Strategic destruction of the Western commercial aircraft sector: Implications of systems integration and international risk-sharing business models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper offers a critical perspective on the changing organisational structure of the Western commercial aircraft industry. The role of systems integration based on risk-sharing partnerships for new aircraft programmes is explored. We find that build-to-print subcontracting relationships are being replaced by internationally devolved design and engineering tasks for airframe development, signaling a profound change in the geography of commercial aircraft production. While sensible from a financial standpoint, the international outsourcing of design-intensive production entails substantial amounts of technology transfer–including the delivery of proprietary knowledge to risk-sharing partners. For several of the advanced market economies, including Canada, France, Germany, the UK, and the US, the long-range strategic downside is that foreign risk-sharing partners could eventually become competitors. Systems integration on a risk-sharing basis also implies home-country joblosses among skilled workers with expertise in design, engineering, and R&D.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it