Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)  
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5103 times:

I like the 'can-do' attitude that comes through from Boeing:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/134687003_7e7boeing01.html

48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5049 times:

a hint of the Boeing of years past. I like the can do, "kick airbus' ass" (no offense to Airbus fans) attitude.

It's healthy competition, and maybe the boys of the Northwest can give Airbus a run for their money.

I love aviation.


George



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6575 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5004 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

"common airplane systems and common cockpits"

Hmm.. sound familiar.. anyone?



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineMarcus From Mexico, joined Apr 2001, 1790 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4987 times:

Very familiar.......I just hope we don't see another link to some news article in the future were ex MDD execs what to get their way.


Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6575 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Didnt Boeing at one point say the common cockpits didnt really saved that much money to operators? Is it me or this article sound like an acceptance that they have to play catch up?

Hey the first step is to accept something, then you do something about it. Hopefull that will happen



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4899 times:

Hey the first step is to accept something, then you do something about it. Hopefull that will happen

agreed Mt99.

My only worry is that it is a bad time to do the investments. Shrinking business put aside a lot of usefull aircraft. Second hand values for these aircraft puts pressure on any business case.

On the other han´t Boeing can´t wait much longer... Airbus has already taken over the #1 position and will strenghten this in the next 5 years .....


User currently offlineScootertrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 569 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4848 times:

But they'd be significantly cheaper for airlines to buy, maintain and operate because of a common streamlined, heavily-outsourced manufacturing process...

This is an important quote. It will be interesting to see how the labor unions at Boeing look at greater outsourcing on the 7E7 product. No doubt they will fight outsourcing large components (like the wing) tooth and nail.


User currently offlineBobrayner From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2003, 2227 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4758 times:

There seem to be a few distinct strategy ideas blended in there; it would be nice to see more detail.

There's no shortage of pundits, of course, but FWIW I'd say their product lineup needs massaging, rather than completely rebuilding.

At the moment the 737 is (deservedly) selling in large numbers, but the rest of the sales sheet is almost blank despite having competent, fresh designs. Starting a whole new range of planes from a blank page, with a completely new production paradigm, will require a lot more time and investment before it produces anything saleable. They would be able to thrash Airbus in 2010 if it succeeds, but how will they cope in the meantime?

Boeing are still proving their ability to produce lots of tantalising samplers of faraway technologies (the phantom works website always has some eyecandy), but somebody really should stop daydreaming and start the design & build process, or just wave a magic wand to make the 767 & 777 more attractive to customers.  Big grin



Cunning linguist
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4717 times:

or just wave a magic wand to make the 767 & 777 more attractive to customers.

Last I checked, the 777 was the leader in its market... and the USArmed Forces had all but waved that wand for the 767


User currently offlineBobrayner From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2003, 2227 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4677 times:

(repeat post, sorry)

Having thought about it over a cup of tea  Smile I'm convinced there's more meat in this, and that news article is only giving us glimpses of some issues.

Extensive use of advanced materials would mean fewer, larger parts. Large subassemblies would be shipped in and snapped together
This really sounds like a push to use technologies pioneered elsewhere in the Boeing empire; improved design & production for large composite structures, and cunning technologies for joining and forming composites.
Perhaps the c17 tail redesign was such a success (cheaper, simpler, lighter, and faster to produce) that they want to try exactly the same thing with large chunks of airliners.  Smile



Cunning linguist
User currently offlineJbangert From Switzerland, joined Nov 2000, 75 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4502 times:

It looks as if Boeing has learnt something from Airbus: planes family, compatibility, tie-up with suppliers, not to mention the fuselage diameter substantially identical to that of the A 330/340 allowing for the preferred 2-4-2 seating arrangement in economy and for the effective use of cargo containers.

User currently offlineAvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2470 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4458 times:

A new approach like this is definitely needed for Boeing to continue competing effectively with Airbus, particularly in cost reduction. Boeing needs to streamline its' entire production process to get costs down, hopefully it will be able to sidestep the unions on outsourcing, a necessary part of the new discipline. Boeing must be able to match or beat Airbus on price, as well as deliver outstanding product in order to gain back or even hold onto market share. The unions will have to conceed on this, it's necessary for Boeing's survival in the commercial airliner business.

User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4381 times:

Mt99:

Yes it does sound familiar, the 757 and 767.  Smile


User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4348 times:

and the USArmed Forces had all but waved that wand for the 767

It's thinking like that that has this country in trouble.

You know as well as I do BOEING waved its' magic political wand in an absolutely disgusting display of corporate welfare.....a deal, by the way, which is far from done and PROMISED to be killed by a collection of House & Senate heavyweights led by Senator John McCain.

We live in age when we congratulate ourselves on devising new & better shennanigans to keep the balance sheet looking profitable....paying no heed whatsoever to our ingenuity in actual creation.

I foresee a time when Boeing designs and builds the 7X7.....the latest, most hi tech, most cost effective standard twinjet family in the world. I think the first hundred or so will just be hitting the world's airways when Airbus, or some Euro-Russian conglomorate.... perfects the Sonic Cruiser idea that got axed through an amazing lack of vision by Boeing, build aircraft a quarter to a third faster and making the 7X7 obsolete before its' 5th birthday.


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4263 times:

You know as well as I do BOEING waved its' magic political wand in an absolutely disgusting display of corporate welfare.....

Any why not? The the technique works very well for Airbus  Insane



a deal, by the way, which is far from done and PROMISED to be killed by a collection of House & Senate heavyweights led by Senator John McCain

If you have that much faith in anything McCain says... I really dont know what to tell you  Laugh out loud


User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6597 posts, RR: 55
Reply 15, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4178 times:

When companies come out with smarmy cocky comments like that it just makes you want them to fail. I fly a Boeing plane and I love it. I don't want to fly an Airbus at all, however when I read comments like the ones in the article, all high and mighty, I cringe. How can you finally figure out that the way forward is the way your competitor has been advocating for years and years, then fob it off, as your great idea thats going to wipe out the competition. What cheek.

User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4153 times:

You know as well as I do BOEING waved its' magic political wand in an absolutely disgusting display of corporate welfare.....a deal, by the way, which is far from done and PROMISED to be killed by a collection of House & Senate heavyweights led by Senator John McCain.
-----

The 767 is a better pick than the A330 for the tanker role due to its smaller ground footprint and many other factors, according to the Pentagon. The lease deal is because the Pentagon does not have the money to buy outright and because they want to keep some flexibility.

The corporate welfare is not in the 767 order. It is in the higher than market price that would be paid. The government ought to be able to extort a killer deal out of Boeing for an order like this in times like these. But they havn't done this. The government is paying prices that would have made sense four years ago but not today. That is where the corporate welfare comes in.


User currently offlineTransSwede From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1000 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4135 times:

I agree with Cx flyboy,

Suddenly Boeing trumpets ideas that Airbus have pioneered and implemented for 20+ years (commonality, advanced materials), as if it is something brand new that will create a huge advantage for Boeing. Especially since they have been spending the last 20+ years explaining how unimportant such things are.

I don't know wether to call it laughable or tragic.

Boeing has great talent and expertise. That's what makes it so sad that most of their efforts seem to have been moved from engineering to public relations lately.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 18, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4033 times:

""common airplane systems and common cockpits"
Hmm.. sound familiar.. anyone?"

"Very familiar.......I just hope we don't see another link to some news article in the future were ex MDD execs what to get their way."

Yes, 737-600, -700, -800, -900.
777-200, -300
757-200, -300, 767-200, -300.
737-100, -200
737-300, -400, -500

And now 7E7-100, -200, -300.

Guess what, Boeing's been doing that for decades... It's called an aircraft family and other manufacturers have successfully copied the idea.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6597 posts, RR: 55
Reply 19, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4009 times:

Jwenting,

Boeing has done it a little, but nowhere near to the extent Airbus have taken it. We had pilots in Cathay that were cross qualified on A320s, A330s and A340s. You could have pilots that fly the A319/A320/A321/A330-200/A330-300/A340-200/A340-300/A340-500/A340-600. Boeing isn't even close except with the 757/767, and even then, can they fly the 767-400?
It isn't so much the fact that one manufacturer is better than the other, it's the attitude that Boeing has. They're arrogant and cocky about it and that just pisses me off. It doesn't matter if their product is better or not. It's the attitude.


User currently offlineMD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3986 times:

@Jwenting, when you say:
"Yes, 737-600, -700, -800, -900.
777-200, -300
757-200, -300, 767-200, -300.
737-100, -200
737-300, -400, -500

And now 7E7-100, -200, -300.

Guess what, Boeing's been doing that for decades... It's called an aircraft family and other manufacturers have successfully copied the idea."

I agree with you on that, but guess what, Airbus not only copied the idea, but improved it.....
Also, I agree with CX_flyboy, that it's a bit a sour grape strategy that Boeing goes. What makes them so sure to "kick Airbus's butt"? The plane isn't flying yet, not to think about reached the performance targets that they set. Also, I remember that they said once that the engines are accountable for the largest share in efficency inprovement....... Who thinks that AI can't adapt those engines to their planes as well and have a benefit?

Last but not least, I really hope that Boeing succeeds to build those family, as competition always stimulates the business!

Cheers, Thomas


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3930 times:

Who thinks that AI can't adapt those engines to their planes as well and have a benefit?

Well, for starters, I'd say the lawyers who'll be working on the exclusivity contract...  Laugh out loud


User currently offlineMD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3917 times:

"Well, for starters, I'd say the lawyers who'll be working on the exclusivity contract... "
----------------------------------

Who thinks that any engine manufacturer, which are all struggling to make some money, would agree on that? Provided indeed the engines as a whole are "protected" by an exclusivity agreement, I don't think you can stop any technology swap to the other products............

In my opinion, those kind of agreements are not a sign of confidence in the "superiority" of your product as a whole...........

Cheers, Thomas


User currently offlineSQ325 From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 1451 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3913 times:

If we pull this off, we'll ruin Airbus. We'll reinvent the whole business," said one senior technical employee. "

Megalomania
Airbus still is the better product and with one new production line Boeing will be far away from ruining Airbus!

It is like saying Swiss is going to ruin Lufthansa


User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10677 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3865 times:

It´s sounds like turning Mercedes into Toyota. Horrible outlook. Such a family of generic jets will certainly help to loose my interest in aviation. Boring skies ahead
Boeing might not be the best on the field of economic production right now with their very diverse product family, yes, but this sounds bad, and overall completely leaves the top end of the market to Airbus.


25 Post contains links and images Dragogoalie : Hey now, you can bash boeing, you can bash airbus...but dont start bashing the people who made my car. Thats personal...you dont mess with a man's car
26 Na : O yeah, "a man´s car" is a wasp´s nest. Let´s say turning a Mercedes E-class into a Corolla then. I don´t think anyone with some taste and market
27 Post contains images Bobrayner : Hmm. I'll try to compress my rant into a few words Boeing and Airbus both have their own respective strengths and weaknesses in how they build planes.
28 Post contains images Dragogoalie : hehe, sounds much better NA --dragogoalie-#88--
29 Greg : Not to have a totally contrary view..but Airbus responds fairly quickly to market demand (maybe not so much quickly...as accurately). More than anythi
30 Rj777 : Anybody know when the final design is going to be released? I can't wait to see the imaginary liveries.
31 Keesje : It seems necessary all labor intensive work is outsources to countries with lower labor costs. Agree with Greg, 332 seems to become a best seller like
32 LMP737 : Keesje: What kind of aircraft are you referring to when you say "bigger Airbusses"?
33 Post contains images AvObserver : "All other factors will largely remain the same since each have the same technology available." "Dont be surprised if Airbus introduces improved 330 s
34 RayChuang : I think the big question about Airbus with future A330 variants that will compete against the Boeing 7E7 design is will Airbus fund the design of a ne
35 L.1011 : Lets face it. Boeing is going to kick Airbus's ass with the 7E7 and we all know it. It wouldn't surprise me if the 7E7 is more of a medley of Boeing's
36 Travellin'man : I think that for Boeing to revamp their line, and in effect, build three planes instead of six, or perhaps even one plane in different sizes, is very
37 Post contains images Keesje : Lets face it. Boeing is going to kick Airbus's ass with the 7E7 and we all know it..... Boeing has a big edge in all the technology its developed for
38 Post contains images L.1011 : I know Keesje-wouldn't it be great?
39 Post contains images Keesje : Yeah great, however a unpracticle for the crew at the gates..
40 Post contains images L.1011 : LOL Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaahazhahaahahahahahahaahah
41 Cloudy : If Boeing does push this full revamp, the next move is to go to radically different designs that offer major improvements in efficiency, such as the B
42 Areopagus : Airbus admits that most of the economic savings from the A380 will be derived from the inherent efficiencies of a large size - not from the savings po
43 Post contains images Keesje : One would nearly think the 7E7 is the plane to beat now. However it is not. All I have is seen beautifull pictures & bold predictions. Developing new
44 Bobrayner : Developing new materials & technology tends to be very expensive Boeing already have some excellent technologies that have yet to be applied to commer
45 MD-90 : Well the KC-135s are getting old (although the re-engined ones surely won't be gotten rid of for years), and they're not as capable as the KC-10. Pers
46 Jbirdav8r : An A330-200 with such a new wing (let's call it A330-600) will probably increase the economic cruise speed of the A330 to Mach 0.85 and possibly incre
47 Jbangert : You are right, Jbirdav8r: the 737NG's normal operating speed is Mach .785 agains .745 for the 737Classic. The corresponding starting point for the A33
48 Sonic : According to that article, it wouldn't be one family, but three familes using same cockpit and other things, something between A340/A330 and 757/767.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Can 7E7 Customers Use Plane Not For Range? posted Tue Jan 25 2005 06:33:12 by Lehpron
AN-74, One Plane - Three Views posted Mon Jul 7 2003 13:28:02 by Jarek
How Many Pilots For One Plane? posted Wed Nov 16 2005 19:04:09 by FJWH
Not One Passenger Order For 747-8 posted Tue Nov 15 2005 10:07:10 by A380900
Airlines With Only ONE Plane? posted Fri Nov 4 2005 11:29:14 by Spantax
One Plane Intercontinental Operators posted Tue Jun 14 2005 20:08:24 by Caravelle
Not New Mexico But Greybull, WY posted Tue Jun 7 2005 14:56:08 by JHSfan
One, Two Or Three Runways? posted Wed Mar 9 2005 16:47:24 by Spike
7E7 Not Selling As Expected? posted Wed Sep 22 2004 19:33:37 by Flying-Tiger
One Airline - All Three Major Engine Makers posted Wed Aug 25 2004 20:21:21 by Boeingnut