Two Qantus Planes Grounded by Engine Explosions.

[Broomstick]

Countries strapped for cash buy used airplanes - that's why there are still something like 400 DC-3's in active service these days, all of them a half century old or whatever. Maintained, airplanes can last a long time.

Heck, Southwest has been known to buy used B737's, and they're considered a major player these days.

Newer planes suffer greater stresses on the aircraft skin and metal fatigue is a problem. I seem to recall at least one incident involving metal fatigue failure that resulted in a crash.

There have been more than one. In fact, the British de Haviland Comet airliner suffered two of them in 1954, so it's been an issue for quite some time.

And... I recall that older 737s are known to have a peculiar locked rudder problem. Or was it another Boeing craft?

No, they are not reputed to suffer a "locked" rudder, though there were three crashes due to "rudder reversal" between 1991 and 1994. The cause was identified and a solution devised. Three other incidents occurred after which the airplane landed safely. By now, ALL B-737's have been upgraded so this should no longer be a problem.

[folti78]

Some pics and analysis of the explosion.

[Broomstick]

From the linked article about Comac's contribution and why it ain't gonna happen the way some people think:

Comac expects to sell more than 2,000 C919s over the next 20 years.

I don't have issue with this figure. It is plausible, even if not likely for a new entry into the field.

Speaking at a Comac press conference to announce the order, the company's chief accountant, Tian Min, said: "In the future we expect to see 3,000 new planes here in China and more than 30,000 new planes globally. So this is a very big market."

Let's see.... best selling airliner model in history is the B737, approximately 9,000 manufactured since 1967. In other words, it took 40 years to sell 9,000 of them. Most which, by the way, are still flying and probably will be for some time.

No, I don't see Comac selling 30k of airplanes over even the next 50 years. Granted, Cessna has sold 43,000 of one model (the C172 Skyhawk) but it took them 54 years to do so. Also, having 21 military customers for the stock C172 and 24 militaries using the T-41 variation helped raise that number. And most of those 43K Skyhawks are still flying, including the first one to roll of the production line. In any case, the C172 is not an airliner, it's a light airplane.

See, that's an obstacle for Comac - Boeing and the other established players have massive, massive market penetration already, and even they have to face "competition" from already built airplanes still be used by customers who thus don't need to buy a brand new one.

If you're curious about other airplanes with production runs over 30k, #2 is the Russian biplane Polikarpov U-2 with 40k, the Russian bomber Ilyushin Il-2 with 36K, and the fighter Messerschmitt Bf 109 with 35k. The airliner with the greatest number of units sold is the DC-3 with about 16k, #18 on a list of best-selling models and the youngest of which, by the way, is 58 years old. Which brings me to another observation - the C172 is not only the best selling, it's also the only one of the top four still production. The Polikarpov production ran from 1928 to 1959. The Ilyushin was 1941 to 1945 (there are a number of top sellers during the WWII years). And the Me-109 was 1936 to 1938. Of the top ten best sellers (see this list) none of them started production later than the 1950's, and most of the models were WWII military, a time when airplanes were cranked out by the thousands. Later models never reached such numbers because, first of all, with the end of WWII a lot fewer airplanes were needed, and second, later models have to compete with surviving older models.

Airplanes last a LONG time. There are few freakin' Curtiss Jennies still flying, and they were first rolled out in 1915! No, wait, it gets better - two Blériot XI's, registration numbers G-AANG and N60094 are still airworthy. They're 101 years old and can still fly. (The Swedes have a third flyable Jenny, but it's 9 years younger a "mere" 92 years old but it was flying at the Stockholm Festival of Flight in August 2010.) Here is a video with the American Blériot in action in 2009, shows up at around 1:52. A 1918 Jenny shows up and takes off around 4:30 on that clip.

When it comes to airplanes a pattern emerges - older models appear in greater numbers in any category you look at. There were 16k DC-3's built, with a production run of 1935 to 1952. Next in line among airliners, as mentioned, is the B737 with 6k and a production run of 1967 to the present - it took Boeing longer to sell fewer as compared to the DC-3. If you add up ALL the Boeing airliners from the 707 onwards, that is, from 1957, including the McDonnell-Douglas lines they took over and produced, it's 14k - still less than the production run of DC-3's.

It took Boeing 53 years to sell 14,000 airliners.

No fucking way is Comac selling 30,000 even in a century. Maybe that not exactly what their accountant meant, but it comes across like that and just looks silly. Fact is, they'll be lucky to sell 2,000 in 20 years, or an average of 100 a year. I don't know what the timeline is on that 30k figure, but I'd be surprised to see than many sold total by all manufacturers in 20, or even 40 years time. There's just too damn many airliners already built that will still be flying in the future that it will depress new demand.

[Broomstick]

Some pics and analysis of the explosion.

Very informative.

From the article:

The wing of the jet shows remarkable structural strength in sustaining damage that might have destroyed the airliners of earlier decades, but the questions as to whether control system revisions are necessary to deal with some of the consequences in terms of failed hydraulics and fuel imbalance are said to be very actively under consideration.

Some folks think all the big airplanes haven't changed over the years. They have - you just can't see a lot of the changes. If that engine blow-out had happened 25 years ago it would have been much more likely the airplane would have been lost. Airliners have been beefed up over the years and designed with knowledge of past accidents to guide system redundancies. When possible, existing airliners have been retrofitted for increased safety. On top of that, crew training for events like hydraulic failures have improved greatly over the years. What might have been a tragedy in the past was "merely" a scary incident.

Good job on the part of the Qantas crew for landing it safely.

[MKSheppard]

I don't have issue with this figure. It is plausible, even if not likely for a new entry into the field.

No actually it's very likely.

There is a very strong and growing "buy chinese" sentiment in China, and when I say "buy Chinese"; I don't mean the stuff that's made by Foxconn for foreign companies; but indigenously owned designs where the corporate IP money stays in China.

No, I don't see Comac selling 30k of airplanes over even the next 50 years.

Here, we see silly woman demonstrating poor comprehension.

Comac said:

"In the future we expect to see 3,000 new planes here in China and more than 30,000 new planes globally. So this is a very big market."

Why don't we go to an authoriative source in commercial jets?

BOEING

Demand by 2029 for 30,900 new airplanes with a value of $3,590 billion; broken down as:

720 x Large
7,100 x Twin Aisle
21,160 x Single Aisle
1,920 x Regional Jets

And of course; CNN has a nice quote:

Link to CNN article

Where it talks about 4,400~ commercial jets being needed for the Chinese aviation market alone; which tallies well with Comac's statement of "we expect to see 3,000 new planes here in China"

[Broomstick]

I don't have issue with this figure. It is plausible, even if not likely for a new entry into the field.

No actually it's very likely.

There is a very strong and growing "buy chinese" sentiment in China, and when I say "buy Chinese"; I don't mean the stuff that's made by Foxconn for foreign companies; but indigenously owned designs where the corporate IP money stays in China.

Where it talks about 4,400~ commercial jets being needed for the Chinese aviation market alone; which tallies well with Comac's statement of "we expect to see 3,000 new planes here in China"

And I stated that the figure was plausible. I doubt all those new acquired airplanes in China will be Comac, though, because there are just so damn many used airplanes already out there that are perfectly serviceable. Comac might be able to sell their brand new airplanes for 20% less than other brand new airplanes but I doubt very much their price will be lower than a used airplane. And some folks, Chinese or not, will simply prefer the established brands over a new one.

No, I don't see Comac selling 30k of airplanes over even the next 50 years.

Here, we see silly woman demonstrating poor comprehension.

Silly man totally ignores my point about literally thousands of already made airliners being available for use. A good portion of that future demand will be supplied by refurbished used aircraft. There might be thousands of aircraft new to China but a good fraction of them will have had prior owners. Right now a savvy airline could snap up quite a few privately owned Boeings and Airbuses being sold by private owners who can no longer afford upkeep. There is also quite a stock of airliners in mothballs, grounded and put into storage during the current downturn, that can easily be returned to service instead of building new airplanes.

Sure, there's a "buy Chinese" sentiment, but if someone is starting an airline they may be forced by economic reasons to purchase used Boeings or Airbuses rather than new Comacs.

And the demand forecasts all assume the economy will recover, fuel prices won't drastically increase, and nothing else happens to fuck up demand. I'm sure that in 2000 the forecasts for 2010 looked pretty damn rosy, too. Reality turned out different.

Even if predictions are correct and the world will want 30k new airliners by 2029 those will be divided between airplane builders, no one company will get the full number. Comac will be damn lucky to get an even third of that, or 10k. So, yeah, maybe they'll sell 10k but no fucking way will they sell thirty thousand new Comac airplanes in that timeframe. I still think a good chunk of that demand for "new" airplanes will be met through already existing airframes. It's the way it's been for a long time, I don't see a reason for a sudden change in the near future.

That also assumes that Comac will have no more problems/accidents than Boeing or Airbus does. If they don't have a safety record close to those two they just won't sell all those tens of thousands of airplanes because it's not economical to buy airplanes prone to crashing. I'd like to be an optimist and say Comac is as good as Airbus or Boeing, but China's been having some serious issues with everything from baby formula to dry wall to toxic tilapia to pet food to toothpaste to... well the list is depressingly long. One seriously has to wonder if they'll do any better with something as complex as an airliner.

Don't get me wrong, I wish Comac success and this an additional big player would be good for competition and keep the two current big players on their toes. I just think the figures given in the linked articles are WAY too optimistic. At least Boeing isn't making the claim they will sell all 30k of the hypothetical future demand in airliners - Comac shouldn't either, unless they want to look ridiculous.

[LaCroix]

Silly other man ends discussion with article link explaining what will happen...

Article

Comac is likely to build more than 2,000 C919s in the next two decades, with a view to grab a 10% share of the global market for narrow body aircraft.

[MKSheppard]

Silly man totally ignores my point about literally thousands of already made airliners being available for use.

Silly woman ignores the fact that the Boeing study specifically states this:

The long-range forecast for 2010 anticipates delivery of 30,900 new airplanes over the next 20 years, valued at $3.6 trillion.

But let's look at the total numbers again LINK

Airplanes in Service 2009 (2029)

Large - 800 (960)
Twin Aisle - 3,500 (8,260)
Single Aisle - 11,580 (25,000)
Regional Jets 3,010 (2,080)
Total - 18,890 (36,300)

Even if you figure a couple thousand airliners are refurbished and returned to service; that won't make much of an impact -- witness that between 2009 and 2029, Boeing estimated total commercial airliner numbers would grow by 17,410.

And on top of this, a whole clutch of older designs are going to have to be retired:

By 2029; the newest aircraft in the following families will be:

Douglas:
DC-9: 47 years old
DC-10: 41 years old
MD-11: 29 years old
MD-80: 30 years old
MD-90: 29 years old
MD-95/717: 23 years old

Boeing:
727: 45 years old
737 Classic: 29 years old
757: 25 Years old

There's also the fact that the earliest models of planes presently in production like 767, 777, 737 Next Generation, etc etc will be getting old by 2029; along with much of Airbus' early fleet.

Sure, you can operate 30+ year old aircraft...but it's increasingly expensive; witness the USAF's tanker fleet.

In fact if you flip ahead to page three of that report:

Airplane deliveries, for fleet growth and replacement of aging airplanes, will total 30,900 over the next 20 years, with a value of US$3.6 trillion.

Page five has:

The need to replace older, less efficient airplanes accounts for 44 percent of the projected market for new airplanes. The 2010 forecast anticipates 13,490 airplanes will be replaced over the next 20 years. This reflects rising fuel prices and the increasing economic burden of using older, less capable, and less efficient airplanes. At this replacement rate, 84 percent of the fleet operating in 2029 will have been delivered after 2010.

Page six:

Among the 30,900 aircraft to be delivered over the next 20 years, 21,160 (69 percent of the units and 47 percent of the value) will be single-aisle airplanes. Demand for single aisles comes not only from growth markets, but also for replacing older aircraft such as the 737 Classics, A320s, and McDonnell Douglas MD-80/90s. It is forecast that there will be a wave of single-aisle aircraft retirements in the 2015 to 2017 timeframe as many of these older aircraft reach 25 years of age - a typical retirement age for jet aircraft.

Even if predictions are correct and the world will want 30k new airliners by 2029 those will be divided between airplane builders, no one company will get the full number.

Again, silly woman has poor comprehension:

This is what Comac said:

Speaking at a Comac press conference to announce the order, the company's chief accountant, Tian Min, said: "In the future we expect to see 3,000 new planes here in China and more than 30,000 new planes globally. So this is a very big market."

Here, I've helpfully supersized the revelant paragraph. Maybe you ought to go back to school to learn how to read.

MARKET. MARKET. MARKET. LEARN WHAT THAT MEANS IN A BUSINESS CONTEXT.

[Broomstick]

Comac is likely to build more than 2,000 C919s in the next two decades, with a view to grab a 10% share of the global market for narrow body aircraft.

Now that is actually possible.