Boeing vs. Airbus: CEO compensation (2015)

Last year, I wrote a couple of post titled “Boeing vs. Airbus: CEO compensation (2014)” (and 2013) in which I compared the compensation of both CEOs. Yesterday, I saw that those posts received a larger than usual amount of visits which reminded me that now, at the end of the year 2016, we can find the same information for the 2015 fiscal year. Thus, this follow on post.

As both Boeing and Airbus are public companies, the information about their CEOs compensation is public and can be found in the annual report and proxy statement from each one. I will just copy the information below for comparison and future reference.

Airbus Group CEO, Tom Enders’ 2015 compensation (financial statements here, PDF, 1.7 MB, page 58).

Airbus Group’s Tom Enders 2015 compensation.

Airbus Group’s Tom Enders 2015 compensation.

In the case of Boeing, 2015 was particular in the sense that Jim McNerney was the CEO for the first half of the year and since July 1st the position is held by Dennis A. Muilenburg. Find in the table below the figures for both (proxy statement here, PDF, 3.7 MB, page 30):

Boeing’s Jim McNerney and Dennis Muilenburg 2015 compensation.

Boeing’s Jim McNerney and Dennis Muilenburg 2015 compensation.

It is interesting to note that while the base salary is nearly the same (1.4 m€ vs 1.6 m$, which after taking into account current exchange rate is almost equivalent) the incentive schemes at Boeing end up with a total remuneration about the double of that in Airbus Group.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aerospace & Defence

Flight excursion to San Sebastian

One of the goals that I had for this year as a recently qualified private pilot was to make a flight crossing the French border. For this purpose, last July I approached a colleague, Asier, who had obtained his license years ago and already had the experience of having flown to San Sebastian, the destination chosen for the flight.

We took a day off at the office to have time enough to make the return flight on a day and avoid constraints with the availability of airplanes. The weather was very good early in the morning all the way from Toulouse to San Sebastian, with only some wind, and a few gusts by the coast.

On the way to San Sebastian we would make a short stop over by Pau. On the way back we had planned another one by Tarbes, but in the end we skipped it. The outgoing flight took us 2h28′ (engine running time, including the stop over) for over 176 nautical miles; the return one, 2h04′.

The navigation went rather well even if we didn’t make use of the GPS and just navigated using the charts, compass and VOR… It basically consisted in departing from Toulouse Lasbordes and flying around the CTR of Toulouse via the southern itinerary. Once arrived at the SN way point we took a west heading towards the VOR of Tarbes (TBO) and from there we sought the integration in the CTR of Pau. At Pau we simply went to the general aviation parking, drank some water, refreshed ourselves, rearranged some papers, visualized the second part of the flight and got ready for departure. While at the holding point we had to wait for an airliner and a French Air Force CN-235, a nice view considering that both Asier and I used to work for Airbus Military.


Navigation log.

Navigation log.

It was when flying around Pau that we noticed that the temperature of the oil was rather high, almost in the red zone of the arc. As the pressure was OK we decided to simply reduce the rpm. The action was succesful in lowering the oil temperature back to the green area of the arc, but we were forced to fly for the rest of a very hot day at a somewhat slower speed (between 150-170 km/h vs. the planned 180-200).

Final approach at Pau airport.

Final approach at Pau airport.

From Pau we followed the transit towards Biarritz via Orthez and Dax that follows more or less the high speed way and river Gave de Pau. We flew around Biarritz by the North and coastal transits. The bay and beach of Biarritz are wonderful on the ground, even more so from the air. In general it is a very recommendable experience to fly from Biarritz to San Sebastian, as despite of the turbulence that you may encounter the views are breathtaking. See the pictures and video below.

Atlantic coast.

Atlantic coast.



St Jean de Luz

St Jean de Luz

Leaving St Jean de Luz,the French air traffic controller bid us farewell in Spanish. Those were the first words in Spanish I ever exchanged in the radio as I obtained my license in France and the FCL055 to be qualified to speak in English when flying abroad, but I had never flown by myself to Spain. We then contacted the air traffic control at San Sebastian, who were waiting for us. While talking to the controller I felt very awkward, as despite of being a native Spanish and having reviewed aviation phraseology in Spanish the previous days, the terms and sentences didn’t come natural. I am sure that I used plenty of expressions that are either not correct or not in use. I noticed a couple of them by myself (“back track” the runway was employed by the controller in English, rather than a Spanish form I used or “Responde” for the transponder); there ought to be many more.

Air space around San Sebastian was very quiet. We demanded a clearance to make a detour by the bay of San Sebastian and come back to the airport in neighboring Fuenterrabia and it was granted without hesitation. Basically we could do as we pleased, we just needed to report when approaching the airport. After taking some pictures of the bay we headed back to the airport and we flew through the port of Pasajes, which I had visited on ground a few months before.

San Sebastian

San Sebastian

San Sebastian

San Sebastian

Entering Pasajes.

Entering Pasajes.

It took me a while to spot the runway in long final but the landing went smoothly.

Final approach to San Sebastian airport Fuenterrabia.

Final approach to San Sebastian airport at Fuenterrabia.

We then went to have lunch with a relative of Asier at a close by restaurant and later had a walk through the village centre (Fuenterrabia).


About 3 hours later we came back to the airport. Just in time to take-off and leave before the weather deteriorated. Clouds were approaching the airport from Pasajes, thus we took off heading North (runway 04), with heavy cross wind (310 degrees, 15-20 kt) in what was the most difficult take-off I have experienced so far. Once on air, at Biarritz the controller adviced us (and any other aircraft around) to either land or fly inland as soon as possible as a front was approaching from the sea. So we did, turned east, inland, and continued our flight towards Toulouse.



The rest of the flight went very smoothly, even though we skipped flying over Tarbes after having slightly diverted from our planned route as demanded by controllers.

To conclude this post, find below:

  • a video we made during the flight. Despite having played with the camera for most of the flights, of having collected over 1 hour of footage, most of it is about flying in the countryside, not that interesting to watch. However, I rescued the approach and landing at Pau and the flying along the coast in the way back, which are worth seeing (~10′).
  • the navigation log as it was after using it during the flight.

Used navigation log.

Used navigation log.

If you liked this post, find in the page Flight excursions of this same blog, a list of posts describing similar experiences to other destinations.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aerospace & Defence

My baptism on a Junkers Ju 52 at La Ferté Alais 2016 (video)

Last May, we had to travel by car from Toulouse to Paris. We took the opportunity to make some stop overs along the route, one of them at Cerny, a small village in the department of Essonne where the aerodrome “La Ferté Alais” is located. There, every month of May since over 40 years ago, the association L’Amicale Jean-Baptiste Salis organizes an air show dedicated to old aircraft with an impressive static and dynamic display.

The air show in itself deserves a dedicated post which I will leave for another moment, as in this post I mainly wanted to share the video of my baptism on a Junkers Ju 52ju-52The aircraft in itself is iconic, mainly for its corrugated duraluminium skin. Over 4,000 airplanes of its different variants were built in Germany, France and Spain between 1931 and 1952. Only 8 remain airworthy today, 4 of them are operated by the Swiss company Ju Air. Ju Air brought its Ju 52/3m g4e registered HB-HOS to the air show “Le Temps des Helices” at La Ferté Alais to take part in the dynamic display and to give baptisms to aficionados, at a price of 180 euros per passenger.

When we got to know that we would attend the show I did not hesitate, I booked a place onboard the aircraft as soon as I could.

The flight lasted for about 40 minutes. We departed from Cerny and flew towards Fontainebleu, where we flew over the famous château. Find below an edited video I have made with the different clips and pictures I took in that flight.

Of the 17 passengers that we flew at that time, I believe only one made use of the headphones provided, the rest wanted to hear the roaring of those engines, therefore I left the sound unedited and I didn’t add any music to it; I wanted to leave audible the sound of the 3 engines.

I will leave for another post to provide further information and historical anecdotes of the Junkers Ju 52, as right after that flight I read a book by a former employee of CASA about it “El Junkers JU/52 3m CASA C.352. El avión y su historia” and I believe I will soon write a review of that book.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aerospace & Defence

2016 Olympic Games medal table vs. population and GDP

Now that the 2016 Olympic Games of Rio de Janeiro have finished, I wanted to update and share here in the blog a couple of tables I produced a few days ago comparing the medal count per country and the ratios of such medal count in relation to the population and the size of the economy of each country.

To start with, find here the official medal count, which is ordered taking into account which national olympic committee has obtained the most gold medals, then most silver medals and finally most bronze medals (and not by the total tally).

Rio 2016 - medal table 2016.08.21

In the table I have only included the top 20 countries, but you can find here the complete list. There are 86 nations that have collected medals in the Games. This means that over a hundred nations have not collected a single medal.

Without doubt the most dominant nation in the Olympics has been the United States with 121 medals won, 46 of them of gold. That is over 50 more medals than China or the United Kingdom.

However, the United States has a population of about 5 times that of the United Kingdom, therefore the pool of talent where to search for olympians is much larger. This allows me to introduce the first ratio: Population / medal. I collected the figures of population from the Wikipedia (here). Find a table below with the results:

Rio 2016 - ratio population medal table 2016.08.21 selection

The table shows a selection of 44 countries not the complete list of 86. Find such complete list at the bottom of the post and find your country. These 44 countries help me to make the following remarks:

  • Small nations such as Grenada and Bahamas, despite of having collected only 1-2 medals lead the table.
  • In the top 20 we find nations such as New Zealand, Denmark, Australia, Netherlands and Sweden that tend to be in the lead pack of any positive ranking. They seem to be good as well in producing olympian talent.
  • The 4 bigger European Union nations find themselves in the upper third of the list, with between 1 and 2 million inhabitants per medal, with the UK leading the pack followed by France, Germany and Italy.
  • United States for all its dominance in the medal table is only the 43rd nation taking into account the size of its population. That is at the middle of the table. One would say that the average American doesn’t play any better at sports but the sheer size of the country allows it to find plenty of good olympians in different sports.
  • Funny enough, just above the USA we find Russia in this ranking. And just below, Spain. All 3 have about 1 medal for every 2.7 million inhabitants.
  • At the bottom of the table we find large nations such as India, Nigeria, Philippines or Indonesia that with over 100 million inhabitants have also collected only between 1-3 medals each.
  • Plenty of nations have not managed to collect a single medal, some of them large nations: Pakistan (~194 million inhabitants), Bangladesh (~160 m). Most African countries have not won a medal as many in the Middle East (e.g. Saudi Arabia). Some emerging nations from Latin America neither: Chile, Peru, Uruguay

As there are few developed countries at the bottom of the list I thought of producing a similar ranking but with the ratio “gross domestic product (GDP)” / medal. The guiding thought is that the larger the size of the economy of a given country the more resources it will have to recruit sportive talent, to train it, to send it to international competitions, to build sport infrastructures, etc. (1) (2) I collected the figures of GDP from the Wikipedia (here; the source for most of the figures is the International Monetary Fund whereas for about 5 of them is the World Bank). Find a table below with the results:

Rio 2016 - ratio nominal GDP medal table 2016.08.21 selection

The table shows a similar selection of ~45 countries not the complete list of 86. Find such complete list at the bottom of the post and find your country. These countries help me to make the following remarks:

  • Among the top 30 nations all are small economies. The first G20 economy we find is Russia in the 34th position. These small economies leading the table translate between 1 bn$ and 20 bn$ of GDP per medal.
  • We find Grenada, Jamaica and Bahamas in top 10 in both rankings.
  • African nations that do well in athletics show up here: Kenya (12th) and Ethiopia (24th).
  • Where are New Zealand, Denmark, Australia, Netherlands and Sweden in this ranking? They are between the 25th (New Zealand) and the 48th (Sweden) positions, converting between 9 bn$ and 46 bn$ of GDP into a medal.
  • Where are the 4 bigger European Union nations in this ranking? They are between the 44th (United Kingdom) and the 60th (Germany) positions, converting between 41 bn$ and 82 bn$ of GDP into a medal. That is at the second half of the ranking.
  • Where is the USA? At the bottom of the pack, in the 73rd position just followed by China. Both translating between 152 – 162 bn$ of GDP into a medal. That is an economy about the size of New Zealand (4.7 million inhabitants).
  • We find the richest economies of the Middle East (Qatar and United Arab Emirates) at the bottom of the table, not being able to translate petrodollars into medals, despite of signing some good athletes.
  • At the bottom of the table we find some of the same large nations: India, Nigeria, Indonesia… and Austria.
  • Even if plenty of nations have not collected a single medal, most of the larger economies have. The largest economy in failing to win a single medal at Rio was Saudi Arabia (20th by nominal GDP), followed by Hong Kong (33rd) , Pakistan (39th) and Chile (43rd).

Another discussion would be whether in itself it is indeed important or not to collect medals at the Olympic Games but that discussion is out of the scope of this post.

(1) I used GDP and not GDP per capita with the idea the GDP per capita would be more linked to the overall sports habits and fitness level of the nation, but the number of athletes that can be sent to the olympics is limited, thus GDP would show by itself whether the size of the economy of a given country would work efficiently in finding that talent and bringing it to the level required to win medals at the olympics.

(2) I used nominal GDP instead of “purchasing power parity” figures with the idea that sport talent of olympic worth needs to be trained and tested in several international events along the year, thus comparing the more local PPP figures wouldn’t do.

Complete table with medal tally ordered by the ration “Population / medal”:

Rio 2016 - ratio population medal table 2016.08.21 TOTAL

Complete table with medal tally ordered by the ration “GDP / medal”:

Rio 2016 - ratio nominal GDP medal table 2016.08.21 TOTAL


Filed under Sports

Airbus vs. Boeing, comparison of market forecasts (2016)

Last week, on the first day of Farnborough air show, Airbus released the new figures of the 2016-35 Airbus’ Global Market Forecast (GMF, PDF 2.6 MB). This is good news, as it did so at the same time as Boeing released its Current Market Outlook (see a post here about it) and before it used to do so in September.

In previous years, I have published comparisons (1) of both Airbus’ and Boeing’s forecasts (Current Market Outlook, CMO, PDF 4.1 MB). You can find below the update of such comparison with the latest released figures from both companies.

Comparison of Airbus GMF and Boeing CMO 2016-2035.

Comparison of Airbus GMF and Boeing CMO 2016-2035.

Some comments about the comparison:

  • Boeing sees demand for 12% more passenger aircraft (excluding regional a/c) with a 10% more value (excluding freighters). The gap is higher than in 2015 (similar to 2013 and previous years).
  • In relation to last year studies, Airbus has increased demand by ~650 aircraft whereas Boeing has increased by 1,670.
  • Boeing continues to play down A380 niche potential (66% less a/c than Airbus’ GMF).
  • Both companies’ forecast for the twin aisle segment is nearly identical: ~7,600-7,700 aircraft (Airbus sees demand for about a 100 less aircraft than Boeing, mainly due to Boeing increased figures in relation to 2015). The mix between small and intermediate twins varies, ~300-400 units up and down. However, Boeing’s wide-bodies mix is not to be taken as engraved in stone, see the erratic trend in the last years here.
  • On the other hand, Boeing forecasts about 4,600 single-aisle more than Airbus (the gap has widened in 800 units this year). Boeing doesn’t provide the split between more or less than 175 pax capacity airplanes since its 2015 CMO, this year Airbus hasn’t included it either.
  • In relation to traffic, measured in terms of RPKs (“revenue passenger kilometer”), that is, the number of paying passenger by the distance they are transported, they see a similar future: Airbus forecasts for 2035 ~16.0 RPKs (in trillion, 4.5% annual growth from today) while Boeing forecasts 17.01 RPKs (4.8% annual growth).

The main changes from last year’s forecasts are:

  • Both manufacturers have increased their passenger aircraft forecast in between ~650-1,670 a/c.
  • Both manufacturers have increased the volume (trn$) of the market in these 20 years, by about 300-400 bn$.

Some lines to retain from this type of forecasts:

  • Passenger world traffic (RPK) will continue to grow about 4.5% per year (4.8% according to Boeing). This is, doubling every ~15 years.
  • Today there are about 18,019 passenger aircraft around the world (according to Airbus; 18,190 in Boeing’s CMO), this number is about 700 a/c more than the year before (4% increase) and will more than double over the next 20 years to 37,708 a/c in 2035 (39,750 as seen by Boeing, excluding regional jets).
  • Most deliveries will go to Asia-Pacific, 41% or 13,239 passenger aircraft (according to Airbus).
  • Domestic travel in China will be the largest traffic flow in 2035 with over 1,600 bn RPK (according to Airbus (x 3.7 times more than today’s traffic), or 1,897 bn RPK according to Boeing), or 11% of the World’s traffic.
  • About 12,830 aircraft will be retired to be replaced by more eco-efficient types.
Passenger traffic growth vs. global GPD growth.

Passenger traffic growth vs. global GPD growth.

As I do every year, I strongly recommend both documents (GMF and CMO) which provide a wealth of information of market dynamics. This year, Airbus included as well an excel file with its data, find it here [XLS, 0.3 MB]

(1) Find here the posts with similar comparisons I made with the forecasts of previous years: 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aerospace & Defence

Review of Boeing Current Market Outlook 2016

Last week, on the first day of Farnborough air show, Boeing Commercial published its yearly update of the Current Market Outlook (CMO) for the next 20 years of commercial aircraft market (2016-2035).

I have just compared the figures for passenger aircraft of the last two years’ CMOs:

CMO 2016 vs 2015 comparison

CMO 2016 vs. 2015 comparison.

Some comments to it:

  • You can see that the total number of new aircraft delivered has slightly increased from 37,130 to 38,690, a 4.2%, which is consistent with the 4.8% traffic increase (1) that Boeing predicts (2).
  • The volume (Bn$) increases by a larger percentage, 7.2% (380Bn$) up to 5.66 Trn$… this is due mainly to the increase in (3):
    • single-aisle aircraft expected sales in volume (8%, +230M$) and aircraft (+1,410), and
    • small wide-body segment with 220 more aircraft (+5%) and an increase in volume of 80 Bn$ (+7%).
  • Three years ago, I wrote about a sudden change between CMO 2013 and CMO 2012 of the mix in wide-bodies; in this respect, CMO 2015 is consistent with last year’s one, showing simply an  increase in demand for both sub-segments.
  • It is interesting to note how Boeing continues to downplay the large aircraft segment at the moment when a A380 is discussed, however this year’s figures are increased in relation to CMO 2014 in terms of both aircraft and volume.

This year study’s figures and presentation focus again on single-aisle (737 MAX 8, “Medium-size aircraft are at heart of single-aisle market“) and small wide-bodies (787, “opening new markets”), the products to be pushed by the sales force.

Find below the nice infographic [PDF, 464 KB] that the guys from Boeing have put up together:

Boeing Commercial Aviation Market Forecast 2016-2035 infographic.

Boeing Commercial Aviation Market Forecast 2016-2035 infographic.

As always, I recommend going through the CMO, as you can learn a lot about the business: from global numbers, to growth, traffic figures, fleet distributions, forecasts, etc… You may find the presentation [PDF, 4.7 MB], a file [XLS, 0.6 MB] with all the data or the full CMO report [PDF, 4.1 MB].

This year again, together with the CMO, Boeing provides two interesting papers from a couple of years ago: Key Findings on Airplane Economic Life [PDF, 0.3MB, dating from August 2013] and A Discussion of the Capacity Supply -Demand Balance within the Global Commercial Air Transport Industry [PDF, 0.6MB, dating from August 2013].

(1) Traffic increased measured in RPKS (revenue passenger kilometers) in billions.

(2) These two ratios, 4.2% fleet demand and 4.8% traffic growth, point to an implicit increase in the average size of the aircraft in fleet and / or a higher utilization of the aircraft (higher availability).

(3) These two segments (single-aisle and small wide-body) saw as well the largest increases in number of aircraft and volumes in the CMO of 2015 in relation to 2014.

(4) Find the reviews I wrote comparing 2015 CMO with 2014 CMO2014 CMO with 2013 CMO and 2013 CMO with 2012 CMO.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aerospace & Defence

What I Talk About When I Talk About Running (book review)

MurakamiHaruki Murakami is Japanese writer of World fame. Murakami happens to be a consistent runner since the early 1980s, about the same time as he went full-time with the process of becoming a professional writer. “What I Talk About When I Talk About Running” (2007) is an autobiographical book in which the author not only explains what running means to him but also how he turned from running a bar to becoming a writer, from being a rather sedentary person to training about 60 km weekly, running at least a marathon a year for over 25 years, etc.

Murakami draws some parallels between running and writing:

  • Stop right at the point when you feel you can do more, both when writing and running. As he says to keep going you have to keep the rhythm, the most difficult part being starting and setting the pace.
  • The most important qualities for a novelist after talent: focus (“the ability to concentrate all your limited talents on whatever’s critical at the moment”) and endurance. These two can be applicable to practically every profession (e.g. “The Focused Leader” by Daniel Goleman at HBR).

There are some other passages that drew my attention while reading the book that I want to share:

Nobody remembers what stupid things I might have said back then, so they’re not about to quote them back at me”. (Think now about today’s social media)

“I’m struck by how, except when you’re young, you really need to prioritize in life, figuring out in what order you should divide up your time and energy. If you don’t get that sort of system by a certain age, you’ll lack focus and your life will be out of balance.”

“Have you ever run sixty-two miles in a single day? […] I doubt I’ll try again, but who knows what the future may hold. Maybe someday, having forgotten my lesson, I’ll take up the challenge of an ultramarathon again” (No need to tell me that)

“[…] Thus the seasons come and go, and the years pass by. I’ll age one more year, and probably finish another novel. One by one. I’ll face the tasks before me and complete them the best I can. Focusing on each stride forward, but at the same time taking a long-range view scanning the scenery as far ahead as I can. I am, after all, a long-distance runner.”

If you are a frequent runner it is quite easy to relate to the author in several passages (1). In my case, it has been from the races he has taken part in (New York or Athens marathons), to the experiences lived in a 100 km ultra marathon, the thoughts or lack of them while running, the balance found in training, etc.

The book is rather light (about 180 pages in the version I have) and makes for a good reading, however, if he ever wins the literature Nobel prize it won’t be for this book.🙂

(1) I guess that for a professional writer there may be several parts easy to relate to as well.

Leave a comment

Filed under Books