Story ID: 754 A320 updateFINAL
Engine Delays Hold Back Neo Deliveries
By: Ian Goold
Caption: Pratt & Whitney’s geared turbofans are still not ready for prime time.
Word Count: 1124
Straightening out costly and disruptive kinks in its production processes is a key priority for Airbus in 2016. As the first half of the year came to a close, the European airframer appeared to be making some progress on issues that have dogged both its A350XWB and A320neo programs.

In late April, Airbus Group CEO Tom Enders acknowledged that the company was having to redouble its efforts to clear unspecified supply chain bottlenecks for the A350, with a focus on reducing the backlog of outstanding work and reducing recurring costs. Despite describing these issues as “increasingly challenging” in its first quarter results statement for 2016, Airbus remains committed to achieving a monthly production rate of 10 aircraft by 2018 (see story 756AirbusA350 on page ??).

Meanwhile, Airbus is now hopeful that technical issues with the Pratt & Whitney PW1100G-JM engines for the A320neo have been ironed out to the extent that it can reverse a trend of delayed deliveries during the second half of 2016. Pratt & Whitney has made a firm commitment to deliver sufficient engines, incorporating fixes for engine start-time and software nuisance alerts, to support at least 56 aircraft deliveries (see story 522PrattCivil on page ??). Deliveries of A320neos powered by the rival CFM International Leap 1A engine have been progressing according to plan.

In early June, Airbus Commercial president Fabrice Brégier conceded: “We are late. I fully understand why customers are not satisfied.”

Delayed PW1100G deliveries prevented Airbus from completing numerous Neos in the first half of the year, with June seeing at least 25 engine-less examples parked at Toulouse, a number that Airbus said would start to reduce “soon, very soon.” But in an early June press briefing Airbus Commercial president Fabrice Brégier acknowledged the frustration of early operators when he conceded: “We are late. I fully understand why customers are not satisfied.”

Some operators—including Germany’s Lufthansa and Indian low-cost carrier Indigo—took delivery of six early-production Neos. Pratt & Whitney said that it is now working with these airlines to retroactively install the fixes at their convenience. On June 2, India’s GoAir received its first Neo and this entered service a week later.

Engines with “very small” modifications to shafts and compressors—to allow faster start-ups that otherwise delay departures—began arriving by mid-June, according to A320 Family program head Klaus Roewe. The delay had been well signposted, since Airbus reported in January that 2016 Neo shipments would be “back-loaded”—that is, delivered later in the year.

Roewe says that “in the autumn time-frame” Neo engine start-up time will have been reduced to match current-model A320 “Ceo” engines. He confirmed that updated software to overcome “headache” faults that generated rogue reports from the full-authority digital engine control (fadec) system has been installed on all aircraft, with each delivered Neo demonstrating fuel performance better than guarantees.

In view of the knock-on effects of the production delays, it also emerged last month that some Neo customers expecting 2017 deliveries have been invited to accept Ceos instead, with Airbus confirming that delivery of such models might continue into 2019. Previously, all aircraft had been expected to be Neo variants by that time.

The situation arose as Airbus works to increase A320 production, described by chief operating officer Tom Williams as one of two challenges facing the European manufacturer (the other being to increase the A350 manufacturing rate). The manufacturer has studied (but dismissed) a higher build rate than the current 60/month target: “There’s no investment plan beyond 60, and there are no [available] slots to sell,” according to Williams.

Saying that the “sun never sets of A320 production,” he acknowledged that establishment of a fourth German final-assembly line in former A380 hangars at Finkenwerder in Hamburg (in addition to lines in China, France, and the U.S.) would help to amortize the very-large airliner’s development as related costs now will be charged to the single-aisle program. To further enhance production efficiency, Airbus has designated Toulouse as an A320 cabin-furnishing location, so that aircraft are no longer flown to Germany for completion.

A320 family product development continues apace, with Roewe noting availability of up to six more seats and higher passenger-exit limits by the end of this year, improved pilot operations, low-speed performance, and 35,000-pounds thrust for A321 high-temperature/-altitude operations during 2017, and further A321 capacity growth to 240 passengers by the beginning of 2019.

Contributing to increased capacity have been the introduction of “slim-line” seats, so-called Space-flex rear galleys, “reduced-footprint” (aka “smaller”) lavatories, and new door configurations permitting up to 20 more passengers in each variant.

Asked in late May about the implications for the A320 program of any Boeing move to increase capacity of its competing CFM International Leap-1B-powered 737 Max designs, Williams pointed to “strong A320 Neo and A321 Neo positions.” Regarding a possible enlarged Max 7, which hypothetically could be a shortened Max 8 fuselage on the current Max 8 wing (at existing Max 8 take-off weights to provide greater Max 7 range), he said a more important consideration is what Canadian manufacturer Bombardier might do to offer a C Series model with more than 130 seats.

Strategy and marketing executive v-p Kiran Rao believes that—at about 27 percent—there is too big a proportionate increase in seat numbers between current Max 7 and Max 8 models. This compares with a roughly 20 percent gap between A319Neo, A320 Neo, and A321 Neo variants.

Airbus officials dismiss suggestions that Boeing might consider Neo engines for a larger Max variant, citing the 737’s lower ground clearance. “They can’t take ‘our’ engine as it is, but it is available,” said Roewe. “Boeing will also have to address commonality [issues].”

Williams does acknowledge that Airbus might have to respond if its U.S. competitor offers a new, larger “Max 10” variant. “We have [an A321 Neo] backlog. Whatever Boeing does, we will have to [consider] what to do,” with options including a refined A321 Neo wing, carbonfibre unit, or a new wing.

Although Airbus has a three- (and at one time four-) model A320 family, officials do not expect great demand for the 124-seat A319, except perhaps from low-cost carriers employing high-density 148-passenger configurations. Rather, the manufacturer sees demand for larger models. “The market has moved,” according to Rao.

While he conceded that “a lot of airlines need smaller aircraft” like the A319, he conceded that the 150-seat A320 remains the “optimum size…but going forward we might see [requirements for bigger aircraft].” A321s comprise 40 percent of current A320 family deliveries and a greater proportion next year, according to chief operating officer (customers) John Leahy.