Live data from Hacker News

Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

wsj.com

261–270 of 273 posts

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also let’s be clear if the C919 actually works out they will be a serious competitor. The market for wide body aircraft is the one that captures all the imagination and attention but the narrow body sales are the bread and butter. That's a pretty large if. Head west a bit to Russia and see how they're doing in the international market. The Sukhoi SuperJet is, by most accounts, a great plane. Sukhoi managed to sell to…

Sukhoi and Comac are still hugely dependent on the west to build these planes. Avionics and engines especially. Boeing and Airbus don’t build their own engines. I don’t expect COMAC to try that in their first rodeo. The metallurgy required to build a modern turbofan engine is incredibly exotic — outside of France, England, and the US it's simply not there. If you’re betting on metallurgy to be the barrier to keep wes…

If you’re betting on metallurgy to be the barrier to keep western technological advantage alive I think you’re in for a surprise.

It's worked out well for the past 70 or so years. Industrial espionage can only go so far, that's more or less why the Russians dominate the rocket market.

So they have gone back to using the material used to build every other narrow body plane on the market in this size category. I admit, a new design should use carbon fiber, but given that no one else is yet...

The MC21 and C-series use carbon fiber wings and the MC21 also uses a CF wing box. Comac is targeting planes from 20-30 years ago. Even if it were perfectly reliable, it's nowhere near competitive with what's on the market now. If that extra few percent of fuel burn weren't important there'd be no market for the NEO or MAX.

First off, airlines have purchased a ton of E175 family aircraft.

That's the entire point. Without that scale support becomes that much more difficult and expensive.

Third off, COMAC can focus on the Chinese market to start and take it region at a time slowly expanding across Asia.

Yeah they've tried. The ARJ went over like a lead balloon. The domestic airlines haven't warmed up to Comac, and it's highly unlikely the C919 will move the needle much.

From there South Asia and SEA is easy and both are big markets

With a strong anti-Chinese sentiment (Malaysia, Vietnam). Perhaps more importantly SEA sees a lot of short-range widebody service which the C919 doesn't help with.

Russia would welcome it with open arms

Russia would welcome a direct competitor to its homegrown offerings? That seems unlikely for the C919 and unlikely even if we're talking about a hypothetical plane built in a Sino-Russian joint venture. Although why would they partner? Russian avionics aren't going to be accepted internationally, Russian engines are woefully inefficient. Comac struggled with the Ukranian wings on the ARJ. Maybe a carbon fuselage, but are the Russians anywhere near being able to do that?

and then they can take a whack at the middle eastern market

The shrinking middle east market? Emirates/flyDubai (who's got both Airbus and Boeing wrapped around their fingers is scaling back their growth (to put it delicately).

and also be competitive anywhere Airbus and Boeing aren’t really playing that hard anyway. (Africa, etc.)

How welcoming will Africa be as they slowly come to terms with how screwed they are by the Belt & Road initiative? Sure, maybe CCP applies pressure to make sales. That's not going to translate to any sort of European or American success though.

Let’s see Boeing deliver the MAX again first.

I suspect that's not going to happen.

I think it would be easy to win a bet that COMAC delivers C919 to commercial airline customers before Boeing delivers a new narrow body design to replace the 737 family.

Boeing began working on a 737 replacement before the MAX program was begun, meanwhile Comac pushed the EIS target for the C919 back to 2022. As Aviation Week pointed out last year the C919 needs about 33 hours per month of flight testing for a 2021 EIS, in practice they're seeing about 5 hours per month. So, maybe.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#262
post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also let’s be clear if the C919 actually works out they will be a serious competitor. The market for wide body aircraft is the one that captures all the imagination and attention but the narrow body sales are the bread and butter. That's a pretty large if. Head west a bit to Russia and see how they're doing in the international market. The Sukhoi SuperJet is, by most accounts, a great plane. Sukhoi managed to sell to…

I expect Comac to do a much better job on supply chain support than Sukhoi did. Russia in general has always been troublesome for parts supplies for its exported equipment, whereas China has a much more consumer-friendly culture and is likely to invest heavily in making the C919 a success there. The bigger issues I expect for the C919 will be fuel-efficiency, and trust that it is a safe plane. The fact that they're b…

I expect Comac to do a much better job on supply chain support than Sukhoi did. Russia in general has always been troublesome for parts supplies for its exported equipment, whereas China has a much more consumer-friendly culture and is likely to invest heavily in making the C919 a success there.

I wasn't aware that China had built much of a reputation for international customer support.

The fact that they're building it from scratch when the main competitors are using refreshed old designs of the 737 and A320 might help it achieve competitive fuel-efficiency, but it remains to be seen

There's not much to see. The C-series is the one to beat and so far the assuredly optimistic, published specs (per Wikipedia) for the C919 don't come close to the CS300.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also let’s be clear if the C919 actually works out they will be a serious competitor. The market for wide body aircraft is the one that captures all the imagination and attention but the narrow body sales are the bread and butter. That's a pretty large if. Head west a bit to Russia and see how they're doing in the international market. The Sukhoi SuperJet is, by most accounts, a great plane. Sukhoi managed to sell to…

Sukhoi and Comac are still hugely dependent on the west to build these planes. Avionics and engines especially. Boeing and Airbus don’t build their own engines. I don’t expect COMAC to try that in their first rodeo. The metallurgy required to build a modern turbofan engine is incredibly exotic — outside of France, England, and the US it's simply not there. If you’re betting on metallurgy to be the barrier to keep wes…

The C-Series is using carbon wings, and an absolute fuckton of carbon fiber everywhere. I've seen tech that goes into their carbon fiber parts and geometries, it's incredibly impressive, and I'm confident Bombardier more or less got it down.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I'd like to point out here, not taking away from any of your points. If you think of Airbus as a multi-national consortium (as it rightly is: French, British, etc.) then a Chinese/Russian hook-up is not totally daft. You could make the same argument about "a great recipe to delay everything even further" about Airbus versus Boeing and yet Airbus appears to be doing okay. Don't we think competition is good?…

Replying to myself. Airbus is a consortium of four countries: France, UK, Germany, Spain – started in the 60's. Basically China/Russia are 50 or 60 years behind! Here's a recent doc about the most technologically advanced aircraft they've manufactured, the A350: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yutzg2NLwcU “Giant Aircraft: Manufacturing an Airbus A350 | Mega Manufacturing | Free Documentary”

Not to forget a joint venture with Canada.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CR929 is vaporware: they're not even planning to begin construction of the first prototype until 2021. Also, it's "CR" for "China/Russia", since this is meant to be a joint venture between COMAC and UAC (Sukhoi). Which sounds like a great recipe to delay everything even further. Also also, even if China does pull off the airframe, they'll still rely on Western jets to power it. China's first modern turbofan, the…

Something I'd like to point out here, not taking away from any of your points. If you think of Airbus as a multi-national consortium (as it rightly is: French, British, etc.) then a Chinese/Russian hook-up is not totally daft. You could make the same argument about "a great recipe to delay everything even further" about Airbus versus Boeing and yet Airbus appears to be doing okay. Don't we think competition is good?…

> Don't we think competition is good? What happened to cheering on free markets?

No? Not really? Obviously competitions is good when it drives innovation, which is beneficial for domestic industry as a whole. Competition is not good for competition's sake. It's not good competition when Western players fall behind. This isn't some kind of hypocritical failing of free-market doctrines. You either don't understand what it intended to accomplish, or are deliberately misrepresenting it. I suspect the latter.

> Why exactly do we want a Western duopoly to continue to exist in perpetuity?

... Why wouldn't we want our own players to dominate the industry? I don't think any kind of monopoly/duopoly is a good thing, but I don't really think that's your point. Your use of the word 'Western' betrays your intent here.

> If Western countries believed their own rhetoric they'd be helping Russia and China to compete on the world stage – it would be a win for the entire globe.

Um... no? China's exports becoming more competitive would not be a win for the entire globe, it would be quite the opposite.

> The West does not have some God-given or divine-right to remain on top of the heap...

Of course not, God didn't put us on top of the heap either.

> China (and India) are going to eventually catch up, it's just a matter of time, the only thing up for debate in my mind is whether it's sooner rather than later, and I believe in China's case it's going to be upon us sooner than we expect.

I wouldn't hold your breath.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#266
post #83
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the airlines know that Boeing will never go under because the US government would (justifiably) never let that happen for strategic reasons.

Boeing has burned a lot of political and public capital recently so they may actually be in hot water over this. As a Canadian I'm still pretty outraged over the stupidity that the US carried out at Bombardier - Boeing basically told the US Government "Hey, those Canadians are better than us at everything" and then the US Government said "Oh, poor baby, well we'll just help the free market out with a 300% tariff." Th…

Canada did that with dairy products. Fair is fair.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#267
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this why they should have 90% or more of their fund in bonds by now?

China has 90% of their funds in US bonds by now (called dollars), and what good does that do them ?

It gets them stable 2% interest every year with almost 0% risk of default.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#268

Can't they just rebrand the 737 max? Sort out their dodgy internal processes and add some new safety features. They've been repackaging old designs since the 60's anyway. Either that or they go all in on a new medium-range aircraft, the market is already disrupted in Airbus' favour.

The MAX was a "bridge too far" for the 737 type. They need a clean-sheet design with big engines and fuel-efficient wings to compete with the A320neo, and the 737 can't be adapted to do that (wings too low to the ground) and it has a bad reputation. They're better off developing the Future Small Airplane (FSA), and call it a "797."

Boeing can build a fuel-efficient aircraft that is highly compatible with the 737 airport equipment. There are two obvious approaches.

The first approach is that taken by the Boeing 717. Do a T tail with rear engines. Bombardier, Gulfstream, and Embraer commonly do this.

The second approach is that taken by the Boeing C-17. Mount the wings high. Although usually done for turboprops and military cargo, passenger jets have been done in this configuration. The British Aerospace 146 is an example.

There are many more unusual options as well.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Strategically, airlines are in a worse position if Boeing goes under. Not only do they lose the planes on order. They also lose their service and replacement-parts provider. The survivors would, in the medium-term, face an Airbus monopoly and, in the long-term, a Chinese-European duopoly. Boeing "going under" just means that shareholders will get wiped out, not that they cease operations.

I wonder if Lockheed Martin would get back into passenger jets. Or Bombardier leads a Canadian aerospace resurgence.

Bombardier is part of Airbus now.

Re: Boeing to Suspend 737 Max Production in January

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sukhoi and Comac are still hugely dependent on the west to build these planes. Avionics and engines especially. Boeing and Airbus don’t build their own engines. I don’t expect COMAC to try that in their first rodeo. The metallurgy required to build a modern turbofan engine is incredibly exotic — outside of France, England, and the US it's simply not there. If you’re betting on metallurgy to be the barrier to keep wes…

The C-Series is using carbon wings, and an absolute fuckton of carbon fiber everywhere. I've seen tech that goes into their carbon fiber parts and geometries, it's incredibly impressive, and I'm confident Bombardier more or less got it down.

It’s seemingly an excellent aircraft so far but it is not in the same size class as the C919, B737 or A320. In that market carbon fiber hasn't really hit yet. It clearly will in the next generation since the size class down (this market) and size class up (787, etc) both are carbon fiber designs. But the 737/320/919 size class isn’t there yet.
Post reply on HN