s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,959 
|
Post by s543 on Apr 12, 2015 16:20:46 GMT 1
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Apr 13, 2015 3:02:43 GMT 1
What was the point of re-signing this again, when the order was already firmed up two years ago?  It was not actually re-signed, they just set up a public relations stunt so that heads of state had something to take credit for. |
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Apr 13, 2015 3:09:03 GMT 1
This is not a 2015 order. No cancellation is involved, the order is just moved from the "unidentified" line to the Copa line in the "total orders" table. |
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Apr 16, 2015 4:08:57 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by airboche on Apr 16, 2015 10:51:21 GMT 1
It's not the final production engine yet isn't it? So there is still room for improvement hopefully. Would be interesting to find out where exactly that claimed shortfall is coming from. Might affect the neo as well...
|
|
someone
in service - 1 year
Posts: 3,333
|
Post by someone on Apr 16, 2015 13:12:46 GMT 1
It's not the final production engine yet isn't it? So there is still room for improvement hopefully. Would be interesting to find out where exactly that claimed shortfall is coming from. Might affect the neo as well... The "same" rumours is telling the 1A for the NEO is a few percetages behind SFC, but that should be doable to mostly catch up before EIS. A 4,5% deficit in the 1B for the MAX on the other hand is much harder and might require some re-engineering. While the "same" engine, there is differences in the fan diameter, compressor stages and by-pass ratio, making the 1A for the NEO quite a different engine than the 1B for the MAX. 1C for the Comac is almost the same as the 1A for the NEO The problem with the 737 is that it is simply not enough space under its wings to hang a engine with a large enough fan diameter |
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Apr 16, 2015 17:32:58 GMT 1
It's not the final production engine yet isn't it? So there is still room for improvement hopefully. Would be interesting to find out where exactly that claimed shortfall is coming from. Might affect the neo as well... As someone said, the neo's Leap 1A shortfall is less than the MAX's 1B. IMO, the difference may be a strong indication that the 1B limitations do indeed have a negative impact on the SFC and that it will be difficult to close the gap between the two variants. Aside from that, even if CFM manage to recover 2% by MAX EIS, beyond which it is going to be difficult according to most analysts, PW is already said to be beating expectations and has a -2% upgrade in the works for 2019 and beyond. So the 4-5% difference is pretty much going to be restored by then. |
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Apr 16, 2015 21:33:21 GMT 1
I don't read Leeham's piece as confirming the Aspire aviation performance shortfall numbers (4,5%). I think Leeham just acknowledges the rumours and tries to simulate the likely implications of the alleged shortfall, as well as those of a lesser (2%) shortfall. |
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Apr 17, 2015 1:50:56 GMT 1
I don't read Leeham's piece as confirming the Aspire aviation performance shortfall numbers (4,5%). I think Leeham just acknowledges the rumours and tries to simulate the likely implications of the alleged shortfall, as well as those of a lesser (2%) shortfall. Leeham says it received confirmation that the 1B is behind targets. I know it's open to interpretation but I can't see Leeham staking their reputation in producing a paid analysis using numbers without some merit. It could even be bordering on libel. |
|
|
|
Post by peter on Apr 18, 2015 16:40:39 GMT 1
COPA Airlines just signed for 61 MAX8 & MAX9 ( link) Boeing seems to have some idiot producing O+D listing  61 aircraftLatest O+D on Boeing Website: 51 for COPAOr am I missing something here ?? |
|
