could be the emerging signs that the CFM LEAP-X could be a little bit behind schedule. At least there is no customer for the LEAP-X on the A320NEO yet. As EIS for the NEO is 4.5 years away, some airlines (as well as ILFC) seem to be confident enough to order the GTF, but not the LEAP-X. They could also wait another year or even two and decide then about the engine - means ordering one engine now that they are sure that the other is not ready in time? Leahy last week said that the LEAP-X would be available by about 9 months, but no more than 12 months after the GTF. As EIS of the NEO was moved forward by 6 months at the same time, that means that the LEAP-X would have been 3-6 months later than the GTF per original schedule. Three to six months should not really be the deciding factor when ordering an aircraft that is used for twenty years and longer. So there could be something more behind all that...

The absent LEAP-X customers

It is very early to say anything about the long-term share of the Geared Turbo Fan and the LEAP-X on the A320neo. On the other hand it is notable that there are now three announced engine choices for the A320neo and none of them is in favour of the LEAP-X.

• ILFC opted for the GTF for at least 60 of their 100 aircraft (MoU with Airbus yet to be firmed up). They have an option for the GTF for the remaining 40 aircraft, but are in talks with CFM about the LEAP-X. Apparently ILFC is not yet convinced to order the LEAP-X.
• Indigo: this can be deemed as an easy win for P&W, although also CFM fought hard for this large deal. Indigo currently uses the V2500 on their "classic" A320.
• Lufthansa: as I wrote in another blog entry, the most important win for P&W so far. They initially ordered the V2500 for their A320, but when RR had problems with the High Pressure Compressor, they had to switch to the CFM56. By the time the A321 was launched, the V2500 then became Lufthansa's choice again - but for the A319 Lufthansa favoured the CFM56. I see two reasons for their split: one is to get a maintenance license for both engines, as Lufthansa Technik is a major player also in the engine maintenance business and saw business opportunities with third parties. Another reason is that the A321 typically flies on longer routes than the A320 and A319, where the better engine SFC of the V2500 plays a bigger role. On the other hand, the CFM56 could have an edge if you fly shorter routes and more sectors a day, as the CFM56 with it's single stage turbine has lower maintenance costs than the V2500. Now Lufthansa ordered the GTF for both the A320neo and the A321neo - a significant move in my eyes!

Now - who is the most probable LEAP-X customer, once ordering the A320neo? GECAS of course! There is no order for the A320neo from GECAS so far - this is no judgement so far, but if Airbus collects some more and potentially large orders by the time of the Paris Air Show in June and GECAS does not come on board, I have a sense that there could be a problem with the LEAP-X - as GECAS should be the customer who has the best insight into the engine.

Pratt did it again - with Lufthansa!

Pratt did it again! Third engine announcement, third win - a good run! And I would say, the third is the most important one, as I explained in earlier blog entry. The engine choice from Lufthansa for the PW1133G will probably be a signal for many other airlines, which do not have such a large and well-experienced technical department as Lufthansa. So we can expect that the Geared Turbo Fan will keep the lead position against the LEAP-X for the next months - and as we can expect a few more orders for the A320neo until the Paris Air Show in June, this could translate in many orders for the GTF as well.

Geared Turbo Fan scores big (again)

Flightglobal just has this story out. If it gets materialized (and I have no doubts), this is indeed a big coup for Pratt & Whitney and their PW1133G Geared Turbo Fan. After ILFC's selection for at least 60 of their 100 ordered A320NEO family aircraft (well, it is still an MoU as far as we know, but consider that it will be a firm order by June the latest), this is the second win over the LEAP-X engine. This is a bit surprising, as P&W can be considered a "new" engine OEM in the narrowbody market, as the V2500 offered now is sold by the IAE consortium and not by P&W themselves. So Pratt was believed to have a more difficult start to sell their engine, as they can not count on an own customer base like CFM can.
An advantage in this particular case was that IAE is providing the V2500 for the A320 ordered by Indigo before.
Meanwhile AirAsia CEO Fernandes said that an announcement for a A320NEO order would come soon and there would be some order conversions from the old order for classic A320's to the NEO version. Here CFM has a clear edge over P&W, as AirAsia currently uses the CFM56 and it would be difficult to convert an order from CFM56 powered A320's to GTF powered A320neo's.

There are orders and MoU's for 332 A320NEO family aircraft so far - 210 aircraft will be equipped with the GTF, so the GTF has a market share of (at least) 65% today. I am curious where this is after the Paris Air Show...

P.S.: Meanwhile the press release from P&W is out.

Boeing 737 successor Part III

We still have to wait about 3 months until we probably hear from Boeing what their plan is regarding the future of the B737. But if you read what the Boeing CFO this week said at the JP Morgan Aviation, Transportation and Defense Conference in New York, one has to question why Boeing should develop a new airplane at all.
If Boeing believes what their CFO James Bell told the audience, Airbus just closes today's gap between the A320 and the B737-800 with the introduction of the NEO. So why then doing something at all? If both big players are on-par, they could go on and share 50% of the market each - at least above the 150 seat level, where Bombardier reportedly will not offer a CS500 (and the announcement of collaboration with COMAC sheds some light on this) and Irkut and COMAC will have a long way to be a player in the the market.
So where is the incentive for Boeing to spend some $10 billion on a new aircraft with all the technical risk involved, but still staying with a conventional tube-and-wing design and the risk that Airbus will follow a few years later leapfrogging the 797 with an unconventional, radical new design.
The low-risk and low-cost solution would be what Airbus says Boeing will do: follow with a re-engined B737 and let the engine maker(s) pay for most of the cost, as now does Airbus (Udvar-Hazy made some comments about this at the ISTAT).
There are just two things that could lead Boeing to design a new aircraft:

1. Their statement that the re-engining only closes the gap is not true and in reality the NEO's are far better in costs then the NG's. The steadily rising oil price is in favor of the NEO cash operating costs right now and there is probably nobody out there who will predict oil at below $80/barrel in the future. But a re-engining could close that gap - maybe not entirely, but close enough, so that by "adjusting" the purchase price (see A340-600) for the aircraft should be good enough to sell the aircraft.
2. The basic design of the 737, namely the narrow cabin is too old to be attractive for airlines in the future. This is somehow contrasted by the good response to the Sky interior just introduced for the B737NG.

Bottom line: I am not convinced that Boeing will show the world a B797 in Paris - at least not this year...

There is more about that here:
Part I
Part II
Part IV