Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
No New 200 Seater From Boeing  
User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5909 times:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...eplacement-for-new-narrowbody.html


According the article, it looks like Boeing is not developing a new 200 seat airplane to replace the B757.
They will focus on slightly bigger B737-700 and -800 replacements first and maybe look for a bigger aircaft later-on.

That raises the question, what Boeing will do with the B739ER?
They cannot leave it unchanged as it would not have a single chance against the A321neo.

Do they really leave the 757-replacement market to Airbus?
I cannot believe it.

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineqfa787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5452 times:

What's so surprising about this? Really, the huge heart of this market encompasses the 320/738 and that's what Boeing will address first, in a very logical and correct move IMO. A 739ER replacement will follow at some stage down the track and any new 797 might actually have 3 models that are slightly larger than the existing 73G/H/J. Just because it wasn't mentioned doesn't mean nothing won't be done, but Albaugh did indicate they may wait a while and decide whether this segment should be a stretched 797 or a shrunk 787. Anyway, a modestly larger 73H(say 3 rows) will fill a lot of the 739/321 market.

User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4311 times:

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 1):
What's so surprising about this? Really, the huge heart of this market encompasses the 320/738 and that's what Boeing will address first, in a very logical and correct move IMO.

But more than 1000 B757's was built, and almost some 900 A321's has been ordered so far.
Personally I think this will be a huge gift for Airbus and the A321NEO, but we'll see.


User currently offlinepylon101 From Russia, joined Feb 2008, 1510 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4222 times:

As I am reading Mr. Albaugh's words: Boeing never considered 757-200 replacement.
Boeing was talking about "light twin aisle aircraft" covering 180-220 sector.
I would say: nothing new. Boeing make the whole industry to keep patiently waiting for its decision.
This appears to be a part of a business plan which prepares market to meet any Boeing decision with great relief.
I am more and more convinced that 797 project is being prepared to be presented at the right time.


User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2647 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4179 times:

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):
Do they really leave the 757-replacement market to Airbus?

Strictly speaking, they are leaving it to no one. Airbus does not have a direct answer to the 757. Not on a 1 to 1 basis anyhow. The real question is, does the 757 really need a replacement?

Will something with the same capacity but shorter range (A321NEO) suffice?

How big a part does the 757s capacity, range and short field performance play in the missions 757s are currently flying?
Is there enough demand for such capabilities to develop a more efficient and direct replacement?



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinemir2069 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 50 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4151 times:

boeing cant do 2 things at once

User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5435 posts, RR: 30
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4038 times:

Quoting qfa787380 (Reply 1):
What's so surprising about this? Really, the huge heart of this market encompasses the 320/738 and that's what Boeing will address first, in a very logical and correct move IMO.

Actually...that's also what Airbus has decided to do by delaying the 321NEO until last. They are putting the largest plane EIS closest to the time a potential new competing plane from Boeing could be released.

Airbus themselves have been making many more statements against the CSeries of late than the 737, which would seem to me that they are also concentrating on the markets for the smaller planes.



What the...?
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4038 times:

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):
Do they really leave the 757-replacement market to Airbus?
I cannot believe it.

Why not? Airbus never had a real answer for the 757, and they are doing just fine. Furthermore, the market for aircraft in the 160-180 seat range like the A320 and 738 positively dwarfs the 757 market. It isn't even close.

Quoting pylon101 (Reply 3):
As I am reading Mr. Albaugh's words: Boeing never considered 757-200 replacement.

Why would they? That isn't where the money is.

Quoting garpd (Reply 4):
Is there enough demand for such capabilities to develop a more efficient and direct replacement?

Certainly not at the expense of smaller versions. That would be a massive mistake. The market is going to get what it's getting now - derivatives of existing models.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3972 times:

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):
According the article, it looks like Boeing is not developing a new 200 seat airplane to replace the B757.

The bit that attracted my attention was the "new" concept of designing an aircraft that was easier to produce. Is that a backhanded comment about the 787 not being easy to produce I wonder.

According to some who may well know, one of the advances for the A32x was a design that took production into account. If so and this is not a factor in current Boeing designs, having a new design easier to produce is not surprising, but perhaps it is a bit late for Boeing to think this is a good idea????


User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2223 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3869 times:

That was easy top predict. Many had a lot of doubts whether a 200 seat aircraft family with weaknesses as 150-seat variant would work on the market. Even more when Boeing started to discuss twin aisles configurations.

This decision means that Boeing has left the risky and uncertain path and has put the focus again on the proven mainstream market. The 200-seat market that could have been conquered IMO does not outweight the 150-seat market that would have been lost.

Although 200 seats is not a size that can not be covered well with a family that also covers the 150 seat version well. Look at the A320 family: the optimized middle version is smaller than the 738 and still the A321 is larger than the 739.

The problem would have been if Boeing would have centered their new NB family somewhere close to 200 seats. In that case the 150 seat version (even designed from scratch) could probably not even have beaten the A320NEO.

I would say a new design that is centered at 160-170 seats should yield a nice A321 competitor while not loosing significant ground as a 140-150 seat version.

Trying to cover 757 territory with an offspring of a family that mainly replaces the 737 is not only a matter of size. An even larger difficulty poses the range of the 757. The largest member of this drafted 737 replacement familiy can easily to be expected to be as big as a 757. But to reach also 757-range the design of this new family would have to incorporate quite extensive MTOW-capability (big engines, big wings, heavy gears, large structures, heavy structures that support a comparably high MTOW). And exactly this is the anti pattern to get also an efficient aircraft familiy in the 150-170 seat region (which has been identitied correctly as the bread-and-butter size). A 210-seater with 4000nm range means that the 150-seater potentially has a range of 5000nm. But I fear that a potential 5000nm A320/738 replacement would:

a) offer too much range. Airlines would not need this capability.
b) this uneeded capability would hamper the competitiveness as the short-medium range 150-seater

Because of these reasons I can fully understand why Boeing orientates their potential new design along the capabilities of the current 737/A320 families.


User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3605 times:

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 9):
Because of these reasons I can fully understand why Boeing orientates their potential new design along the capabilities of the current 737/A320 families.

I think it is a shame, that Boeing is not trying to create a new 767/757 combo for the airlines by offering a new 200 seater in addition to the B787-8.

Such an aircraft with same pilots flying both types, could be a real killer for the A321neo at a lot of airlines.


But, yes, i know that the main market focus will be between 150 and 180 seats.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30898 posts, RR: 87
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3381 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The need to replace the 757 with a similar plane seems to be much more an airliners.net idea than an airline idea.  

The A321-200 can lift the same payload weight of a 757-200, but even in neo form it's not going to be able to match the 3000nm range of the 757-200 when carrying that much weight so I don't believe it can serve as a viable TATL replacement. So I imagine we could see 757s with three decades of service life on them for those operators who really need the capabilities.


User currently offlinemir2069 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 50 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3329 times:

Let me repeat this huge clue in case you all missed it.If the 757 line were open and producing the same basic aircraft from the 80's-90's it would beat 737/738/739/A320/A321in CASM/total # pass/cargo/performance/range/fuel burn.Why cant boeing work on several lines at the same time it would be great for econmy/country.production consist of the 777/767/737/787/748(not mentioning military) not familiar with boeing.once the enginneers/architects/designers ect ect,then starts suppliers list so on .Its not like jobs arent needed in this country.

User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2647 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3329 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
The need to replace the 757 with a similar plane seems to be much more an airliners.net idea than an airline idea.

The A321-200 can lift the same payload weight of a 757-200, but even in neo form it's not going to be able to match the 3000nm range of the 757-200 when carrying that much weight so I don't believe it can serve as a viable TATL replacement. So I imagine we could see 757s with three decades of service life on them for those operators who really need the capabilities.

   I completely agree.
The only 757 replacement is a 757.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7135 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3239 times:

Quoting 328JET (Thread starter):
Do they really leave the 757-replacement market to Airbus?
I cannot believe it.

Well, when did Boeing discontinue production of the 757 and what was the reason, something to do with little to no sales.

Quoting Chiad (Reply 2):
But more than 1000 B757's was built, and almost some 900 A321's has been ordered so far.
Personally I think this will be a huge gift for Airbus and the A321NEO, but we'll see.

Yes, and the more than 1000 were purchased primarily by US airlines, and those non-US carriers soon switched when the A321-100 was introduced since it carried roughly the same payload with less range, and since the bulk of them did not need the range the A321 sold very well. IMHO the A321-200 was mainly done to satisfy the US transcon market, hence the thought that the A321-NEO is after the same market, I just think it is long overdue and could have been done a couple years ago without needing the A320 sales to assist.
Even though it is not a full 757 replacement, more deployed in the US would free up 757's to server their current primary market TATL to which they have no NB competitor.


User currently offlinemdword1959 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3204 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
I imagine we could see 757s with three decades of service life on them for those operators who really need the capabilities.

There will still be a significant number of 757s hauling freight somewhere when everything else in commercial service today has been converted to pop cans.


User currently offlinepoz2brs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3147 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
The A321-200 can lift the same payload weight of a 757-200, but even in neo form it's not going to be able to match the 3000nm range of the 757-200 when carrying that much weight so I don't believe it can serve as a viable TATL replacement. So I imagine we could see 757s with three decades of service life on them for those operators who really need the capabilities.

Are the figures for an A321NEO publicly available yet? It would not take such a massive improvement to make an A321NEO that can compete with the 752's loaded range, the classic A321 is only around 500nm short as it is. The key issue for Airbus is to ensure any future development of the A321 does include the ability to operate the lucrative TATL routes, and it would seem pointless to spend money further developing the variant if it does not achieve this.

Perhaps this announcement shows that Boeing view mass-marketing of a 737 replacement, particularly to the LCC market who buy in large numbers, as a more profitable venture. With the ongoing costs incurred from the 787 and 748 projects, getting a cash-cow (which surely a decent 737 replacement would be) to market is vital.


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3015 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 4):
How big a part does the 757s capacity, range and short field performance play in the missions 757s are currently flying?
Is there enough demand for such capabilities to develop a more efficient and direct replacement?

Well, many people here have said that 90% of the current 757 missions can be accomplished with either the 739ER or A321. With 1000 757's sold, that leaves a market for about 100 planes. Even with growing demand, that number doesn't justify the expenses of developing a whole new airplane.

There's a good reason Airbus didn't develop an updated A300-600 and Boeing stopped any further investment in the 757... demand just wasn't enough.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30898 posts, RR: 87
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2971 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting poz2brs (Reply 16):
It would not take such a massive improvement to make an A321NEO that can compete with the 752's loaded range, the classic A321 is only around 500nm short as it is.

It's 750nm per Airbus' and Boeing's ACAPS - 2250nm for the A321-200 vs. 3000nm for the 757-200.


User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1563 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2938 times:

Of the 800 US B757's does anybody know the breakdown between Trancon operations and TATL operations?

I thought that the former was far more important.On this post it appears that it the opposoite.Just wondering.

BTW I guess one can assume that the 321NEO will have approx 15% more range for a given payload no?


User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2918 times:

Quoting mir2069 (Reply 5):
boeing cant do 2 things at once

Recently, Boeing hasn't been able to do even one thing at once. I am seriously beginning to loose faith in the idiots in Seattle and Chicago.

I am as big of a Boeing fan as anyone here, however, to simply discount this market altogether is idiocy. They say point-to-point is the future of air travel? Well, what does the large narrowbody with a long range emphasize? point-to-point. We have all seen the growth of 757s into the TATL service, and realize what it was originally intended for medium-to-long, thin routes.

Sure, several airlines originally purchased them to fly from DEN-ORD, or JFK-DFW, but the truth is, that plane was built, originally to compliment the 767, on thinner routes. Now that airlines have finally figured it out, Boeing abandons the market. It just makes no sense.



Sic 'em bears
User currently onlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2741 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2901 times:

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 20):

Woo, gotta love armchair CEOs at Airliners.net. Pray tell, where did you get all this inside info of what EXACTLY is happening in Chicago/Seattle? (PS. Airliners.net does not count.)  



View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7135 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2892 times:

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 17):
Well, many people here have said that 90% of the current 757 missions can be accomplished with either the 739ER or A321.

I think you have the wrong a/c, unless I am the one who is mistaken, the proverbial wisdom is that 80-90% of the current 757 missions can be flown by 737-800's and A320's versus the A321 and 737-900ER. At least on the Boeing side, 757 domestically are being replaced by 737-800's not the 900ER.
I stand to be corrected by the experts  


User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2223 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2809 times:

Quoting 328JET (Reply 10):
I think it is a shame, that Boeing is not trying to create a new 767/757 combo for the airlines by offering a new 200 seater in addition to the B787-8.

The idea is perfect.

But reality is that such a combo would mean mostly two fully fledged development programs in-parallel. Regarding cost, effort, engineering staff and so on. Two wings to be designed (while even an own wing variant for the 789 to be designed over several years was asked too much), two fuselages to be designed (while even one simple stretch of the same fuselage of the 788 takes years), two gears, two tails.

Realistic timelines would be 2022 for the 170-seat 797-800asNB, 2024 for the 220-seat 797-800asWB, 2025 for the 150-seat 797-700asNB (SW will ask for repriorization), 2027 for the 200-seat 797-900asNB, 2031 for the 260-seat 797-900asWB.

A wonderful program to promote the A320-family to the most sold aircraft type in absolute terms.

Quoting mir2069 (Reply 12):
Let me repeat this huge clue in case you all missed it. If the 757 line were open and producing the same basic aircraft from the 80's-90's it would beat 737/738/739/A320/A321in CASM/total # pass/cargo/performance/range/fuel burn.

Problem is that those who had the chance to back up such claims by investing $$$'s had no clue. I maybe have missed what you told us but I have not missed that the 757 production ended because airlines stopped wanting new ones. Mostly because their need was covered by new 737's and A320's.


User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2670 times:

Quoting KPDX (Reply 21):
Pray tell, where did you get all this inside info of what EXACTLY is happening in Chicago/Seattle?

The OP, when he specifically stated that Boeing would not be pursuing a 200 seater? That is the statement upon which I based all my statements. If you read every single one of my previous posts, you will see that I am anything but an "armchair CEO," often berating them. However, with the cluster-f*** that the 787 has been, the delayed 748 and now a decision not to pursue a market that has seen great growth, I think only the blind or ignorant sheep would not be forced to look at Boeing with a critical eye these days.



Sic 'em bears
25 YYZYYT : But surely it's more than those 2 choices. The last 5 flights I've taken on a 757 have all been on routes that could be accomplished with the range o
26 planemaker : Boeing didn't say they were "simply discounting this market altogether". See next. Boeing did NOT say that they would not be pursuing a 200-seater...
27 mir2069 : it carries more/longer/cheaper and you say there is no market?Really
28 mir2069 : Well, many people here have said that 90% of the current 757 missions can be accomplished with either the 739ER or A321. With 1000 757's sold, that le
29 planemaker : The facts demonstrate the opposite. They are going to make more money with the far more fuel efficient NBs that will replace the 757s. The "capabilit
30 tistpaa727 : I agree, the opportunity at first glance looks great...on paper. However, Boeing, like any other business, is run by bean counters and if they say th
31 Stitch : A 200-plus seat narrowbody may very well be something the market wants... ...the market being developing markets with large populations like China and
32 BMI727 : It wasn't that simple, and you know it. Using two wings when one will do is just dumb. The current wing was performing somewhat above expectations, t
33 Tangowhisky : Exactly. Yesterday's plane categories do not necessarily be what is required for tomorrow. The 757 with its 200-280 seat capacity and up to 3900 mile
34 Post contains images PGNCS : They keep the industry waiting because they don't know what they are going to do. The industry is impatient with them, and given their recent manager
35 LAXDESI : Nice summary. Looking at the breakdown of 737 orders, it is nearly a 2.5 to 1 ratio in favor of 738 over 73G, and is likely to get larger in favor of
36 RoseFlyer : What could they do? They could recognize the fact that currently the A321 only represents about 13% of the A320 family orders and focus on competing
37 ChicagoFlyer : The issue here is that while there are common pilot type ratings, and a few parts, in reality, there are 2 different airplanes. From the development
38 Tangowhisky : Agreed. The fuselage will be slightly wider for cargo containers and to accommodate an increased aisle and seat width (close to the A320). But that i
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...
New Long Haulers from Boeing. posted Mon Mar 8 1999 18:52:39 by CX747
A New 767-200 Order For Boeing From SilverJet? posted Mon Oct 22 2007 15:01:15 by Gilesdavies
Why No News From Boeing? posted Fri Feb 4 2005 18:41:59 by SNATH
Santa Barbara AL New 727-200. Where From? posted Sun Jan 16 2005 15:00:26 by Luisde8cd
Why No Double Decker From Boeing? posted Fri Oct 22 2004 22:31:23 by 7E72004
Why No New BF Seats On CO 767-400/-200? posted Tue Dec 30 2003 18:15:59 by Transtar
Boeing : First 7E7 Delivery 2008, The 200 Seater? posted Tue Jun 24 2003 14:25:22 by Keesje
No News From Boeing Still! Does Anyone Know Why? posted Tue Apr 24 2001 13:12:38 by United Airline
777-100 = New SP From Boeing? posted Tue Aug 8 2000 20:14:56 by Ilyushin96M
New WN Nonstops From DEN: CMH, JAX, PIT posted Tue Nov 16 2010 08:19:45 by DIA77