Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5634317/

Topic: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Max Q
Posted 2012-12-13 04:12:53 and read 18993 times.

This, last of the 7 series is still a mystery.


What's it going to be ?


A real clean sheet replacement for the venerable 737, or a completely new 777 type product.


Even more intriguing, a real VLA replacement for the 747-8.



Thoughts, opinions ?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-13 04:18:16 and read 18972 times.

With the 777 most likely being updated its the 737 that will get replaced first, so my guess is that the NSA will be the 797. One has to wonder how long the 737 will live on, there will come a day when there is a lot efficiency to gain by replacing it despite the huge costs of new programs.

I guess the MAX is the last iteration of the fantastic 737 family.

Maybe an EIS 10-12 years after the EIS of the MAX? Seems like MAX will be a 2 model family, the 7 model having zero orders and very low interest in the market. The 797 will grow to capture the niche above the 739 and below the 787-8, that itself probably will be a slow seller going forward.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: BlueSky1976
Posted 2012-12-13 04:43:59 and read 18823 times.

Successor to the 737. 777 will live on for now in form of 777-8, -8ER, -8F and -9, the life of 787 has just begun, 747 is on its death bed (about time) and 737MAX is the last of the line. Sure it is selling, but Boeing will need to replace it sooner than later.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: waly777
Posted 2012-12-13 07:58:05 and read 18289 times.

It will most probably be the next short/medium haul aircraft to replace the 737-Max. The concept that was once floated around by Boeing of a twin aisle 737 sized (800 and above) aircraft certainly looked interesting.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: readytotaxi
Posted 2012-12-13 08:06:36 and read 18228 times.

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 2):
An aircraft?

Only you would be so daring.  

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Triple7X
Posted 2012-12-13 08:15:13 and read 18155 times.

There are rumors of a ''Blended Wing Design' for the B797...although I don't know how true is the rumor

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-13 08:55:02 and read 18002 times.

Quoting Triple7X (Reply 6):

There are rumors of a ''Blended Wing Design' for the B797...although I don't know how true is the rumor

I really doubt it. This month's Boeing Frontiers has a nice article on their BWB prototype. Boeing Commercial passed the BWB project off from Commercial to Phantom Works many years ago...they now think the first application will be military, which makes a lot of sense.

http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2012/december/#/1/

Tom.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: lhcvg
Posted 2012-12-13 08:59:47 and read 17964 times.

Am I right to think that the 797 will be true 757 replacement, given that the MAX and the NEO are still under 200 seats and marginal for TATL? My thinking is: centered in 200-seat range with some growth potential to 220ish and some shrinkage to a 150+ seater (if they even bother at that point, with the possibility of a "CS350" or "CS400" maybe growing to fill those shoes), and I presume the range would be pushed enough to give it legitimate TATL capability to cover current 75E jobs, if not a bit more.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: ukoverlander
Posted 2012-12-13 10:01:45 and read 17773 times.

Quoting Max Q (Thread starter):
What's it going to be ?

Let's hope for Beoing's sake ........a) on time and b) profitable !!!!!!!!!!

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: YTZ
Posted 2012-12-13 10:28:38 and read 17652 times.

I would say the 797 will be the true 737/757 replacement.

Baseline will be 200 seats (single seat capacity). And the shrink will be 30 seat less (170 1-class). The stretch will be 30 seats more (230 1-class). Single aisle. Wider aisle. Wider seats. TATL range with a full payload. Substantially lower operating costs than either aircraft.

Nothing too radical like BWB.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: PHX787
Posted 2012-12-13 11:32:58 and read 17448 times.

I think the 797 will probably be the last quad ULH in our history. And I'm saying that as a 21 year old. I see it as a bridge between the 77W and the 744/748. I see it as a structural engineering feat beyond what we know so far, as well as containing the most fuel-efficient engines in the world, burning biofuels at a rate that makes the GEnx look like the PWs on an MD88. Extremely contoured fuselage, built for speed and efficiency, and with the lowest drag ratio of any aircraft in the air today.

All of this is just a hope though  

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-13 12:41:22 and read 17251 times.

Yeah the 797 should be 170/200/230 a perfect portfolio in these times with so much competition below 150 seats, none above 220. The 787-8 will not be the best selling 787 model, here the NSA will see to it as well.

The question is how do you make a 170 seat short haul plane good at 230 seats TATL?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: capri
Posted 2012-12-13 12:44:52 and read 17223 times.

It will be a tri-jet, bring those back, we will love to see an updated MD11

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: morrisond
Posted 2012-12-13 12:44:59 and read 17222 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 11):
The question is how do you make a 170 seat short haul plane good at 230 seats TATL?

Really big electromagnetic Catapult?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2012-12-13 12:54:28 and read 17160 times.

I'm not sure there will be a B-797. Boeing may just jump to the next family, the B-800 series, beginning with the B-808. That will be a good start towards replacing the entire B-700 series of the most successfull airline family in history.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-13 12:56:37 and read 17140 times.

Well if the NSA would grow why not do a proper TATL shuttle? Having a lot less OEW compared to the 787-8 with 230 seats on long and thin. If range was not important we would not see the MAX/NEO at 3600nm.

I think the OEMs see place for NBs on some routes served with old WB gear currently. Comfort for passengers? Well I think the economics will rule. Either go with few packed A380s or more frequency on NBs. NBs have one fat advantage, OEW/Seat, very little dead space per seat.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: BigJKU
Posted 2012-12-13 13:13:28 and read 17062 times.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 9):
I would say the 797 will be the true 737/757 replacement.

Baseline will be 200 seats (single seat capacity). And the shrink will be 30 seat less (170 1-class). The stretch will be 30 seats more (230 1-class). Single aisle. Wider aisle. Wider seats. TATL range with a full payload. Substantially lower operating costs than either aircraft.

Nothing too radical like BWB.

I think that the next small aircraft won't happen until one of two things occur.

1. There is a new form factor (ie not tube and wings) that radically increases efficiency. Otherwise it is just not worth it as you can keep slapping new engines on the 737 and A320 with comparatively minor changes and low upfront cost.

2. There is a manufacturing revolution where Boeing or Airbus can drastically reduce the man hours put into assembling each airframe. This would necessitate in my view the ability to do a single piece CFRP barrel where the only joins are the tail assembly and the cockpit section, or possibly cooking in one piece everything but the tail assembly.

Number 1 allows you to charge more money for a more efficient aircraft. Number 2 lets you charge about the same amount of money for a slightly more efficient aircraft (benefits of CFRP reduce as you get smaller). Short of those two things happening I just don't see anyone taking on the risk in this sector.

I think the next Boeing is going to be a full on 777 replacement rather than them doing the 777x. It will be a twin, look similar to the 777 but possibly be a bit wider and be a CFRP aircraft from the start.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: lhcvg
Posted 2012-12-13 13:14:45 and read 17050 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 11):
The question is how do you make a 170 seat short haul plane good at 230 seats TATL?

I think that's just it: it will be centered around the 200-seat range, with appropriate accomodations for the 230-odd seat stretch, which I assume would be the size for a possible ~200 seat TATL plane. Certainly there will be the ability to shrink to ~170, but in order to get the top-end performance (and absolutely if you want to take 200+ TATL in the larger variant rather than just ~175) you'll need to optimize for that at the expense of the little guy. Of course they could always do a 787-10 or A35J and make some tweaks to the stretch TATL variant, but that may not be feasible in this size range. In short, I think any 170-seat 797 variant will probably get the short end of the optimization.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: HoMsaR
Posted 2012-12-13 13:22:14 and read 17013 times.

I think it will be well into the 2020s before we have any hint of what the "797" (or whatever the next new commercial aircraft Boeing develops is called) will look like.

That gives us at least 12-15 more years of "what will replace the 757?" threads.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-13 13:23:51 and read 17015 times.

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 17):

Yeah If the 200 seater has TATL range that would actually replace the 752 right off the bat, with the larger model having the range of NEO/MAX A321/739, 230 seats to Hawaii or east coast to west coast.

The 170 seater could have a lower MTOW instead to lower fees?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: lhcvg
Posted 2012-12-13 13:36:08 and read 16950 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 19):

Yeah If the 200 seater has TATL range that would actually replace the 752 right off the bat, with the larger model having the range of NEO/MAX A321/739, 230 seats to Hawaii or east coast to west coast.

The 170 seater could have a lower MTOW instead to lower fees?

Well I think they have three options here:

1) Build it with the base model (200-seat domestic config, ~175ish w/ J) having TATL range, and the stretch (~230 domestic/~200 w/ J config) being like the NEO or MAX where it can just barely do it. The 170-seat shrink still gets short shrift, but won't be too far off given it's lower fees and better field performance where needed.

2) Build so both models can do TATL, where the 230/200 stretch has some optimizations to give it true TATL range but at the expense of some commonality with the 200/175 base model. Obviously this is more complex and expensive, but it just depends on where the market goes for it, and how extensive the mods would have to be to get there. I think this is worse for the 170-seat version because the base will have to share some accomodations made for the stretch that will only harm the economics of the shrink even more.

3) Just can the idea of a 170-seater altogether. Leave everything below 200 domestic/175 int'l to BBD and Emb and just optimize purely for the 200-250(HD) market below the 787.

Not saying which is necessarily the better course for Boeing, but they each have some different costs and benefits to them.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: justinlee
Posted 2012-12-13 13:37:40 and read 16951 times.

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 7):
Am I right to think that the 797 will be true 757 replacement, given that the MAX and the NEO are still under 200 seats and marginal for TATL? My thinking is: centered in 200-seat range with some growth potential to 220ish and some shrinkage to a 150+ seater (if they even bother at that point, with the possibility of a "CS350" or "CS400" maybe growing to fill those shoes), and I presume the range would be pushed enough to give it legitimate TATL capability to cover current 75E jobs, if not a bit more.

Totally agree, there is actually no exact 757 replacement in the market. I guess 797 would serve some really thin routes, which means a narrow body long-haul plane. The range should be around 9,000 km in order to serve trans-atlantic and trans-eurasia routes.


Quoting sweair (Reply 15):
Well if the NSA would grow why not do a proper TATL shuttle? Having a lot less OEW compared to the 787-8 with 230 seats on long and thin. If range was not important we would not see the MAX/NEO at 3600nm.

787-8 is still too big to serve really long and thin routes. Most companies will use it as a 767 replacement in the current economy.

Quoting sweair (Reply 15):
NBs have one fat advantage, OEW/Seat, very little dead space per seat.

Narrow body has another big advantage: air resistance.

[Edited 2012-12-13 13:39:05]

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: lhcvg
Posted 2012-12-13 13:48:02 and read 16896 times.

Quoting justinlee (Reply 21):
The range should be around 9,000 km in order to serve trans-atlantic and trans-eurasia routes.

I think so. I'd like to see them go all-out and push it to 10K, but we can always dream, and 9K would be totally sufficient for a lot of TATL work.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: strfyr51
Posted 2012-12-13 13:58:17 and read 16834 times.

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 7):

Y'know? I think you're right. I think the 797 will be a replacement for the 757 with about a 3000 Mi range and hopefully with an 8" wider cabin. The 737 is a little cramped for ETOPS flying over 5 hrs. and a replacement for the 757 would be an excellent airplane for West coast- Hawaii or East coast- Western Europe. a very suitable mid range airplane with a little
wider fuselage for a nicer seat and shoulder room. JMO of course.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: seabosdca
Posted 2012-12-13 14:03:57 and read 16812 times.

You all are very fixated on the TATL 757 mission... you are forgetting that it represents about 150-200 of the about 10,000 narrowbodies in service worldwide.

I also expect the next all-new Boeing plane to be a narrowbody, although there is an outside chance it could be a 777/747 replacement (likely with an ovoid cross-section just a bit wider, but significantly less tall, than a current 747).

But that narrowbody will be optimized to serve the bulk of the missions. If it weren't, Airbus would just come in with something lighter and more efficient. As we are already hearing of the neo and MAX, Boeing will develop the 3500 nm variant first and then figure out what has to be done to get a variant to 4000+ nm for those few operators needing longer range.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: lhcvg
Posted 2012-12-13 14:06:54 and read 17224 times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 23):

Yup that's exactly what I'm thinking - a 757 with wider cabin (~13 ft) and the accompanying better range and efficiency from 30 years of new developments. Unless something changes where designs don't have to be so optimized around a given "center", I just don't see 797 covering much except for the very top end of the MAX/NEO market.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-12-13 14:08:28 and read 17162 times.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 9):
I would say the 797 will be the true 737/757 replacement.

That is my first thought. But I got to thinking, and I know that is a dangerous place to be, but I wonder if we could see a 100-120 seat short haul aircraft that would be more of a replacement for the market that seems to not have a Boeing aircraft to cover.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: BigJKU
Posted 2012-12-13 14:28:27 and read 17217 times.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 24):
You all are very fixated on the TATL 757 mission... you are forgetting that it represents about 150-200 of the about 10,000 narrowbodies in service worldwide.

I also expect the next all-new Boeing plane to be a narrowbody, although there is an outside chance it could be a 777/747 replacement (likely with an ovoid cross-section just a bit wider, but significantly less tall, than a current 747).

But that narrowbody will be optimized to serve the bulk of the missions. If it weren't, Airbus would just come in with something lighter and more efficient. As we are already hearing of the neo and MAX, Boeing will develop the 3500 nm variant first and then figure out what has to be done to get a variant to 4000 nm for those few operators needing longer range.

This was kind of my thought. The preference for 737/A320 types seemed pretty clear back then. The handful of aircraft like this doing long range work are not a viable business case.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Bill142
Posted 2012-12-13 14:29:28 and read 17194 times.

the 797 will be a hypersonic aircraft powered by dark matter.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: YTZ
Posted 2012-12-13 16:01:37 and read 15886 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 26):
That is my first thought. But I got to thinking, and I know that is a dangerous place to be, but I wonder if we could see a 100-120 seat short haul aircraft that would be more of a replacement for the market that seems to not have a Boeing aircraft to cover.

Only if Boeing can offer something substantially better than its competition which will yield good sales. Otherwise, roughly splitting the pie makes for poor economics.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: zippyjet
Posted 2012-12-13 16:41:23 and read 15338 times.

Quoting Bill142 (Reply 28):

That will be Boeing's foray into their new 800 or 7000 family.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-13 16:55:39 and read 15186 times.

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 27):
This was kind of my thought. The preference for 737/A320 types seemed pretty clear back then. The handful of aircraft like this doing long range work are not a viable business case.

I don't know about the others, but for me at least it's a size issue more than anything - the 737 and 320 both max out around 200 seats, and those versions end up a bit short on range and field performance too. The gap in the current market is right around 200-250 seats for a domestic bird, and that seems like the next logical hole to fill by centering the 797 on that range rather than sub-200 seats. I don't see a game-changing development in the 737/320 size range in the time a 797 would come to market, but I do see the perfect timing for replacing 200-230 seat domestic lift, 200-seat transcon w/ short-field capability, and narrowbody TATL missions currently held by the 757. All those NEO's and MAX's rolling off the lines soon will be holding up just fine for the time being. As said above, there is obviously room for a shrink that would more closely fit the 170ish seat slot and that's where A and B are headed anyway (above 150 seats).

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: seabosdca
Posted 2012-12-13 17:23:04 and read 14854 times.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 31):
I do see the perfect timing for replacing 200-230 seat domestic lift, 200-seat transcon w/ short-field capability, and narrowbody TATL missions currently held by the 757.

The problem is that all of these markets together don't add up to nearly enough frames to justify a whole new type.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-13 17:34:29 and read 14795 times.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
I'm not sure there will be a B-797. Boeing may just jump to the next family, the B-800 series, beginning with the B-808.

I just had a terrible revelation...unless Boeing calls their next new type the 797, the a.net thread debacle will be epic. There is no possible name they can come up with that won't immediately bring out the lovers and the haters in a way never seen in modern times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 23):
I think the 797 will be a replacement for the 757 with about a 3000 Mi range and hopefully with an 8" wider cabin.

3000 mi is under 3000nm, and 3000nm isn't enough to even do US east coast to UK reliably. Realistically, you want 4000nm to do the TATL market.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 26):
I wonder if we could see a 100-120 seat short haul aircraft that would be more of a replacement for the market that seems to not have a Boeing aircraft to cover.

There's a reason Boeing and Airbus don't play in that market...there are already two established OEMs, soon to be four or five, and the margins are terrible.

Tom.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-13 18:15:35 and read 14316 times.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 32):
The problem is that all of these markets together don't add up to nearly enough frames to justify a whole new type.

No, but they'd surely support at least a variant of it. The 797 that I am proposing would go 170-230ish seats and 3000ish to 5000-5500 mile range. Within that, I would think you'd have a good number of orders for the shrink to replace 738s/320s (those who didn't go MAX or NEO, and even some to replace those ordered just as stopgaps), a decent chunk of the base model to replace the 739s/321s/757s and again a few NEO/MAX customers who arranged a deal for that, another chunk for true 752 replacement (the scenario you're getting at), then the stretch would get a decent number to replace 753s and expand capacity in that size range as global air travel increases (presumed). My point is that I think they have to build in the growth capability for those missions from the outset (the groundwork with design choices, not all the specific parts obviously), otherwise it will be far more complex and expensive to do it later.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: bohica
Posted 2012-12-13 18:24:24 and read 14263 times.

Boeing will go back to it's roots of jet design for the 797. It will be a 200 seat plane based on a plane they built a long time ago, the 367-80. This plane will carry four P&W turboJETS mounted in pods below the wing. It will be a fuel guzzler and the avionics will be a type once known as steam guages. The plane will be extremely loud and will be easily heard five miles away from the airport. During takeoff it will leave trails of very thick black smoke and shake every building near the airport.

The seats will be comfortable, even in Y. Y will have a generous 36" seat pitch. IFE will consist of magazines and newspapers handed out by the stewardess. Children will be given coloring books, crayons, and a miniature model of the plane. A movie might be shown on a flight. It will be projected onto a retractable screen which when pulled down, will block the aisle.

Ahhh, the good ole days.   

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: seabosdca
Posted 2012-12-13 18:25:25 and read 14219 times.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 34):
Within that, I would think you'd have a good number of orders for the shrink to replace 738s/320s

A shrink by its very nature is not well optimized. Right now the 738/320 space (particularly at the 738 size) is the exact heart of the market. That may move slightly up over time, but probably to 200 seats, not 220 or 230. If Boeing relies on a shrink of an aircraft optimized for 230 seats to cover the heart of the market, Airbus will just waltz in with a new frame optimized for 200 seats and the result won't be pretty for Boeing.

I think there is no choice but to optimize for the heart of the market and then do what you can (ACTs, wingtip extensions, thrust bumps, ugly-ish field performance, etc.) to accommodate the range and capacity outliers as best you can. The optimized frame should be about halfway between today's 738 and 739ER, with sufficient endurance for real-world missions of 7 to 7.5 hours. Then there can be a stretch to a size between the 752 and 753, and a high-weight/extra-fuel variant that can do nine-hour missions.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: xlc
Posted 2012-12-13 18:29:06 and read 14208 times.

What are China, India, and Brazil going to need? That's where the growth is going to happen. Especially if Brazil builds all 800 of those proposed airports!   

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: PassedV1
Posted 2012-12-13 22:16:29 and read 12439 times.

Quoting xlc (Reply 37):
What are China, India, and Brazil going to need? That's where the growth is going to happen. Especially if Brazil builds all 800 of those proposed airports!

Agreed, however the US market is still the largest.

By the time this airplane comes online....say 2025ish, all of the early 800/900's are gonig to need replacing and the MAX is obviously a stop-gap.

Not surprisingly I think the resulting aircraft will look a lot like a "757NG". I think more important than range will be increased cargo capacity. A more oval fuselage which allows for a taller fuselage that carries more cargo and more fuel in the main tanks. Composite construction of course, with geared fan engines.

I think Boeing will definetly have a new NB replacement in short order, I think a bigger question is if it will be a 737 or not. That will depend on how far the FAA let's them stretch the term "type".

If you compare a 737-100 and a 737-900ER the differences are astounding. Boeing has even managed to get the FAA to sign off on an all glass 777ish flight displays. The MAX is going to be 787ish.

I can see Boeing developing the "757NG" described above with a totally new design but making those changes invisible to the pilot. They could position/design the cockpit so the outside site picture is the same for the pilots. With total FBW they could design the flight controls to mimic that of a 737MAX. The same could be done with the systems, if you make it invisible to the pilot then I don't believe it matters, what difference does it make to the pilot if a "pressurization switch" opens a bleed off the engine or turns on an electrically driven air pump.

What is the limit of calling something a "737"

I guess this all means that my prediction is that the 797 will be a wide-body.

[Edited 2012-12-13 22:18:10]

[Edited 2012-12-13 22:19:43]

[Edited 2012-12-13 22:20:55]

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: davs5032
Posted 2012-12-13 22:57:38 and read 12177 times.

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 25):
Yup that's exactly what I'm thinking - a 757 with wider cabin (~13 ft) and the accompanying better range and efficiency from 30 years of new developments. Unless something changes where designs don't have to be so optimized around a given "center", I just don't see 797 covering much except for the very top end of the MAX/NEO market.

Unless Boeing changes their design strategy, I don't see it widening this much. On basically their entire product line, they've kept the fuselage small enough to allow for a tight seating arrangement (which they know airlines will utilize so long as the general public won't pay more for a few inches) allowing for a maximum number of seats in a minimized fuselage in order to limit weight and drag. The 737/757, 777 and 787 are all in this format. I think they'll probably widen the 737/757 replacement a couple inches to give ..ahem.. wider passengers some more space, as the cabin is quite cramped, but they won't add more than 6", because there's not much to gain by doing so, especially when airlines couldn't go 4x3 anyway. I also think when the 777 replacement arrives, it will follow the same strategy, allowing for a tight 3x5x3 layout.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: flightsimer
Posted 2012-12-13 23:05:31 and read 12112 times.

I had thought about this late last year and came up with the following. I even had projected numbers for dimensions of the proposed family, but I can't find the notebook I wrote it in.

The aircraft systems would all be scaled down versions of the 787s such as the all electrical system architecture, FBW, etc... Construction material could be anything, but I think CFRP Is most likely.

The aircraft itself will be 6 abreast in a 3-3 configuration. However, the aisle will be wide enough for two average sized adults to pass one another side by side. The seats themselves will be wider as well for greater comfort. The fuselage would be between the 767 and 737 in width.

Now for the aircraft sizes. In this family, I see three mini families within the main family of aircraft. This would allow it to be Certified under one family for commonality but offer the widest range of products for the airlines. Between each mini-family, the planes would share at the very least 80% of the parts that airlines would have to stock. And if possible, I would try to have at minimum, 60% of the parts shared between group 1 and 3. However, the true shared amount would be whatever is required for the certification under one family certificate and the more the better.

So onto the sizes.

-100 : seats 110 in two classes
-200 : seats 140 in two classes

-300 : seats 170 in two classes
-400 : seats 200 in two classes

-500 : seats 230 in two classes
-600 : seats 260 in two classes (not sure if this model is really needed to begin with)

Now how this would work, Boeing would start with the -300, 170 seat aircraft. They would then shrink it to create the 110 seat -100 and optimize the -100 for its role. They would then do a simple stretch of the -100 to create the -200. They would then do a simple stretch of the -300 to make the -400. Finally, they would stretch the -300 to the -500 length and re-optimize the -500 for Its intended role. They would finally do a simple stretch of the -500 to create the -600. I'm not sure the -600 is really even needed due to the limited sales of the 757-300 previously.

Group one would be capable of flying at least 2000nm westbound during the winter months. Group two and three would be capable of flying At least 4000nm westbound during the winter months. I'm thinking there would be two wing profiles available, one optimized for the first group which would be a narrow span for domestic ops and one optimized for groups two and three which would be wider. However, I'm thinking that group two would be available with group one's wing for a more domestic role should the operator choose too. Both aircraft from group three would be double bogey main landing gear while groups one and two would only be single.

If Boeing would be able to produce this family of aircraft, it would be on hell of a program to go against.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-13 23:20:50 and read 11996 times.

As the 739-ER has replaced the 737-700 sort of I would say size will grow. The base model will be a bit larger than the 737-800, 170 seats 2 class..compared to 162 seats 2 class..

The bigger model/models would have higher MTOW of the base model to increase payload range, more thrust etc

The current 737 is handicapped going bigger. Below the 737-9 there will be increasing competition, this i a market best left to the others. The bigger models one 200 seater and one 230 seater could be optimized for different markets too, one high density east to west coast, one with the range to make long and thin where the 787-8 is too big/wasteful.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: vhtje
Posted 2012-12-14 03:49:20 and read 10381 times.

Wasn't the 797 a Mazda?

  

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-14 06:31:54 and read 9998 times.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 40):
However, the aisle will be wide enough for two average sized adults to pass one another side by side. The seats themselves will be wider as well for greater comfort.

Why would airlines pay for the extra weight and drag for that non-revenue space? What's in it for the customer?

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 40):
So onto the sizes.
-100 : seats 110 in two classes
-200 : seats 140 in two classes

-300 : seats 170 in two classes
-400 : seats 200 in two classes

-500 : seats 230 in two classes
-600 : seats 260 in two classes

That's a more than 100% cabin stretch across models...that has never been even close to achieved on any airliner. There is just no way for that to be done with acceptable performance unless you completely redo the fuselage and wing gauges for one of the ends. That can, of course, be done but it drives the design/development/tooling/test costs through the roof so it makes the business case a lot harder to work out.

Tom.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-14 06:51:05 and read 9922 times.

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 39):

A 13' cabin is just a few inches more than a current 320 cabin...hardly a big difference. That's why I said ~13' -- wider yes, but very doable in a marginally larger external cross-section, especially as we continue to refine our designs in terms of potential cabin size within a given fuselage diameter. The idea here is that you'd have an inch or two added to the aisle and each seat, which would put you right around 13 feet even, vs. a current Boeing narrowbody cabin. Speaking of Airbus fuselages, another thing I think we'll see is more extensive cargo space like a 320 and 757 have vs. a 737.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 40):

I think below 150 has pretty much sailed at this point - 110 definitely a no-go, and 140 only has a slim chance. IF Boeing does a 100+ seater, it will be an optimized design a la C-series. I won't wade into that here, but suffice it to say that plane would not be the same plane that would replace the 737-757 range in the lineup. My guess would be that the max size difference would be ~80 seats at most, from the presumed 170-seat variant slotting between 738s and 739s to potentially (if needed) 250ish at the very high end for a stretch, more likely a direct 753 replacement in the 230 range.

That said, I think you hit it on the head with the commonality and different models. And in reference to my previous points, what you get at is what I was trying to say about TATL capability: it may well require significant differentiation that reduces commonality but takes advantage of economies of scale from the other variants in most areas. Given the range of desired capabilities they may well need to have two somewhat different 797 models.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: panais
Posted 2012-12-14 07:21:28 and read 9841 times.

Many seem to ignore the family aspect of selling aircraft. Airbus is very focused on demonstrating business benefits of using a family of products. So far they are doing OK with the A320 and the A330 which is to be replaced by the A350. While people are talking about meeting niche market such as 757 TATL, Airbus offers an A321NEO that can do probably 80% of the routes. No airline is going to blame them for not offering 100% cover. Instead airlines with either up-size or downsize the plane or drop the route altogether.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-14 07:35:53 and read 9777 times.

Quoting panais (Reply 45):
While people are talking about meeting niche market such as 757 TATL, Airbus offers an A321NEO that can do probably 80% of the routes. No airline is going to blame them for not offering 100% cover. Instead airlines with either up-size or downsize the plane or drop the route altogether.

It's not about covering a niche market, which obviously couldn't prop up the type by itself. It's simply about making fundamental design choices to accomodate those variants down the road. It's like building a pickup truck: when Chevy designs a new Silverado (or Ford an F-150), the 1500 is obviously the big seller, but the HD models are also a key driver of several design choices. The 1500 market is massive compared to the HD demand, but nonetheless they know that they will make an HD version, so there are some choices made at various points to accomodate expansion into those capabilities.

I'm not an engineer so I can't speak to the exact nature of these, but there are most definitely going to be a number of instances where they have to choose how to design something, where they can spend a couple extra bucks now to allow for much better capability down the road. You can still get a Silverado 1500 for ~$20k, even though you can build out a 3500HD for maybe $50k at the high end. But the only reason that can happen is that the 1500 includes some accomodations for special HD parts or components that would be far more expensive and difficult to retrofit later if not considered in the initial design process. Likewise, the bread n' butter of the 797 will be the 80% of current 737/320/757 missions that will be covered by the "1500" versions of the plane, but there is still enough high-end demand to support investment in those variants when you are doing a clean-sheet design.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: clydenairways
Posted 2012-12-14 07:48:37 and read 9743 times.

I think it will be a 200 seater 737 replacement with various models covering the 170-230 seat range.

I think it will be optimised for efficiency in the shorter ranges as this is what circa 95% of the missions require.

It won't have the performance of the 757 because you can't have this for free without compromising more efficiency at the core 1-4 hour segments.

I think it will have marginal TATL capability and not as much as the 757 can do.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-12-14 08:32:43 and read 9644 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 43):
What's in it for the customer?

Which customer are you talking about? Airlines who purchase the aircraft or passengers who fly in the aircraft. The airlines who purchase the aircraft are the ones who will ultimately decide on what is built. They will either have a say in the design or they will not purchase the offering. Due to the amount of money needed to develop an airliner they will not proceed with a brand new model with out input from its best customers.

The people who fly the aircraft won't matter to Boeing as it is up to the airline to determine that part of the equation. Looking at what is offered these days, the airlines don't really care about its customers either.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-14 09:05:35 and read 9582 times.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 44):
A 13' cabin is just a few inches more than a current 320 cabin...hardly a big difference. That's why I said ~13' -- wider yes, but very doable in a marginally larger external cross-section, especially as we continue to refine our designs in terms of potential cabin size within a given fuselage diameter. The idea here is that you'd have an inch or two added to the aisle and each seat, which would put you right around 13 feet even, vs. a current Boeing narrowbody cabin.

But for what purpose? It's been proven time and time again that passengers aren't willing to pay for wider seats or wider aisles. How do they get a return on the investment in making the fuselage a few inches wider when it can't seat more passengers abreast?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-14 09:23:00 and read 9537 times.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 46):
I'm not an engineer so I can't speak to the exact nature of these, but there are most definitely going to be a number of instances where they have to choose how to design something, where they can spend a couple extra bucks now to allow for much better capability down the road. You can still get a Silverado 1500 for ~$20k, even though you can build out a 3500HD for maybe $50k at the high end.

This is absolutely true. The problem with aircraft is that the impact of those design tweaks to support the bigger model directly and materially impact the performance of the smaller model. In cars, you might eat a few dollars of manufacturing cost and a miniscule fuel burn penalty for the weight but it's invisible in the noise of the data and the bigger models tend to have much better profit margins to make up for it. In aircraft, you're chewing directly on the performance of the more popular (and hence majority) of all your aircraft to enable the not-much-better-margin stretch. It can, and is, done but you need to be extremely careful about it to a much higher degree than most other products.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 48):

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 43):
What's in it for the customer?

Which customer are you talking about?

The airlines.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 48):
The airlines who purchase the aircraft are the ones who will ultimately decide on what is built.

Exactly. Having wider aisles and seats will cost the airline money (more fuel to overcome the drag of the fatter fuselage and the induced drag of the heavier fuselage). But the customers' customers (passengers) won't pay any more money for wider aisles or seats. So why would the airline want them?

Tom.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-14 11:05:00 and read 9314 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 49):
But for what purpose? It's been proven time and time again that passengers aren't willing to pay for wider seats or wider aisles. How do they get a return on the investment in making the fuselage a few inches wider when it can't seat more passengers abreast?

Same logic as Boeing uses for the 787 - they advertise improved customer experience features all the time for it. A narrowbody can't fit any more across, but with today's materials and techniques, such a fuselage probably wouldn't be much larger than an A320. If it were really such a big deal, Airbus would never have made a 12-foot narrowbody cabin in the first place. And that fatter fuselage is very competitive with it's narrower Boeing sibling.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 50):

Yup. I should have specified that I am thinking more about choices in materials and shaping/design since weight can obviously be a deal-breaker.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: YTZ
Posted 2012-12-14 12:18:32 and read 9155 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 49):
How do they get a return on the investment in making the fuselage a few inches wider when it can't seat more passengers abreast?

Turn times

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-14 12:35:19 and read 9113 times.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):

Turn times

Wasn't that Boeing's pitch for the twin-aisle narrowbody? I don't remember the figures given, but they seemed to think they could really cut down on boarding time. Even if the 797 is still a narrowbody, I would think wider aisles and seats would certainly do a bit to trim turn times, even if not by quantum leaps like a twin-aisle might.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: morrisond
Posted 2012-12-14 12:55:19 and read 9072 times.

They could make the next NB Eliptical - which with the same cross Section as an A320 would give them 2x2x2 very comfortably or possibly 2x3x2 in a very tight config.

More Comfort - Same Drag. An eliptical 3x3 wouldn't give them enough height to accomodate Standing or containers in the belly.

However I think the next Boeing Project is 777/748 replacement, Where they will pioneer the technology they need for the NB replacement. The big technological change will be the Eliptical (Horizontal) fuselage and new Carbon Processes to radically lower cost of production.

A eliptical 12W 3x6x3 Non - Autoclave replacement 70 and 80 M in length with an 65m wing with Max wingtips or 75M+ without, using existing 115K Thrust Engines.

70M Version 8,800-9,000 NM 400 Seats - 80M Version 8,000 Nm 475+ Seats - Taking it to the A380

The NB is eventually replaced by a family of Non-Autoclave Carbon Eliptical 2x2x2 or 2x3x2 Aircraft with two different Wing Sizes (Short Range/ Light Weight, Long Range Higher Gross weight), same cross section, cockpit, avionics, tail etc..., covering 170-230 seats, up to 4,500 NM for true TATL range.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2012-12-14 13:10:34 and read 9013 times.

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 7):
Am I right to think that the 797 will be true 757 replacement, given that the MAX and the NEO are still under 200 seats and marginal for TATL?

Except for the facts that a) the A321 is good for 220 seats (with plans for a 235 seat neo) and b) the A320neo will comfortably operate TATL, and a 185 seat A321neo will be able to do most of the TATL routes presently operated by the 757. But let's not kid ourselves into thinking there's much of a market for that; there are less than 50 757s operating those routes, making it very much a niche.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: flightsimer
Posted 2012-12-14 19:35:13 and read 8674 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 43):

For the first part, it would allow a quicker and easier boarding experience. Someone trying to put their bag into the overhead will be able to do so without having to block all the others from being able to pass. And one of the issues with the 757 and especially the -300 is boarding times due to the length. By having a wider aisle, the 757-300 replacement especially should be able to cut loading times in half if not more. Remember also, with a larger fuselage, you are also increasing the available cargo space, so it not all being wasted as you say.



As per the second part, just because something hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be. And i would argue that it indeed already has been done to a degree as the current 737 family sizes are not far off in terms of size as this family. The original -100 only seated ~90 in a two class cabin yet our new -800/900ERs are seating between 160-180.

We are at the point where we are no longer revolutionizing planes and families designs, so something has to change. With this family, the things changing are not directly related to the planes themselves, but instead the certifying process and other synergies related to everything being a common type. The way I'm looking at it is more like the 757/767. Both were designed concurrently and shared many similar things. However, instead of being two separately certified aircraft like the 757/767, this family would be a single family.

Look at Delta, they will be operating the 717, 737-700/800/900 and 757-200/300 with nearly identical capacities of what my family would be. The 717, 737 and 757 shares absolutely no commonality with one another. This single family would be able to provide delta with all of their narrow body needs, while saving them tons of money on training and MX.

But like I said, it would be a very tough and challenging lineup to design, but if they can make it work, it would be one hell of a family.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-14 20:10:24 and read 8614 times.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 56):
As per the second part, just because something hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be. And i would argue that it indeed already has been done to a degree as the current 737 family sizes are not far off in terms of size as this family. The original -100 only seated ~90 in a two class cabin yet our new -800/900ERs are seating between 160-180.

Sorry for nitpicking here, but the 737-100 and -200 are vastly different planes altogether from an NG let alone a MAX. The entire 737 lineup was re-centered around the 738 (150-160 seats, U.S. transcon-capable), so I would argue that's a bit different from making variants intended for concurrent production that far apart in capacity. Even the 736 and 318 are uncompetitive for their seating capacity, and that will only get worse with the MAX and NEO. The reason A and B keep moving their planes up the scale is that large RJs can do the 100-seat range much more efficiently. The 757/767 don't even cover much more than about 100 seats of capacity - it's more so range and mission flexibility across the models. I think that even with the tech available for the 797, you'd need two entirely different airframes altogether a la 757/767 to cover everything from a 100+ seater all the way to 220 or so. Otherwise, I don't think you could sufficiently optimize for both ends of the spectrum at once.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-14 20:11:35 and read 8619 times.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 56):
For the first part, it would allow a quicker and easier boarding experience.

That's a good point; it would be interesting to see where the breakeven is for the improved boarding time increasing utilization enough to pay for the performance penalty.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 56):
Remember also, with a larger fuselage, you are also increasing the available cargo space, so it not all being wasted as you say.

You only get more useful cargo space if you bulk load (pretty unlikely for future replacements up into the 757 range) or you invent a new and odd LD size, which many airlines would hate.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 56):
The original -100 only seated ~90 in a two class cabin yet our new -800/900ERs are seating between 160-180.

That's true, but I think it's the wrong comparisson. The 737 went through two major re-gauges and re-designs to get from the -100 to the -900. They is very little commonality beyond architecture and the fuselage outer mold line. What you're talking about is having considerably more size variation all within a single family at equal generation...doing that economically would be extremely difficult.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 56):
We are at the point where we are no longer revolutionizing planes and families designs, so something has to change.

Every new type is revolutionary compared to its predecessor...don't confuse not changing configuration with not changing designs.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 56):
Look at Delta, they will be operating the 717, 737-700/800/900 and 757-200/300 with nearly identical capacities of what my family would be. The 717, 737 and 757 shares absolutely no commonality with one another.

Exactly...nobody knows how to build a common aircraft that spans from the 717 to the 757-300 size range. That's why it's served by multiple types.

Tom.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-14 20:21:31 and read 8594 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 58):
You only get more useful cargo space if you bulk load (pretty unlikely for future replacements up into the 757 range) or you invent a new and odd LD size, which many airlines would hate.

What about those special bins used on a 320? Obviously it wouldn't necessarily use identical ones, but aren't those an "odd LD size"?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-15 03:33:25 and read 8387 times.

I know what would speed up boarding times, only allow a small carry on bag. Just yesterday we got 15 minutes delayed because of all cheap people filling the overhead bins, blocking the isle, they had to put some bags in the lower hold.

I have a back pack that nicely slides under the seat in front of me, if all 186 passengers did like me boarding would be dead fast.

But as the checked bag adds 8 euros on the ticket they try to cram as much in the cabin bag, even 2 bags even if its against the rules.

Airlines have brought this on them selves. Is a delay cheaper than missing out on 8 euros?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: bond007
Posted 2012-12-15 05:19:29 and read 8286 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 58):

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 56):
For the first part, it would allow a quicker and easier boarding experience.

That's a good point; it would be interesting to see where the breakeven is for the improved boarding time increasing utilization enough to pay for the performance penalty.

I cannot believe that an aisle twice as wide, could be cost justified by faster boarding times.

The cheapest and easiest way to enable fast boarding, is for airlines to enforce their carry-on policies. Trying to find overhead space because of over-filled bins, and F/As gate checking bags, appear to be a good percentage of the boarding time on most of my flights.

Airlines will always try and fit as many seats into the aircraft as possible - not make more non-revenue space (and weight).


Jimbo

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: EPA001
Posted 2012-12-15 05:35:49 and read 8255 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 60):
Just yesterday we got 15 minutes delayed because of all cheap people filling the overhead bins, blocking the isle, they had to put some bags in the lower hold.

That is indeed something where great improvements could be reached. But most passengers are either clumsy, or egoistic, or both. They are blocking the aisle much longer then necessary. What helps the best is a two door entrance (from the front and from the rear) to airliners. That speeds up the boarding by more then 100%.

Then again, this will not have a great impact on what type of aircraft the B797 will be. Personally I also believe it will be the next NSA, the real B737 replacement. That is most likely to me considering what Boeing is planning now with the B787 en B777-X.

But maybe KC135TopBoom is right. They might start the new family with the B-808. That would still be the NSA imho. But it will be some time before the B797 or the B808 is going to be announced. It will be in the next decade for sure.  .

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: LHCVG
Posted 2012-12-15 10:37:07 and read 8054 times.

Quoting bond007 (Reply 61):

In fairness though, wouldn't boarding and de-planing a full 753 still take a while even with light carryon loads? I know I've seen a few quips from GAs that 753s can take forever to get everyone out of the long tube. At least in a twin-aisle, if granny clogs up aisle 1 getting herself together for 10 minutes, people can always shift over to the other aisle and still have some outflow rather than her clogging up the whole works. Again, that doesn't address the cost/benefit of such a design in dollar terms, but I can see how it would greatly improve boarding.

On another note, I would hope the 797 would be configured like a 757 with the "lobby" at door 2 to allow for door 2 boarding (doesn't the 321 allow this as well?).

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: bond007
Posted 2012-12-15 14:14:32 and read 7860 times.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 63):
In fairness though, wouldn't boarding and de-planing a full 753 still take a while even with light carryon loads? I know I've seen a few quips from GAs that 753s can take forever to get everyone out of the long tube. At least in a twin-aisle, if granny clogs up aisle 1 getting herself together for 10 minutes, people can always shift over to the other aisle and still have some outflow rather than her clogging up the whole works. Again, that doesn't address the cost/benefit of such a design in dollar terms, but I can see how it would greatly improve boarding.

Agreed, it can only help .... but that reason alone could never justify an extra aisle (or double-wide aisle).

On the smaller aircraft, like B737, it seems when the airlines actually need to board quickly, they can do it. WN can routinely do it in 15-20 mins because they may have to...other airlines can take 30 minutes because they don't have to do it in less.


Jimbo

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-15 14:41:53 and read 7822 times.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 59):
What about those special bins used on a 320? Obviously it wouldn't necessarily use identical ones, but aren't those an "odd LD size"?

But if you use the same ones you don't get and gain from the extra width because you're stuck with A320 sized containers, and if you use different ones you're doubling the number of oddball LD containers in the world...neither is an attractive option.

Tom.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Max Q
Posted 2012-12-15 15:37:42 and read 7733 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 65):

But if you use the same ones you don't get and gain from the extra width because you're stuck with A320 sized containers, and if you use different ones you're doubling the number of oddball LD containers in the world...neither is an attractive option.

Does anyone even use those A320 containers ?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: The777Man
Posted 2012-12-15 19:09:13 and read 7516 times.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 66):
Does anyone even use those A320 containers ?

Hi !

Yes, AC, AF and LH to name a few. MX used to use them as well.

The777Man

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-16 01:40:21 and read 7301 times.

B had an idea about a twin isle fat but short NB patent the other year. If you could have a twin isle 2-3-2 short haul cabin this could be turned into a comfortable 2-2-2 cabin for long haul, of the according to folks here few long and thin NB routes. Less seats more fuel weight to be carried, longer range, and with twin isles a longer range NB maybe more acceptable for all whiners out there?

As A&B lost the market below 150 seats going forward, they will have to grow in size or hope all action centers around just their two models. Clearly size of the NB is growing looking at the MAX/NEO orders, very few/none for the smallest model and quite the number for the larger model. These larger models are a bit stretched to be of best efficiency as the sweet spot they were designed around is lower, the 739er particularly is handicapped growing.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2012-12-16 02:04:32 and read 7268 times.

Quoting The777Man (Reply 67):
Hi !

Yes, AC, AF and LH to name a few. MX used to use them as well.

The777Man

Add BA, TK and SK to the list.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: na
Posted 2012-12-16 02:12:07 and read 7252 times.

The 797?

1. The 737 successor (I dont think the max will do it for long)
2. a joint 747/777 successor (if Boeing drops the 777X)
3. a 747 successor, a quad of a size between 748I and A380

All possible by the mid-20s.

[Edited 2012-12-16 02:14:48]

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Superfly
Posted 2012-12-16 02:28:47 and read 7211 times.

I'd like to see a 4-engine T-tail design like the IL-62 / VC10 but a widebody and longer instead.
Use huge engines like on the 777 and 747-8 but make the plane out of plastic like the 787.
Has ultra long-haul capabilities and can do Sydney - London non-stop fully loaded with strong head-winds.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Max Q
Posted 2012-12-16 03:25:58 and read 7128 times.

Quoting na (Reply 70):
un Dec 16 2012 05:12:07 your local time (1 hour 12 minutes 43 secs ago) and read 127 times:

The 797?

1. The 737 successor (I dont think the max will do it for long)
2. a joint 747/777 successor (if Boeing drops the 777X)
3. a 747 successor, a quad of a size between 748I and A380

All possible by the mid-20s.

Er, ok, that was sort of my question !!!!

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: na
Posted 2012-12-16 03:34:34 and read 7120 times.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 72):
Er, ok, that was sort of my question !!!!

Yup, because you were right with your suggestions, only that I see the second possibility a bit different. I do not think that Boeing would build a totally new plane of 777 size, unless they also build a larger 747 successor. I think that a joint 748/77W successor which in its largest form could be larger than the 748 is more likely though, either as a 797 in the mid-20s if they cancel the 777X, or as a 7007 around 2030.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: 817Dreamliiner
Posted 2012-12-16 05:19:42 and read 7017 times.

For me, I think it will be a new narrow body. Because think about it, the 737 design has run its course. Also, unless proven wrong by Boeing, the MAX series should be the last version of the 737. I doubt it would be another large aircraft. My guess would be something with a range of 4000-4500nm with capability to hold around 200+ pax maximum (as a 737/757 replacement) but thats just my opinion.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: liftsifter
Posted 2012-12-16 07:21:45 and read 6910 times.

I actually really think that the 797 will never come to fruition. The 737 has another 10-20 years on it. 77X will be at least 10 yaers out for EIS. 747/VLA is a dying medium. The 787 just began service, so about 20 years for demand to die out nd the program will eventually be over. And there is no true outcry for a 757 replacement. I see Boeing starting the B800 line in about 25 years with Y1 Y2 and Y3 as originally intended, but adjusted for the current technology.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Superfly
Posted 2012-12-16 07:40:09 and read 6891 times.

Quoting liftsifter (Reply 75):
I see Boeing starting the B800 line in about 25 years

The Boeing 808 with Hawaiian Airlines as it's launch customer.  

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: CXB77L
Posted 2012-12-16 07:45:47 and read 6875 times.

I agree with those who think it'll be the 737 replacement. I think the MAX, as competitive an aircraft as it is, would only be an interim solution until Boeing builds their NSA, of which concepts were being thrown around before Boeing decided to launch the MAX instead. I would envisage that the 797 would start at around 180 seats to around 230 seats, and would EIS around the mid to late 2020s.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-16 10:10:27 and read 6736 times.

IF the 797/NSA could cover up to 230 seats and 1000nm more range than MAX I think the 787-8 will sell less in the future. It seems many orders for the 8 are being converted to the 9 model. The idea to have a 110t OEW on routes down to the capability of the 739er is a bit disturbing IMO. Its a lot of frame to fly for just 220 seats and 4500nm. Airbus has this even worse, donĀ“t know the OEW of the A358 but on short routes it seems like a lot of airplane.

NBs are being trenched upwards in size the question is will they up the range above NEO/MAX on the next generation?

The C-series has all but closed the below 150 seat market for both A+B, I guess they wont even bother doing a model smaller than the current 737-800/A320. A shrink model or base/sweet spot at 160-170 seats might be the future? Even in this market the Irkut MS-21 will start to compete. Only weapon left is to have more payload range as the Irkut has quite short range(maximum 5500km/212 seats)

China will enter this market too. Only way I see A+B defending their market cap is to grow both size and capability in the NB market. Sure it will eat at the bottom end of the WB market for them but seen as both the 787-8 and A358 are not the futures best selling variants maybe its a sound idea in the long run.

The A330 and 767 will be about EOL in 10 years, A+B are safe in the WB market but will start to feel the heat in the NB market IMO, this is where they will have to make a move next. The 797 should lay the foundation for the future for B in the NB market, to keep it a very profitable segment they really have to think hard about this.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: EPA001
Posted 2012-12-16 10:15:13 and read 6723 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 78):
The A330 and 767 will be about EOL in 10 years

The B767 is already at EOL. The A330 is still selling like hot cakes. That will cool down within 10 years, but the B767 is not selling anymore already.

The NB-market is by far the most important market to A & B. They will do all they can to keep their presence there. No doubt newcomers will enter that market segment, but it would be unwise to grow the next NB to big. You would automatically concede a part that that highly profitable NB-market.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-16 10:37:40 and read 6681 times.

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 79):
The NB-market is by far the most important market to A & B. They will do all they can to keep their presence there. No doubt newcomers will enter that market segment, but it would be unwise to grow the next NB to big. You would automatically concede a part that that highly profitable NB-market.

A 230 seat NB is till a NB, but in a segment that the new competition is not bothered to touch, they will however give it all below 150 seats. So the A319/737-700 has lost already.

Will A+B settle for just 2 models A320/A321/738//39? When they clearly have a capacity gap up to the quite large WBs next in size(not A330/767).

See they can create a new NB market segment in the much "hated" 757 market segment. They lost market anyway, create some new!

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: PHX787
Posted 2012-12-16 11:43:46 and read 6598 times.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 71):
Has ultra long-haul capabilities and can do Sydney - London non-stop fully loaded with strong head-winds.

That would have to have some serious incentives to get going on such a route, because I highly doubt that would be profitable.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: Superfly
Posted 2012-12-16 12:18:09 and read 6547 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 81):
That would have to have some serious incentives to get going on such a route, because I highly doubt that would be profitable.

Even if it's made of plastic like the 787?

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-16 13:08:58 and read 6482 times.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 71):
Has ultra long-haul capabilities and can do Sydney - London non-stop fully loaded with strong head-winds.

Fully loaded? That would imply a spec range of ~12,000nm...who on earth would want that? You'd pay an absolutely incredible weight penalty on even "normal" long-range routes.

Tom.

Topic: RE: So What Will The B797 Be?
Username: PHX787
Posted 2012-12-16 13:10:48 and read 6479 times.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 82):
Even if it's made of plastic like the 787?

The 787 would never be able to turn a profit on a LON-SYD route even if it could make it


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/