Ruscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1408 posts, RR: 2 Posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1351 times:
I have been thinking about what fuselage width A&B will go for with the 733/320 replacement craft.
B have stated just about every possibility and now saying could have 3 different fuselage widths. I think this is unlikely.
My first guess is that the next generation "narrow body" will be about 20" wider than the current 737.
This would allow the option of either single or twin ailse.In twin aise mode seats would be roughly the same as to-day but with 2 ailes and 2x2x2.
In single ailse mode the carrier could either have wider seats or a wider ailse. I think most would go for a slightly wider seat and a much wider ailse to make boarding and deboarding easier.
Second guess is that the fuselage width will stay approx same as at present, to keep weight down.
RedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4181 posts, RR: 30 Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1322 times:
I think Boeing is more likely than Airbus to change the barrel diameter of their fuselage, even if they stay with a single aisle concept. The 320 is pretty successful - and, for that matter, more comfortable - as is. Boeing has to revamp their 737 fuse. It is, after all, based on a 40+ year old design.
OyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2575 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1188 times:
Quote: "We could do three different fuselages. Five abreast; six abreast; we could even do a twin-aisle," Mulally said. "We're looking at all those opportunities."
According to Mulally they could do 3 different fuselage width.
I wish that this means they could offer more than just one fuselage width, although no one has agreed to this yet.
FlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15 Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1178 times:
Airbus doesn't like to change anything that works. Of the aircraft numbered A300 to A350, only one doesn't share the same fuselage.
I would expect their already nice and wide A320 fuselage to continue.
As a result, Boeing, I'm sure, will make one wider, maybe even by a foot. So long as they are changing it, they might as well make it worthwhile, right?
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1163 times:
Boeing need to cover the market space up to the B787-8. That rules out a 5 abreast size. Given the need for 6 abreast seating and any given cabin width, one aisle is more efficient for embarkation/disembarkation than two aisles. One wide aisle will rarely be blocked. Two narrow aisles will frequently be blocked.
The B787's composite fuselage technology obviates the most of the weakness in a non-circular fuselage cross-section. Boeing can easily make Y1's fuselage greater in height than width. This would allow it to accomodate LD3 containers single-file.
OyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2575 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1025 times:
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 5): Boeing need to cover the market space up to the B787-8. That rules out a 5 abreast size.
In my opinion Boeing could do 2 fuselage width. Just like the 757 and 767 just much more commonality. That way they are optimising the 75-250 seat range.
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 5): This would allow it to accommodate LD3 containers single-file.
That would be of a huge advantage.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1408 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4181 posts, 
From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2575 posts, 
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
