Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Prediction - 787 And 797  
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1669 times:

I predict that the numbers 787 and 797 will soon be attributed...

The 737 is getting long in the tooth, and Boeing has I believe already announced that the -900 variant will be the last one. It has served well, but I think airlines and passengers will want something new soon. My prediction is that the successor to the 737 will be the 797, and that Boeing will announce its development sometime in 2001.

The 747X project maybe kinda stalled right now because airlines (and passengers) are starting to realize that the 747, as wonderful and capable an aircraft it has been, is over 30 years old. Orders and deliveries of this plane are slowing down substantially (only 21 orders in 2000, many of them cargo).

The 747X will be a good opportunity to make MAJOR changes, not just stretching the fuselage. It will certainly have a new wing, will probably have FBW like the 777, different engines, 777-style interior. They can also do some major changes on the structure, using composite materials (a process already started somewhat with the 747-400). If they really want to be smart, they will make the cockpits common between the 777, 747X, and why not even the 797 (737 successor). The only difference will be extra controls for 2 more engines. Airbus did it, and cockpit commonality has proven to be a big asset for them.

With so many changes, why not mark the occasion by retiring the honored 747 designation gracefully, and naming it the 787. It would also be a signal that this is not just a lengthened 747, but a practically new plane (after all the 727, 737, A330 and other "new models" took a lot of parts from previous models). The fact that it will look a lot like a 747 does not mean it IS one. Otherwise the 747 would have been called the Carvair II  

That's my crystal ball.

Cheers,

Charles



13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3505 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1601 times:

I think that the 787 will be a stretched 747, like the A3XX. And I HOPE that the 797 will be a sort of a 727NG. That would rock bigtime!

Danny


User currently offlineSashA From Russia, joined May 1999, 861 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1572 times:

Interesting predictions, colourful and justified well.

Looking a bit ahead, what would Boeing use when they run out of 7X7 designations? 8X8?

Also, would there be any hope to see Boeing making a quad-powered single decker? Like A-340 / IL-96 / B 707, for that matter.



An2/24/28,Yak42,Tu154/134,IL18/62/96,B737/757/767,A310/320/319,F100,BAe146,EMB-145,CRJ,A340-600,B747-400,A-330-300,A-340
User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

You Bet!

A 4-engine, 120 seater(2 class) 707-XXX with trans-continental range, and 777 avionics would be like DROOOL!

It would also be the ultimate fragmentor, and probably allow operations from Meiggs Field to Timbuctou!


User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4537 posts, RR: 42
Reply 4, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1557 times:

Well, 787 was at one stage being touted for Boeings NLA (New Large Aircraft, very simmilar in appearance to the A3XX and MD-12 final edition).

As for 797, who knows. If it was to be a 737 replacement, i hardly immagine they'd announce its development in 2001! The 737NG is very young, and is selling like wildfire. Come back in 15 years or so, and it will be time for Boeing to dump the 737, by which stage there will be some way cool technology to use... Of course, depending on how much this technology separates this aircraft from past ones, this could be where the 8xx (8x8 perhaps, but it could just as easily be 8x7...) designator might come in...



"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlineSamurai 777 From Canada, joined Jan 2000, 2458 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1490 times:

After the "7X7" designation runs out, I doubt that Boeing would go for the "8X8" designation for new a/c. It's much more likely to be "27X7". Yes, the 2707 was originally the designation for Boeing's SST, which got axed in 1971. A 2707, if it was built, would much more likely be a subsonic airliner anyways - the HCST (High Speed Civil Transport) project also got cancelled because it just wasn't very economical, much less the thorny sonic boom problem.

Speaking of the 787 and the 797, well.... I'm not too sure. But I think the 787 might be a 600-800 passenger competitor to the A3XX, either being a true double decker watermelon like the A3XX, or a superstretched 747X. I have the feeling Boeing's going to get really serious about competing with the A3XX within this decade. The 797 is even harder to predict, but it might very well most likely be a replacement for the 767 rather than the 737 about 10-15 years in the future. The reason is that the 737NG is likely to stay in production for about 15-20 years from now but with more advanced technology, while the 767-200 and -300, which first came out in the early 1980s, will need to be replaced.

Whatever the future brings for Boeing, I'm sure it'll be cool to see what happens!


User currently offlineBoeingrulz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 465 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1479 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

If the VLA market proves sucessful in the next 10-15 years, and boeing decides to build a new aircraft for that market, it will be the BWB (Blended Wing Body). The economics are very good and the concept has received alot of attention from Boeing.

I see a new family of twins serving the entire range from 100 pax to the size of 777-300. Two different fuselage diameters but as many common systems as possible. This would take the Airbus concept of common cockpit ratings one step further to include many of the systems on the planes. I personally feel that the narrow body should have a fuselage diameter similar to that of the A320 if not slightly wider to provide better passenger comfort.

As to their designations? I don't know except that it has to have as many sevens as possible.

Carolyn



User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1476 times:

WHy on earth would Boeing introduce a 797 in 2001 as an alternative to the 737 line?

The 737 NG family is new, the wing design is new, they can milk it for the next 20 years, and they still have to cover the development costs. Unless a new narrow body line of A/C offers brand new technology in all respects, why on earth would they launch a new Aircraft type thats similar to the 737 line.

As far as renaming a 747 a 787, well.... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck. So why bother with a new designation?


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1448 times:

Jaysit,

I didn't say they would introduce the 737's successor in 2001, I said that they would announce it. By the time it's ready, it will be late in the decade. It takes a lot of time to build an all-new aircraft. By that time the 737 will be a 10 year-old update of a 40 year-old design.

As for your second point, most people don't have a clue. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, but you call it a goose, there are an awful lot of people who will believe you. It's called marketing.

Charles


User currently offlineFly_emirates From United Arab Emirates, joined Oct 2000, 1046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1429 times:

At the mean time!
i dont think that beoing will begin the idea of 787 and 797.. may be they are working on it but didnt announce it yet? i dont know!


User currently offlineN-156F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1410 times:

Launch the replacement for the B737NG only a few years after the NG itself entered service? Can you say "suicide"? No one would buy the B737NGs anymore- they'd either go Airbus or wait for the successor. I doubt if Boeing will launch a successor to the B737NG before 2015.
As for the B787 idea, not many airlines would go for this. First off, you lose the worldwide knowledge of the B747 name, and you introduce pax to a new design. Also, you have to worry about new type ratings and extra training, as opposed to a new B747 which needs only conversion training. B747-500 is the more likely designator here.
As far as the what happens when the B7X7 designators are gone, I expect to see the B1707 (pronounced Seventeen-Oh-Seven), followed by the B1727, and etc.
And as far as an updated B727 goes, don't bet the ranch. It'd be competing with the B737NG. Simply put, one of the two would be killed instantly.


User currently offlineIainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 1381 times:

Boeing has said it is changing its numbers so there will be no 787 or 797!
Iain


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39478 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (13 years 4 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1370 times:

How many types of the 737 do we need?

I would like to see Boeing make a hi-wing 4 engine jet similar to the Lockheed C5-A or the IL-76.
Just imagine a double-decker with wings above you for un-obstructed views of the world below you.

I am sick and tired of twin engine jets being made!



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4537 posts, RR: 42
Reply 13, posted (13 years 4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1366 times:

Problem with high wing aircraft is that the spar will cut into passanger space. Take the BAe 146, under the wing, there is about as much roon in the overhead lockers as in a car's glove box, if that, and you cant stand up there (not if you're tall, anyway). This is with a relatively small wing. Take a huge wing, and more than likely it would cut the upper deck in half. Thats why the wing spar on most typical commercial jets, and certainly on all large ones, pases through the cargo hold. Cargo does not care if it cant get from end of the aircraft to the other in an emergency. People do.


"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
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...
Will The Numbers 787 And 797 Ever Be Used? posted Tue Dec 31 2002 01:40:03 by BR715-A1-30
787 And 797? posted Thu Jun 1 2000 21:49:22 by Ericmetallica
UAL Says Looking At 787 And A350 posted Tue Dec 12 2006 19:10:05 by NYC777
Why Is There A Gap Between The 787-3 And 787-8? posted Tue Sep 19 2006 05:00:13 by JAM747
What's The Diff Between The 787-3 And 787-8? posted Sun Sep 17 2006 04:48:06 by Remcor
787 And 748 @ Farnborough Air Show 2006 posted Tue Jul 11 2006 17:01:19 by BoeingBus
Why Only Two Engine Choices On 787 And A350? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 02:02:16 by 1337Delta764
Thomsonfly Looking At 787 And A350 posted Mon May 15 2006 19:37:10 by TomatLTN
EL AL Update: 787 And 350 posted Fri May 12 2006 13:47:11 by Amirs
The 787 And Top Secret Technology posted Mon Mar 13 2006 18:12:31 by Kaneporta1