Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing: Next Job Could Be The New 777  
User currently offlineUALMMFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 135 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 19850 times:

Quote:
If Airbus firms up the specifications of the largest A350 model so that it competes directly against the hugely successful 777-300ER twin-aisle jet, then Boeing may have to act. Revamping any of its older planes would likely involve incorporating new technologies developed for the 787, including more efficient engines.

The company could put a revamped 777 on the front burner, ahead of a 737 replacement, McNerney indicated.

Link to article:


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...echnology/2003681476_boeing26.html


Treat others like you'd like to be treated!
105 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 19781 times:

Well they need to, or Airbus is going to pull the carpet from under their feet with the A350-900 and A350-1000.

I guess new engines for the 777 together with a weight reduction effort could help the 777 stay competitive, although it may be interesting to see what kind of complications the GE/777 marriage brings as Boeing can't just ditch the GE-90 and go with RR and their Trent for the 7773NG, whereas it is very unlikely from their reluctance to step into the A350XWB GE is willing to dump the GE-90 already (have they even made their money back on it already?)

Interesting to note also Boeing itself isn't willing to sacrifice the 777 for something completely new (the much discussed Y3), which in a way does make sense as that plane would in effect wipe away 2 relatively new Boeing products at once: the 777 and the 748, but on the other hand, it definitely feels like Boeing is reacting in very much the same way to an all new technology aircraft taking a good shot at their core business, as Airbus was a few years ago when the 7E7 was announced: by trying to upgrade the existing and highly successful competing product...

[Edited 2007-04-26 13:23:36]

User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 19781 times:

I think a 787-11 would make far more sense than a revised 777. A 787-11 with the same payload/range performance as the 777-300ER would weigh 80-85,000 lbs less. I believe Boeing might be able to trim 20,000 lbs from the 777-300ER, but not 80,000 lbs. A 787-11 would also cost much less to produce than any 777.

User currently offlineERAUgrad02 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 19682 times:

Did Boeing ever get the weight down on the 777-200LR?


Desmond MacRae in ILM
User currently offlineTinPusher007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 977 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 19407 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 2):
I think a 787-11 would make far more sense than a revised 777. A 787-11 with the same payload/range performance as the 777-300ER would weigh 80-85,000 lbs less. I believe Boeing might be able to trim 20,000 lbs from the 777-300ER, but not 80,000 lbs. A 787-11 would also cost much less to produce than any 777.

I concur. Boeing needs to learn their lesson here from the 764 vs A332. Airbus learned the same thing when trying to 'revamp' the A330 to compete with the 787 and it didn't work. Its a given that the A350XWB will have newer technologies that the current 777 doesn't have, after all the A350 was designed to leapfrog Boeing's technology with the 787. So unless Airbus doesn't get the A350 right, which I doubt, Boeing will have to come with a newer, bigger 787 to go against it.



"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
User currently offlinePEET7G From Hungary, joined Jan 2007, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 19333 times:

...and I think a well thought Y3 would make the most sense and possibly blow away competition... R.I.P.

but seriously, I could just see Boeing do both, come up with a revamped 777 and start works on the Y3 with a targeted EIS of 2017-onwards. Just think the 777-300ER will be a sole player until 2015 (Airbus time) it is still 8 years of dominance (especially with a revamped 777 family), if everything goes well at Airbus, and if they pull an other A380 mumbo jumbo act it could be that Y3 and the A350XWB-1000 comes on line togeather. We are talking about like 10 years. Hell 12 years ago 777s have just started rolling of the lines, and the -300 series are not even 10 years old (1998 if I'm correct)



Peet7G
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6924 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 19287 times:

I think this is a potentially dangerous road for Boeing. It is not likely that they will be able to get enough added efficiency out of the 777 to compete with the A350XWB, and so the effort would be wasted. Look at what success Airbus had with trying to improve the A330 to compete with the 787; Boeing would be putting themselves in exactly the same position and would end up launching Y3 before Y1, which IMHO would be stupid. The A320 is Airbus's cash cow; rather than try and defend the 777 they can cut the legs out from under Airbus with Y1, and concede the 777 market to the A350, while the 787 eats the A330 and A340 for lunch. As to making a 787-11, that is probably stretching the design farther than it can economically go. Look at the A346; I believe that Boeing would end up with the same situation; a plane that is too heavy because it is too long and probably having CG issues as well.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31062 posts, RR: 87
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 19257 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I agree that Boeing can only do so much with the 777, but history has shown that even when a superior product enters the market, much less is defined, the prior product doesn't instantly die, especially when that product has a solid track-record behind it.

Boeing still sold plenty of 767s when the A330 entered service. And Airbus is still selling plenty of A330s with the 787 on the cusp of EIS. Boeing still sold passenger 747s when the A380 was launched and Airbus still sold A340s when the 777 took to the skies.

The A350XWB is not going to end the 777, even if it hits every design goal Airbus has for it. So Boeing will not be forced to launch Y3 lest it cede the entire 300+ seat market to Airbus. Just as Airbus has used the past few years to push as many A330s and A340s they can in the face of the 777 and 787 backlog, Boeing will do the same with the 777, especially if EK and QR take the first 200 A350XWB frames and push availability for other customers into the latter-half of the 2010's.

This will give Boeing the time it needs to decide to respond with a 787-10ER and 787-11 or go forward with Y3.


User currently offlineNoWorries From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 19188 times:

On the one hand, Boeing has said on several occasions that the A350XWB shouldn't be compared to today's 777 because it (T7) will improve in some way by the time the 350 launches -- on the other hand, when pressed for details they are very elusive (somewhat understandable). For example, in a recent briefing at JPMorgan, Randy Baserler ruled out new materials (e.g. CFRP panels). That doesn't leave much room for improvement ... new engines, a new wing would cost more $$$. The only other area that I can imagine is that Boeing uses the full 787 "electric airplane" technology (and bleddless engines) to save some additional weight and improve performance. Has Boeing ever said how much additional savings is attributable to bleedness engines and "all electric" systems on the 787?. One could strongly argue that investing in that kind of technology on a frame with a limited life is a waste, but that technology might carry directly over into Y3 since it would likely be a similarly sized frame, (Maybe a bit far-fetched, but could they do a little bit of Y3 now -- new engines and systems for 777-- and do the rest a little later.)

User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 19132 times:

Watch for a CFRP replacement, as the 787 will have several years of service under it's belt, and any A-350 weakneses will have been revealed for Boeing to capitalize on.

I still think that Boeing will do the 737 replacement first, as it would hurt Airbus the most if done correctly.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 883 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 19017 times:

I don't know that I see much more than a statement that the 777 upgrade might be done in the near future. They have already said they are not going to change it to CFRP panels. I suspect any upgrades would simply be additional weight removal, new engines and some other assorted 787 tech. Likley not anything too expensive or too time consuming IMHO.

I think any program you see here will likley be done to give current 777 customers a chance to top off their fleet and upgrade their current fleet if they decide to do so to a modern standard. I would be shocked if they went with a new engine for it. The GenEx is not big enough and it would be a bad investment on GE's part to upgrade the 90 for a 777 upgrade unless it also could be used on Y-3 eventually.


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 18740 times:

Problem: GE wont want to do a new engine. At least not until their GE90-115B investment is amortised.

As for the 777 itself, its a great plane but its today plane. Im feeling something of a deja vu sensation, the situation is the same as it was several years ago when Airbus proposed redesigning the A330 to counter the 787.

In my opinion Boeing should let nature take its course with the 777, and concentrate on doing larger versions of the 787, namely the -10ER & -11, a wiser investment.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 979 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 18631 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
Problem: GE wont want to do a new engine. At least not until their GE90-115B investment is amortised.

There is little doubt that the Ge90-115B has amortized it's development cost. Now they are just trying to protect their golden goose for as long as possible, but they will know better than anyone that if someone must replace their cash-cow, they should be the ones to do so.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 9):
I still think that Boeing will do the 737 replacement first, as it would hurt Airbus the most if done correctly.

As do I. This may simply be rhetoric to customers that the 777 isn't obsolete yet and that it will still put up a fight against the A350. In the end, I strongly suspect Boeing will stretch the 787 line rather than upgrading the 777.


User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13165 posts, RR: 100
Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 18612 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
As for the 777 itself, its a great plane but its today plane. Im feeling something of a deja vu sensation, the situation is the same as it was several years ago when Airbus proposed redesigning the A330 to counter the 787.

Yep... its too conservative. Boeing should do the 737RS first and then Y3. Yes, this would keep Airbus alive off of widebody orders, but business before pride!  yes 

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineJAL From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5085 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 18577 times:

Wouldn't a replacement for the 737 be a more a priority for Boeing?


Work Hard But Play Harder
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6924 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 18501 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 12):
This may simply be rhetoric to customers that the 777 isn't obsolete yet and that it will still put up a fight against the A350.

I hope this is the case; IMHO if Boeing were to try to make the 777 competitive with the A350 (which they won't be able to do), or worse, launch Y3 before Y1, it will be almost as big a strategic mistake as Airbus doing the A380 in the first place. They have the chance to really dominate by doing Y1 before Airbus can match it; Airbus has the jump with the A350; they should concede it until they can crush it with Y3, which will have the advantage of several more year's worth of advances if they do Y1 first. They have the midsized market pretty well locked up with the 787; they should not get too greedy.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 18447 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 12):
Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
Problem: GE wont want to do a new engine. At least not until their GE90-115B investment is amortised.

There is little doubt that the Ge90-115B has amortized it's development cost.

Sorry, I mean their investment in the 777LR/ER programme to be precise. According to a recent thread, GE themselves expect this to happen in 2012.


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4336 posts, RR: 28
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 18405 times:

Quoting NoWorries (Reply 8):
The only other area that I can imagine is that Boeing uses the full 787 "electric airplane" technology (and bleddless engines) to save some additional weight and improve performance. Has Boeing ever said how much additional savings is attributable to bleedness engines and "all electric" systems on the 787?

I'm not sure the advantage of all electrical systems over pneumatic ones is so much weight savings as it is maintenance cost savings.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineFuturecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18227 times:

Boeing should NOT put the 737 replacement on hold so they can dedicate resources to the 777 IMO. They are poised to launch the 737RS with a first flight date set in the mid 2010's. An area Airbus can't even wish to match. Let Airbus have the high seat market for now with the hugely sucessful A380 and A350-1000XWB, the 787 is selling like pancakes at IHOP and the 737 replacement market is several thousand frames large. Airbus will be fiddling mostly with the XWB till about 2012-2014 I'd guess, with the 787 getting finished up in the next year or two the 737RS, an entirely new design with all the new technology, can be in the market by 2015 I'd assume. Kick Airbus twice while they're down, 787/737 combo. Two planes which we know will sell fast and which there are huge markets for. The 777 can live on for now, go after the huge narrowbody market.

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18206 times:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 18):
Boeing should NOT put the 737 replacement on hold so they can dedicate resources to the 777 IMO.

It might not be as bad as it sounds. Nobody is expecting Airbus to move first on the 737/A320 replacement size (ignoring the A320E which is just an update).


User currently offlineNoWorries From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18094 times:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 18):
Kick Airbus twice while they're down, 787/737 combo

I agree completely that this would be a serious hit to Airbus. This is just my opinion, but I don't believe that Boeing wants to "hurt" Airbus. There's a certain safety and comfort in a duopoly. If Boeing is content with a 50/50 NB split with Airbus for the next 5 years or so, maybe they'd rather put their capital towards more immediate needs. The disadvantage to moving first on 737RS is that it does give Airbus a chance to "respond" a bit later. Just my opinion, but I think A nd B are going to watch each other carefully, but not move too quickly here -- unless some other 3rd part becomes a serious threat.


User currently offlineAminobwana From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18094 times:

In the article of the SEATTLE TIMES it says:

The company could put a revamped 777 on the front burner, ahead of a 737 replacement, McNerney
indicated.

Nevertheless, when textually quoting what McNermey said, I do not see the "ahead of a 737..." part.

1)Given that lately the press ) is acting very confusedly, has anybody seen the complete text of
McNermey's statements, to verify if this phrase is only a S. Time deduction or he really said that ??

I ask this because I do not see that if Boeing was able to develop simultaneously the B787 and the
B748i (pax+cargo), why now they cannot do it with the B777 and B737 follow-up models !

Two additional questions:

2) Why is Boeing not pursuing instead the alternative of a B787-10X to compete with the captioned
A350 model ??
Is it because BOEING is thinking that revamping the B777, similarly as done with the B747-300ER
to create the B748, is quicker and cheaper ??

3) Has AIRBUS the means (presently they did not have the funding for the basic line) to develop
such a A350, which, as McNermey stated some weeks ago, is a very different aircraft and not a
simple extrapolation of the smaller aircraft ?

Thanks in advance for your input

Aminobwana





:


User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 883 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18076 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 15):
I hope this is the case; IMHO if Boeing were to try to make the 777 competitive with the A350 (which they won't be able to do), or worse, launch Y3 before Y1, it will be almost as big a strategic mistake as Airbus doing the A380 in the first place. They have the chance to really dominate by doing Y1 before Airbus can match it; Airbus has the jump with the A350; they should concede it until they can crush it with Y3, which will have the advantage of several more year's worth of advances if they do Y1 first. They have the midsized market pretty well locked up with the 787; they should not get too greedy.

I would think it is probably not the case. Doing Y3 first would present almost as much of an engine problem as Y1 I would think. The 777 has a healthy backlog that would get it through for a while and it will still sell for 3 or more years well enough. Talk of a 777 upgrade is probably limited to things that could be done to the airframe without major reworking or retooling of the line. Additionally I would suspect it is meant to sort of keep people guessing on their response to the A350-1000.

I think we are seeing a massive game of chicken. Airbus does not want to announce its final specs for the 1000 because it does not want Boeing to make an equal or better 787-10. Boeing is holding off on the 787-10 to see exactly what the competition is from Airbus. Airlines that want a 777 replacement are sort of caught in the middle. In the end I suspect that Boeing will build a 787-10 that takes a bit more work than a simple stretch somewhere in between the A350-900 and the A350-1000 to keep some level of competition in the market. It is sort of a game of who will show their hand first.


User currently offlineGlareskin From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1307 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 17906 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 9):
I still think that Boeing will do the 737 replacement first, as it would hurt Airbus the most if done correctly.



Quoting NoWorries (Reply 20):
I agree completely that this would be a serious hit to Airbus.

What is this? A dog fight? I don't believe either Boeing or Airbus are making strategic decisions just to 'hurt' the other. They both know it is their task to build the best selling aircraft in order to make profit. Nothing more, nothing less. And for all us passengers: let's hope the competition will keep going on. If it becomes a monopoly the planes will not develop a lot and the prices for planes and tickets will go up!



There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 17881 times:

Well one things for sure the sooner Boeing launch the 737 replacement, the less profits they will take from the 737NG.

25 ATLflyer : I love the 777, so it would be nice to see an updated version of it in 2012. How about a composite 777? It doesn't seem like they need to design a new
26 EI321 : That would effectivly a new aircraft.
27 SEPilot : That is a very shortsighted reason to delay. Right now the 737 and A320 are pretty well splitting the market, and Boeing is selling them faster than
28 1337Delta764 : I would think that before Y3 is made, Boeing would update the 777 by reducing weight and using new engines. I wonder if airlines would prefer if Boein
29 ConcordeBoy : ...say what?
30 Bmacleod : Isn't Y3 supposed to be the 777-300ER replacement? Designing a 777-400 or 777-500 wouldn't make any sense and as quoted above, a 787-11 would be an ex
31 Post contains images Pygmalion : The 787-10 competes well enough with the A350X-900. The EIS of the A350X-1000 that competes with the 773ER is something like 2015. With a refresh of t
32 EI321 : Thats ties into the point I was making, the sooner Boeing developes Y1, the sooner Airbus will match it.
33 SEPilot : They shouldn't waste the effort; the 777 will be completely outclassed by the A350-1000, and Boeing should just accept it and get on with Y1. Trying
34 BoomBoom : We heard the same kind of tough-talking bravado when the A380 was launched. It was going to kill the 747. Didn't happen, in fact the 747 has outsold
35 AirCanada014 : If composite materials proves weight reduction on B787s why don't Boeing start using composite on newer B777NGs?
36 SEPilot : Because that would be a new aircraft, as has been mentioned many times on this forum.
37 Post contains images Futurecaptain : Oh sorry, thought everyone could spot that as a bit of sarcasim in my post. Here is the updated version. with the hugely sucessful A380 and A350-1000
38 BlackKnight : As I have said in other posts: Y1 provides X income over many frames were as Y3 would provide X income over less frames. This will be a money driven d
39 BlackKnight : [http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/3375973/?searchid=3375973&s=BlackKnight#ID3375973] Link to other post on the same top
40 EXAAUADL : Wishful thinking from the home of the EU
41 SEPilot : Interesting analysis, BlackKnight. I would agree that Boeing is going to analyze the situation very carefully before deciding whether Y3 or Y1 should
42 Aminobwana : I fully agree with BOOM BOOM. As an engineer I am baffled regarding the fact that many expect any reaction from BOEING in front of a still not comple
43 AirSpare : Glad somebody pointed tha out, posters should stay on topic a tad more! bigger, juicier...himm. Ok, anyone else visit the B twin isle narrow body exh
44 Justloveplanes : I think its a question of managing expectations. I think Airbus would have been more successful sticking to their guns on The old A350 with minimal i
45 SEPilot : They probably can, but they will be dealing with the 748 and the residual issues on the 787 during this time. They will also be developing the 787-9
46 AndesSMF : But an incremental improvement of the 777 might keep airlines in their camp for a while longer till the replacement is available.
47 Post contains images Glideslope : This is what will happen. Summer 08 Y1. You would be a nice addition to marketing.
48 SEPilot : The 777 will not be competitive with the A350, and incremental improvements won't get it there. They will be a waste of time and money.
49 1337Delta764 : You could make the same argument with the 737NG and A320. The 737NG, while an update of an existing aircraft, has proven to be a viable competitor to
50 Gigneil : Redesigning the 737 when its selling out all its production would be stupid. There is no compelling reason to replace either short range aircraft. The
51 SEPilot : The difference is that the A320 did not offer any major new technology; it was an incremental improvement over the 737 Classic. The 737NG was able to
52 LuisKMIA : If Boeing maxes out the amount of composites they can put on a new version of the 777, I would imagine that would change the supply chain and building
53 HughesAirwest : I would agree. However, the 77L will still be a very viable, efficient, and competitive product when the A350 becomes available. To take advantage of
54 Blackbird1331 : It is time to build a new four-engined plane. A 777/747 combi. If you want a 737 repacement, come up with a 787-6.
55 Grantcv : I think Boeing should make an ultra short-body 787-0, 787-1, and 787-3 to replace the 737. Then they could make a 787-11 to replace the 777, a 787-12
56 BlackKnight : The world of aviation is changing. Partnerships and risk sharing partners are where it is at. Government funding will be challenged becuase of its pol
57 Jfk777 : Whatever happens to the 777 it took Boeing to a new dimension, hey Air France loves them. The 772LR makes the world smaller, 777 you are a great way t
58 XT6Wagon : I can see too things. Y3 gets a pushed up launch with real work starting when the 748 engineers get done playing with their toy. This would lengthen t
59 Stitch : I'd take exception to that.The A320 introduced a number of major advances in electronics and flight-control systems. She also had improvements in aer
60 Gigneil : Hear hear. NS
61 JAAlbert : I had read that the 777's wing was the most aerodynamically advanced wing ever constructed. So much so that winglets were not required. What benefit
62 SEPilot : Granted, the A320 flight control system is more modern than the 737, but it doesn't make any more money for the airlines. The aerodynamic improvement
63 NoWorries : Thanks for the info -- so if the wings are as good as they can get, and the all-electric systems can't be easily integrated into the 777, and Boeing
64 BigJKU : It is better to make your own product obsolete than wait for your competitor to do it for you. For Boeing there are lots of ways to justify the cost
65 BlackKnight : Remember the 747-8 will be a success as a freighter. The return on investment has already taken place. Y3 will not take away from the 747-8.
66 Gigneil : At the time, sure. The 787's wing is going to be far more advanced than the 777s. NS
67 JSquared : If Boeing was planning to do Y3 first and have it ready around 2015, then why would they even bother with the 747-8? Sure they'll get a ROI, and I can
68 WingedMigrator : Not only that, but it is also not in the business interest of the engine makers (GE in particular) to make Y3 before Y1. They need many more years of
69 Spaceshipone : As I read the column, this is the pertinent issue: "If Airbus firms up the specifications of the largest A350 model so that it competes directly again
70 Scbriml : Didn't GE say exactly the opposite recently?
71 XT6Wagon : While the money may not be in the bank, there is little doubt it will be given the number of engines already sold. I doubt that as of today its paid
72 Lemurs : There's been little discussion of exactly how much engineering effort would go into this program. Boeing obviously has the engineering resources to ma
73 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Nor would the nomenclature... probably go with the ridiculous -800 labels if ever created You don't have sufficient tangible evidence to make that ca
74 Post contains links BoomBoom : http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/313116_boeingearns26.html
75 VC10DC10 : I hope BigJKU is wrong -- nothing personal, but I'm convinced that there will always be at least a few airlines and/or governments that will want fou
76 SEPilot : True; I am basing it on the experience that Airbus had in trying to tweak the A320 to answer the 787. This is assuming that Airbus does as good a job
77 Aminobwana : " target=_blank>http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine....html I would advise ABOULAFIA tell to AIRBUS: " wait with the A350 until the A787-8/9 has been
78 SEPilot : Correction: should be A330, not A320.
79 Blackbird1331 : What is the Y1, Y2, Y3 thing?
80 BlackKnight : Y1 = 737 replacement Y2 = 787 Y3 = 777 and 747 replacement
81 Revelation : The 737NG and A320 are made using the same basic construction technology. The 777 and A350XWB will not be built using the same basic construction tec
82 Post contains links LimoJet : Hi Guys!!! This is just my second post after having joined recently, and having read these threads for quite some time beforehand. In reading the prev
83 ConcordeBoy : ...thing is though, it's design actually preceded that by the better part of a decade-- meaning far more than just 12yrs has elapsed for the accrual
84 SEPilot : It seems that some people think that all kinds of magic can be acheived with a new wing, and that as time goes on equal improvements can be made conti
85 JoeCanuck : I don't thing there is a huge saving in weight going to a composite fuse barrel. From what I understand, the savings in that respect come from the man
86 SEPilot : If this is the case, then how come Airbus was totally unsuccessful in competing with the 787 with a warmed-over A330? What's sauce for the goose is s
87 BigJKU : I agree and I think this is what is going on with all the information coming out of Boeing regarding the 787-10 and the 777 upgrade. They are not goi
88 Revelation : I'm not sure which scenario you are talking about. It's clear from both the basics and from data already released by Boeing that there are real gains
89 BigJKU : I would suspect a new wing and lots of improvments would run about the same as the 747-8 program which is what, $4 Billion or so? If you bother to do
90 SEPilot : You may be correct, and my estimates are WAGS, but 2.5% improvement will not come close to making the 777 competive with the A350-1000. In the currec
91 Revelation : The A350 can be ignored for quite a while. The baseline model won't EIS till 2012 at best, and the -1000 won't EIS till 2015. The big problem is stil
92 SEPilot : My comments are directed to the original topic, which was whether or not Boeing will or should attempt to answer the A350 by upgrading the 777 to avo
93 Post contains links NoWorries : Yet another article -- doesn't add much of anything new, except perhaps to reinforce that a 777NG of some form is on their minds ... http://www.flight
94 JoeCanuck : I think everyone agrees the original 350 would have been more efficient than the 330, but one of the problems is that it wasn't big enough. It couldn
95 BigJKU : There are a lot of problems invovled with attaching large composite parts to aluminium. There is no point in putting in all the money to do that. Why
96 NoWorries : Just curious ... what are those problems? If memory serves, the A380 has a composite tail section attched to a metal fuselage?
97 Post contains links Aminobwana : " target=_blank>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm....html I attach here another report, issued by FLIGHT, which addresses the same issue but includ
98 BigJKU : From what I have gathered there are various issues with the part corosion. It can certainly be done, but my main point is why bother trying to solve
99 Parapente : I guess it's just me but I always thought that y3 was to be the BWB. That would be the "game changer". Do Y1 -Airbus will have to follow (late). Then
100 Pygmalion : Structural attachments are usually with titanium fittings. Aluminum directly with carbon fiber is, as stated, a corrosion issue. Titanium to aluminum
101 JoeCanuck : My brother owns a body shop which specializes in big rig trucks. The cabs are made of aluminum and fibreglass. There are, virtually, no corrosion issu
102 SEPilot : My understanding is that Boeing is not convinced that either the airlines or the public is ready for the BWB. I understood that Y3 was going to be a
103 JoeCanuck : It's probably not their first choice, (for public acceptance reasons), but it sure would be the leap ahead in performance that's required. Besides, I'
104 Post contains images NoWorries : Every time this thread seems to be on the verge of a merciful death -- someone resuscitates it -- I'm guilty as charged -- none the less -- here goes
105 Post contains images SEPilot : That is without question, but it is no good if not enough people will buy it or fly in it.
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...
Air France-KLM Will Be The #3 (tied) 777 Operator posted Thu Dec 14 2006 04:49:38 by N328KF
News Story - Boeing Announces It Will Build The New 7E7 (!) posted Sun Jul 9 2006 04:05:21 by Grantcv
A320 Successor - What Could Be The Name? posted Wed Jan 11 2006 10:16:07 by Glidepath73
Next UAL 772 For The New Colors posted Sat Mar 26 2005 00:45:08 by Nbgskygod
Boeing 7E7 - Who Will Be The Launch Customer(s)? posted Fri Feb 13 2004 04:50:56 by Usa4624
What Could Be The Most Succesfull Helicopter Ever? posted Thu Sep 18 2003 16:58:20 by Keesje
Whats Wrong With The New 777-200LR And 777-300ER posted Wed Apr 2 2003 21:53:03 by United777
CI Could Be The Launch Customer For 744QXLR posted Fri Oct 18 2002 06:28:14 by Bigo747
When Did The 767's Get The New 777-style Interior? posted Wed Aug 21 2002 00:03:18 by QatarAirways
Sonic Cruiser: Boeing Signals It Could Be Scrapped posted Wed Jul 24 2002 23:38:18 by Singapore_Air