Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Vs Boeing  
User currently offlineFlybynight From Norway, joined Jul 2003, 1005 posts, RR: 2
Posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5068 times:

Living in Seattle, I hate to say it, but it seems to me the A320/319's are pulling away in sales from the 737's, as the A330/340 hurt 767's sales.
Maybe it is time to go back to the drawing board. I know the 737 7's, 8's and 9's are very different than their early 60's counterparts, but the origins of the design does dates back 40 years.
It's kinda like Ford's Mustang. They keep improving, but the basic design goes back to 1979, and it shows.
I say, start from scratch, Boeing. Y


Heia Norge!
27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineOsteogenesis From Germany, joined May 2003, 647 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5005 times:

I think a completely redesign only makes sense when there is new technology available to make a big difference against the competition. I think that since the A300/A310 and 767, 757 are older then the A32X and the later 737´s the idea of the 7E7 makes more sense than a new design in the not so lucrative 150 seat market.

What remains to be seen is if the 7E7 is capable of getting far ahead of the A330. I think Airbus wants to implement al their research and development they spent for the A380 into their other model lines after the A380 is finished.

I once read that the engineers of Airbus thought they could easily change components of the A330/A340 and A32X families once they had the capabilities in new materials needed for the A380.

But as always only time will tell.


User currently offlineMas a330 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4996 times:

Don't the airbus widebodies date back from the A300?

User currently offlineTekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4989 times:

Cockpit of a next-gen 737:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Radoslaw Idaszak



Cockpit of an original 737:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Aaron 747



You basically state that both of these planes above were designed in the 1979.

What's wrong with the next-gen 737s? Please don't insult the aviation industry by comparing airplanes to cars. Many airlines prefer the 737s to the A320s.

Lastly, you're telling Boeing to redesign a plane they just got done redesigning.

[Edited 2003-08-02 09:31:32]

User currently offlineOsteogenesis From Germany, joined May 2003, 647 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4964 times:

Of course it was redesigned but there are thinks that can not be changed without a total new design. For example the cargo bay or the with of the cabin.

[Edited 2003-08-02 09:39:48]

User currently offlineTekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4902 times:

Of course it was redesigned but there are thinks that can not be changed without a total new design. For example the cargo bay or the with of the cabin.

Why would those be changed?


User currently offlineFritzi From United Arab Emirates, joined Jun 2001, 2762 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4805 times:

Tekelberry said

Why would those be changed?

Maybe to support more passengers and cargo?  Insane


Lastly, you're telling Boeing to redesign a plane they just got done redesigning

He is not saying that they should redesign the 737, he thinks that they should drop it and design a new airplane to take over the role of the 737.


User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4716 posts, RR: 44
Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4683 times:

The reason why BOEING has lost out to the A 330-300 and esp A 330-200 is because they persisted with their ageing 767 product in the 90s and didnt bring fwd ASAP their 7E7 product (777-100). Any airline in the 90s would choose if given the finances the A 330 over the B 767 due to the economics and modernity / advancement involved. The 767 is 1979-80 technology!

As a result they have lost key A 330 orders to Emirates, Qatar, Swiss, Air France, KLM, Qantas, CX, CI, BR, TG, US AIR, NWA, BMI, UL etc etc. EK now has over 24 A 332s and CX has nearly a dozen as does TG.


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4656 times:

(shaking head)

I just don't understand some peoples thinking in this matter. The only thing old about the 737 or other aircraft for that matter, is the fuselage. The shell if you will. All airliners have the same concept for fuselages. From the 707 to the A380. You strip everything out and they are all the same thing. An aluminum shell.

As the saying goes, it's what's inside that counts. The 737NG has the latest, most modern technology found. So to say that the 737NG is old technology is just plain dumb.

My three cents.  Laugh out loud


User currently offlineCapt078 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4563 times:

i do think the A-330/A-340 is beating the 767 because they are newer. however, the 777 definitely wins over the a-340, and the 737 over the a-320 series regarding noise and efficiency.

i think it would be remiss to suggest that airlines prefer airbus to boeing without mentioning the international political climate. right now, american is not very popular with the rest of the world, particularly the middle east. notice how all the middle eastern carriers are buying boeing (except the ones we have an influence over: pia, el al, mea). and of course, just like the u.s. gov't aids boeing, the eu aids airbus, and right now, a lot of european state airlines are replenishing their fleets.

we've discussed the 737 vs. a-320 topic before. most passengers are naive and do not realize that the 737ng, while looking like the classic 737, is really a completely different airplane. passengers in the western world have been flying on 737s and 747s and 757s and 767s for anywhere from twenty to thirty years. of course they are going to think the airbuses are newer and better. boeing needs to find a way to distinguish its newer airplanes from similar old ones. i love the 737 winglets. on top of adding efficiency, they make the plane look newer and more technologically advanced. similarly, the new 7e7 will be a tremendous boon for boeing, as passengers and the world embrace it as the newest, latest, and greatest (just like they did the 777).


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5637 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4531 times:

I have to agree with Boeing nut. The wing are new. The engines are new. The cockpit is entirely new. The cabin is new. The systems (electrical, hydraulic) are new. So... what else is left? The shell. The fuselage. It's a time- proven airframe, known for it's inherent strength and durability.

Incidentally, you compare it to the Mustang. While that doesn't offend me at all, I think it would now be appropriate to point out that the Ford Mustang is the BEST SELLING CAR IN ITS CLASS. It shoved the Firebird and Camaro out of production last year- and it has been around longer (Mustang in 1964, Camaro came out of the stable in 1967).

There are airlines that are making profits flying 737s. Southwest. There are airlines that are profitable flying A320s. JetBlue.

I don't think it warrants the billions of dollars needed to R/D, build, test, et cetera, an entirely new airframe. The 777 was a much needed airplane in Boeing's lineup. A new 737 is not. It remains one of the best selling airframes, currently. And I blame the A320s recent sales success NOT on winning a large number of customers, but on winning large orders. I mean, Easyjet or whoever it was ordered a huge number. JetBlue keeps ordering 40 at a time. But Boeing successfully pitched the 737 to AirTran (which surprised me, I feared that they would go 'Bus for sure).

The design of the wheel goes back millennia. It will never get any rounder. It may get lighter. It may get better bearings. But it's still just a wheel.


User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4532 times:

Many airlines prefer the 737s to the A320s.

No doubt, that's why AirTran just ordered 100. along with 10 more 717s (or was it 14)


User currently offlineHlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4531 times:

The mustang design does not go back to 1979 anymore, it goes back to 1994.

Stuff will go in phases. Boeing will receive a couple more big orders and could be put back in front again.

I don't see the A380 being a super big hit. They may have some orders now, but that is for 3-4 years down the road. Many could also be cancelled by then.



User currently offlineRabenschlag From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 1005 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4480 times:

i generally agree that modernizing an older design can be very successful. however, there may be limitations that cannot be overcome easily.

one instance is the diameter of the 767's fuselage. it cannot take two ld3 containers in a row, which sets some limits on cargo operations. thats one advantage of the A332.

another thing is efficiency of production. at the advent of the jet age, boeing had a smart production: one fuselage for four lines of aircraft (707, 702, 727, 737). then came the 747, one fuselage was added. fine. but then the 717, 767, 777 were added, and five fuselages were necessary for six lines of AC (do 73X and 75X have the same diameter?).

another thing is how older and newer tools for production can be integrated if you constantly upgrade.


r




User currently offlineFlybynight From Norway, joined Jul 2003, 1005 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4331 times:

Since I stared this:
1 - Technology and public perception are many times mutually exclusive. The 737's does date back to the early 60's. It's a fact that no one can argue. How can you?
2 - While the newer generation of 737'a are fully modernized, the A320's are an overall more modern design, and I believe this will hurt Boeing sales. I think a new ground-up design is needed. Also, to many people, the 737 has negative press associated with over the rudder design (I know this has been redesigned!). The United crash near Denver and the US Air crash in Pittsburgh might be a factor in their decision making. Maybe, maybe not.
3 - Overall, the 737's series should be put to rest, and a ground up new series with a fresh designation take its place - like the 757 did with the 727.
4 - What is wrong with using analogies (Mustang)? C'mon!!
5 - Along those lines - The Mustang does date back '79. Back to the Ford Fairmont. In the mid-90's the Mustang got a re-design (ala the 737 with its 700-900 series), but the basic platform still dates back to Ford's Fox platform. Why is the Mustang the best selling car in its class? It's the only one! Camaro is gone.
Overall point, sometime you have to start from scratch.
Hey, Boeing can always keep loosing sales to Airbus. Facts are facts.



Heia Norge!
User currently offlineStefandotde From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4138 times:

Another theory is the unique fleet: i've been told that it's not a big problem to change from the cockpit of a 320 to a 340. Just seems to be 3 weeks training.
What about Boeing? Have heared that you need special licence to change from a 737-400 to a 737-700 cause of new technology. That correct?
And if airlines think "we already have a boeing-fleet and now we are ordering 737 instead of airbus", sorry, so i fear they think from twelve to noon. Somewhen it's better to change if they get better conditions and maybe the planes are more economically.


User currently offlineScottb From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6573 posts, RR: 32
Reply 16, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4085 times:

Flybynight-

By the exact same reasoning, the A330 and A340 should be scrapped immediately because they share the same fuselage width as the A300 on which design began in the early 1970's. The A330 and A340 are 30-year-old designs, Airbus needs to come up with a new product immediately in order to not be destroyed by the 777 and 7E7, right?

The A320's have a public perception problem as well -- after all the 737 never flew itself into a stand of trees because it decided (against the pilot's wishes) that it was going to land. And the crash of AA 587 caused a public perception problem in the U.S. (world's largest aviation market) for anything made by Airbus.

The 737's biggest customers LOVE the model. Southwest will be taking 100+ over the next 5 years. The most profitable hub-and-spoke carrier in the U.S., CO, has nearly 250 737's in its narrowbody fleet. While they recently deferred some 737-800 orders, this has more to do with the weakness in the U.S. air travel market than with how CO feels about the 737NG.

Airline management DOES NOT CARE about an extra few inches cabin width. They care about the aircraft's capabilities and how much it will cost to operate. Sure, it sounds nice in a press release, but cabin width doesn't win orders. And there's a lot to be said for passengers' familiarity with the 737. Practically everyone has flown on one and they have an astoundingly good safety record given the number of flights/miles done by the worldwide fleet.


User currently offlineMD80Nut From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 888 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 4007 times:

There is no question that the 737NG series is technologically advanced aircraft that has performed magnificently. But this great aircraft has a competitor that is essentially equivalent from a technological point of view but has a wider fuselage.

Ask the average passenger who doesn't care about what kind of jet they fly in if he/she would prefer the wider plane or the narrower plane and not have to pay more for the wider one, what do you think the answer would be? By getting the word out that they have a wider fuselage, Airbus gets a marketing advantage and sows a seed among the general public. While airline management may care more about operational costs, what if they can have an airplane that costs about the same to operate and gives them a marketing edge? And makes they passengers happier to boot? It's all basic good 'ol marketing and capitalism!

Plain and simple, Boeing made a mistake in not increasing the 737NG's fuselage width to match the A320s. But they have an opportunity to come back. I would propose them developing a narrow body aircraft in tandem with the wide body 7E7 that would match the A320 Family's width. Call it the 7F7, I proposed this in another thread. It would have the same commonality with the 7E7 that A320s share with the A330/A340 family. I would even go as far as offering the wide body 7E7 in a few fuselage lengths and in 2 and 4 engine versions just like the A330/A340. In today's commercial aviation environment, when airlines are fighting to keep costs down, the market demands efficiency and commonality is one way to get it.

Boeing has to get bold and take steps to compete with Airbus. They can't afford to keep letting them out market them!

Just my 2 cents as a business guy.
Ralph



Fly Douglas Jets DC-8 / DC-9 / DC-10 / MD80 / MD11 / MD90 / 717
User currently offlineIndustrialPate From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3988 times:

The reason why BOEING has lost out to the A 330-300 and esp A 330-200 is because they persisted with their ageing 767 product in the 90s and didnt bring fwd ASAP their 7E7 product (777-100). Any airline in the 90s would choose if given the finances the A 330 over the B 767 due to the economics and modernity / advancement involved. The 767 is 1979-80 technology!

Quite a few airlines choose the B767, or continued to purchase the B767, over the A330 in the 1990s...


User currently offlineMITaero From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 497 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3925 times:

>notice how all the middle eastern carriers are buying boeing (except the ones we have an influence over: pia, el al, mea)

First of all, Pakistan (PIA) is not in the Middle East, it's a Southeast Asian country. Secondly, PIA is slated to receive every member of the 777 family, and they're the launch customer for the 777-200LR, if I'm not mistaken.

Honestly, I don't think such a small difference in cabin width is such a huge deal.


User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3886 times:

Airbus is willing to go lower to land a big order than boeing is willing to go. Example easy jet


If the 7e7 follows in the 777 foots steps then it would be sense to redesign the 737 now until then keep it as long as it is making money for the company.



Eagles Soar!
User currently offlineFlyingbronco05 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3873 times:

It's kinda like Ford's Mustang. They keep improving, but the basic design goes back to 1979, and it shows.

The Camaro has ALWAYS overpowered and been better in 0-60 and quarter miles. The only reason mustangs got more sales were because of the stupid people who bought them only because they looked better.

You cant compare the performance of the Camaro to the design of the Mustang.

Remember when Mustangs were recalled cause guys in Z28's were beating the "better" mustang. Seems like a design flaw in the engine of the mustang caused that.

BTW- Boeings burn less fuel and have better cost per mile than Airbus, but airbus planes are cheaper (it's the only way Airbus can get rid of their planes).

FB05




Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
User currently offlineCapt078 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3866 times:

MITaero: thank you for making my point. ok, pakistan is not at the heart of the middle east, but certainly given their close proximity and their involvement with current situations in that region, my statement was accurate. the point that i was making is that they and other countries who have sided with the u.s. (without publicly deriding our international policies) have found themselves the welcomed recipients of wonderful lease and purchase rates of u.s. aircraft.

conversely, emirates and gulf air have selected airbus, probably for many reasons, not the least of which are boeing's lack of involvement at the paris air show, AND those airlines' national customers who currently look at america with apprehension because of our outlandish and oh-so-far-reaching international policy. simply put, there are external influences that airlines might also take into consideration when purchasing aircraft, not just operational economics. therefore, the fact that in recent months airbus has secured more orders than boeing is not necessarily an indication that airbus is a superior product to boeing.


User currently offlineJpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4355 posts, RR: 27
Reply 23, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3854 times:

i think it would be remiss to suggest that airlines prefer airbus to boeing without mentioning the international political climate. right now, american is not very popular with the rest of the world, particularly the middle east.

I think the international economic climate is just as important right now. Airbuses are cheaper! Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Justin



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineVivaGunners From Italy, joined Oct 2000, 363 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3855 times:

I will repeat that: the real problem boeing will have to face is a replacement for 757. If boeing doesn't start to solve this problem soon they will lose aganist A321 as they are doeing aganist A330. 737-900X and 7E7 ARE NOT valid 757 replacements! The one is too small and has no range and cargo, the other is obviously too big.

Cheers.



Any ideas for a signature?
25 MITaero : Capt078 - you're right, I agree that politics are part of it. I thought you had meant to say something else. For sure, recent order totals say nothing
26 Trex8 : All this talk of politics or crashes affecting aircraft purchases is nuts! The only recent airline decisions I am aware of where politics clearly had
27 Post contains images Flybynight : Trex8 - Thank you for using another car analogy!!
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...
Airbus Vs. Boeing - Fuel Consumption posted Sun Feb 26 2006 20:44:43 by FlyDreamliner
Airbus Vs. Boeing Aircraft Cost posted Sat Oct 29 2005 19:10:01 by 737DAB320
Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI posted Wed Jul 14 2004 10:14:02 by United777
Airbus Vs. Boeing (WINDOWS) posted Tue Apr 27 2004 20:42:56 by Benjamin
Seattle PI: Airbus Vs. Boeing Long Range Jets posted Wed Feb 4 2004 12:20:33 by United777
Airbus Vs Boeing posted Sat Aug 2 2003 08:46:54 by Flybynight
Airbus Vs. Boeing = EU Vs. US? posted Fri May 23 2003 22:07:48 by PKK
Airbus Vs Boeing posted Sat Mar 30 2002 00:00:19 by Dutchjet
Airbus Vs Boeing: Fuel Efficiency posted Sat Nov 3 2001 07:54:12 by JU101
Sonic Cruiser? Airbus Vs. Boeing - Again posted Fri Jun 22 2001 05:53:06 by Af007