More Boeing Bad News

[PHXPhlyer]

A very sobering report.
I always thought that Airbuses (Electric Jets) were most apt to be affected by stray electrons. Seventeen years of 320 family experience resulted in awareness that the plane needed to be treated like the collection of computers that it is. If you encounter a problem in the air , reset a computer. On the ground, shut it down and power it back up. Computer reboots and restarts were common solutions from maintenance.
My Boeing experience is much more limited. Type rating on 737. Course don on -200 and -300 sim. Never actually "flown" a real one.
It seems that the Max has morphed into an "electric jet" but not quite to the extent of the 787.
I am now happy to have survived my 3 or 4 deadhead flights on a Max.
It is still a very old design only now tarted up with nice screens, a little more automation and bigger engines.
Hopefully the extra attention and more focused training will help, however in light of this report Boeing's QC and design processes will be put under the microscope and a systemic change will occur.

PP

[Alisoncc]

Boeing 737 Max - Still not fixed

Factory workers are frequently required to perform intricate, physically demanding tasks in tight spaces while in awkward physical positions (overhead, bending, reaching, etc.).

Reminds me of working on Lincoln's!

Or Vulcans. Reminds me of getting up behind the AEO/Navs bench. You needed the agility of an olympic gymnast.

[Pontius Navigator]

Ian, I would guess you weren't a plumber then

[Pontius Navigator]

Boeing 737 Max - Still not fixed

Factory workers are frequently required to perform intricate, physically demanding tasks in tight spaces while in awkward physical positions (overhead, bending, reaching, etc.).

Reminds me of working on Lincoln's!

Or Vulcans. Reminds me of getting up behind the AEO/Navs bench. You needed the agility of an olympic gymnast.

I tried that once. A fuse in JB343 had blown* so the radar was offline. We were on the ground at El Adem and tge the engines were running. I opened the door and tried to get at the panel. We were into wind but it was still hot. The periscope I think was just in front of the panel and I think its heater was on. There were something like 24 screws securing the panel - why so many? I gave up and we decided the radar would fail once we were airborne.

I briefly considered trying once we were airborne but binned that idea. Shortly after the doppler failed. The radio compass was u/s and after Malta the TACAN failed.

We pressed on home over France with just the computer and visual pinpoints from fl450. We updated the kit at Nice and our final update at Lyon before cloud cover over France.

We caught up a Canberra and followed him for a while until we overtook. He immediately assumed we knew where we were with our superior kit and fell into line behind us.

I learnt about flying from that : if it isn't working before flight things won't get better once airborne.

[ian16th]

Ian, I would guess you weren't a plumber then

Sorry PN, you have lost me there.

In RAF terminology a 'plumber' was an Armourer.

[Rwy in Sight]

Ian, I would guess you weren't a plumber then

Sorry PN, you have lost me there.

In RAF terminology a 'plumber' was an Armourer.

I take it means with a belly slightly bigger than the average

[Pontius Navigator]

Ian, RiS. both right. At Lindholme the Varsity was a bomber. To load bombs required the same wheeled trolley as used by car mechanics to load the bombs, 24 of them I believe.

[ian16th]

Ian, RiS. both right. At Lindholme the Varsity was a bomber. To load bombs required the same wheeled trolley as used by car mechanics to load the bombs, 24 of them I believe.

Yes, 24 x 25lbs 'Smoke & Flash'.

[Undried Plum]

Abstract


Boeing 737 Max - Still not fixed

Reminds me of working on Lincoln's!

Reminds me of a bunch of apes, who haven't yet evolved opposable thumbs, trying to put together an Ikea chest of drawers with a hammer.

The management seem to me to simply be apes in business suits.

[TheGreenGoblin]

Reminds me of a bunch of apes, who haven't yet evolved opposable thumbs, trying to put together an Ikea chest of drawers with a hammer.

Can I steal that one please?

[PHXPhlyer]

Boeing’s 2020 net loss hits record $11.9 billion, pushes out 777X deliveries to late 2023

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/boeing- ... nings.html

AEROSPACE & DEFENSE
Boeing’s 2020 net loss hits record $11.9 billion, pushes out 777X deliveries to late 2023
PUBLISHED WED, JAN 27 20217:05 AM ESTUPDATED WED, JAN 27 20219:46 AM EST
Leslie Josephs

KEY POINTS
The aircraft maker lost a whopping $15.25 a share on an adjusted basis in the fourth quarter that took Wall Street by surprise; analysts had forecast a loss of $1.80 share.
Boeing’s loss was worsened after the company pushed out the deliveries of its 777X plane to late 2023.
It took a $6.5 billion charge in the fourth quarter against that wide-body program.
The pandemic is upending demand for wide-body planes that are generally used for longer, international flights.

Boeing reported a record net loss that topped $11.9 billion in 2020 — results that worsened after it pushed out the deliveries of its 777X plane to late 2023, taking a $6.5 billion charge in the fourth quarter against that wide-body program as the coronavirus pandemic hits aircraft demand.

Boeing’s shares tumbled by more than 4% in morning trading after its report.

The company lost a whopping $15.25 a share in the fourth quarter on an adjusted basis that took Wall Street by surprise; analysts had forecast a loss of $1.80 share. The company also booked a $468 million write-down against “abnormal production costs” on the 737 Max program.

Boeing’s fourth quarter revenue dropped 15% from a year earlier to $15.3 billion, better than analysts’ forecasts for $15.07 billion in sales. The company’s net loss for the three months widened to $8.4 billion from a $1.01 billion in the fourth quarter of 2019.

Here are the numbers:

EPS: A loss of $15.25 a share
Revenue: $15.07 billion versus $15.07 expected by analysts surveyed by Refinitiv
2021 is shaping up to be another challenging year for the aviation industry as new travel restrictions and coronavirus infections curb already depressed demand for flights.

“2020 was a year of profound societal and global disruption which significantly constrained our industry. The deep impact of the pandemic on commercial air travel, coupled with the 737 MAX grounding, challenged our results,” CEO Dave Calhoun said in the earnings release.

Revenue in the commercial airplanes unit fell 37% in the fourth quarter from a year earlier to $4.73 billion.

Boeing’s aircraft deliveries plunged to the lowest in decades, and cancellations hit records last year as the extended grounding of its 737 Max after two fatal crashes and a collapse in travel demand from the pandemic.

Sales in its increasingly important defense, space and security business helped offset some of the weakness, rising 14% in the fourth quarter to $6.78 billion.

The pandemic is upending demand for wide-body planes that are generally used for longer, international flights. Boeing had previously cut production of its 787 Dreamliners, jetliners that are used for long-haul international planes, the type of travel that has been most impacted by the pandemic.

Its 777X program had already been beset by engineering delays. Boeing now says it expects to deliver the first one in late 2023, more than two years later than its forecast last April, because of weaker demand and increased certification requirements in the wake of the 737 Max crisis.

Boeing executives will discuss their results on a 10:30 a.m. ET call with analysts.

The Chicago-based aircraft manufacturer is seeking to turn a page from two crashes of its 737 Max that killed all 346 on board. U.S. aviation regulators in November cleared the best-selling planes to fly again, allowing Boeing to start delivering roughly 400 new jets it has produced at its Seattle-area facility but wasn’t able to hand over to customers. American Airlines, United Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Aeromexico and Brazil’s Gol are among the airlines that have received Max jets so far.

Deliveries are key for Boeing because it’s when airlines pay the bulk of the plane’s price.

Calhoun in April forecast that travel demand won’t return to 2019 levels for two to three years.

PP

[Undried Plum]

[TheGreenGoblin]

Boeing ended 2020 fighting fires on every front in its enterprise, absorbing the largest full-year loss in its history — $12 billion. From returning the 737 Max to service after its extended grounding and working through manufacturing quality issues that have waylaid at least 80 787s, to redesigning key portions of its KC-46 tankers and its CST-100 spacecraft, the stability Boeing so badly seeks eludes the aerospace giant. All that is to say nothing of the unprecedented collapse in demand for commercial air travel in a pandemic that shows little sign of easing.

Its flagship 777X, which first flew a year ago, is stalled by the combined fall-out from airlines saying they don’t want large aircraft any time soon and the intense regulatory scrutiny that has come from the 737 Max’s twin crashes and recertification. Boeing on Jan. 27 wrote off $6.5 billion on the 777X program and slid service entry of the 400-seat 777-9 to late 2023, nearly four years after it first planned. The program had already slipped once into 2021 due to engine issues and again into 2022 when the pandemic arrived.

When it first launched the 777X in November 2013 on the back of three Middle Eastern carriers plotting world aviation domination, Boeing envisioned the aircraft as another in the successful series of aircraft spawned from the original 777 first certified by the Federal Aviation Administration in 1995. Every follow-on derivative from the original 777-200 has been anchored on that approval, allowing the company to focus certification efforts on specific areas of the aircraft that were changing. The result is an inherently lower cost process that grandfathers much of the airplane’s unchanged design under the jet’s original 1995 certification requirements from 25 years ago.

Crucially, Boeing said it has completed “an updated assessment of global certification requirements” and was a significant driver of the new schedule that has been heavily guided by a collapse in demand for the largest twin-aisle aircraft — a casualty of the COVID-19 pandemic. A Boeing spokesman confirmed that the 777X -- which is around 80% new -- will remain tethered to the comparatively-youthful 25-year old 777 as an amendment to its FAA type certificate. Starting with a new type certificate would have massively ballooned the slate of required changes.

https://theaircurrent.com/

[PHXPhlyer]

Boeing shifts 118 777 orders to “iffy” under accounting rule; 191 firm orders remain
By Scott Hamilton and Vincent Valery

https://leehamnews.com/2021/02/01/exclu ... rs-remain/

Feb. 1, 2021, © Leeham News: There are now just 191 firm orders for the Boeing 777X.

Boeing last week reclassified 118 777X orders from firm to iffy (LNA’s term) due to the accounting rule called ASC 606. There were 17 iffy 777 orders before last week. The ASC total is now 135. After the adjustments, Boeing confirmed to LNA there are 191 firm orders for the X, down from 309 previously.

ASC 606 essentially requires contracts with customers that may be unable to take delivery due to their financial condition. Alternatively, an order can receive such classification if the seller has strong reasons to believe the transaction won’t materialize, despite the customer’s ability to pay.
Delayed EIS
With an entry into service delayed by almost four years, several 777X customers may have informed Boeing of their intention to cancel their orders without penalties. As a result, Boeing had to reclassify those orders while negotiations are ongoing for potential conversion.

Longstanding 777X struggles
The reclassifications do not bode well for the 777X program. Sales stalled at a peak of about 350 orders. Cancellations brought the backlog down to 309. About a third of these were iffy by LNA’s analysis before last week’s ASC adjustment.

There are only eight identified customers for the 777X.

Etihad Airways last year made it clear it doesn’t want its order delivered. The financially-ailing airline began a major fleet readjustment. An order for Airbus A350s was rejected. The carrier is downsizing its fleet and operations. These actions began pre-COVID.

Other customers dragged down by the pandemic
Cathay Pacific Airways deferred its entire order until 2025 and beyond. Market intelligence indicates the carrier wants to cancel this order in favor of Boeing 787s. No confirmation has been forthcoming from Cathay, which is financially struggling due to China’s crackdown on democracy demonstrations and COVID. Hong Kong Airport will also receive a third runway by 2025, which will diminish the need for an aircraft of the 777X size.

Singapore Airlines is under COVID pressure, and Singapore Airport will receive another runway by the mid 2020s. However, the carrier did not indicate it was considering changes to its 777X order. Neither Lufthansa indicated so far that it wished to convert or cancel its 777X order.

All Nippon Airways recently retired two 777-300ERs that entered service in 2005. Therefore, the carrier won’t want more large aircraft for the foreseeable future. Since the carrier is the largest Dreamliner operator, a conversion of the 777X order to 787s (or outright cancellation) is a distinct possibility.

Before this adjustment

Before this update, Boeing flagged 17 777 orders as iffy. LNA’s analysis suggests that they belonged to the following customers:

We now look at alternative scenarios for the airlines behind the 777X reclassification.

Two less likely scenarios
One scenario would involve Emirates entirely walking away from all or part of its 115-strong 777X order. Tim Clark, the president of Emirates, publicly complained about the engines and the delays. He is known to want to swap between 50-70 orders for more 787s. The delays incurred so far probably trigger the option to cancel orders without penalty. Cancellation is believed to be based on a plane-by-plane basis after a 12 month delay, not the entire order in a block.

Since other customers, notably Etihad, have expressed a stronger desire to cancel their orders, this scenario is the least likely.

Excluding orders for Emirates, Qatar Airways, and British Airways, the total orderbook is 116. The customers are All Nippon Airways (20), Cathay Pacific (21), Etihad (25), Lufthansa (20), Singapore Airlines (20), and the unidentified one (10). LNA believes that the three carriers listed first are the least likely to entirely cancel their 777X orders, due to their size (Emirates and Qatar) and operations at congested airports (British Airways).

This scenario, which would be grim for the 777X program, isn’t much more likely than the first. It would be hard to envision two customers, Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines, canceling their orders without any public notice beforehand.

The most plausible scenario
LNA believes that the orders from Cathay Pacific, Etihad, and the unidentified customer are the most likely to have been reclassified as ASC 606 by Boeing. The total of those five orders is 56. That leaves 62 orders for the other airlines.

Emirates previously threatened to cancel a portion of its 777X order or do more conversions to Dreamliners. After converting a portion of its original 777X order to the 787-9, Emirates still envisioned taking 777-9 deliveries over the 2021-23 period. LNA believes that the other 62 orders reclassified as ASC 606 are Emirates’, representing almost half of the carrier’s total 777X order for 115 units.

Conclusion
Claudius said in Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “When sorrows come, they come not single spies, but in battalions”. This sentence comes to mind when reflecting on last week’s news surrounding the 777X program.

PP

[PHXPhlyer]

Air Force Holds Back $336 Million on Flawed Boeing Tanker

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... n-holdback

Air Force Holds Back $336 Million on Flawed Boeing Tanker
By Anthony Capaccio
February 1, 2021, 12:00 AM MST Updated on February 1, 2021, 12:48 PM MST
Service is paying out funds gradually as problems resolved
A new tactic after years of frustration over the plane’s flaws

The U.S. Air Force has set aside $336 million in development payments for Boeing Co. and is doling out the funds over time as the contractor shows progress in fixing the flawed camera system on its KC-46 tanker plane.

It’s a new tactic after years of frustration at the Pentagon over persistent problems with the $44 billion tanker program that Boeing was awarded in 2011. So far, $135 million of the previously undisclosed set-aside has been released, according to the service.

The funds are “outstanding KC-46 development payments that have been realigned to incentivize Boeing to perform,” Captain Joshua Benedetti, an Air Force spokesman, said in a statement.

A final, improved version of the “Remote Vision System 2.0,” needed for the tanker crew to connect to another plane in midair, is expected to complete development and flight testing late in 2023. Then it will be deployed on new aircraft and retrofitted on those already delivered.

Boeing agreed in April to complete a major overhaul of the camera system at its cost. The Air Force discovered in 2017 that shadows or the sun’s glare sometimes can hamper the cameras’ view, resulting in occasional scraping of planes being refueled or difficulty in performing the operation.

Billions in Charges
Since 2014 Boeing has amassed $5.1 billion in accounting charges for the program’s numerous development issues, said Ron Epstein, a defense analyst with Bank of America Corp., including $275 million announced on Jan. 27 with the company’s fourth-quarter earnings. The total exceeds Boeing’s original $4.9 billion fixed-price incentive contract for development and delivery of four test aircraft.

Any delay in payments will sting for Boeing, which has been leaning on its defense division while its commercial business grapples with a global pandemic that’s crushed jetliner demand. Boeing burned through almost $20 billion last year, and is on pace to consume $5 billion to $11 billion in free cash this year, Moody’s Investors Service said in a report on Jan. 28.

As part of the agreement on the Remote Vision System, Boeing and the Air Force added a warranty clause “reinforcing Boeing’s obligation to correct all non-conformances. Boeing remains committed to, and has made continued progress, resolving all remaining deficiencies,” Benedetti said.

The Air Force also can immediately reimpose withholding of as much as $28 million per plane if progress slips. Withholding was stopped as part of the April agreement, and $882 million was returned to Boeing to help improve company cash flow as part of Covid-19 relief efforts.

General Jacqueline Van Ovost, who has direct command of KC-46 aircraft as head of the Air Mobility Command, told reporters Monday that although she can’t undo the previous nine years of technical problems, “we are making lemonade out of lemons.” She said that in the last year “we’ve become more of a team with Boeing, and I am heartened” by the attitude shown by its officials.

Van Ovost said the Air Force and Boeing “are doing everything we can to accelerate” production and fielding of the improved vision system by late 2023 or 2024.

94 Planes
Including awards made last month the Air Force has put 94 of a planned 179 tankers on contract, with 42 delivered as of Jan. 14.

The Air Force continues to work with Chicago-based Boeing to resolve serious “Category 1” deficiencies on the KC-46. The Air Force said Monday that four remain -- two with the Remote Vision System, one with the retractable refueling boom and one with the fuel system.

Asked why the Air Force continues to put aircraft on contract in spite of the unresolved flaws, Benedetti said producing and fielding the tanker in parallel and fixing deficiencies through operational testing “is the quickest route to achieving Full Operational Capability and meeting warfighter requirements.”

The Air Force and Boeing have “made steady progress” to providing solutions for the Category 1 deficiencies, he said.

Boeing spokeswoman Jane McCarthy said the $336 million that was set aside represents “reallocated progress payments from existing KC-46 contracts” and not additional funding. Boeing and the Air Force “are working together to make the KC-46 the world’s most capable refueling tanker,” she said.

— With assistance by Julie Johnsson

PP

[ian16th]

“outstanding KC-46 development payments that have been realigned to incentivize Boeing to perform,”

Err, is that a way of saying, 'we will pay when it works'?

[Rwy in Sight]

I am wondering when Boeing would start to regret fighting back to win this program from Airbus

[ian16th]

An opinion.

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/airc ... 05f233473a

Please do not shoot the messenger.

[TheGreenGoblin]

An opinion.

Please do not shoot the messenger.

Douglas Aircraft started down a 30-year path toward extinction when it merged with McDonnell in 1967. McDonnell management prioritized military programs and was not willing to make the investment necessary to maintain its commercial jetliner market position. By the time it merged with Boeing, Douglas’ jetliner products were on their last legs.

It has been nearly 25 years since Boeing and McDonnell Douglas merged. Given Boeing’s significant engineering cuts, program execution problems, clear prioritization of shareholder returns, extremely uncertain product development road map and deteriorating market share outlook, it is time to consider whether Boeing Commercial Aircraft (BCA) is destined to share Douglas’ fate. Three criteria are key.

1. Slashed engineering spending.
2. Market coverage gaps.
3. Abandoned product developments.

Definitely precedents, and similarities, that's for sure.

Boing is no longer an engineering driven company. When Wall Street talks then engineering talent walks...

[Woody]

Haven’t seen anything about this incident anywhere else.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... newcomment