Airbus and Boeing use different seating assumptions when comparing each others’ airplanes. As one of the charts in a previous post shows, Boeing’s assumptions tend to favor Boeing. Airbus assigns more seats to its airplanes than does Boeing and fewer seats to the Boeing airplanes.
Below is a chart of “real” configurations and the average. This data is from Seatguru.com. Several airlines have multiple configurations and we’ve averaged them for purposes of this table.
We were surprised by the low average of the 737-900/900ER but the sampling is small and Turkish skews it. Eliminating Turkish gives an average of 170 seats for the 737-900(ER).
If you eliminate American Airlines for the A321 (102 seats is correct), the A321 average is 189.
|3||Air New Zealand||169|
The war of words between Airbus and Boeing continues over the A320 and the 737, with each company boasting its airplanes are better than the competitors.
The competing positions were evident in the pre-Paris Air Show briefings from both companies. The comparisons between the single aisle airplanes were front-and-center again.
We’ve written on several occasions that when Boeing compares the 737 with the Airbus A320, officials credit the 737 with Performance Improvement Packages (PIPs) but except for the sharklets and the neo, does not credit Airbus with any other improvements while listing years of upgrades for the 737.
We’ve been critical of the practice, which continues. We recognize that Airbus and Boeing will put their product in the best light, and Airbus selectively chooses information to promote its airplanes at the expense of Boeing (the A330-300 v the 787-9 being a particularly egregious example we’ve written about in the past.)
We’ve written many pieces that airlines tell us the 737-800 and A320 are within 2% of each other on cash operating costs, favoring the 738.
In the most recent briefings, Boeing displayed the following charts comparing the 737 vs the A320.
Bloomberg has a good story looking beyond the Boeing 787 issues at the FAA’s reliance on industry to certify airplanes. The story details a number of cases where flaws crept through the system, leading to deaths–a circumstance, of course, that did not happen with the 787.
We have written a couple of posts about the relationship between the FAA and industry in response to focus following the 787 battery issues. We pointed out this relationship is nothing new.
The Bloomberg piece is well worth reading.
Post-SPEEA Vote: The ratification of the contract offer by Boeing by the SPEEA technical workers is welcome news. It gives Boeing and its stakeholders certainty at a time when the 787 issues remain outstanding and the developmental programs of the 777X, the 787-9 and 10, the 737 MAX and the KC-46A are at important stages. Although SPEEA took a loss over the pension issue, the union was able to extend the previous contract provisions over economic issues for another four years. Call this a draw for the two sides.
LionAir and RyanAir: On Monday Airbus announced an order for 234 A320ceo/neo family members from LionAir, previously an all-Boeing customer. Today Boeing announced an order for 175 737-800s from RyanAir, an exclusive Boeing customer. There were no MAXes in the order, however. RyanAir CEO Michael O’Leary has not been a fan of the re-engined 737.
ANA skeptical of 787 timeline: Reuters has an interview with All Nippon Airways in which it expresses some skepticism about the Boeing timeline of returning the 787 to service within weeks. ANA calls this a “best case” scenario.
On the other hand, LOT, which took the 787 out of its schedule through September, now says the airplanes could be back in service by summer.
Vote in the Polls: All Nippon Airlines has begun its effort to rebuild the 787 brand flying in its colors. Boeing began its effort last week. Is the view of the 787 turning? If you haven’t already done so, please be sure to vote in these polls (scroll down after clicking the link).
Paine Field Pleads its Case: Targeted for closure in Sequester, with a decision to be announced this week, the director of Everett Paine Field pleaded his case to remain open in this letter: FAA Tower Closure – Paine Field (1).
Well wishes: Daniel Tsang, founder of Aspire Aviation, has been hospitalized in Sydney, Australia, with an unknown ailment first thought to be measles but it’s not. Well wishes to him.
Ray Conner, CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, appeared today at the JP Morgan aerospace conference.
Here is a running synopsis:
Ray Conner (RC)
Joe Nadol (JN) of JP Morgan:
RC: It’s important to recognize that batteries are not used in flight. They are back-up to start the APU and for the systems. After events, put together 200 engineers. Have done 200,000 hours of analysis. Have come up with comprehensive solution and presented to FAA on Feb. 22 and last week to Japan.
- This is not just a Boeing-type of solution. We’ve worked with a number of people outside Boeing to ID causal factors and run by them and did the same with potential solutions.
- That’s what we presented to FAA.
- We’ve provided different layers of protection for fixes.
- Hope to see approval of certification plans and then move into certification testing.
- We would not go forward unless we thought we had it nailed.