AHC: Three major airliner manufacturers instead of two

jonathan1984

Today the commercial airliner market is dominated by two companies: Airbus and Boeing. What's the most plausible scenario that could lead to a third manufacturer still remaining in the business?

For the purposes of this argument, to be considered a major competitor, it must have:

  • have both at least one widebody and one narrowbody family in production
  • deliver approximately at least 150 aircraft to customers per year
 

Have Blue-117

McDonnell Douglas doesn't go bankrupt and get bought out by Boeing. The MD-11 had several lengthened variants coming as well as the MD-12 in the pipeline. I'm not so keen on the specifics of the OP like some on here are but a surviving McDonnell Douglas is your best bet.
 

MattII

Be nice to see something out of the old Soviet Bloc too (Ilyushin and Tupolev seem the most likely), or maybe Embraer.
 

jonathan1984

Have Blue-117 said:
McDonnell Douglas doesn't go bankrupt and get bought out by Boeing. The MD-11 had several lengthened variants coming as well as the MD-12 in the pipeline. I'm not so keen on the specifics of the OP like some on here are but a surviving McDonnell Douglas is your best bet.
Click to expand...

I only really put those specifics in to define smaller players like Embraer (sells only narrowbodies) and Ilyushin (only makes a handful of planes) as not major competitors. Basically, it has to be somebody that can compete with Boeing/Airbus across the board and not be utterly obliterated. I chose 150 because that's right around the rolling five-year average of Airbus deliveries in the early 90s (based on Wikipedia).
 

brazen

Maybe Vickers gets a fair deal for the VC-10 from BOAC without all the constant spec changes then a UK player can stay in the buisness, the VC-10s were better suited to BOACs needs anyway.

With newer hush kitted engines the basic air frame was a winner and capable of years of service, similarly get the HS Trident away from BEA's meddling and just bring it into service as soon as possible to many more potential customers.

Industry observers at the time felt that the British aircraft industry had again stumbled "into the pitfall of having designed exclusively for one customer an aeroplane that has potentially a much wider scope" thats a quote from Flight international in 1959, this in essance is what killed off the UK indigenous air liner manufacturers.
 

altamiro

Banned
jonathan1984 said:
I only really put those specifics in to define smaller players like Embraer (sells only narrowbodies) and Ilyushin (only makes a handful of planes) as not major competitors. Basically, it has to be somebody that can compete with Boeing/Airbus across the board and not be utterly obliterated. I chose 150 because that's right around the rolling five-year average of Airbus deliveries in the early 90s (based on Wikipedia).
Click to expand...

If you get a Soviet Union that economically opens in a gradual fashion in the 70s - such as China has done in the 90s - Ilyushin or Tupolev may become a global player (or an amalgamation of these two).
 

MattII

Before the war they couldn't compete and for a long time after the war they weren't allowed to compete.
 

Tyr

altamiro said:
If you get a Soviet Union that economically opens in a gradual fashion in the 70s - such as China has done in the 90s - Ilyushin or Tupolev may become a global player (or an amalgamation of these two).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think a Russian company is the way to go.
They can really establish a solid base with a captive audience in the eastern block. Add in some sales elsewhere too and have them be well ran, Russia not turning into a corrupt mess after the Soviet Union collapses, and there is a lot of room for a Russian company to continue.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Have Blue-117 said:
McDonnell Douglas doesn't go bankrupt and get bought out by Boeing. The MD-11 had several lengthened variants coming as well as the MD-12 in the pipeline. I'm not so keen on the specifics of the OP like some on here are but a surviving McDonnell Douglas is your best bet.
Click to expand...

If the DC-10 had been built with more redundancy, the aircraft wouldn't have suffered the cargo door and hydraulic problems that contributed to the string of crashes and grounding early in its career. Earlier development of the MD-90 and MD-95 would have helped ward off competition from the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737 Classic, and an earlier and more optimized MD-11 would have been better able to compete against the new Airbus and Boeing widebody aircraft. Also, offering some of the MD-80/90/95 and MD-11 upgrades on earlier models could provide McDonnell-Douglas with a steady revenue stream, especially as aircraft transition to the cargo companies.

brazen said:
Maybe Vickers gets a fair deal for the VC-10 from BOAC without all the constant spec changes then a UK player can stay in the buisness, the VC-10s were better suited to BOACs needs anyway.

With newer hush kitted engines the basic air frame was a winner and capable of years of service, similarly get the HS Trident away from BEA's meddling and just bring it into service as soon as possible to many more potential customers.

Industry observers at the time felt that the British aircraft industry had again stumbled "into the pitfall of having designed exclusively for one customer an aeroplane that has potentially a much wider scope" thats a quote from Flight international in 1959, this in essance is what killed off the UK indigenous air liner manufacturers.
Click to expand...

In 1959 de Havilland approached Boeing with a proposal for joint development of a trijet. Representatives even visited each other, but in the end the companies went their separate ways and developed the Trident and the Boeing 727.
 
Simon

Simon

I don't have any books to hand but I'm sure I can remember reading somewhere that for a while Boeing was losing money or at least making very little on the 707s they were delivering, to the extent that the board seriously considered withdrawing from the commercial market and concentrating solely on military aircraft. If that's true and they decided to stay in the military field then it opens up the commercial market to any number of other companies.
 

e of pi

Another potential would be a Lockheed that manages to successfully launch the TriStar (we had this happen in Eyes Turned Skywards, and eventually they and McDonnell merge instead of the OTL Boeing-McDonnell merger, leaving three manufacturers).
 
varyar

varyar

Maybe China launches economic reforms a generation or two earlier (under the KMT or a less psychotic Communist leadership, perhaps) and a domestic aviation industry emerges, consolidates and competes on a global level?
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
MattII said:
Be nice to see something out of the old Soviet Bloc too (Ilyushin and Tupolev seem the most likely), or maybe Embraer.
Click to expand...

Would you EVER, if any other option existed, get onto a Tupolev airliner?

There are reasons that there are a limited number of players in the market. Airlines have an aversion to aircraft that have engines fall off.
 

Dunning Kruger

You pretty much need a state sponsored manufacturer for there to be a third competitor. And this state sponsored competitor probably needs to sell to state sponsored airlines and defense. This pretty much limits you to the Russians and Chinese.

If you look at Boeing and Airbus' financials, they arent that good. Highly cyclical business with low margins and high fixed costs. Given the amount of capital required to build a plane, the immense regulations, and the cyclical/low profitability, there is little economic incentive for a third competitor to emerge or remain.
 

MattII

CalBear said:
There are reasons that there are a limited number of players in the market. Airlines have an aversion to aircraft that have engines fall off.
Click to expand...
Bad design or bad maintenance? Down here in NZ one of our own airlines had a wing flap come lose, and that was a Boeing aircraft.
 

Kevin Renner

CalBear said:
Would you EVER, if any other option existed, get onto a Tupolev airliner?

There are reasons that there are a limited number of players in the market. Airlines have an aversion to aircraft that have engines fall off.
Click to expand...

DC-10, Chicago, circa May '79 ring a bell
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top