Could Jetliner Duopoly Being Avoided?

well, I'm no expert on aviation. but the British had De Havilland, Dutch had Fokker, Russian have Tupolev and Ilyushin. Even in the US, Boeing was not the only jetliner manufacturer, there were McDonell-Douglass and Lockheed competing in the industry.


how come today airliner industry transformed into a duopoly between Boeing and Airbus? and could it be avoided so we could see a more diverse jetliner industry?

pandu saksono said:

well, I'm no expert on aviation. but the British had De Havilland, Dutch had Fokker, Russian have Tupolev and Ilyushin. Even in the US, Boeing was not the only jetliner manufacturer, there were McDonell-Douglass and Lockheed competing in the industry.


how come today airliner industry transformed into a duopoly between Boeing and Airbus? and could it be avoided so we could see a more diverse jetliner industry?

Click to expand...

Well...
DeHavilland never built a full sized jetliner (the original Comet only carried 44). And, of course, the fatigue problems gave it a bad name.

Vickers (Vanguard, Viscount, VC-10) had a chance. Although 4 engines on the tail of the VC-10 was weird.

Sud Caravelle

Douglas did OK with its DC-8 and DC-9, but skimped excessively on the DC-10 and drove the company under.

Lockheed with its 1101 TriStar was too late to the game, and they didn't have the smaller passenger jet experience.



I suspect that if Douglas had produced a better quality plane for the DC-10 they might have shut the TriStar out of the sub-jumbo market (where there probably wasn't room for 2 manufacturers at that point).


I could see 4 mainline manufacturers today - Vickers, Douglas, Airbus, and Boeing if things had gone just a bit differently.

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

Well...
DeHavilland never built a full sized jetliner (the original Comet only carried 44). And, of course, the fatigue problems gave it a bad name.

Vickers (Vanguard, Viscount, VC-10) had a chance. Although 4 engines on the tail of the VC-10 was weird.

Sud Caravelle

Douglas did OK with its DC-8 and DC-9, but skimped excessively on the DC-10 and drove the company under.

Lockheed with its 1101 TriStar was too late to the game, and they didn't have the smaller passenger jet experience.



I suspect that if Douglas had produced a better quality plane for the DC-10 they might have shut the TriStar out of the sub-jumbo market (where there probably wasn't room for 2 manufacturers at that point).


I could see 4 mainline manufacturers today - Vickers, Douglas, Airbus, and Boeing if things had gone just a bit differently.

Click to expand...

how about the Russian? Do they stand a chance? The airline industry in the Soviet era was quite massive. But could they compete against western manufacturers head-to-head? well, at least Il-96 looked quite promising.

I could see some of the business going to Bombardier and Embraer with some Bae on the side. The Avro RJ was originally designed in Hatfield. Nobody seems in a rush to fly Russian.

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

I could see 4 mainline manufacturers today - Vickers, Douglas, Airbus, and Boeing if things had gone just a bit differently.

Click to expand...

Fokker could have survived also with little change (but that is the lower/mid end of the market)

pandu saksono said:

how about the Russian? Do they stand a chance? The airline industry in the Soviet era was quite massive. But could they compete against western manufacturers head-to-head? well, at least Il-96 looked quite promising.

Click to expand...

The Soviet history of competing on the open market for consumer and durable goods was not a happy one.

Then add in that they had no need to worry about how noisy they were, doomed their chances in Europe and USA.

Since fuel was cheap in the USSR, fuel economy wasn't important. In the West, it was.

Then add in stuff like the Il-62 were still all manual cable controlled, well, that wasn't a great selling point to western pilots who had to fly the things.

By time the Wall came down, it was too late for Russian companies to compete

pandu saksono said:

well, I'm no expert on aviation. but the British had De Havilland, Dutch had Fokker, Russian have Tupolev and Ilyushin. Even in the US, Boeing was not the only jetliner manufacturer, there were McDonell-Douglass and Lockheed competing in the industry.


how come today airliner industry transformed into a duopoly between Boeing and Airbus? and could it be avoided so we could see a more diverse jetliner industry?

Click to expand...

For one, Douglas could have (should have) used the same air frame for all it's narrow aisle aircraft in much the same way as Boeing did for it's 707/720, 727 & 737 series.

If they did this, especially for the DC-9 series, (i.e using the DC-8 air frame) it would have allowed them a huge cost saving in R & D, manufacturing plus also the advantage of being further developed into a 727 battler.

Secondly, financies would thus have been better from having a greater range of aircraft, allowing an avoidance of their demise in the 60's with their buyout from McDonnell.

These above points would then allow Douglas to developed firstly a 767, then a 777 targeted aircraft.

With all of this, they might have then had the finance to build the ill-fated MD-12 "SuperJumbo) before Airbus.

Hope this has helped.

Regards filer.

Actually, the jetliner market is surprisingly diverse with companies like Canadair/Bombardier and Embraer giving the 'established' companies a tun for their money and several more companies trying to get into the game. The only part where there is really a duopoly is in the segment of large passenger long range aircraft where there are currently only the Airbus 330 and 380 and the Boeing 747,777 and 787. The main reason for the latter is that it is a small market with high up-front investment and development costs and very slow recuperation of investment. Like this, only the biggest players could stay in the game. Note that it only became a duopoly in the 1990's when Boeing merged with McDonnel-Douglas (as the name suggests spread a merger). So I don't see there being more companies in the 200+ passenger market unless we could butterfly away all the industry mergers of 1970's onwards

I have an essay in the works where the Douglas-Lockheed doupoly of the 1950s, Boeing-Douglas duopoly of the 1960s and 1970s and Airbus-Boeing duopoly from the 1980s onward are replaced by a British monopoly in the 1950s and that evolves into a British dominated European consortium that dominates western civil aviation from the 1960s onwards.

In the 1950s British firms dominate the world airliner market as they once dominated merchant shipbuilding (and in an associated timeline they do that for longer too).

marathag said:

The Soviet history of competing on the open market for consumer and durable goods was not a happy one.

Click to expand...

But remember, they don't have to really compete if China decides that producing airliners domestically is a priority. Chinese jetliners could become the preferred airliner of any anti-western bloc.

NOMISYRRUC said:

I have an essay in the works where the Douglas-Lockheed doupoly of the 1950s, Boeing-Douglas duopoly of the 1960s and 1970s and Airbus-Boeing duopoly from the 1980s onward are replaced by a British monopoly in the 1950s and that evolves into a British dominated European consortium that dominates western civil aviation from the 1960s onwards.

Click to expand...

That would be interesting to read. The real trick would be to somehow get the aircraft manufacturers to design with one eye on the export market rather than purely around British Overseas Airways Corporation and British European Airways, or being so dependent on the government.

Doesn't Embraer count? IIRC, their E-190 and E-195 are considered to be mainline airliners.

Simon said:

That would be interesting to read. The real trick would be to somehow get the aircraft manufacturers to design with one eye on the export market rather than purely around British Overseas Airways Corporation and British European Airways, or being so dependent on the government.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested in reading that too. I'm curious how you keep the American aircraft companies from producing a competitive airliner though. The US defense requirements virtually guarantees a large domestic US aviation industry and expanding from that to commercial aircraft seems like it would be relatively easy.

wietze said:

Fokker could have survived also with little change (but that is the lower/mid end of the market)

Click to expand...

Boeing and Douglas both built the first jets in the US. Douglas became Henry Ford and if Airlines wanted changes Boeing would do what the Airline wanted Douglas for years told this is our Air Plane take it or leave it. When these Planes came Douglas had a much better reputation then Boeing.

When the Air lies wanted bigger planes the 747 and Lockheed L1011 the president of American Air lines and convinced Douglas they would order enough to make it worth their while. He wanted to use the DC-10 as a way to keep the L1011 purchase price low. The L1011 was a year late to the party since Rolls Royce The L1011 was was in Bankruptcy. The L1011 was a superior plane in many ways. MD took the DC10 upgraded it and brought it out as the MD 11.
the MD 11 as delivered used more fuel which meant less range.

Lost Freeway said:

Doesn't Embraer count? IIRC, their E-190 and E-195 are considered to be mainline airliners.

Click to expand...

Yes they do, but they have airliners that fall into the 70-130 seat market similar to the way the BAe 146 & Fokker 70-130 fit, which I far as I know Airbus & Boeing doesn't fill.

Regards filers.

Escape Zeppelin said:

I'd be interested in reading that too. I'm curious how you keep the American aircraft companies from producing a competitive airliner though. The US defense requirements virtually guarantees a large domestic US aviation industry and expanding from that to commercial aircraft seems like it would be relatively easy.

Click to expand...

In the 1950s they do it by keeping one step ahead of the American firms. For eamply IOTL several US airlines bought the early BAC-111 because it was the only airliner in its class. Orders dried up after the Boeing 737 and DC-9 appeared.

In the longer term British firms start production in the USA. They do that by building new factories or going into partnerhship with an American firm like Fokker and Fairchild did with the F-27 and F-28. I haven't done much work on it lately, but I was toying with Convair building the Britsh 707 equivalent (not necessarily the Vickers V.1000) for the US and Canadian markets in place of its large airliner, while the British firm makes the ones sold in the rest of the world.

pandu saksono said:

well, I'm no expert on aviation. but the British had De Havilland, Dutch had Fokker, Russian have Tupolev and Ilyushin. Even in the US, Boeing was not the only jetliner manufacturer, there were McDonell-Douglass and Lockheed competing in the industry.


how come today airliner industry transformed into a duopoly between Boeing and Airbus? and could it be avoided so we could see a more diverse jetliner industry?

Click to expand...

Either Douglas/MD or Lockheed might have managed to stay on as a third contender, but it's admittedly an open question as to whether the large airplane market can support more than two competitors.

Lockheed actually might have been better placed than McDonnell Douglas to survive had a couple key things gone better for the L1011. The decision to only offer Rolls Royce engines turned out to be Lockheed *twice* shooting themselves in the head. By most measures, the L1011 was a better aircraft than the DC-10, and the market really wasn't big enough to support both. What brought about the DC-10 launch was AA's orders; AA would likely have ordered Lockheed's jet had they had a non-Rolls Royce engine on offer.

Then, Rolls Royce's bankruptcy nearly dragged down the remaining L1011 program. Absent these factors, Douglas wouldn't have built the DC-10. They'd have faded from the market, probably going out of the commercial business by the early 1980s. Lockheed would dominate the sub-747 jet market and could use that frame as a base for a twinjet variant (which was considered OTL). They could also have used Douglas' exit to build a small plane to compete with Boeing and Airbus.

Moreover, unlike McDonnell Douglas, Lockheed's extensive military business could have helped keep the company afloat.

Today, you might be in a position where Lockheed and Boeing are the dominant commercial manufacturers, but where Airbus remains a relatively strong third (if weaker than OTL) due to European financial support.

I think consolidation of the European manufacturers into Airbus is somewhat inevitable, as the US had an extremely dominant position in aerospace post-Comet disasters...
The closest that could compete was the Caravelle, and it wasn't a huge player...

The Europeans aren't that willing to give up having an aerospace industry, unlike the Japanese...
Especially with books like "The American Challenge" (Le Defi Americain)...

oreocruncher said:

I think consolidation of the European manufacturers into Airbus is somewhat inevitable, as the US had an extremely dominant position in aerospace post-Comet disasters...
The closest that could compete was the Caravelle, and it wasn't a huge player...

The Europeans aren't that willing to give up having an aerospace industry, unlike the Japanese...
Especially with books like "The American Challenge" (Le Defi Americain)...

Click to expand...

There were 400+ Vickers Viscounts, 500+ De Havilland Doves and nearly 150 De Havilland Herons in the 1950s. But the Euorpean consolodation was inevitable. In my timeline the British start it in the early 1960s by ordering a significant number of parts for the Trident from French and German firms to get Air France and Lufthansa to buy it in preferrence to the Boeing 727. Buying the British product creates jobs in France and Germany.

NOMISYRRUC said:

I have an essay in the works where the Douglas-Lockheed doupoly of the 1950s, Boeing-Douglas duopoly of the 1960s and 1970s and Airbus-Boeing duopoly from the 1980s onward are replaced by a British monopoly in the 1950s and that evolves into a British dominated European consortium that dominates western civil aviation from the 1960s onwards.

In the 1950s British firms dominate the world airliner market as they once dominated merchant shipbuilding (and in an associated timeline they do that for longer too).

Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see how you stop the American companies (which had the largest market share in the immediate postwar period).