Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Is Boeing Dragging Their Feet About Y1?  
User currently offlineDTWPurserBoy From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 1580 posts, RR: 7
Posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8616 times:

Airbus, whose 320 model is of late '80's vintage is a logical choice for the NEO upgrade, especially with the sharklette winglets. Boeing, on the other hand, keep rewarming the 737 which was an early 60's design and has only benfited from avionics upgrades and other minor changes desperately needs an entirely new narrow body design to replace the 737 once and for all. Is it because of the costs they have incurred with the 787 or are they nervous about that huge leap in technology that continues to bedevil them that they seem so reluctant to commit? However, if Boeing cedes this market to Airbus or Bombardier (or the Chinese Series C919!) they are making a serious mistake, IMHO.


Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 851 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8540 times:

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
DTWPurserBoy

You gonna get many 'if it aint broken why fix it´ reply´s

Cheers

//Mike  



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlinedelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1504 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8523 times:

The common answer is: technology has not advanced sufficiently to make Y1 worthwhile. Boeing wants serious operating gains above the 737 and they don't yet see a way to achieve them.

User currently offlinedbo861 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 883 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8462 times:

Quoting solnabo (Reply 1):
You gonna get many 'if it aint broken why fix it´ reply´s

It ain't broke?

It's a 50 year old design (at least the airframe), the biggest customer is BEGGING for a replacement, other historically loyal Boeing customers are considering switching to Airbus because of their newer, improved A320NEO.


User currently offlinePITingres From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8438 times:

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
Boeing, on the other hand, keep rewarming the 737 which was an early 60's design and has only benfited from avionics upgrades and other minor changes ...

Oh geez, not this sh*! again.

The current 737 is indeed based on a 60's design, but has been given a new wing, new systems, (relatively) new engines, new all sorts of things. Hardly "minor" changes. Aside from the basic dimensioning it's more appropriate to call it a mid-90's design in most of the aspects that count. How much the remnants of "60's design" are limiting future improvements, can be and has been argued on numerous prior threads.

As for why Boeing are "dragging their feet", I rather suspect that it's because they feel the need to make the right decision on re-engine vs clean sheet, and it's not a simple choice. I doubt that the engineers are sitting around playing Solitaire and picking their noses ... there are tons of trade studies to do in order to arrive at the decision. If the company gets it wrong, it could put them behind for decades, so it's fairly important to get it right!



Fly, you fools! Fly!
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8339 times:

I would just like to second Reply 4.

1. This obviously is the answer.
2.Making the...."only benfited from avionics upgrades and other minor changes" comment is so obviously there to start a "flame war".We can do better than this.


User currently offlinemsp747 From United States of America, joined May 2010, 307 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8262 times:

I do think the "dragging their feet" comment is kind of funny. I mean, Airbus dragged their feet for months and months on whether or not to launch the 320neo. How long has it been since they finally went ahead and launched it? 2 months? 3 months? Considering they would be putting billions of dollars on the line, I'm ok if Boeing gives it a few months to go over the numbers and decide what's best. It's easy for a group of aviation enthusiasts to sit here and criticize them, because every day they wait seems like an eternity for us, since we all want to see some great new design. If 2012 comes around and they have no decision, then I'll say they are blowing it. Obviously, I think a decision will come much sooner than that.

User currently offlinepacksonflight From Iceland, joined Jan 2010, 379 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8174 times:

Quoting solnabo (Reply 1):
You gonna get many 'if it aint broken why fix it´ reply´s

Boeing philosophy is: It aint broken until you cant fix it anymore


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8193 posts, RR: 24
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 8035 times:

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
desperately needs an entirely new narrow body design

They do? The 1960's 737 sure doesn't seem to have any problems holding it's own against the 1980's Airbus. The fact is that the 737 is still an enormously efficient and competitive airplane. Boeing does need to replace it to remain competitive, but not desperately so.



This Website Censors Me
User currently offlinejetfuel From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7980 times:

simple answer is the 787 delays.. Y1 will based on much of the 787 technology and a leap ahead of A320. Boeing need to get the 787 right first, Sit back and wait


Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
User currently offlineNorthwest727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 491 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7931 times:

I think PITingres, hit it spot on, Boeing is seriously looking at a replacement, but they aren't desperate, and they are making sure they make an informed decision. Boeing went ahead with the 747-8, and currently, Boeing itself is wondering if that was a good decision, considering its rather lackluster sales.

While as an aviation fan, I am anxious and would love to see some radical new aircraft from Boeing, I must also keep in mind that Boeing is a business, and wants to do what every business does: make a profit. If they don't feel they can make a good enough profit, Boeing won't do it.

Besides, let's see if Boeing can get the 787 straight before they start marketing for a new aircraft and promises.


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3722 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7908 times:

Quoting N766UA (Reply 8):
They do? The 1960's 737 sure doesn't seem to have any problems holding it's own against the 1980's Airbus. The fact is that the 737 is still an enormously efficient and competitive airplane.

The new target in efficiency for the 737NG is not the A320, but the A320neo.

Quoting jetfuel (Reply 9):
Y1 will based on much of the 787 technology and a leap ahead of A320. Boeing need to get the 787 right first, Sit back and wait

And herein lies the problem. If the IAM strike several years ago when 787 prototype production was starting to ramp up had never happened, there would be far fewer 787 problems (and fewer "787 Delayliner" jokes on a.net).

Because of the IAM strike, Boeing missed that window of opportunity. Y1 will be too little too late against the A320neo, CSeries, and possibly even the C919. Even "cash on the wings" incentives on the 737NG will not help 737NG sales.



I don't work for FWA, their tenants, or their ad agency. But I still love FWA.
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4488 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7889 times:

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
737 which was an early 60's design and has only benfited from avionics upgrades and other minor changes
Quoting dbo861 (Reply 3):
It's a 50 year old design (at least the airframe),

By that (flawed) logic the A330/A340 is a 40 year old design.

Quoting PITingres (Reply 4):
The current 737 is indeed based on a 60's design, but has been given a new wing, new systems, (relatively) new engines, new all sorts of things.

   Wings and engines alone are a HUGE investment and the primary driver of efficiency gains.

I think this "dragging their feet" talk is just overemotional sentiment on the part of the fanboys. What do you expect Boeing to do--announce a competitor the next day, just because the other company did?



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlinedelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1504 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7831 times:

Seeing as the NEO will not be in service until 2016 at the earliest, and Airbus can only deliver so many planes a year, I think "too little, too late," might be overstating it. Were Boeing to launch Y1 tomorrow it would follow the NEO to market by a couple years.

User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7748 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 12):
By that (flawed) logic the A330/A340 is a 40 year old design.

Can you perhaps tell me the need for injecting the A330/A340 into it......other of course than for the fanboy effect? I mean, it's a thread about the 737, so if you need to use the same logic why not simply use the 747 or 767? Would that be too easy?


User currently offlineFlyNWA727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 305 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7636 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 14):
Can you perhaps tell me the need for injecting the A330/A340 into it......other of course than for the fanboy effect? I mean, it's a thread about the 737, so if you need to use the same logic why not simply use the 747 or 767? Would that be too easy?

You are reeeeeeeeally reaching with this act of sudden incomprehensibility and being totally aloof. I see there are a lot of people on here who love to play games of semantics to support their own asinine agendas. If you can't understand the obvious point that JBird was making, there are serious, serious issues at hand that we at A.net can not even begin to help you tackle.



First flight aboard a Northwest B727-251ADV out of BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport, my hometown airport.
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4387 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7631 times:

Quoting dbo861 (Reply 3):
It's a 50 year old design (at least the airframe), the biggest customer is BEGGING for a replacement, other historically loyal Boeing customers are considering switching to Airbus because of their newer, improved A320NEO.

But up to now nobody ordered the A320NEO.

Boeing still has time until summer to drag their feet, then they have to pull the rabbit out of the hat. Either a 737Leap, or an all new design. I expect the 737LeapX to be announced in summer, with 2016EIS and a 6% increased list price compared to 73G and 738.

The tiny ( 1 or 2% ) fuel disadvantage it may have compared to A320NEO can be compensated via a slightly lower price.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7549 times:

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 16):
The tiny ( 1 or 2% ) fuel disadvantage it may have compared to A320NEO can be compensated via a slightly lower price.

Add to that about 4-5% capacity advantage of 738 over A320, which Airbus is working to reduce to 2-3% with the NEO series.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7551 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting delimit (Reply 2):
The common answer is: technology has not advanced sufficiently to make Y1 worthwhile. Boeing wants serious operating gains above the 737 and they don't yet see a way to achieve them.

That's pretty much the reason.

Airbus is expected to spend a billion to update the A320neo.

Boeing will spend an order of magnitude more to develop Y1.

If the result of that expenditure is a plane that is only, say, 5% more efficient than the A320neo, Boeing not only has a lot more money they need to recover (so there could be pricing pressure), but they also risk those technologies coming of age within a half-decade or so and allowing Airbus to leap-frog Y1 with their own product, leaving Boeing in the same position they were in when Airbus launched the A320 within years of Boeing launched the 737 Classic.

On the flip side, if Boeing can bring a 737neo to market that is 5% less efficient than the A320neo, but can do so for maybe $2 billion, then Boeing can work with pricing and use the sheer cost of fleet conversion to the A320neo to keep 737 customers with Boeing.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12356 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7507 times:

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
Is it because of the costs they have incurred with the 787 or are they nervous about that huge leap in technology that continues to bedevil them that they seem so reluctant to commit?

How often do you make decisions to spend $2B - $10B or more?

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 7):
Boeing philosophy is: It aint broken until you cant fix it anymore

And Airbus too. Witness A340-500/600 and now A320NEO.

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 14):
Can you perhaps tell me the need for injecting the A330/A340 into it......other of course than for the fanboy effect?

To show how flawed the logic is. If you can say the 737 is 60s technology, then you can also say A330 is 1970s technology.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinefrmrCapCadet From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1710 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7489 times:

My assumption is that Boeing is in close conversation with its customers. Costs and improvement tradeoffs are being made in how the 737 can be updated, and more grindingly slow, what are the various parameters of a new build. About the day a few major customers order or converst existing orders to an update, or are ready to order a few hundred of a new build we will read about in the newpapers (and on this site).


Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlinedelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1504 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7476 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 18):
On the flip side, if Boeing can bring a 737neo to market that is 5% less efficient than the A320neo, but can do so for maybe $2 billion, then Boeing can work with pricing and use the sheer cost of fleet conversion to the A320neo to keep 737 customers with Boeing.

I think people also consistently lose sight of the fact that the 320 NEO's EIS date is being set entirely by engine availability.

The only thing Boeing has to lose by waiting to announce where they're going is potential early orders from airlines that either: a) operate both planes; or b) are new entries into the market.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7461 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting delimit (Reply 21):
I think people also consistently lose sight of the fact that the 320 NEO's EIS date is being set entirely by engine availability.

indeed.

And while Pratt had tested the GTF forever and a day on the test stand, the laboratory is not the field. Assuming the PW1000G and CSeries do enter revenue service in 2013, how well it performs during those first two years will decide how successful the PW1400G engine is on the A320neo.


User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7427 times:

Re Stitch's comment.

Indeed - it is all (well mostly) about engines.A testbed Leap-X,a "paper" PW1400G and a Cfm/RR OR "concept". How the hell do they design in such massive and game changing variables? (without taking a huge - think Farm, risk). B****y difficult I would say!


User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1359 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7399 times:

I think Boeing wants the 787 finished. A lot of that technology is going into future plans (or maybe not depending on how it turns out).

Capital. Boeing has spent $$$$$$ on new planes (787, 747-8) and has yet to see any cash roll in.

Waiting. 737 is competitive today. Being first means your product is older sooner and if there is a big leap in technology (composites, open rotor, etc) then going too soon is a problem. Also a design for $2.50 a gallon fuel will look different than a design for $5/gal.

Management. They totally screwed up on 787 and 747-8 hasn't been on time or budget either. Need to do some internal studies and figure out what to do.

Confidence. You think the board will approve a new plane with Boeing's recent history. The program would need 100% reserve and 3 years buffer and still turn a profit to be approved today.

History. It is my understanding in the recent years Boeing doesn't strike first in replacing a product that sells. They lost sales on 737s against A320s and A319s while waiting to launch the current 737-700/-800.

Time. Boeing has a few months to make an announcement of plans. They could hold onto many customers if they announce a new plane starting in 2015, with an EIS of 2019.


25 LAXDESI : I think a 738NEO with a simple engine change should cost no more than $1 billion and still be within 5% of A320NEO on trip fuel burn. Capacity advant
26 Post contains images JBirdAV8r : No, using the A330/A340 best illustrates the point...which you seem to have missed. I kind of get the feeling YOU are trying to make this into an A v
27 art : Indeed. What would be the point of designing a replacement for the 737 with today's technology when you could design it using 2015 technology? An add
28 DTWPurserBoy : I think this is the issue. Boeing has bet the house on the 787 and while I personally believe this will be an industry changing aircraft everyone wil
29 Stitch : Only if Boeing wants to use an 80" fan diameter - and even then, only the LEAP-X might require those modifications. The head of GTF development at Pr
30 msp747 : I think the point is that a lot of Airbus fans on a.net do NOT see the 737NG as a thoroughly modern aircraft. The most common argument on this websit
31 flybyguy : Nope. I'm not much of a union fan, but I don't think anyone can blame the unions for the mess the 787 program became. Haven't you been reading flight
32 2707200X : My guess is probably the continuous success of the current 737 and if they are going to ramp up production they are probably not thinking about replac
33 kanban : for all you that like to throw out these percentage gains or losses, all those are just theory and wishful thinking at this point. Yes. A has touted s
34 Post contains images faro : Very well put, I agree 100%. In the general scheme of things, if a *conventionally* configured Y1 provides only a single-digit efficiency gain over t
35 Post contains images 14ccKemiskt : My guess too. Well put. I agree on all points. Especially the confidence part is very important. The feelings right now among current top management
36 Post contains links lhrnue : I think you missed something. http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/new...eco-efficient-engines-off-taxiing/
37 kanban : 1. the engines are not in production yet 2. lengthening the gear requires modifying where it's stowed in flight.. the main would have to be moved out
38 Goblin211 : Boeing 737 today is an entirely new cake so to speak, that retains its original designs just modified. that is exactly what Y1 is an example of. that'
39 Post contains images Revelation : And from what I have been told, even the fuse has changed a lot, in terms of fasteners used to put it together, etc. And it seems that by 2016 the A3
40 tdscanuck : The biggest commonalities between the original 737 are the outer mold lines of the fuselage (i.e. the external shape), the flight deck interface (*no
41 Stitch : If the 737NG really was "effectivelya forty-five year old design", that it could maintain market parity with the two-decade newer A320 would be a rath
42 rheinwaldner : Boeing is dragging Y1 because it has simply some disadvantages even if they will be forced to it. The bottleneck that will make the 737 obsolete one d
43 tdscanuck : Except they changed the ground clearance in the mid-90's. They did all the redesign about which there is so much hand-wringing now with respect to fi
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...
Why Is Boeing Confident On 787 posted Thu Nov 23 2006 20:22:08 by SJCRRPAX
Why Is Boeing Losing So Many Orders? posted Sat Nov 6 2004 19:59:47 by Blsbls99
Why Is SQ Using Their B772 On Regional Routes? posted Sun Sep 26 2004 16:18:07 by Fluorine
Why Is Boeing Not Displaying The T7 posted Tue Jul 20 2004 12:55:16 by Dreamcraft
Why Is Boeing Canceling The 757? posted Sat Mar 6 2004 04:54:49 by Osubuckeyes
Why Is UA Changing Their Flight # posted Thu Dec 11 2003 04:43:42 by Legacyins
Why Is Boeing More Expensive Than Airbus? posted Mon Sep 15 2003 05:34:06 by Ual747
Why Is Boeing? posted Sat May 6 2000 01:58:24 by CB777
Why Is The Boeing 747-8i Selling So Poorly? posted Fri Jun 18 2010 16:57:40 by keesje
Why Is Lufthansa So Quiet About Bmi Plans? posted Fri Nov 28 2008 09:12:11 by TFFIP