Is Ranil pining for Boeing?

BY DR UPUL WIJAYAWARDHANA-February 14, 2020, 8:30 pm

Which is worse, putting profit before safety or backhanders to enhance sales? Politicians may have their own opinions but what should really matter is the opinion of passengers. Squeezed into a giant aluminium tube with hundreds of other passengers, travelling at speeds approaching the speed of sound, at an altitude of around 30,000 to 40,000 feet, flying non-stop for up to almost 19 hours, I am sure many a passenger would consider safety to be of paramount importance.

In today’s world of flight there are two major players; Boeing, based in the USA, and Airbus based in Europe. William Boeing started his company in Seattle, Washington, way back in 1916, and with the merger of McDonnell Douglas, in 1997, it has become a huge corporation and, in dollar value, is the largest exporter in the USA. Airbus is, relatively, a newcomer and the multinational European manufacturer’s origin can be traced back to 1970, when consolidation of European aircraft manufacturers took place. However, last year it overtook Boeing as the largest aircraft manufacturer in the world. Airbus has challenged the dominance of Boeing in other ways too; by introducing the first digital fly-by-wire aircraft, A320 and next, by producing the largest passenger aircraft A380, which overtook the work-horse of long-distance travel, the Boeing 747, the ‘Jumbo’.

At present, both aeronautical giants are facing gigantic problems; Boeing losing trust as it seems to have put profits before safety, and Airbus because of its admission of backhanders to increase sales!

Boeing’s best seller was the narrow-body, short-haul aircraft B737, which underwent a modification to have larger engines that could fly longer distances. Rather than designing a new aircraft, the 737 Max was launched, with a computer programme to stabilise the aircraft due to the change of centre of gravity produced, but training on this was not made mandatory. A brand-new 737Max aircraft of Lion Air crashed in October 2018, off the coast of Indonesia, followed in March 2019, by the crash of Ethiopian Airlines brand-new 737Max, with a total loss of 346 lives. Boeing was slow to act, not taking any useful action after the first crash and delayed action after the second crash. In fact, Federal Aviation Administration too delayed taking action, being the last to ground the 737Max, which remains grounded still. CEO of Boeing who was adamant that safety was not compromised had to resign, finally.

The grounding of 737 Max has affected many airlines and they had turned to Airbus but it is not able to capitalise on the woes of its rival, which is facing many law-suites, too, as it has no capacity to increase production. Apparently, the production line of A320 will be full till 2025. In spite of this, Airbus recently reported an overall loss of 1.36 billion euros for 2019. The main reason for the shortfall was an agreement to pay $4 billion in fines to France, Britain and the United States to settle a lengthy global corruption investigation. This they hope will remove the legal cloud and help them to keep ahead of Boeing.

Unfortunately, SriLankan Airlines has also got involved in the Airbus scandal and it is claimed that $ 2 million was paid to an account of the former CEO’s wife. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa called for an immediate investigation no sooner this was reported and the former CEO and his wife are in remand, pending investigations. SriLankan Airlines, unfortunately, developed a bad reputation under the chairmanship of Nishantha Wickremesinghe, but it was no better under the Yahapalanaya. An order for A 350 aircraft was cancelled with agreement to pay huge compensation, which, according to many, was a bad commercial decision, a renegotiation being a much better option. Now that Airbus has admitted liability for corruption, our government should take urgent steps to seek compensation, as stated in the editorial ‘Soaring corruption’ (11 February):

"Former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has called upon the government to demand compensation from Airbus for having bribed a SriLankan Airlines executive and his wife to clinch aircraft sales. One cannot but agree with him. Sri Lanka must sue Airbus. Now that the aircraft manufacturing giant has paid USD 4 billion in fines to the UK, the US and France, Sri Lanka’s may be an open-and-shut case."

What causes concern, as commented by the editor is Ranil’s next suggestion:

"Wickremesinghe has also called for a ban on the purchase of aircraft from Airbus. Most Sri Lankans seem to think this is the course of action the country should resort to, but let no hasty decisions be made. The real problem is not the quality of the Airbus products but the manner in which they have been sold, we reckon. Therefore, the question is whether it is advisable to impose a blanket ban on the purchase of Airbus planes."

"Wickremesinghe has said that if Sri Lanka bans Airbus products, other countries will follow suit. But what guarantee is there that other plane-makers won’t grease the palms of airline executives and their political bosses to influence sales?"

If we ban the purchase of Airbus aircraft, there is no choice but to go for Boeing aircraft. Are we to change to a supplier who put profit before safety, shying away from a manufacturer whose products are not questioned though sales tactics are very questionable? As the Sinhala saying goes, it is the choice between the proverbial ‘kehi geni’ and ‘hotu geni’!

The 12,000th aircraft made by Airbus, an A220, was delivered to Delta Air Lines on 20 May 2019 and there is no decrease in orders following the scandal. Therefore, SriLankan Airlines boycotting Airbus products is not likely to have any impact, contrary to Ranil’s assertion.

SriLankan has an all Airbus fleet of 26. If we start buying Boeing aircraft, henceforth, we would need facilities for two different types of aircraft, adding to the running cost, which would be a disaster for the loss-making carries.

Let us not forget that the chums Ranil brought to head SriLankan Airlines did as bad as the previous lot. He had ample time to investigate suspicious deals which he did not do. Therefore, is Ranil making use of this opportunity to help his American friends is a moot question. It is well known that Ranil had been a regular visitor to the USA on many occasions, sometimes for so-called ‘lecture tours’. Making use of the Airbus scandal as an excuse, is Ranil pining for Boeing?