Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Talks More About Its Narrowbody Future...  
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5477 posts, RR: 30
Posted (3 years 9 months 17 hours ago) and read 14264 times:

A couple of weeks after Boeing all but confirmed it will go all new for its narrowbody offerings instead of putting new engines on the 737, Nicole Piasecki tries to add some perspective...while being careful not to commit to anything;

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...For%20737%20Successor&channel=awst

Quote:
When she recalls McNerney’s comments, Nicole Piasecki, the commercial airplanes vice president for strategy and business development, jumps on a phrase he used in a different context: “aggressive but responsible.” The need to be “aggressive” in a highly competitive market is obvious. Being “responsible” relates to “understanding where air travel is going”—the rise of low-cost carriers in burgeoning markets, for instance—­before building a new airplane, she says.



What the...?
72 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 14161 times:

It seems Boeing can't decide, they need to see how many airlines defect to As NEO during this spring/summer to see which way they will go. I find this a very passive strategy.


Non French in France
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31221 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 14137 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ferpe (Reply 1):
It seems Boeing can't decide...

I imagine the truth is their customers can't decide - on a single strategy. Some have publically advocated for a re-engine and others have advocated for a new airframe.

Airbus didn't give their customers a choice - they imposed the A320neo on them because they are not ready to launch a new narrowbody, likely for a variety of reasons. So customers who want a new airframe may very well be the ones defecting to Boeing if they do launch Y1


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13890 times:

My conclusion: Boeing absolutely has no idea what to do, and has no qualified staff to work on it this year.
Quote: "We’ll know a lot more in six or 10 months ." - and refering to watching 320NEO sales as indicator  Wow!

So, Boeing will not give this answer this year. All they can do is to throw smoke to keep NEO orders below 1000 for this year.
My prognosis:
Until 2016, B sells the 737 as it is.
If sales drop, they can price more agressive.
For 2016-2018 they still can sell well, since many airlines see the risk of completely new engines.
In 2018 the new engines will be mature or will have failed. So a 737NEO for 2019 - announced in 2013 when the worst is over with the 787 and 748 is what will happen.

Boring for enthusiast, but fine for bean counters.


User currently offlineAsiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13874 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Airbus didn't give their customers a choice - they imposed the A320neo on them because they are not ready to launch a new narrowbody, likely for a variety of reasons.

Interesting way to put it. Imposed, as if the customers had no choice. Customers still has the choice to buy it or not, just like before. I believe all planes are imposed to customers according to your definition.

Airbus did what they found to be the best business case for them. Likewise will Boeing do.  



SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13842 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Airbus didn't give their customers a choice - they imposed the A320neo on them

AFAIK as I know, the A320OEO is still available after 2016, so they give their customers a choice.


Reading the above text three times, I see more between the lines.
Boeing has to ship 400+ narrow bodies a year, even in the year of Y1 EIS to keep cash flowing.

Imagine they did it like with the 747 - stop production for one year to get the new line running. They cannot afford. And: imagine then EIS to slip like with the 748.

So if there is a decision for the 797, 797 and 737 will be both produced for years. This makes only sense if the overlap is partial.
The sweet spot for LCC is a 198 seater, so if they build a 797 for delivery it will initially only make the 739 and partially the 738 obsolete, with mainly 73G and some 738 coming off the lines, until 797 production rate is high enough.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5681 posts, RR: 29
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13818 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 1):
It seems Boeing can't decide

Were life only that easy...

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 3):

Until 2016, B sells the 737 as it is.

Versus...?

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 3):
In 2018 the new engines will be mature or will have failed. So a 737NEO for 2019 - announced in 2013 when the worst is over with the 787 and 748 is what will happen.

I don't think that there is much concern about the new engines "fail"-ing. If there were, I don't see why everyone is or would be jumping on board.

As to 2019, anything is possible, but that seems quite far out to be doing a re-engine. And no, I don't believe that they are so limited in their resources that they couldn't get one out sooner.

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 4):
Interesting way to put it. Imposed, as if the customers had no choice.

Imposed, as in didn't give them the option of an all-new plane. Certainly, they could do the NEO, the OEO, or something else entirely.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10159 posts, RR: 97
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13771 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
I imagine the truth is their customers can't decide - on a single strategy. Some have publically advocated for a re-engine and others have advocated for a new airframe.

I suspect the same was also true for Airbus

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Airbus didn't give their customers a choice -

There's no way on earth that Airbus didn't consult heavily with their customer base, and examine the options   
They might not have been quite the same options as Boeing might offer of course

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 4):
Airbus did what they found to be the best business case for them. Likewise will Boeing do

Correct

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 3):
My conclusion: Boeing absolutely has no idea what to do, and has no qualified staff to work on it this year

My conclusion is that Boeing have absolutely no need to knee-jerk into a decision.
With approaching 2 500 737's in backlog, 500 orders last year and product improvements in train, I think they can make hay with the 737 for some time yet.  

There are 3 decisions really.
Do nothing
Re-engine
New plane

Every one of those decisions involves a different trade-off, and can be made to work, within a timescale, recognising that the first two don't preclude the third decision at some point in the future.

Rgds


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5681 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13741 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 7):
I suspect the same was also true for Airbus

Let's give the A320 platform the credit it deserves. Airbus was absolutely not in the same position as Boeing. They had a very clear and viable path forward with the NEO that was compelling enough - and manageable enough - to move forward with relatively easily.

They know that Boeing is not in the same position.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 7):
They might not have been quite the same options as Boeing might offer of course

Again, IMHO, Airbus probably said "We have this New Engine Option with these characteristics, this development timeline, and this slight premium. Oh, we also have this all new idea that will be much further out, more expensive, and more risky. Did we mention the New Engine Option?"  

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10159 posts, RR: 97
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13715 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 8):
Again, IMHO, Airbus probably said "We have this New Engine Option with these characteristics, this development timeline, and this slight premium. Oh, we also have this all new idea that will be much further out, more expensive, and more risky. Did we mention the New Engine Option?"

Exactly  

As you say, Airbus might well have been able to offer a more compelling short-term set of options compared to Boeing, and less compelling long-term set of options, particularly in terms of timescale.

But I'm sure they have ALL been offered, and discussed

Rgds


User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2255 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 13684 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
I imagine the truth is their customers can't decide - on a single strategy.

Then never ever a new Boeing aircraft will appear again. Because their customers never will decide on a single strategy. If Boeing would really wait until a single strategy among all customers would emerge they would have to wait forever. Or until there are no more customers...

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Airbus didn't give their customers a choice

Really? The reality is that Airbus is the ONLY choice to get the most fuel efficient NB in 2016. Worldwide. They certainly are commited to offer their customers a choice.

If offering a real upgrade would be "no choice" how would you rate Boeing's deplorable business of indetermination?

The report highlights also some other points that were made in the last time:

- Boeing is rightfully uncomfortable having no answer:

Quote:
Piasecki understands that customers may be confused by this back and forth. “We know that [they] need to know, need to have clarity around where we are going,”

- Boeing still seems to win time with pep talk:

Quote:
“We want to see how the NEO is going to do in the marketplace. We want to see how the engine companies and airlines respond. We’ll know a lot more in six or 10 months.”

- A worthwhile 737NEO seems not to be ready to be launched.

- Did somebody notice recently that Leahy predicted an own outcome how Boeing will act: His scenario for Boeing went like this: offer a new build design, abandon it after some time like Sonic-Cruiser because of lack of maturity of the aspired technology and finally having to re-engine the 737 anyway.

I don't go as far as Leahy (I would be 'tarred and feathered' if I would) but the notion that the absence of a commitment suggests that Boeing both struggles to define a proper strategy for a new design and also struggles to design a worthwhile 737NEO.

My impression is that Boeing faces a loose-loose-situation (even a loose-loose-loose situation if the 777NG is considered as well). Would it be a win-loose decision the conclusion would be known already. And would it be a win-win situation they also could bring the 737NEO without much hesitation. Because even an intermediate aircraft will sweeten the gap until the new design has EIS and soften the value losses of the old aircraft family.

(Not so new) Conclusion:
The 737NEO seems clearly not as promising to Boeing as the A320NEO is to Airbus. That can only mean that the expected numbers do not match the A320NEO.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5681 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 14 hours ago) and read 13619 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 9):
But I'm sure they have ALL been offered, and discussed

Touche'.  
Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
Then never ever a new Boeing aircraft will appear again. Because their customers never will decide on a single strategy.

Of course what he is implying is not EVERY customer agreeing, but rather a clear preference for one over the other. If there are multiple camps of customers, and you are debating over spending $4B or $10B (or whatever), and there is not as clear of an option as the NEO was for Airbus, then you have yourself a dilemma.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
Really? The reality is that Airbus is the ONLY choice to get the most fuel efficient NB in 2016. Worldwide. They certainly are commited to offer their customers a choice.

Again, I think that Airbus may have given their customers a choice, but I don't think there was a very strong chance that an all-new design was being marketed seriously. For one, Airbus is kind of busy with multiple models. For two, they have a very successful airframe that would remain competitive as is for most carriers. For three, the NEO program was a slam dunk. They didn't need to lift here, tuck there, nip this, morph that, etc.

So for all intents and purposes, Airbus was very likely not going to offer a new build option at this time. IMHO.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
His scenario for Boeing went like this: offer a new build design, abandon it after some time like Sonic-Cruiser because of lack of maturity of the aspired technology and finally having to re-engine the 737 anyway.

I would relate that even more to the A350 saga, but I guess we all see things a little differently. In my opinion, I felt like Airbus was in many ways trying to buy time during that whole drama, and in the end they ended up where they logically needed to be. I assume Boeing will as well.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
Would it be a win-loose decision the conclusion would be known already.

Would it be a CLEAR CUT win-lose scenario, sure. But it isn't CLEAR CUT. There isn't a clear perfect option, and quite possibly there is not a CLEAR CUT message from their customers.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
And would it be a win-win situation they also could bring the 737NEO without much hesitation. Because even an intermediate aircraft will sweeten the gap until the new design has EIS and soften the value losses of the old aircraft family.

So you advocate Boeing doing a NEO and then turning around and doing a new build to "sweeten the gap"? All things being equal, if I were going to do a new build by 2020/2021 I would probably just drop the price of the 737NG until then. It would cost me less up front than engineering an all-new plane, and I would still have all those engineers to work on my 777NG or whatever project.

But what do I know?  

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 14 hours ago) and read 13547 times:

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
Really? The reality is that Airbus is the ONLY choice to get the most fuel efficient NB in 2016. Worldwide. They certainly are commited to offer their customers a choice.

-He obviously means a choice BETWEEN a clean sheet OR a Re-engine. Airbus didn't give their customers this choice, because they didn't need to, and probably couldn't with the A350 still in the early stages.
-This is not a bad thing, as Airbus has a flexible frame with the A320 that can easily and cheaply add a new engine and other improvements in a small time period. However, you're crazy if you think that Airbus (or Boeing for that matter) have enough man-power to pull off two clean sheet developments side by side...not happening.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
If offering a real upgrade would be "no choice" how would you rate Boeing's deplorable business of indetermination?

If I didn't know any better, I'd say that you consider anything and everything coming out of Seattle, Washington deplorable to begin with....

-"Indetermination" can also be referred to as strategy. If Boeing needed to come out with plans to avoid a "mass migration" by their customers over to Airbus jets, they would have done so by now. They are taking their time, because the market is hesitant and stagnant, and none of their big customers are doing anything more than whining at the moment. When that changes, let me know...


User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 758 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 14 hours ago) and read 13492 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 7):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
I imagine the truth is their customers can't decide - on a single strategy. Some have publically advocated for a re-engine and others have advocated for a new airframe.

I suspect the same was also true for Airbus

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Airbus didn't give their customers a choice -

There's no way on earth that Airbus didn't consult heavily with their customer base, and examine the options
They might not have been quite the same options as Boeing might offer of course
Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 10):
Did somebody notice recently that Leahy predicted an own outcome how Boeing will act: His scenario for Boeing went like this: offer a new build design, abandon it after some time like Sonic-Cruiser because of lack of maturity of the aspired technology and finally having to re-engine the 737 anyway

Airbus customers were obviously comfortable with the NEO option otherwise Airbus would not have gone down that road. Boeings customers took a different view on a 737 NEO on an older platform and many have been advocating a clean sheet replacement.
Boeing have only embarked on new programs when they have had no choice and were dragged kicking and screaming by their customers to do so - this was particularly the case with the 777 and to a lesser extent with the 787. To be fair to Boeing it is not a decision to be taken lightly but it always seems to take some very public and vocal prodding from their customers before they take the leap. I think the latest releases from Boeing are testing the water before any final decision is made.


Regards,
StickShaker


User currently offlineflyglobal From Germany, joined Mar 2008, 593 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 14 hours ago) and read 13434 times:

Again, this is an American company listed in the American stock exchange. (I work for an American owned car company, so I know what I talk about). Those companies have the near (max mid term) shareholder value way more in the middle of the decisison process then compenies in Europe which look more long term.
Therefore investment is poison for shareholders income hunted by agents to always change their investment (as they get their bonus from changing).

Now at Boeing I see the real conflict is: I need somehow to explain my shareholders to spend either around 3-4 bn$ or 10 bn $ to keep competitive/ or be benchmark.

The conflict at Boeing is:

1) a 1bn$ investment in the plane will not bring the 737NG anywhere near the A320NEO.
2) a 3-4 bn$ investment will probably do the job pretty well but will still not reach the NEO
3) a 737NEO with an engine spec meeting the A320 will cost only about 1-2 bn $ less (7-8 instead of 10?) then a complete new Plane.
4) a 10 bn$ new 797 plane will slightly exceed the A320NEO, but has the risk that it could be obsolete if OR engine technology and other advancements could be proven a new step in fuel consumption improvement around 2018 but requireing a dedicated new plane design to utilize such improvement around 2025-2030.

I guess that Boeing internally is divided about what to do, so they are buying time by blowing smoke. (which I can understand - I do not really want to make that decisison).

It is all about, how they want to explain this to customers and shareholders. Probably the presentation for 1) 2) 3) 4) isn't completed yet and the internal 'fights' for 2) and 4) aren't completed.

regards

Flyglobal

[Edited 2011-02-24 02:04:03]

User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10159 posts, RR: 97
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 13 hours ago) and read 13350 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 11):
All things being equal, if I were going to do a new build by 2020/2021 I would probably just drop the price of the 737NG until then. It would cost me less up front than engineering an all-new plane, and I would still have all those engineers to work on my 777NG or whatever project.

But what do I know?

Personally? I'd say you know a fair bit, as that is exactly how I see it too   

But what do I know?  

Rgds


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5681 posts, RR: 29
Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 13 hours ago) and read 13258 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 15):
But what do I know?

Apparently a fair bit.  

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlinembj2000 From Germany, joined Dec 2005, 426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 13 hours ago) and read 13231 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 11):
All things being equal, if I were going to do a new build by 2020/2021 I would probably just drop the price of the 737NG until then.

Didn't Airbus try this tactics with the A340-600 and it didn't work out?

But what do I know?  



Like most of life's problems, this one can be solved with bending -- Bender Unit 22
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1634 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months 13 hours ago) and read 13229 times:

It's been said above, I know ,but... Airbus has given it's customers a choice of OEO and NEO.And we all know this...

It really beigins to worry me when Boeing starts to knock other people rather than concern themselves about themselves.

1.Telling Airbus that the NEO engineering is harder than they realise! Who the **** are they to tell Airbus about their own aircraft! Whilst they cannot even make a decision.

2.Telling P&W about the problems (mantainance) they have not considered!! In fact she states that Boeing is the only company to ask this question.No they are not! and what disrespect to everybody concerned to suggest that this issue has not been at the forefront of everybodies (all those concerned) collective minds.

So while she is busy teling everybody else how to do their jobs - what new shaft of light did throw on to Boeings plans? "Oh we will wait and see what people think of the NEO" (ergo " we don't have a clue)- then make a decision. Wow.

Of course we have heard it all before.There was no market for VLA's and they prooved this with their forecasts.P to P was the entire future....Untill it wasn't and they belatidly warmed over the 747......Hmmm

Well todays UK broadsheets talk about the $110 a barrel and quotes"experts" who are forecasting a $200 barrel if the middle East continues to implode.(Which it will)

Since the good lady cannot see any aspect of the future I will help her.

When (not if) the 320 NEO comes out in 4 years time if oil is anything North of $100 (and I can' find anyone to bet against this) then I can tell her with 100% certainty how many 737's she will be selling.Only a month or so ago (Oil $75 a barrel) Easyjet was saying that fuel costs were 45% of their operating costs. Clearly it is already over 50% on straight maths....And at $200 a barrel??

Waiting is not an option any more.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5681 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 12 hours ago) and read 13179 times:

Quoting parapente (Reply 18):
1.Telling Airbus that the NEO engineering is harder than they realise! Who the **** are they to tell Airbus about their own aircraft! Whilst they cannot even make a decision.

Never stopped Airbus.....remember "Chinese copy"?

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlinetristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 4051 posts, RR: 33
Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 12 hours ago) and read 13155 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 6):
I don't think that there is much concern about the new engines "fail"-ing. If there were, I don't see why everyone is or would be jumping on board.

You need a longer memory.

Airbus launched the A340 with the PW Superfan, which failed miserably and they were forced to stretch the CFM56 to power it.
Airbus launched the A318 with the PW6000 which also failed miserably and was years late.

Now Airbus launch the A320 NEO with the next PW civil engine.

Are they brave?


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5681 posts, RR: 29
Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 12 hours ago) and read 13132 times:

Quoting mbj2000 (Reply 17):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 11):
All things being equal, if I were going to do a new build by 2020/2021 I would probably just drop the price of the 737NG until then.

Didn't Airbus try this tactics with the A340-600 and it didn't work out?

But what do I know?

If you could offer comparable figures between the A340vs777 as compared to the A320NEOvs737NG, it might help to understand the correllation better. Did Airbus drop the price of the A340? I thought they were talking about compensating carriers for additional fuel burn?

Anyhow, I would think that different aircraft, different missions, different operators (in some cases) might make this an apples and oranges thing, but it's 3am and I work at 7am so I guess I should go to bed.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1634 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (3 years 9 months 12 hours ago) and read 13099 times:

Stolen from another new thread.Sorry.

Boeing can wait as long as they want - just don't expect everyone else to, thats all.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...tiate-2-5-billion-plane-order.html


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (3 years 9 months 12 hours ago) and read 13054 times:

Quoting parapente (Reply 22):
Boeing can wait as long as they want - just don't expect everyone else to, thats all

This coming order is not the most surprising one, but a good one - question is if Leahy gets his 500 signed by the show.


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10159 posts, RR: 97
Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 12 hours ago) and read 12991 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tristarsteve (Reply 20):
Now Airbus launch the A320 NEO with the next PW civil engine.

Are they brave?

With another engine option alongside the GTF as well?
Good queston.

Perhaps worth a reminder that they've had a working GTF slung underneath an A340 for quite a while now

(which in light of the events you alluded to, is somewhat ironic, I guess   )

Rgds


25 fcogafa : If the price of oil rises considerably then, as a couple of years ago, airlines will struggle to operate profitably and some would go out of business
26 rheinwaldner : Great remark! You wrote some fine responses/opinions in this thread. Me, too. I don't know however whether Leahy would like that perspective. I have
27 AirNZ : In reality, such is not really quite true. Do car manufacturers (or any other business) give their customers 'a choice'? No, they technically do not.
28 parapente : If they could,they would. Boeing have stated that they can only "see" single digit improvements in Sfc by a NEO strategy.Well if we take a big "if" th
29 packsonflight : Sounds plausible. But are they in any state to launch a new program in the near future? They have clean up their act and come up with a credible plan
30 Delimit : Please correct me if I am mistaken but I had thought the two numbers were regarding different things. The Airbus number was fuel burn whereas the Boe
31 tdscanuck : If you look purely at fuel consumption, that will be true. But airlines don't look only at fuel consumption, they also look at trip cost and seat mil
32 Revelation : Absolutely? That's some pretty harsh language. As below, there really isn't the kind of hurry that many enthusasts seem to think there is. Isn't it t
33 Ronaldo747 : I'm still thinking that Boeing already works on Y1/737RS and also delays the official launch afar as possible, in order to avoid similar failures like
34 StickShaker : Don't forget the Tristar and the RB211. Regards, StickShaker
35 Post contains images EPA001 : I think so too. The customers wishes are much more important then what the OEM wants. And this is how it should be imho. For now, Boeing might react
36 JoeCanuck : Actually, it would only be a tie. Perhaps Boeing is looking for a win, not a tie. They have the time to research it. If it proved to be a winner, the
37 Post contains images lightsaber : Airbus now trusts Pratt about as far as they can throw them. There is a reason behind why for the C-series Pratt is putting extra engines to flight t
38 RoseFlyer : There are hundreds of people working on the technology for the next generation of plane. Despite what many think, the 787/748 workload is lower than
39 ckfred : Southwest has said that it wants a new airplane to replace the 737NG line of airplanes. AA went for quite a while without taking 737-800 deliveries, i
40 Post contains images jsquared : Agreed, and I think many customers would be happy to take a cheaper 737NG in the near term. While not a perfect analogy, consider the auto industry -
41 parapente : Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 36): One day in the next year they will make their decision...and until then, more of the same. Boeing says mostly nothing ne
42 RoseFlyer : I personally think that AA's long streak of not taking deliveries had more to do with the financial situation at AA than their desire to see what the
43 UAL747DEN : Boeing will not do that, they have a HUGE backlog of 737 orders, they will not stop one line to start another, they will run both at the same time. T
44 Post contains images kmz : ...fascinating...really! how some of us take this A and B thing so personally. as if it could be possible that one of these companies is completely cl
45 kanban : It may turn out just the opposite... your bias is showing.. this isn't about airlines or builders is it, it's about keeping enthusiasts entertained..
46 tsugambler : To be honest, I don't believe that oil will reach $200/barrel anytime soon... primarily because, at anywhere near that price, it would be extremely p
47 Stitch : As we've seen, launching a new airframe is an 11-figure investment even when it goes well (777), much less when it does not (A380 / 787). Boeing's ma
48 SEPilot : I agree to some degree, but the first option involves a slow decline in market share at the very least, and if the C-series is successful it will mea
49 Post contains images bikerthai : They are called contractors I have seen first hand the pitfall of hiring a bunch of automotive engineers to do aerospace work without proper training
50 Post contains images astuteman : To be honest, I think that's meaningless in the context. You think the average experience of the guys working today at Boeing is an order of magnitud
51 SEPilot : But your first option was to do nothing-which means that Boeing's new competitor would not be arriving anytime soon. I totally agree. Neither company
52 ferpe : It might be that B is clever by waiting and doing a good decision later this year, who knows. But I have to comment serveral B defenders (I am not an
53 Post contains images tistpaa727 : I don't think the goal of the NEO is to attract Boeing defectors but to appease current operators and entice the new LCC entrants. LOL. Sorry, that j
54 Post contains images EPA001 : Since the long term forecasts of Boeing and Airbus are never that far apart in numbers I can not agree with youry statement. Boeing had to do somethi
55 Post contains images Stitch : If this was Boeing's strategy going forward until well into the next decade, I'd agree. But Boeing has shown no sign of planning to continue to just
56 kanban : A repeat of having ex missile engineers design the Jetfoils.... had no clue about maintenance issues on systems that had to work more than once. can'
57 Post contains images EPA001 : I can only agree with these statements as well. The market evolves, the products evolve, but the market shares will only move slightly in either dire
58 Post contains images bikerthai : I've met one of those guys . . . he was a stress analyst though. Stress analysts are the few who you CAN plug in anywhere and they will do fine biker
59 JoeCanuck : It's not as if Airbus is delivering NEO's tomorrow. They still have to wait 5 years for the engines...their mods will be ready long before then. So w
60 astuteman : "for now". I specifically said that didn't preclude an all-new airframe later on. If Boeing wait until August 2013 say, (2 1/2 years from today) to l
61 StickShaker : Whoops -should have qualified that to recent programs. However, I dont think we will ever see anything again as bold as the 707 or 747 programs - lit
62 rheinwaldner : Somebody who belongs to the leading aircraft manufacturers can not be satisfied just keeping the own customers at it. E.g. in the last 30 years Airbu
63 Post contains images mbj2000 : Maybe one of those ex missile guys designed the Trent 900 at R&R and he somehow got the engine mission wrong You have valid points, I always appr
64 Post contains images Stitch : You clearly have not been reading the same posts I have.
65 rheinwaldner : I can't really believe. Would be nice to see an example of what you mean. Be precise: just a statement floating around somewhere here that Boeing wou
66 SEPilot : Due to the 787 debacle they might. SW and DL, two of Boeing's most loyal customers, have been making very unhappy noises in the press lately. If Boei
67 parapente : Question. The ladies key comments (re go no go) are about the 2 new engines under development.But she tells us that - "We’ll know a lot more in six
68 ckfred : Up until 2006, the issue was definitely finances. But in 2007 and 2008, AA was in a position to take some 738 deliveries. However, Boeing was explori
69 kanban : If memory serves me (and it sometimes fails) when Boeing is in a transition on a model customers can transfer to the new model fairly easily.. this i
70 JoeCanuck : They are not waiting specifically until they know more about the engines. They might be waiting do decide which engine is best for them. They are pri
71 Revelation : I ran across the article in the thread starter today, and I found one part to be very interesting: So could we see an all-aluminum 737 replacement wit
72 Post contains images kanban : I'm picturing a great sleek body with a bulbous cockpit... slightly phallic....
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...
Boeing Talks About 787-10 At Asian Airshow posted Wed Feb 22 2006 06:50:15 by OyKIE
Boeing 767 Moves Towards New Leaner Future posted Mon Aug 2 2010 13:51:01 by propilot83
Boeing, LM, NG, Nasa Look At Future Airliners posted Sat Jul 24 2010 15:10:05 by KC135TopBoom
AI Skeptical About Its 787 Order posted Sat Dec 12 2009 06:32:31 by Aviationbuff
Does Boeing Need More B-747-400LCFs? posted Mon Nov 9 2009 08:46:16 by KC135TopBoom
Boeing Pitching More 777s To Thai? posted Sun Oct 25 2009 22:17:15 by Kaitak
YX Service To OMA? (Yes, More About Those ERJs) posted Wed Oct 22 2008 19:29:52 by UltimateDelta
Boeing Strike = More 787 Delays? posted Sat Aug 30 2008 15:31:36 by BoeingFever777
Iraqi Airways In Boeing Talks posted Sun Dec 23 2007 02:55:24 by Flying-Tiger
Can Boeing Add More Test Pilots (to Hasten Cert)? posted Tue Sep 11 2007 16:34:36 by Bringiton