More Boeing Bad News

[1DC]

Slight thread drift from a layman.. This new 777X with the foldy wings, is it a new certification or is it hanging on to the design of the original 777?

[PHXPhlyer]

Pretty sure that they are going the route of the 737.
I don't think they have the money or the competent manpower to do otherwise.

PP

[Rwy in Sight]

The initial 777 had forecasted to have the wings folding so they might use the original certified mechanism.

[PHXPhlyer]

Boeing to cut thousands of additional jobs through 2021 as it prepares for long air travel slump

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/busine ... g-n1245072

Boeing to cut thousands of additional jobs through 2021 as it prepares for long air travel slump
About 19,000 employees are leaving Boeing this year, with thousands more job cuts announced for 2021.

Oct. 28, 2020, 5:12 AM MST / Source: CNBC.com
By Leslie Josephs, CNBC
Boeing, which is already shedding 16,000 jobs, said Wednesday it will cut thousands more through the end of next year as it prepares for a long slump in air travel and aircraft demand because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Boeing’s CEO David Calhoun told employees the company aims to have a staff of 130,000 by the end of 2021. Earlier this year, Boeing targeted a 10 percent cut to its staff, which stood at 160,000 people at the start of the year.

About 19,000 employees are leaving Boeing this year, but the company is adding some jobs in its more stable defense unit.

“As we align to market realities, our business units and functions are carefully making staffing decisions to prioritize natural attrition and stability in order to limit the impact on our people and our company,” Calhoun said in a staff note.

The pandemic’s impact on air travel demand, which is still not back to half of last year’s levels, has worsened Boeing’s crisis stemming from two fatal crashes of the 737 Max. Regulators are at the tail-end of the planes’ review but have still not signed off on them, preventing Boeing from delivering them to customers and crimping its cash flow as a result.

The company reported third-quarter results ahead of the market open, and Boeing executives will detail their results on a 10:30 a.m. ET earnings call.

PP

[Undried Plum]

I'm sorry for the many hard-working diligent workers who are losing their jobs. It's a serious personal catastrophe for them and for their family and other dependents.

I'd like to see the entire top echelon not only lose their jobs, but their liberty for a couple of decades in some nasty penitentiary.

Fukkem. The C-suite wankers that is, not the honest workers.

[Rwy in Sight]

UP if they are smart enough to reach the top echelon of such a company they are good enough to cover their backside legally hence avoiding any serious punishment.

[Boac]

It ain't over yet https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/ar ... -procedure

[PHXPhlyer]

American Airlines quietly made a decision that'll disturb everyone

https://www.zdnet.com/article/american- ... -everyone/

American Airlines quietly made a decision that'll disturb everyone
When attention is focused elsewhere, a business can make controversial decisions. But when even your own employees speak out, you may have a problem. Especially when it involves technology and safety.

Chris Matyszczyk
By Chris Matyszczyk for Technically Incorrect | November 7, 2020 -- 13:00 GMT (05:00 PST) | Topic: Enterprise Software

Flying involves an absolute trust in technology and the humans who operate it.

When your pilot tells you there's a fault on one of their indicators, you believe that pilot when they tell you it's fixed and takeoff is now safe.

In recent times, the hurriedly released Boeing 737 Max was clearly not ready for takeoff. In two horrific incidents, 346 people died. In both cases, the pilots weren't able to handle the software in such a way as to rectify a stall.

The Max was taken out of service. However, as the nation's focus was on all things electoral, American Airlines quietly announced that it would return the Max to its schedule next month.

European regulators have already declared the Max is safe to fly. What 's curious is that Boeing hasn't yet made the software changes that European regulators insisted was necessary.

In the US, the Max has passed its certification test flights. American, though, understands that passengers will be nervous. American is trying to entice passengers to take a tour of the plane at selected airports.

This all exudes a quiet confidence. Yet it's one thing to patch software. It's quite another to ensure that those who operate it know all of its nuances.

So this week I was a little disturbed to read: "Southwest, American pilots say new Boeing 737 Max manual may lead to errors in emergencies."

The pilots are concerned that the Federal Aviation Authority's manual for handling the new software in the event of an emergency is inadequate.

They say there are simply too many steps to remember. This, they insist, has been proved in simulator flights. Yet the FAA is proposing pilot training every three years when the pilots believe it should be two.

Moreover, pressure groups such as FlyersRights.org are demanding that all documents with respect to the FAA and Boeing's latest 737 Max testing be released publicly so that independent experts can make their own judgments.

How, then, can American's customers be confident that the Max is safe to fly?

I've flown in a Max twice -- a United Airlines Max. As a passenger, I was extremely conscious about the sheer size of the engines on either wing. They made the sort of sound I'd never heard on a plane before, offering what felt like a huge amount of thrust for an excessively long plane. I can't say I was frightened, however.

Now, would I be more concerned about what's happening in the cockpit? I would.

The Max will undoubtedly have a difficult future. Southwest Airlines doesn't seem to be hurrying to schedule it. Airlines aren't ordering more. Some, including Southwest, are said to be looking at Airbus alternatives instead of ordering more Maxes.

An intriguing element is whether American and other airlines will tell customers they're flying in a Max at all.

At the end of last year, they began referring to it as the 737-8. Which is quite bizarre, given that there's already a 737-800, a bastion of flying for many years.

While some passengers may be interested in the type of plane they're flying, many don't really care. They're more interested in whether the plane is clean and whether their feet will actually fit under the seat in front.

Could it be, then, that one of the ways airlines will try and reassure passengers is to only tell them it was a Max after they've landed? That's not the case with American. I checked its Miami-La Guardia schedule -- the one originally targeted for the Max -- and the type of plane is clearly stated as being a Max 8.

In terms of comfort, the Max has one big plus -- larger overhead bins. It also enjoys criminally tiny bathrooms and seats that are thinner in order to pack more in.

This is one software update that simply cannot go wrong. It has to be absolutely perfect and enjoy the absolute confidence of those who use it.

Perhaps, though, by the time American sends its first Maxes back into the air, everyone will be so very tired that they'll have no energy left for fear.

We'll all just be grateful to be flying somewhere.

PP

[PHXPhlyer]

What the 737 MAX's return to the sky will mean for passengers

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/737- ... index.html

What the 737 MAX's return to the sky will mean for passengers
John Walton, CNN • Published 13th November 2020

(CNN) — Would you fly on the Boeing 737 MAX? That question is going to become all too real for passengers in the near future when the aircraft that's been grounded for some 600 days returns to service.
The 737 MAX was grounded in March 2019, following two crashes within five months of each other that killed 346 people.
All indications are now pointing to the aircraft being certified to return to service soon in the US following changes mandated by regulators.
US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) administrator Steve Dickson said earlier this week that the review of proposed design changes could be "finished in the coming days," and the regulatory process from there is expected to be relatively simple.
2020 is a year where the unprecedented is the new normal, and of course the current state of Washington, DC, is no exception. But even if the FAA sticks to that timetable, it's no exaggeration to say that aviation doesn't have a road map to convincing passengers that the latest generation of the world's best-selling aircraft, the Boeing 737, is safe.
Related content
The 737 Max is set to fly again soon. But Boeing's financial struggle is far from over
Some carriers, including American Airlines, are already starting to sell tickets on the MAX (albeit, in this case, on a single daily round-trip).
"Our customers will be able to easily identify whether they are traveling on a 737 MAX even if schedules change," says American Airlines spokesperson Curtis Blessing. "The aircraft type will be visible through the booking path, and if schedules change, there will be notification."
United Airlines is promising passengers that they'll be able to rebook if they don't want to fly the MAX.
Southwest Airlines, meanwhile -- which had the largest MAX fleet in the US before the grounding -- says it will take longer, suggesting three to four months from the legal ungrounding to returning to service.
Southwest chief operating officer Mike Van de Ven said, in an industry earnings call in October, "We've got significant operational experience with the aircraft. It is our most cost-effective aircraft. It is our most reliable aircraft. It is our most environmentally friendly aircraft, and it's our most comfortable aircraft. So we really look forward to flying it again."
But the arguments that might placate investors are unlikely to persuade passengers.

Getting passengers comfortable is a tall order
Fundamentally, part of the problem with convincing passengers that the MAX is safe is that there's no playbook for how to do that, and another is that the airline and commercial aviation industry doesn't like to talk about safety.
There's a substantial segment of the population that already experiences some form of fear of flying, and they don't want to grow those numbers.
There's also the risk that a safety campaign could heighten passenger fears: if Boeing and the airlines operating the 737 MAX go all out on a public relations spree -- which is costly, and the greatest ever recession is very much not the time for that -- they risk reminding people of the problems with the aircraft, or making people who weren't watching the news two years ago aware of them.

"Boeing has to worry about the unintended consequences of talking about safety," explains Addison Schonland, partner at US-based aviation analysis firm AirInsight Group.
"It's a touchy thing because you want passengers to basically forget they are on a MAX. How can Boeing do this seamlessly? With American talking about educating their customers, that helps, but again, there can be unintended consequences. Or do you just tough it out and claim the MAX is the most tested airplane Boeing has ever delivered?"

Indeed, airlines have been strategizing for some time around how to balance using the MAX airplanes for which they have a need with the fact that some (or even many) passengers won't want to fly them.
There's some wiggle room for airlines to avoid being the first mover here, given that the Covid-19 crisis has reduced the pressure on existing fleets, but at some point some airline will have to be the first to get the MAX back in the air.
And that will come with unprecedented levels of interest from regulators, from media, and from passengers.
We live in the 2020s, where almost everyone flying has a cellphone to record what's happening, and it only takes one passenger to go viral while sobbing fearfully about getting on a 737 MAX as an overworked gate agent refuses or is unable to rebook them, to create a serious image problem -- let alone the first time a 737 MAX has to divert or return to its departure airport for a relatively routine issue.

Beyond whatever public relations blitz is put into effect, you can expect most airlines to put in place a policy (openly or quietly) where passengers who don't want to fly on a 737 MAX can change their ticket, at no extra charge.
So when will AirInsight's Schonland be ready to get on a 737 MAX?
"Not for a while is my answer. Maybe wait to see how it goes. I am pretty sure the revised MAX will be a better airplane from systems and safety," he says.
"But still," Schonland concludes, he's "in no rush to try it."

Boeing has a further problem: the rest of the world
Crucially, Boeing doesn't just need to persuade Americans, or US regulators.
After damning revelations in investigations into Boeing, its regulator the FAA, and the relationship between them -- including the US House Transportation Committee's report, which states clearly that "Boeing failed in its design and development of the MAX, and the FAA failed in its oversight of Boeing and its certification of the aircraft" -- international aviation safety regulation agencies are insisting on making up their own minds.
In addition to the key decisions by Europe's aviation regulator, EASA, and China's CAAC, certification from smaller independent regulators in key countries like Australia, Canada, Japan, Singapore and the UAE will be crucial.
There is also, for Boeing and the US, a wider China issue: the increasingly complicated politico-economic relations between the United States and China feature US exporter Boeing as a key player.
Beyond the essential safety certification role of CAAC, China's interests lie in developing its homegrown airliner programs, which in-depth analysis of the MAX's systems would assist. And of course, Boeing is very useful leverage against this White House or the next.
But Boeing has a problem that's even more daunting: persuading passengers that the fundamental flaws in the 737 MAX have been addressed and resolved and are not going to make them the 347th person to die on board these aircraft.
In the manufacturer's place, says AirInsight's Schonland, the immediate priorities of the Boeing 737 MAX program should be "FAA Certification, the aircraft update to meet certification requirements, and deliveries — in that order."
But part of the delivery piece of the puzzle is around airline demand, already at historic lows with Covid-19, and which will be even less for an aircraft that has been the subject of damning investigations for two years, and that many experts and passengers do not trust to be safe.
And it will be a brave airline that wants to be first to take the flak for the rest of the industry in putting the MAX back into service.

PP

[PHXPhlyer]

When will market for Max return

Hope link works. Not allowed to CnP on their site.

https://airinsight.com/insight-tuesday- ... ax-return/

PP

[PHXPhlyer]

Boeing's 737 Max debacle could be the most expensive corporate blunder ever

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/17/business ... index.html

Boeing's 737 Max debacle could be the most expensive corporate blunder ever
Chris Isidore
New York (CNN Business)The 20-month grounding of the 737 Max could end as soon as this week, but Boeing's mounting costs have soared to tens of billions of dollars. That means the plane maker's repeated safety oversights and mismanagement were not only tragic but also rank among the expensive corporate mistakes in history.

The two fatal crashes that led to the grounding of the Boeing 737 Max killed 346 people.
Financially, Boeing continues to pay a hefty cost to ensure the safety of future 737 Max passengers.
Direct costs
Boeing has detailed about $20 billion in direct costs from the grounding: $8.6 billion in compensation to customers for having their planes grounded, $5 billion for unusual costs of production, and $6.3 billion for increased costs of the 737 Max program.
The company also spent nearly $600 million for jet storage, pilot training and software updates that are not included in the company's overall cost estimate. It also established a $100 million victim compensation fund, which is also not included in Boeing's $20 billion in estimated costs.
So the costs of the grounding released by Boeing total $20.7 billion.
Boeing's legal liability will almost certainly add to that cost. Published reports show that the families of the first 11 victims to settle with Boeing received at least $1.2 million each. That means the total cost is likely to top $500 million.
Interest costs are adding up, too. Boeing borrowed billions of dollars at a roughly 5% interest rate to keep building 737 Max planes it can't deliver. The company built 450 Max jets during the grounding, but it hasn't delivered a single 737 Max plane in that nearly nearly two-year period.
Only about half will be delivered next year, and some deliveries will stretch as far as 2023. Boeing doesn't get most of the money from a sale until the plane is delivered to the airline, so the interest will pile up — perhaps by about $3 billion or $4 billion, said Chris Denicolo, aerospace credit analyst with Standard & Poor's.
What's clear is that the $20.7 billion in costs that Boeing has detailed is only the starting point. Bank of America puts the costs at more than $25 billion.
"It's going to be more than $20 billion. But it's hard to say how much more it's going to be," said Denicolo.
Lost sales
If financial damage from the 737 Max remains in the $20 billion range, that would not put it in the running for the most expensive mistake by a company. Volkswagen has spent €32 billion, or $38 billion, on its emissions cheating scandal. The most expensive mistake to date is the $68 billion cost to BP of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill of 2010.
But BP lost little or no sales because of Deepwater Horizon, and VW suffered only a minor, short-term loss of sales from the emissions scandal. By contrast, it's clear that Boeing has suffered a huge loss in sales in the wake of the 737 Max grounding.
Because of the grounding, Boeing lost the cancellation fees that had been written into in its sales contracts for 737 Max orders. As the Covid-19 pandemic sent air travel demand plummeting, airlines have begun taking advantage of the free cancellation policy, anticipating they won't need new planes for several years.

Boeing had disclosed 448 canceled orders for the Max so far this year, compared with only nine for its other models. In addition it has dropped another 782 orders from its backlog of 737 Max orders because it believes those orders are no longer certain enough to rely on. In at least some cases those uncertain plane orders are jets airline customers have said they no longer want.
A 737 Max typically sells for about $55 million, or half of the stated list price, so the worst-case scenario for Boeing is that it could lose as much as $67 billion in revenue from the drop in sales.
But experts say it's more likely that Boeing will eventually sell those planes, though at a steep discount, in some cases to the same customers who are now canceling the orders.
S&P's Denicolo and another industry expert agree that those steep discounts in sales price, which wouldn't have taken place if not for the grounding, are the real financial risk for Boeing.
"Say you're an airline. If there's no longer any penalty, why not cancel all my orders, and I can buy them back much cheaper?" said the industry expert, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Boeing will not comment on the prices paid for its planes or any discounts. But the expert said it might be as much as a $20 million discount per plane, or roughly $25 billion total — more than doubling the true cost of the grounding.
Discounting many of the 3,300 other Max orders still on the books could make Boeing's total cost of its 737 Max debacle climb even higher, perhaps past the $68 billion price tag of Deepwater Horizon.

PP

[ian16th]

Boeing's 737 Max debacle could be the most expensive corporate blunder ever

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/17/business ... index.html

Boeing's 737 Max debacle could be the most expensive corporate blunder ever
Chris Isidore
New York (CNN Business)The 20-month grounding of the 737 Max could end as soon as this week, but Boeing's mounting costs have soared to tens of billions of dollars. That means the plane maker's repeated safety oversights and mismanagement were not only tragic but also rank among the expensive corporate mistakes in history.

The two fatal crashes that led to the grounding of the Boeing 737 Max killed 346 people.
Financially, Boeing continues to pay a hefty cost to ensure the safety of future 737 Max passengers.
Direct costs
Boeing has detailed about $20 billion in direct costs from the grounding: $8.6 billion in compensation to customers for having their planes grounded, $5 billion for unusual costs of production, and $6.3 billion for increased costs of the 737 Max program.
The company also spent nearly $600 million for jet storage, pilot training and software updates that are not included in the company's overall cost estimate. It also established a $100 million victim compensation fund, which is also not included in Boeing's $20 billion in estimated costs.
So the costs of the grounding released by Boeing total $20.7 billion.
Boeing's legal liability will almost certainly add to that cost. Published reports show that the families of the first 11 victims to settle with Boeing received at least $1.2 million each. That means the total cost is likely to top $500 million.
Interest costs are adding up, too. Boeing borrowed billions of dollars at a roughly 5% interest rate to keep building 737 Max planes it can't deliver. The company built 450 Max jets during the grounding, but it hasn't delivered a single 737 Max plane in that nearly nearly two-year period.
Only about half will be delivered next year, and some deliveries will stretch as far as 2023. Boeing doesn't get most of the money from a sale until the plane is delivered to the airline, so the interest will pile up — perhaps by about $3 billion or $4 billion, said Chris Denicolo, aerospace credit analyst with Standard & Poor's.
What's clear is that the $20.7 billion in costs that Boeing has detailed is only the starting point. Bank of America puts the costs at more than $25 billion.
"It's going to be more than $20 billion. But it's hard to say how much more it's going to be," said Denicolo.
Lost sales
If financial damage from the 737 Max remains in the $20 billion range, that would not put it in the running for the most expensive mistake by a company. Volkswagen has spent €32 billion, or $38 billion, on its emissions cheating scandal. The most expensive mistake to date is the $68 billion cost to BP of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill of 2010.
But BP lost little or no sales because of Deepwater Horizon, and VW suffered only a minor, short-term loss of sales from the emissions scandal. By contrast, it's clear that Boeing has suffered a huge loss in sales in the wake of the 737 Max grounding.
Because of the grounding, Boeing lost the cancellation fees that had been written into in its sales contracts for 737 Max orders. As the Covid-19 pandemic sent air travel demand plummeting, airlines have begun taking advantage of the free cancellation policy, anticipating they won't need new planes for several years.

Boeing had disclosed 448 canceled orders for the Max so far this year, compared with only nine for its other models. In addition it has dropped another 782 orders from its backlog of 737 Max orders because it believes those orders are no longer certain enough to rely on. In at least some cases those uncertain plane orders are jets airline customers have said they no longer want.
A 737 Max typically sells for about $55 million, or half of the stated list price, so the worst-case scenario for Boeing is that it could lose as much as $67 billion in revenue from the drop in sales.
But experts say it's more likely that Boeing will eventually sell those planes, though at a steep discount, in some cases to the same customers who are now canceling the orders.
S&P's Denicolo and another industry expert agree that those steep discounts in sales price, which wouldn't have taken place if not for the grounding, are the real financial risk for Boeing.
"Say you're an airline. If there's no longer any penalty, why not cancel all my orders, and I can buy them back much cheaper?" said the industry expert, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Boeing will not comment on the prices paid for its planes or any discounts. But the expert said it might be as much as a $20 million discount per plane, or roughly $25 billion total — more than doubling the true cost of the grounding.
Discounting many of the 3,300 other Max orders still on the books could make Boeing's total cost of its 737 Max debacle climb even higher, perhaps past the $68 billion price tag of Deepwater Horizon.

PP

So, if someone had said; 'that big fat donk won't fit under the wing, we'll have to design a new airframe'.

It would have been the cheap option, and Boeing would have a new airframe with lots of development life in it.

[PHXPhlyer]

Not Really Bad News, But The Fat Lady Isn't Singing Just Yet

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/busine ... n-n1248090

FAA clears Boeing 737 Max to fly again
Boeing said it was not a day to celebrate but to remember all the lives lost and the families who've been affected by these tragedies.

737 Max set to return to skies after being grounded for 20 months

Nov. 18, 2020, 6:00 AM MST
By Tom Costello and Ben Popken
The Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday that the Boeing 737 Max will be recertified, the end of a two-year road to redemption after the craft was grounded following two fatal overseas crashes.

The Max was grounded worldwide in March 2019 after a Lion Air crash in October 2018 in Indonesia killed 189 people and was followed five months later by an Ethiopian Airlines crash, shortly after takeoff, that caused the death of all 157 people aboard.

"We will never forget the lives lost in the two tragic accidents that led to the decision to suspend operations," Boeing CEO David Calhoun said, in a statement released Wednesday morning. "These events and the lessons we have learned as a result have reshaped our company and further focused our attention on our core values of safety, quality and integrity."

In September, an investigative report from the House of Representatives blamed the plane manufacturer and the FAA for “repeated and serious failures."

The crashes “were the horrific culmination of a series of faulty technical assumptions by Boeing’s engineers, a lack of transparency on the part of Boeing’s management, and grossly insufficient oversight by the FAA — the pernicious result of regulatory capture on the part of the FAA with respect to its responsibilities to perform robust oversight of Boeing and to ensure the safety of the flying public,” the congressional report said.

Boeing said in a statement after the report's release that it is “dedicated to doing the work” necessary.

Faulty air speed indicators fed bad data to the plane’s computers, causing a software system called “MCAS” or “Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System,” intended to push the nose down to keep the pilot from inadvertently pulling up and causing a stall, to instead put both planes into a fatal nose dive.

“I would put my own family on [the Max]. I understand the concerns. This is the time for humility,” said FAA Administrator Steve Dickson.

Boeing made multiple design errors in the craft, rushed to compete with one from Airbus, and the FAA didn’t properly oversee design and manufacturing, according to the report. Pilot error also contributed to both crashes, the investigators found.

“FAA Administrator Steve Dickson today signed an order that paves the way for the Boeing 737 MAX to return to commercial service,” the FAA said in a statement Wednesday, and specified several steps that must be taken before the planes can fly, such as approving pilot training program revisions and maintenance that must take place on grounded planes.

"I am 100 percent confident in the actions that we have taken,” Dickson told CNBC on Wednesday morning. “I would put my own family on it [the Max]. I understand the concerns. This is the time for humility.”

"A lot of families may be reluctant to fly the Max when it is approved to fly," said Erik Olund, who runs the American Airlines maintenance base in Tulsa, Oklahoma. "My family will fly on the airplane before the general public does. … I'll have no problem getting on this airplane when we get it restored to service."

Michal Stumo, who lost his daughter, Samya, in the Ethopian crash, said he doesn’t believe the Max is safe.

"Samya would have been planning to come to be with us at Thanksgiving,” he told NBC News. "Anyone who is booking a plane really needs to avoid a Boeing 737 Max-8 and try to find another flight."

Passengers could find themselves flying in a 737 Max by the end of the year. American Airlines is planning a single Max passenger flight from Dec. 29 to Jan. 4 between Miami and New York. United Airlines and Southwest say they expect to start flying the Max early next year.

PP

[PHXPhlyer]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/20/business ... index.html

Boeing needs China to approve the 737 Max. But that won't end its epic sales drought
By Laura He, CNN Business
Updated 9:50 AM ET, Fri November 20, 2020

Boeing's 737 Max cleared to fly again

Hong Kong (CNN Business)Boeing is finally close to getting its 737 Max back into the air again in the United States. But the company still faces challenges in the critical aviation market of China, where its business woes go way beyond the troubled aircraft.

The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) has yet to say whether it will allow the 737 Max to fly in the country after the US Federal Aviation Administration gave the green light for the plane to carry passengers earlier this week. While the US government was an important hurdle for Boeing to clear, it will need approval from other aviation regulators before airlines can fly the plane between international destinations.

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency, which oversees flights in Europe, has said it expects to take action in late December or early 2021.
But China's sign-off is critical. The country was the first to ground the 737 Max last year after two of the jets crashed, claiming hundreds of lives. The CAAC said last month that it has its own criteria that Boeing (BA) needs to meet before China will be satisfied with the plane again, including assurances that changes to its design are "safe and reliable."
"As long as they meet the requirements, we are happy to see them resuming flights," Feng Zhenglin, director of CAAC, said last month at a press conference in Beijing. "But if not, we have to maintain strict examination to ensure safety."
CAAC did not respond to a request from CNN Business for comment.
A vital market
China's approval isn't just about allowing the 737 Max to fly in Chinese airspace again. Boeing's business in China has been severely damaged by years of fighting between Washington and Beijing over trade, technology and intellectual property rights, and getting back on track will be a huge challenge.
Before the trade war, China was a big market for Boeing. In 2015 and 2016, China sales accounted for 13% and 11% of the company's total revenue, respectively, according to its annual reports. In 2015, China was Boeing's largest export market, and it was the third largest in 2016.
But the company hasn't sold any passenger planes to China in the past two years for reasons "everyone knows," Sherry Carbary, president of Boeing China, said late last year, according to the state-owned Shanghai Observer. Two freighters were ordered by China Cargo in May.
The company's China problems are "well out of Boeing's control," said Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis at Teal Group Corporation, an aerospace space consulting firm.
"In China, Boeing is prisoner to forces beyond mere aviation market dynamics," he added. "It would be impossible for Boeing to not be wrapped up in this giant mess, involving trade barriers, [intellectual property] disputes, and tariffs."
US-China tensions have manifested in other ways, too. Beijing said last month that it will impose sanctions on American companies — including Lockheed Martin (LMT) and Boeing — that have been involved in selling arms to Taiwan.
Boeing is upbeat about the Chinese market, though. Last week, the company issued a positive outlook, saying that it expected industry-wide sales of new airplanes to total 8,600 in China over the next 20 years. That estimate, valued at $1.4 trillion, is even higher than where it stood before the Covid-19 pandemic — notably, China's economic recovery this year has outpaced the rest of the world.
"Boeing remains compelled to grow its footprint in the China civil aviation market for economic and strategic reasons, alone," said Alex Capri, research fellow at Hinrich Foundation and visiting senior fellow at National University of Singapore. "Failure to do this will cost the company [research and development] revenue and future opportunities to collaborate with strategic partners."
Domestic competition
Boeing may face stronger competition as it seeks to get back on track in China.
Its rivalry with Airbus has deepened, especially after Boeing was hit with its 737 crisis. Last year, weeks after China grounded Boeing 737 Max, Airbus announced a deal to sell 300 passenger jets to Chinese airlines.
The upstart Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, or Comac, is also developing its own aircraft.

Comac's jets might be able to satisfy some demand in China in the next five-to-eight years, Aboulafia said, but analysts agree the planes don't have the makings of a global competitor.
"As for [Boeing] losing market share to Comac, there's no certainty when this might happen," Capri said, adding that China has been trying unsuccessfully to build cutting edge jet engines and other tech for decades.
Capri added that Boeing has also been able to build a solid strategy in China by isolating its businesses in the country and keeping some of its more valuable intellectual property and other operations elsewhere. He pointed to a 737 plant in the Chinese province of Zhejiang, where the company accomplishes low-value tasks like installing interiors.
"Competing in the China market is always going to be a Faustian bargain," Capri said. "But civil aircraft is no different than the situation for the automotive industry or semiconductors," he said.
Correction: An earlier version of this story included an incorrect forecast of Boeing's sales in China.

PP

[Woody]

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... -sold.html

[PHXPhlyer]

The re-fit is actually to remove the MCAS.

PP

[Boac]

.and so it goes on
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... spections/

[TheGreenGoblin]

I note that the Bazilian airline GOL are back operating the Max...

https://airwaysmag.com/industry/boeing/ ... in-brazil/

[TheGreenGoblin]

Boeing officials “inappropriately coached” test pilots during recertification efforts after two fatal 737 MAX crashes killed 346 people, a US congressional report has concluded.

The report by the Senate commerce committee raised questions about testing in 2020 of a key safety system known as MCAS tied to both fatal crashes.

The committee concluded Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Boeing officials “had established a pre-determined outcome to reaffirm a long-held human factor assumption related to pilot reaction time”.

It appeared that the “FAA and Boeing were attempting to cover up important information that may have contributed to the 737 MAX tragedies”.

Friday’s report cited a whistleblower who alleged Boeing officials encouraged test pilots to use a particular control during an exercise, resulting in a pilot response time of around four seconds. Another pilot in a separate test reacted in approximately 16 seconds.

The account was corroborated during an FAA staff interview, the committee added.
Numerous reports have found Boeing failed to adequately consider how pilots respond to cockpit emergencies in its development of the 737 MAX.

Boeing said Friday it took the committee’s findings “seriously” and would “continue to review the report in full”.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... y-senators

[barkingmad]

Oooh dear, erewego yet again with both Boeing and the FAA deep in the manure;

737 Max: Boeing 'inappropriately coached' pilots in test after crashes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55372499

Yet again the question of “can it get any worse” comes to mind...