3 ms·

We'd be a lot better off with a 3rd maker of large passenger aircraft. Duopolies are never good for the market, and markets seem to do a lot better when there'

by magduf 7y ago

We'd be a lot better off with a 3rd maker of large passenger aircraft. Duopolies are never good for the market, and markets seem to do a lot better when there's 3 dominant players: with only 3, the players have very good economies of scale, but because there's 3 (and not 1 or 2), there's still a good amount of competition, while still having a lot of stability, so it balances out. Too many competitors means too little stability and too little economy of scale, too few competitors means too much power in the hands of those companies and too little competition. Personally, I'd like to see Mitsubishi get back into the passenger plane business. They're already starting, but with a smaller regional jet.

breatheoften 7y ago
Will airlines go multi-supplier again or will they specialize in particular manufacturers? The cost to an airline to keep certified personnel on staff capable of supporting planes from different manufacturers is probably greater than the unit savings they could realize in a situation where price competition exists ...
fleetingmoments 7y ago
Embraer is pretty large. Not Airbus or Boeing large but they make passenger aircraft for medium and shorter routes.
- inferiorhuman 7y ago
  Embraer is pretty large. Not Airbus or Boeing large but they make passenger aircraft for medium and shorter routes. Embraer's commercial business is owned by Boeing now — the subsidiary is called BBC.
wahern 7y ago
The E195-E2 is much larger than a typical regional jet, and it even has the range to go coast-to-coast in the U.S. It seems to have been overshadowed by the A220, though, perhaps for good reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family#E195-E2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family#E195-E... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A220#/media/File:CSeries_comparable_aircraft.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A220#/media/File:CSerie... I think what's missing in the Airbus-Boeing debate is an appreciation for the role of engine manufacturers. The A220, E195-E2, and Mitsubishi SpaceJet are all built around P&W's new geared turbofan engines. It seems to me that at this point in the evolution of the industry everybody effectively builds their planes around the capabilities and limits of available engine technology. The immediate cause of death of the A380 was the refusal of any engine manufacturer to design and sell a more modern engine. The A380 became inefficient because its engines were at least 1.5 generations behind, not because there were 4 of them. (Of course, the reason nobody wanted to invest in a newer engine was because the market was too small to make it worth their time, especially considering their struggles with existing commitments.) I imagine any aerospace engineering company could design a state-of-the-art and competitive body around the available engines. Aircraft manufacturers seem to self-select into market niches not because of engineering costs and difficulties, but simply because the global markets aren't large enough to support a third wide body manufacturer and only barely large enough, if at all, to support another 737/A320.

by magduf 7y ago

breatheoften 7y ago

Will airlines go multi-supplier again or will they specialize in particular manufacturers? The cost to an airline to keep certified personnel on staff capable of supporting planes from different manufacturers is probably greater than the unit savings they could realize in a situation where price competition exists ...

fleetingmoments 7y ago

Embraer is pretty large. Not Airbus or Boeing large but they make passenger aircraft for medium and shorter routes.

inferiorhuman 7y ago
Embraer is pretty large. Not Airbus or Boeing large but they make passenger aircraft for medium and shorter routes. Embraer's commercial business is owned by Boeing now — the subsidiary is called BBC.

wahern 7y ago

The E195-E2 is much larger than a typical regional jet, and it even has the range to go coast-to-coast in the U.S. It seems to have been overshadowed by the A220, though, perhaps for good reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family#E195-E2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_E-Jet_E2_family#E195-E... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A220#/media/File:CSeries_comparable_aircraft.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A220#/media/File:CSerie... I think what's missing in the Airbus-Boeing debate is an appreciation for the role of engine manufacturers. The A220, E195-E2, and Mitsubishi SpaceJet are all built around P&W's new geared turbofan engines. It seems to me that at this point in the evolution of the industry everybody effectively builds their planes around the capabilities and limits of available engine technology. The immediate cause of death of the A380 was the refusal of any engine manufacturer to design and sell a more modern engine. The A380 became inefficient because its engines were at least 1.5 generations behind, not because there were 4 of them. (Of course, the reason nobody wanted to invest in a newer engine was because the market was too small to make it worth their time, especially considering their struggles with existing commitments.) I imagine any aerospace engineering company could design a state-of-the-art and competitive body around the available engines. Aircraft manufacturers seem to self-select into market niches not because of engineering costs and difficulties, but simply because the global markets aren't large enough to support a third wide body manufacturer and only barely large enough, if at all, to support another 737/A320.