January 2006 Archives

Militant space enthusiasts may seem like an odd phrase but they are out there and for them NASA is the enemy and the likes of Burt Rutan and his SpaceShipOne (SS1) vehicle, the great white hope.

Last week I drove from Wichita in Kansas, where I visited Cessna, to Albuquerque in New Mexico, to see Eclipse Aviation and interview its inspirational founder Vern Raburn.

I've just undergone death by Powerpoint at the hands of American Airlines' executive team in their Fort Worth, Texas headquarters and I'm impressed.

Seriously, this was a day of briefings from the American management team on where they've got to and where they're going. It tells you something that we were even there - major corporations do not invite journalists in to view their inner workings unless they believe they have a pretty good tale to tell.

And American does. It came a hairsbreadth from going Chapter 11 but, unlike its two arch-rivals, it dodged the bullet. Primarily it attributes that to a gargantuan effort to get its labour force onside in very short order. As has been widely observed, American had been a by-word for confrontational labour relations for years and was not the obvious place to look for mnagement and workers pulling together to stave off bankruptcy.

But it largely managed it and is now on its way back. It has serious, albeit unsatisfactory, cash reserves; yields are climbing; costs are fimly under control; and it is even cautiously expanding internationally.

What's really apparent though is that, face to face, the executive team clearly believes it has pulled it off. From CEO Gerard Arpey down, these are not dumb guys, nor are they ever likely to be complacent after what they have recently gone through. I asked one where he thought the airline was on a scale of one to ten - one being on the brink of bankruptcy and ten being a thriving company building for the future. A bit over five he said.

I think that's probably a bit pessimistic - but I liked his brutally realistic reply. And I wish American luck. They've not always been the most likeable of companies, but you have to admire them. Management and staff there seem to have 'got it' in a way that has never quite seemed the case at United or Delta.

I was also struck by the way that the American execs don't talk about dodging Chapter 11 in a macho way, as if it proved their management manhood that they didn't go under. They talk levelly about the pros and cons of going in or staying out as an academic business exercise, and concede that there are arguments on both sides.

But  I suspect there will be a subtler effect of staying afloat as the airline goes forward - the fact is that the management and workforce were once upon a time forced to ditch a lot of emotional baggage and pull together. And I'd be hopeful that the memory of that will inform the behaviour of both groups in the years ahead.

American will never be a 'low-cost' carrier, but one day it might not be a 'legacy' carrier either. 

There can't be many people in aerospace who won't miss Mauricio Botelho when he steps down from being head of Embraer next year. He's put in an extraordinary performance for the Brazilian company, but he's won a zillion friends while doing it.

If ever there was the right man at the right time then it was Botelho. He had a vision for Embraer that gave the company precisely the focus it needed after some stumbles early on, calling on his countrymen to raise their eyes and aim high. And it worked.

There's resentment in Bombardier and Canada of course over the way the Brazilians pretty flagrantly abused state financing rules before the WTO invevitably came down against it. But who on earth could blame them? How often does a developing world nation get to throw its weight around in that particular forum?

Embraer is top dog in its primary sector just now, but the Canadians could be back with a bang in the next couple of years. both companies are going to face the challenge of managing an alarming number of unwanted 50-seat regional jets, but both were smart enough to realise the writing was on the wall and get out of that game at the right moment. (Having had the sagas of Fokker, SAAB and British Aerospace to learn from of course.) With the benefit of some enforced breathing space Bombardier could just get it right with the CSeries.

So the task facing Botelho's successor is not simple. If it's the similarly well-liked Fred Curado then I wish him well. But with the 170/190 line now well-established, I think Embraer's board will be worrying more about how to expand out of the RJ niche. And I wonder if they think Curado is the man to do that? Perhaps an outsider with more intimate military connections might look attractive. Successions can be fraught with difficulty however. (Isn't that right Airbus?)

Well at the time of writing Airbus in Paris has just claimed a net 1,055 orders for 2005, compared with Boeing's 1,002. I'm sitting here in London not exactly sure how they've done it, but as I promised in an earlier post I'm taking the opportunity to remind the world that I predicted they would. (Let's face it, the world would very definitely have reminded me if I'd been wrong!)

Having had my professional competence questioned already in responses to this blog I'll point out now that yes, it is glaringly obvious that the Boeing dollar value far exceeds that of Airbus.

Although several newspapers that should know better (at least one in Seattle and another published on pink paper) ran stories saying that Boeing had beaten Airbus, you'll notice that Boeing never even suggested that might be true. I'm not surprised - nobody knows better than Boeing PR that, whatever else about Airbus, they're world-leaders in marketing.

Fnally, another prediction: the internet - and probably this blog - will be awash with anti-Airbus poison within the next few hours. Should be amusing for those of you, like me, who are neutral in these matters.

Flight International West Coast Editor Guy Norris writes:

Would-be Hollywood script writers in search of ideas could do a lot worse than visit the next Aerospace Sciences meeting of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA).

The place positively bulges with academics, government officials, project leaders and aerospace engineers - some of whom wear T-shirts proclaiming in large red letters "I REALLY AM A ROCKET SCIENTIST." The conference papers are frequently eclectic in the extreme, but for the non-specialist willing to mine into this rich seam of cutting edge science there is often a gem or two to be found.

If the papers don't yield much, try the exhibit hall. At the Air Force Research Laboratory stand, for example, you'll find enough material to win the Hugo, Nebula and any other sci-fi book writing prize for the next decade. My two favourites this year were a real-life laser rifle and an 'Active Denial System' (ADS) which uses non-lethal millimetre wave energy to zap the bad guys.

My enthusiastic guide from the AFRL's Directed Energy Directorate explained the active denial device is ideal for clearing people away from road blocks, embassy compounds, or the immediate battlefield or anywhere else for that matter. Mounted on top of a HUMMVEE, the large radar-like antenna of the "counter-personnel" weapon beams an invisible ray of millimetre wave energy at a highly irritating 95GHz.

The "targets" feel like they are being deep-fried, although, he re-assures me, the light-speed ray does not cause actual bodily injury. Instead the penetration depth of energy at this wavelength simply confuses the nerve endings in the skin into thinking the body is basically on fire. The heating sensation, which builds rapidly into intolerable agony within seconds, is actually an illusion - but a very, very real one. To demonstrate he asks me to put my finger to the point of a mini-ADS demonstrator mounted on the exhibit stand. Cheerfully flipping a switch he watches as, within a second, the pain suddenly becomes excruciating and I yelp and hurriedly withdraw my pulsating finger.

I peer at my poor digit, expecting at the very least to see it neatly sawn in two by the laser-like beam. But, almost disappointingly, there's not even a red mark. "I volunteered for the tests, and had my whole body exposed. After several tries I managed just over a second….no-one has made it to even three," says my guide who does not appear to be singed, browned or yellowed in any discernable way.

Not knowing quite how to react to this display of unbelievable bravery or apparent stupidity (take your pick), I nod and look at the next piece of hardware which my guide is pointing out, clearly delighted at having legitimately caused pain to a journalist.

Beside the mini-ADS is a large, extremely futuristic laser rifle. Crafted from a tough looking black material, the rifle is appropriately and wonderfully dubbed the personnel halting and stimulation response (PHaSR) weapon. A nearby AFRL officer and project leader agrees to pose for a photograph with the rifle to give me an idea as to scale.

Unlike the non-lethal invisible 'death ray' this cunning piece of weaponry is meant to be seen - by the enemy at least. The PHaSR is designed to dazzle any potential shooter by disrupting their sight. I am told the device does not contravene Protocol IV of the Geneva Convention (added in 1995) which banned the use of blinding laser devices, because the PHaSR is deemed 'eye-safe' at the target distance.

A multi wavelength version, which would make counter measures more complex (like having to carry around several different kinds of eye shading goggles), is also being tested. Tested…….on what? I ask. A Romulin "Bird-of-Prey" or perhaps a Klingon battle cruiser? "Let's hope Starfleet manages to keep this out of the wrong hands," I joke feebly. For some unaccountable reason, the people at AFRL just didn't see the funny side and instead invited me to have another go on the mini-ADS demonstrator. I declined politely and bade a hasty retreat before I got 'zapped'.
 

One of the best bits about listening to EADS's French co-chief executive is deciphering the Forgeard-speak. Unlike most grey CEOs, Noel Forgeard is a man who says what he thinks...sort of - his gargantuan ego and impish personality doing battle with his need to toe the corporate line. At a new year lunch for the press in Paris yesterday, his first as boss of EADS, rather than Airbus, he was in vintage form, more or less admitting that he is still pushing for a merger with Thales. "Off the record," he told the audience of about 100 scribbling hacks, and referring to an interview he gave last year about Thales' suitability as a merger partner, "I don't usually change my mind." On his relationship with his German co-chief executive Tom Enders, Forgeard made no bones about the fact that he thinks he should have been given the job as sole boss of the European company. "Seeking consensus on every issue is hard, he said. " But Tom and myself have been appointed for five years and we get on very well, even though he is more of an Anglo-Saxon, with a very different background to me. We talk to eachother every day." EADS co-CEOs in daily communication shock! Despite having to share the crown with Enders, Forgeard did well out of the EADS succession and has the air of a man pleased with life. One of France's leading industrialists, he has the ear now more than ever of the country's politicians. Although his deputy at Airbus now runs the airframer, few doubt who still pulls the strings on the big decisions. He also is the "face" for EADS's defence and homeland security activities in France. If he steers through a merger with Thales - and my guess is that it will happen this year - it will leave EADS, directly or indirectly, as the dominant defence company in Europe's three biggest markets: France, Germany and the UK. It will also create a more horizontally-integrated Airbus, thanks to Thales' avionics business (although this is likely to worry competition authorities). Forgeard may have pointedly said that a Thales merger "is not a topical issue today - on 9 January", but his insistence that EADS managers had been instructed not to comment on the matter keeps the rumour mill turning.

Airbus and Boeing's annual contest to announce the most orders is just like cricket (OK, stay with me on this one my American friends, but if you're one of our many Indian readers you'll know exactly what I mean.) At time of writing Boeing is 1,029 declared. A declaration is a cricket tactic in which the batting side decides it's set a target that it doubts the opponents can reach before the same number of players as it used are bowled out, and in the remaining time allotted for the game. Often leads to a draw - but not this time.

For ages now Boeing has declared in December and Airbus has cleverly said it won't announce its total until mid-January. Trivial of course, but crucially, in essentially a neck-and-neck race (OK - enough sporting metaphors), it gives them a last few orders that they can probably persuade customers to announce either in the year just gone - 2005 - or the one coming up - 2006.

This year the situation is particularly entertaining to the spectators. On the face of it Airbus has an awful lot to do to make up the ground. But it's well known that there are several big orders of uncertain status that could change everything. Airbus has a lot of clout with some customers who it might be able to persuade to help it along, but I doubt that the Chinese government - which has revealed 150 commitments for Airbus aircraft that don't currently appear in the order book - is one of them. And that could be the clincher.

Years ago, when Airbus was a distant number two, it turned the order contest into an annual battle of operatic magnificence, knowing of course that one day it would duly catch up. And it did, and the world was duly impressed. But conceding second place again now would have suitably Wagnerian overtones.

In fact Airbus absolutely loathes losing marketing battles, and in fact more or less never loses them. (Sales is not the same thing of course.) So if I were a betting man, which as it happens I am, I would say Airbus has kept something up its sleeve and I'm going to predict they will somehow or other sneak this one.

So there's something you can copy and paste and have a good laugh at my expense by adding it to the comments here on 17 January - which is when the final Airbus number comes out. But if I'm right...boy you can be sure I'll remind you.

As the BBC's magnificent Peter Snow says as he manipulates his graphics on British election nights, predicting the career-ending moments of a couple of hundred politicians - "remember, it's just a bit of fun".

Trips are very much a part of being a Flight journalist. Paris, Berlin, Washington, we take those cities and their nations in our stride. But every now and then a trip comes up that offers an experience like no other.