NTSB recommends 737 NG cowl redesign, Boeing accepts

banie01

The NTSB has recommended a redesign of the cowl on the 737-NG series!

7000 airframes to be upgraded if this is enforced!
That's the end of Boeing's cash pile and severe impact on the P+L.

NTSB Chairman Robert L. Sumwalt III said it is not the role of his organization to consider the costs of such a change, but to make sure planes are as safe they can be with new technologies that have become available in the more than 20 years since the 737 NG was certified.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/ntsb-calls-for-redesign-of-key-component-of-boeing-737-ng-after-deadly-southwest-incident/2019/11/19/5e53cf80-0a3f-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html

URL is blocked if you are using ad blocker

GM228

banie01 wrote: »

The NTSB has recommended a redesign of the cowl on the 737-NG series!

7000 airframes to be upgraded of this is enforced!
That's the end of Boeing's cash pile and severe impact on the P+L.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/ntsb-calls-for-redesign-of-key-component-of-boeing-737-ng-after-deadly-southwest-incident/2019/11/19/5e53cf80-0a3f-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html

Boeing confirmed a little while ago they are working on improvements to the design of the inlet and fan cowl to satisfy the NTSB recommendation and will implement on all 737NGs "over the longer term" once approved by the FAA.

Statement from Boeing:-

https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2019-11-19-Statement-on-NTSB-Southwest-1380-recommendations

Irish Steve

Boeing has announced that they are working on an upgrade for the NG cowl in light of the NTSB Findings.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-commits-to-ntsbs-recommended-cfm56-fan-cowl-462417/

Tenger

Maybe Im cynical but this quote seemed like a swipe towards the FAA, in like of the leak saying that they decided against a engineering suggestion in the design as it would costs Boeing a lot of money
NTSB Chairman Robert L. Sumwalt III said it is not the role of his organization to consider the costs of such a change, .........

Stovepipe

The punter will pay the cost, as airlines will pay initially and the cost will be offloaded onto ticket prices and Boeing will lobby hard to have the cost rebated against tax. Boeing will officially moan loudly in public but privately, deals will be done in backrooms to offset the cost of a few thousand cowlings.

Henry Ford III

Stovepipe wrote: »

The punter will pay the cost, as airlines will pay initially and the cost will be offloaded onto ticket prices and Boeing will lobby hard to have the cost rebated against tax. Boeing will officially moan loudly in public but privately, deals will be done in backrooms to offset the cost of a few thousand cowlings.

Depends.

If Boeing are liable for the repairs it'll hurt their profits. They may and try to increase their prices for new planes but deliveries of 737 Max are a tad slow currently.

Even if they do raise prices there is keen competition in the market.

Stovepipe

This isnt Boeing's first outing when critical mods had to be made; the 747 had huge frame repairs on the hull and pylon mods and they paid for them but sales and repairs absorbed the cost. I expect Boeing was already running the liabilty numbers, on a just in case basis, when these accidents kicked off. If it becomes a straight swap out for new cowlings, then that's not a hugely expensive repair like a skin repair or a pylon job. I'll bet the 737 max is redeemable in the short term, as Boeing will have to kill the 737 line and generate a replacement soon.

banie01

Stovepipe wrote: »

This isnt Boeing's first outing when critical mods had to be made; the 747 had huge frame repairs on the hull and pylon mods and they paid for them but sales and repairs absorbed the cost. I expect Boeing was already running the liabilty numbers, on a just in case basis, when these accidents kicked off. If it becomes a straight swap out for new cowlings, then that's not a hugely expensive repair like a skin repair or a pylon job. I'll bet the 737 max is redeemable in the short term, as Boeing will have to kill the 737 line and generate a replacement soon.

The repairs needed in this instance are for the NG tho.
Redesign of the part, retooling for a discontinued airframe or even subcontracting out the work to a component supplier is going to be more expensive, and more complicated because of the fact that the airframe is no longer in production.

Couple that with the cost of writing off the entirety of the existing spare parts/cowlings that are now junk due to new design and requirements.

Massive cost here to be absorbed, and I have posted previously.
It needs to be absorbed by an ever reducing cash pile, and diminishing government and civilian sales.

Stovepipe

The tooling (jigs, frames and stuff like that) is probably being brought in from the storage yard and degreased and repainted and put back into service. They have learned from the past not to throw away building jigs. I'll bet that Boeing accountants have worked over the costs associated with this and have figured out how to offload some of those costs onto third parties. Even if they only get scrap value for unused cowlings, they'll get something back from it. They will work this to the nth degree to have as little real impact as possible on their shareholders and future contracts. Apart from that, they have solid gold contract work on the F15 and Apache and a host of other military projects that will get them over this hump. Boeing's not dead, by a long shot.

wetoutside19

Stovepipe wrote: »

The punter will pay the cost, as airlines will pay initially and the cost will be offloaded onto ticket prices and Boeing will lobby hard to have the cost rebated against tax. Boeing will officially moan loudly in public but privately, deals will be done in backrooms to offset the cost of a few thousand cowlings.

Weird a sensationalist post that is a bit contradictory

1. You could say every cost that an aircraft manufacturer and airline incurs is included in the ticket price, breaking down a cost like this into a per flight basis its immaterial and doesn’t warrant a daily mail style headline like you have given it.

2. And boeing “lobbying” for a tax rebate... When have companies who incur normal expenditure not been able to get a tax deduction “rebate”? Why would this need to lobbied for?

Regards
Iwo19

Stovepipe

It would have to be lobbied for because it is an extra "event" above and beyond the normal lobbying that goes on the whole time, and it is going to be hugely expensive, even for Boeing. All of the large defence companies in the US have permanent lobbyists working for them and Boeing will work hard to get the final bill reduced and get their name and reputation restored. A lot of airlines and govts love Boeing equipment and would need to be reassured that the aircraft will be fit for service, so the PR machine will work flat out to convince them that it is. When you see the CEO of Boeing appearing in front of Senate committees, with the very real threat of prison and/or huge personal and corporate fines hanging in the air, you know they are taking it very, very seriously and are putting maximum effort into solving it. It's not like the old days where you could blame the pilots or mechs in some far-off country and wipe your hands of it......as for tax rebates, the large American companies like Boeing, Amazon, Facebook and the large film studios constantly lobby to reduce their corporate tax bill. It's regarded as routine that if you try to stick one of them for a few hundred million dollars due, say, on tax rebates for buying new cameras or hiring union staff in California, their lawyers and accountants will be in your face before the saliva dries on the stamp.

wetoutside19

You are backtracking / changing the goal posts.

Stovepipe wrote: »

Boeing will lobby hard to have the cost rebated against tax. Boeing will officially moan loudly in public but privately, deals will be done in backrooms to offset the cost of a few thousand cowlings.

Reread your post above. Sorry to be blunt but you don’t know what you are talking about with your “tax rebates” comments. If Boeing are incurring costs as you state they get a tax write off, they don’t need to do the lobbying you are confused about.

Stovepipe

ok, rebate is the wrong word. Im not changing any goal posts....... Go back a few years to the time when 737s were faiing out of the sky because of the failure of an actuator in the rudder. Boeing took a severe hit but fought back hard and the solution to the snag with actuators was found (better filtration of hydraulic fluid and what was probably the start of formalised upset training for commercial pilot cadets). Boeing did not bear all the costs and the problem went away. Now a new problem has arisen and they will deal with this one with their customary vigour.