Posted on 01/29/2005 7:04:25 AM PST by cp124
Boeing to fly high in China with sale of 60 wide-body jets
By Dominic Gates
Seattle Times aerospace reporter
Boeing confirmed yesterday in a Washington, D.C., signing ceremony an agreement to sell 60 of its new mid-size wide-body jets to the six major airlines in China, a deal worth $7.2 billion at nominal list prices.
Boeing also announced that the jet formerly called the 7E7 would henceforth be designated the 787, continuing the company's 7-series model numbering.
And it signaled that a substantial amount of work on the plane will be subcontracted to China.
Air China, China Eastern Airlines, China Southern Airlines, Hainan Airlines, Shanghai Airlines and Xiamen Airlines will each receive at least one jet in time for the opening of the 2008 Olympics in Beijing and deliveries are expected to be complete by 2012.
All six airlines will get the long-range 223-seat model, the 787-8. Boeing did not disclose how the 60 jets would be divided among the carriers.
In a conference call with journalists, Mike Bair, who heads the new jet program, said the redesignation of the model number to 787 was carefully timed to please its Chinese customers.
"We felt it was appropriate to honor this Chinese order in some way," Bair said. "The numeral 8 is good luck in China; 787-8s for the 2008 Olympics made a nice package for them."
Since the naming of the initial 707, Boeing's first and highly successful commercial jet, all of its airliners have been named in succession based on the 7-7 formula.
Boeing had announced in June that the new plane's rudder would be made in China, at the Chengdu plant of China Aviation Industry Corp.
Bair said yesterday that additional contract work will go to China through Boeing's major subcontracting partners. This suggests that some of the major Japanese work on the 787 airframe will be farmed out to China.
"Our expectation is that there's a fair amount of this airplane that ultimately is going to be produced in China," Bair said.
Although 60 percent of the commercial jets in China today are Boeing-made, Airbus has made strong gains there in recent years.
Airbus also formalized a deal yesterday that had been announced earlier: the sale of five super-jumbo A380s to China Southern Airlines, worth about $1.4 billion at list prices.
"Long term, the Chinese have decided that they want to balance their purchases," between Boeing and Airbus, Bair said.
Geopolitics complicates sales to China. The government of the People's Republic of China has been unhappy with a prospective U.S. arms sale to Taiwan, which it considers a breakaway province that is only temporarily independent.
According to sources in China and the U.S., negotiations around the Taiwan issue created delay in nailing down the Boeing order, which the company had originally expected to announce in 2004.
"I can't say for sure there was a political motivation around some of that delay," Bair responded when asked about the political issues.
Bair also announced minor changes to the 787's configuration. He confirmed that the number of seats has increased slightly to 223 seats in three classes on the standard long-range 787-8; 259 seats in three classes on the 787-9 stretch version; and 296 seats in two classes on the short-range 787-3 model.
In addition, the wing span of the two longer-range models has been lengthened by four feet to 197 feet.
Bair said that the use of light, strong composites for the wings allowed this performance-enhancing adjustment without adding weight.
"With composites we can make a lot thinner wing a lot longer," Bair said.
Boeing has a list of 186 announced orders for the 787, of which 56 are firm contracts. Details of the other 130 deals, including the Chinese order, will be finalized later.
It is a derivative of the British Merlin EH101 Mk3. Here are some pics:
Nice airfract and a much needed update modernization., They are looking at one as a proposed SAR too I believe.
I know Sikorsky was disappointed (a mild term) that they lost out there in COnnecticut.
Growth Pace of Economy Slowed to 3.1% in 4th Quarter
By LOUIS UCHITELLE
"but a lot of that spending was for imports. To me it says we are spending a lot and foreigners are continuing to eat our lunch."
Published: January 29, 2005
The American economy slowed to an annual growth rate of 3.1 percent in the final three months of 2004, the Commerce Department reported yesterday. That was the weakest quarterly pace in nearly two years, held down by a surge in imports, which substituted for production at home
Consumers provided most of the lift, increasing their outlays for goods and services by more than enough to offset weaknesses in other areas. They spent most heavily on food and medical care, with home furnishings, home maintenance and motor vehicles not far behind.
"Spending was solid enough," said Edward McKelvey, a senior economist at Goldman Sachs, "but a lot of that spending was for imports. To me it says we are spending a lot and foreigners are continuing to eat our lunch."
The fourth-quarter performance of the gross domestic product was the worst of the year - nearly a percentage point below the 4 percent growth rate in the third quarter and the smallest rise since the first quarter of 2003.
But some forecasters predicted that economic growth would soon rebound, to an annual rate of at least 3.5 percent - mostly on the strength of consumer spending - and the Federal Reserve, in response, would continue its pattern of quarter-point increases in the federal funds rate. The funds rate influences the cost of mortgages, car loans and other consumer and business borrowing.
"We expect the Fed to tighten by a quarter of a point at each of the first four meetings of its policy makers this year," said Kenneth J. Matheny, a senior economist at Macroeconomic Advisers in St. Louis. With two more quarter-point increases in the second half, "we expect the funds rate to hit 3.75 percent by December," he said. The rate now is 2.25 percent.
Nigel Gault, an economist at Global Insight of Lexington, Mass, is not so sure. "The higher rates go," Mr. Gault said, "the more confident the Fed will have to be to keep on raising rates meeting after meeting. And this latest report is hardly stellar." By the measure used by most economists, gross domestic product, at nearly $11 trillion adjusted for inflation, was 3.7 percent higher in the fourth quarter than it was in the 2003 quarter.
That was not as good a performance as in the 12 months from the fourth quarter of 2002 to the fourth quarter of 2003. By another measure, however, one that takes average growth for 2004 and compares it with the average for 2003, last year's increase was 4.4 percent, the largest year-over-year rise since 1999.
The Bush administration focused on the more optimistic measure. "The addition of 2.3 million jobs and a solid year-over-year growth rate of 4.4 percent show the strength of the nation's economy," Treasury Secretary John W. Snow said yesterday.
Gross domestic product measures the value of all goods and services produced in the United States, including the value added in the marketing and retailing of imported products. The final number is calculated by adding together the value of all output, including the value of exported goods and services. From this number, the cost of imports is subtracted.
The surge in imports, mostly consumer products and petroleum, produced a large subtraction in the fourth quarter. A drop in exports, particularly in the export of machinery and other capital goods, made matters worse. The overall swing reduced the G.D.P. in the fourth quarter by 1.73 percentage points, the largest drop since the spring quarter of 1998.
"We are unlikely to get declines of this magnitude on a regular basis," Mr. Matheny said. The weakening dollar and growing prosperity abroad should raise the demand for American exports, he argued.
Until the fourth quarter, exports had risen for 15 consecutive months, although imports outpaced them and the trade deficit, as a result, has continued to grow. Some economists say the widening trade deficit could produce another quarter of weak economic growth this year, unless the dollar drops in value more than it has so far.
At the dollar's present level, "importers have largely absorbed the impact in the form of lower profit margins," Dean Baker, a director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, wrote in his analysis of the latest G.D.P. numbers.
The strong consumer spending was for many economists the most encouraging news in yesterday's G.D.P. report. Personal consumption expenditures were up 4.6 percent, less than the third quarter's 5.1 percent rise, but ahead of increases in consumer spending in nearly every quarter over the last four years.
Relatively low interest rates and mild inflation as well as rising household wealth in the form of higher stock prices and home values all contributed to the strong consumer spending, economists said. So did an increase in personal disposable income, although Microsoft made a significant contribution to that increase with a one-time dividend paid to shareholders last year, according to yesterday's G.D.P. report.
Apart from consumer spending, noticeable contributions came from business investment and inventory accumulation. Wholesalers in particular increased their stockpiles of unsold merchandise, and business concentrated its spending on computers, software and other information-processing equipment.
"Basically I would characterize the investment numbers as strong in computers and software, but the outlays in other categories, including industrial equipment, mostly decelerated," said Brent Moulton, an associate director of the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis, which produces the quarterly reports.
That trend, if it continues, puts pressure on consumers to keep the economy percolating, and Mr. Gault for one questions whether they can do this very much longer on the strength of their borrowing and the rising value of their homes and stock portfolios.
"At some point consumer spending has to come into line with income growth," he said, "and in 2004 income did not rise as fast as spending."
Perhaps you're confused about why I picked on your post in the first place.?
From today's Ft. Worth Star Telegram, a story entitled, "Bell, Lockheed Winners", it says:
Bell and AgustaWestland will jointly build the US101, with Bell assembling the aircraft in Amarillo from components made in the United States, Italy and Britain.
Lockheed, the prime contractor, will install the sophisticated electronics, communications and defensive systems in Owego, N.Y. A company official said some portion of the classified work will be performed by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. in Fort Worth.
"Boeing to fly high in China with sale of 60 wide-body jets to be modified into ICMB and Cruise-missile 'rack' airborn launchers?"
MUCH cheaper and easier for them to buy up some of the dozens of 747's put into mothballs - spare parts are plentifull and they allready have pilots and mechanics.
We are just arming our next enemy as the UN documents say we should by "sharing sophisticated technology", exactly what Presidents Clinton and Bush#1 did.
Russia is arming Syria as the world slowly turns to a shuddering Stop.
Keep the faith.
Makes for more menacing storm clouds on the horizon, sure enough.
 |
Freepers do cool things. Just because we haven't seen a VANITY yet about a Freeper reviving a dinosaur, don't think they haven't! |
I agree. I'm probably harder than anybody on this site re: looking out for China as it relates to arms exports, tech transfers, and their obstinate cheating on WTO rules, but I don't see a big problem here.
I don't see any tech transfer that is going to hurt us...so far only the rudders will be built in China I believe.
We can't expect our aerospace industries to not compete in the Chinese market. This is a big boost for the airline industry and it's not like we are giving them MIRV or stealth avionics.
LOL Great pic. Keep 'em one dimensional (or at least two dimensional) I don't have the firepower to fight one of those bad boys off.
Thank you. The origin of my handle, TigersEye, is based on my concern for China's growing threat to us. Think of being alone on a forest path then see a tiger facing you then look straight into its eyes and see what it's thinking. Feel the intent and the intensity. That's the feeling the thought of China gives me.
You nailed it right on. I have been saying for years that we need to cease and desist on exporting any dual-use technologies to China. They have been engaging in a massive arms buildup for years and some elements in this country seem to be hell-bent on helping them modernize their military forces. I say we imprison them all for treason if we ever get into a "hot" war with China.
Our navy guys will be taking the brunt of any future conflict and to think that some elements in the U.S. helped the Chi-Coms upgrade their military is completely despicable and a national disgrace.
Spot on analysis.
Nothing like helping the Chinese out with their ALCM capabilities! A little cruise missile attack on our naval assets in the Pacific for openers, maybe one or two on L.A.?
Maybe we should help them get caught up with their guidance systems too? How about their anti radiation missiles? Almost forgot, our ChiCom friends need some help with their ASW program too. Toss in some counter battery radars too as a bonus after we get their airborne command and control system up to speed and they are good to go.
(sarcasm ad extremis)
GRRRRRRRR. Treason is afoot. Heaven forbid this gets hot. If it does and we start taking mass casualties, I believe that the internal investigation should be pretty intense state side on the pro- Chi-Com liberal crowd. We need to turn up the heat and tighten the screws on the technology transfer types. Big time. China is getting enough help from Russia and others, they sure as hell don't need ours.
YJ-91 ARM
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/weapon/kh31p.asp
http://www.softwar.net/kh31p.html
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/chinesemissiledes.html
With a deal like this, you honestly think that Linux is gonna really make a difference?
Check out the excerpts and info...it's meant as a warning as to where current practices could lead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.