Boeing and the RRJ
Is Boeing's role in the RRJ still purely advisory, or a stealthy back door into the regional business and perhaps a form of rapid prototyping for a regional jet programme of its own in the future?
"There seems to be some confusion over what we do. We are strictly an adviser on the programme as they proceed. Sukhoi is modelling the design process of its aircraft on the same processes that Boeing uses," says Boeing RRJ programme director Bill Jarrell, who acknowledges the close relationship is open to "misperceptions".
On the surface, at least, Boeing's actions to date back up Jarrell's comments. Late last year it rejected overtures from Bombardier to team up on the CSeries, having previously shelved plans to study a -100X shrink-derivatives of its now abandoned 717-200. But it seems Boeing is keeping its options open for the future, Commercial Airplanes president Alan Mulally having, for example, made references to long-term new-model studies that could potentially extend down to 90 seats.
For now, however, the relationship with Sukhoi is purely advisory, and has subtly changed in detail over the years from April 2001, when the first mention of any involvement in the RRJ came during a visit to Russia by then Boeing chairman and chief executive Phil Condit. The following June, Boeing, Sukhoi and the Ilyushin design bureau announced a "co-operative effort to determine the feasibility of jointly defining, manufacturing, certifying, marketing, selling and servicing a new regional jet for global operations".
Boeing defined the work as a feasibility study encompassing "market research and development of a joint market forecast, analysis of issues regarding the product development and certification of a Russian-built aircraft for export." It did, however, leave the door open to greater involvement and added that the study included "preparing preliminary business plans that will form the basis for evaluation of a possible joint aircraft programme".
Mulally said at the time "we have agreed to work jointly with Sukhoi and Ilyushin to determine whether we can produce a new regional jet below 100 seats that meets the market's needs effectively. The regional market is an exciting and challenging one that is consistent with our fundamental belief that people want to fly directly, point-to-point, with fast, efficient jet service."
In early April 2002 a joint working group session took place in Seattle involving more than 50 specialists from Boeing, Ilyushin, Sukhoi and Russian investment firm Troika-Dialog. Sukhoi also named Yuri Ivashechkin as chief designer for the project. Ivashechkin, who had previously headed the Su-25 and Mikoyan MiG-110 programmes, presided over a pivotal first meeting at which the family concept plan was agreed. This outlined the initial development of a 75-seat RRJ-75, followed by the shortened RRJ-55 and then the extended RRJ-95, all sharing the same engine, wing, avionics and systems.
Meetings continued over subsequent years, with regular telephone and video-conference calls as well as face-to-face visits. Boeing teams continued flying to Moscow and Russian teams visited Seattle. The nature of the agreement also slowly changed, becoming a strictly technical consultancy which was annually extendable. "At the very beginning more was being considered, but as we proceeded we have not considered it any more," says Jarrell. Boeing also introduced the Russian team to the concept of meeting its worldwide supplier base, and of conducting regular design review assessments in the "working together" tradition established with the 777.
So why the change? Part of the reason for Boeing's involvement in the RRJ was also to help improve its access to the domestic CIS market. The "not-so-hidden" agenda behind the project called, for example, for a 737-like flightdeck philosophy that would make it easier for RRJ crews to transition to the larger Boeing model. Making the RRJ compatible or even common with the 737 was a key marketing strategy, providing CIS airline planners with a logical reason to not only seek positions on Boeing's most popular model, but also to continue with the Boeing family through larger types up to the 777. The company also hoped its intimate involvement in the project would help influence its continued efforts to reduce the prohibitive import tax that continues to be levied on all commercial aircraft coming into the country.
However, the increasingly strong influence of the European airlines and latterly, suppliers, may well have helped alter the plan. The Airbus flightdeck philosophy, complete with sidestick controllers, is essentially alien to Boeing, even though the interface of the pilots' controls (such as back-driven throttles) is expected to be more in line with the outcome recommended by the US manufacturer. However, Jarrell argues "any commonality between the our products is good for both of us, and just because they choose a different technology like the sidestick, doesn't mean we're going to lose those bigger benefits."
Boeing is determined to stay aligned with the programme as it advances into production. "At this point I don't see any change in our role. This was a long-term commitment to go forward with Sukhoi and that's what will stick to," he adds.
PARTNERSHIP GUY NORRIS / LOS ANGELES
Source: Flight International
