Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Boeing Replace The 787-9/777 With A New Line?  
User currently offlinepanais From Cyprus, joined May 2008, 462 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7273 times:

There are a lot of ongoing discussions as to what Boeing should do with the upgrade/replacement of the 777, which is a fine airplane especially the 777-300ER. Suggestions coming from Clark of EK is to offer a 300-350-400 seating variant, etc.

Additionally, there is the option of launching the 787-10, and how that can compete against the A350 not to mention some people asking for the 787-11.

With only 1 order for the 787-9 in the last 18 months for 1 plane and only two orders in 2008 for 50 planes, one has to start questioning whether the 787-9 can actually sell well against the A350. The 787-9 has sold 190 airplanes over the last 6 years.

The 787-8 has been selling very well and has a potential of generating more sales compared to the 787-9.

Should Boeing start looking at creating a family of airplanes that start from 300 to 400 seats in order to replace the 787-9, 777 and potentially the 747?

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7232 times:

Quoting panais (Thread starter):
. Suggestions coming from Clark of EK is to offer a 300-350-400 seating variant, etc.

I thought that he was referring to the Emirates fleet, but I might have been wrong.

Quoting panais (Thread starter):
Additionally, there is the option of launching the 787-10, and how that can compete against the A350 not to mention

I think that a 787-10 is a must for Boeing sooner rather than later to compete with the A350-1000 from the bottom and the A350-900 from above. It would most likely be slightly inferior to the A350-100 in payload and range although it would be lighter and probably a bit more efficient on shorter flights. I think Boeing should be able to get away with this easily since they could offer a 777NG to airlines that want the payload and range.

Quoting panais (Thread starter):
The 787-9 has sold 190 airplanes over the last 6 years.

I think that the 787-9 will be the most popular variant when all is said and done, and that the order book will come alive in the future, just as I expect with the A350-1000.

Quoting panais (Thread starter):
Should Boeing start looking at creating a family of airplanes that start from 300 to 400 seats in order to replace the 787-9, 777 and potentially the 747?

In an ideal world perhaps, but Boeing will not be able to design another new airframe, especially with the potential for an all new narrowbody. I think that they should be able to get by just fine with derivatives, assuming they do their homework and get the right plane at the right time.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinecerecl From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 727 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7169 times:

Quoting panais (Thread starter):
replace the 787-9

By the time this 787-9 replacement is ready to fly the potential market 787-9 would have occupied would be taken by A358/9. Plus there is absolutely no guarantee that the 787-9XWB    will be in any way superior to A359. Why would BA, AF, LH, QF etc wait for something that will be most likely another derivative, not necessarily better, might arrive some time before 2020 (again, no garantee there, another words a pie in the sky) when they can pick from two very capable families, not to mention the tried and trusted A333 and B77W?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
I think that a 787-10 is a must for Boeing sooner rather than later

If they can do it sooner, then I believe it will be a success. However, if it is late to the party, then it will not do as well. So far we have not seen any evidence that production of 787-10 will be straight forward. For if it is, it would have been offered many moons ago...

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
I think that the 787-9 will be the most popular variant when all is said and done, and that the order book will come alive in the future, just as I expect with the A350-1000.

I respectfully disagree. I think while both 787-9 and A350-1000 will be great aircrafts with many sold, the base-line models of both family will be the biggest seller. But hey, I have never owned a crystal ball...

[Edited 2010-08-16 23:43:19]

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30618 posts, RR: 84
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7159 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well AA has a firm order for 42 787-9s ready to be executed when they and the pilots come to an agreement, so that will increase the order book by close to 25%.

Also note that the 787-9 production rate is likely going to be between 3 to 5 a month, so the current order book will take 40 or more months to deliver so that could explain why customers are not placing orders at the moment.

So I don't believe the 787-9 is...unpopular...in the marketplace and airlines are actively eschewing it (yes, CX has chosen the A350-900 over the 787-9, but I'm told it was a relatively close contest and not a pre-determined default win for the A359 with the 789 never seriously being considered).

The problem with the 787-10 is that while it can handily out-class the A330-300 and 777-200, it seems that it cannot handily out-class the A340-300 and 777-200ER and I am sure customers want a plane that can perform the missions all four platforms do.

The 787-10 probably needs an MTOW of around 260t in order to address the OEW and payload increase and fill the tanks to capacity. That appears to be around 8t more than the 787 undercarriage can handle, though so far nobody has been able to confirm that limit or identify what component(s) are limited. I'm guessing it's tire loading, which means larger tires or more of them and both means the wingbox needs to be re-designed to accommodate them.

So I am guessing that the 787-10 will need to wait for the 787-9 to reach her final production configuration at which point Boeing can start working on the wingspan extension and new wing box and undercarriage for the 787-10, probably tied in with a 260t 787-9LR model.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7077 times:

Quoting cerecl (Reply 2):
I think while both 787-9 and A350-1000 will be great aircrafts with many sold, the base-line models of both family will be the biggest seller.

I only think that the 787-9 will be the biggest seller. I think that the A350-1000 will be a great success (far greater than the current order book would indicate) I think that the -900 will be the biggest seller in the family.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
The 787-10 probably needs an MTOW of around 260t in order to address the OEW and payload increase and fill the tanks to capacity. That appears to be around 8t more than the 787 undercarriage can handle, though so far nobody has been able to confirm that limit or identify what component(s) are limited. I'm guessing it's tire loading, which means larger tires or more of them and both means the wingbox needs to be re-designed to accommodate them

I think that is definitely a worthwhile effort to make to get the 787-10 where it needs to be, and none of that rules out a straight stretch version to sell a few copies in the interim. The need to expand the 787 and possibly 777 family might be one point in favor of going with a re-engined 737 versus an all new design.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6823 times:

The 787-10 thing goes round and round.Stitch has summarised the issue perfectly.It's one of those vicious circles.In the end you find yourself saying new(heavily revised) wing - new/revised wing box,new/revised undercarriage - and then... and it's true - the engines - they will not be powerful enough.It's nearly a new aircraft! Hence why we don't hear about it.

Lets see what Boeing have in mind for the NG 777 first.They may just opt to keep only the 300er ahead of the game with minor revisions.But if they go for a new wing (carbon) then I bet they will look hard at the 200er model as well whilst they are at it.It would also make more sense for any investment in the GE90 core as with can be amortised across both types.Lets see.


User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2727 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6781 times:

I guess some airlines would like for the 787-9 to firm its specification before they order the new plane. As other members here I believe that the 787-9 will likely become the most popular variant.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
The 787-10 probably needs an MTOW of around 260t in order to address the OEW and payload increase and fill the tanks to capacity. That appears to be around 8t more than the 787 undercarriage can handle, though so far nobody has been able to confirm that limit or identify what component(s) are limited. I'm guessing it's tire loading, which means larger tires or more of them and both means the wingbox needs to be re-designed to accommodate them.

So I am guessing that the 787-10 will need to wait for the 787-9 to reach her final production configuration at which point Boeing can start working on the wingspan extension and new wing box and undercarriage for the 787-10, probably tied in with a 260t 787-9LR model.

While I agree that a higher take off weight would increase the business case for a potential 787-10, I wonder if the technology that will be introduced on the 787-9 will be make it possible to make the 787-10 work without a MTOW increase. The hybrid laminar flow, lighter fuselage barrels etc should also increase the performance on the 787-10.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6767 times:

Quoting parapente (Reply 5):
.In the end you find yourself saying new(heavily revised) wing - new/revised wing box,new/revised undercarriage - and then... and it's true - the engines - they will not be powerful enough.It's nearly a new aircraft!

I don't think Boeing has a choice. Airbus threw them a curveball with the A350 and there is no way that Boeing can effectively compete across its range with one family of aircraft. They have to split it between the 777NG (ten abreast) and the 787, and I firmly believe that the best place to draw the line is right at the A350-1000 with the 787-10 right below it and the 777NG right above it. Do it anywhere else, and they will most likely be making serious compromises. If Boeing continues to offer nothing in the gap between the 787-9 and 777-300ER, they could potentially lose a lot of orders from airlines looking to get a slight capacity jump in a new generation replacement for their 777-200s.

Quoting parapente (Reply 5):
They may just opt to keep only the 300er ahead of the game with minor revisions.

That should work for a while, at least until they get a 787-10 most of the way off the drawing board.

Quoting parapente (Reply 5):
I bet they will look hard at the 200er model as well whilst they are at it.

I think that to stay competitive the 777 will have to go to ten wide which would make the -200 go from capacities in the mid 200s to the high 200s and some will probably be over 300. Even then, I think that the -200 will be just too heavy for what it can do and that particular segment can be best served by evolutions of the 787.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinecerecl From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 727 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6716 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 7):
If Boeing continues to offer nothing in the gap between the 787-9 and 777-300ER, they could potentially lose a lot of orders from airlines looking to get a slight capacity jump in a new generation replacement for their 777-200s

And Airbus currently has no NG aircraft to offer airlines wanting to replace A332 and 767s. You win some, you lose some. The desire to counter the competitor's product range in every possible way is understandable, but may not be practical.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6701 times:

Quoting cerecl (Reply 8):
And Airbus currently has no NG aircraft to offer airlines wanting to replace A332 and 767s. You win some, you lose some.

I wouldn't say that since they have been selling plenty of A330s lately. And by the time they are done with that they will have the A350 up and running, even if it is the heavy -800.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinecerecl From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 727 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6645 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 9):
I wouldn't say that since they have been selling plenty of A330s lately

Quite true, but a lot has to do with 787 delays. How good A358 will be as an A332 replacement, i.e. how effectively it can compete with 787-8 and 9 is questionable. If 787-9 is a worry then one can argue A358 is a worry too. Maybe that's why we see A330NG proposals every other day...  

[Edited 2010-08-17 04:09:14]

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8288 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6511 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 787-9 wil be great and many airlines want it it will be the most sold version of the plane when all the dust settles. Why would Boeing replace a plane not even peoduced yet, Boeing needs to decide what to do about teh 777. A 777 with lots of composites will probably do the job.

User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6487 times:

The 787-9 will be with us for a long time. If it proves inadequate against the A350 (which I do not believe) then it will be improved. Ultimately Boeing will build Y3 to replace the 777 and 747; but that may be a while yet. Boeing's first priority after the 787 is wound down is the narrowbody; the C-series is a threat and cannot go unanswered, even if it has not caught on yet. I believe one reason it hasn't is that the airlines are giving Boeing and Airbus time to counter it; but if they don't the airlines will not wait forever. Actually, I believe that the 789 will prove superior to the A358; the question will be how the 777 fares against the A359 and A3510. The reason is simple; the 789 is a stretch while the A358 is a shrink, and I think that the stretch will prove to be superior.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6462 times:

There is - I believe the question of "cycles".By the time A had been through 2 or 3 iterations of 330 ng's - B had stacked up 600 plus orders for the 788. In essence the cycle had already happened.Indeed they themselves moped up the rest (due to the delays of the 788) with a hat full of 332 and 333's.

So it was sensible (even curve balled!) to attack the next market whose' cycle was coming up - the 772 series.Again they have picked up - what 500 orders is it? You also have the "trade up" orders to the phenominal 300er.Just how much of the 772(er) pie is there left? Long term of course it is a gap the must be (and will) be plugged.Maybe there is still plently left for this cycle,I don't know.If so they better act fast.If not better to do an Airbus strategy - accept one cannot have everything all the time and plan further down the line.

It's abit like Keejse's 330NG.If it could box toe to toe with a 788 then all fair and good.But if not - then better to wait and "do it properly" later with a shortened 350 fuse and new wing optimised for the task that really can take on the 788.


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...
What A/c Will Airlines Replace The MD-11 With? posted Mon Jul 1 2002 20:18:06 by Srbmod
With The 7E7, Will Boeing Close The 767 Line Soon? posted Sun May 23 2004 03:29:56 by A380900
Will Boeing Leave The 777 Alone? posted Sat Jan 13 2007 11:13:13 by Relaxitsfedex7
Will Boeing Let The 777 Die? posted Fri Oct 27 2006 04:13:11 by KSUpilot
Will Jet Airways And Sahara Buy The 787/777? posted Fri May 6 2005 16:26:28 by NYC777
Will LAN Use The 787 For MAD-FRA Flight? posted Thu May 1 2008 00:39:53 by LHStarAlliance
CX 777's With New Seats? posted Mon Mar 17 2008 02:09:46 by Elite
DL 777's With New Business Interior? posted Mon Dec 10 2007 14:50:56 by Jkj777
So, Will Boeing Deliver The Goods? posted Wed Jul 11 2007 03:30:57 by LuisKMIA
When Will Boeing Launch The 767-200LRF? posted Mon Jul 2 2007 01:33:02 by EI321