Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AF Interested In 737 Successor (797)  
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 2727 posts, RR: 2
Posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 17083 times:

Take a look at this (in French):

http://lexpansion.lexpress.fr/entrep...s-airbus-et-des-boeing_258225.html

"Si Boeing propose un avion très attractif en réponse à l'A320 Neo, pourquoi pas en acheter d'ici 2020", P-H Gourgeon


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
113 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinefpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 901 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 17046 times:

English: "If Boeing offers a very attractive plane in response to the A320 Neo, why not buy by 2020" - I think you could ask enyone and you would get that answer. If the plane is better and there is a good offer, why not...

I doubt this means anything,


User currently offlinefd728 From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16892 times:

Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 1):
I doubt this means anything

I'd guess it means a whole lot   As soon as the 737 successor is out, the neo's days of huge orders are numbered. It shows how well a new Boeing narrowbody would be received by major airlines. Bring it on, Boeing!


User currently offlinefpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 901 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16808 times:

Quoting fd728 (Reply 2):
As soon as the 737 successor is out, the neo's days of huge orders are numbered

I guess it very much depends on what that replacement would look like. If it is indeed better, you are correct, I can acctually see also quite a few cancellations from the NEO in favor of the 797. I think Boeing is in a good position to produce another amaizing aircraft regardless of the NEO.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31250 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16816 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 1):
I doubt this means anything.

I think it means something.

Folks on here are carping about Boeing not slapping the GTF or LEAP-X on the 737NG and how Boeing will lose major customers if they don't do so by the end of the year. They also claim that a new airplane is a waste of money and effort since it can't be much better than an A320neo.

And yet here we have a large Airbus narrowbody cusrtomer who hasn't ordered the A320neo and is expressing interest in a new Boeing narrowbody.

[Edited 2011-07-07 13:22:28]

User currently offlineflyingAY From Finland, joined Jun 2007, 712 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16682 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):

And yet here we have a large Airbus narrowbody cusrtomer who hasn't ordered the A320neo and is expressing interest in a new Boeing narrowbody.

You would expect them to say "If Boeing offers a very attractive plane, we'd still take the Airbus thingy"? That wouldn't be in their best interests, me thinks. People here still think that AA talking with Airbus means nothing, even if they're much further than giving one vague comment like this - I don't think this means much either.

Naturally any airline would be interested in a "very attractive plane", but so far we don't know if Boeing's response to the A320neo will be a very attractive plane...


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 16558 times:

The Airline CEO that does not show that he will put his airlines interests indisputably first should not have the job, he shall buy the A/C that is best for his company regardless. In addition he shall keep ALL his suppliers honest to get the best deals whenever he wants to buy something.

So if B makes a really good product with the right timing why not (like they did with the 777).



Non French in France
User currently offlinesteffenbn From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 16563 times:

Quoting flyingAY (Reply 5):
Naturally any airline would be interested in a "very attractive plane", but so far we don't know if Boeing's response to the A320neo will be a very attractive plane...

   AF isn't actually stating anything here that any airline wouldn't say! The only thing that AF is saying is that Boeing is still in the running towards AF 's "next generation" planes!

Why should they stick to Airbus if they could get a "Very attractive plane" from Boeing? I really don't see any news here, other than those who think that AF was "stuck" with Airbus has now been proved wrong for good.



A330, A319, 737,738,752,763,763ER,764ER,777-200LR
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6844 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 16357 times:

There is more in the article. What he says first is about widebodies, that having a mixed fleet is better because planes have varying capabilities, and in case one is grounded it's best not to have the whole fleet grounded. So, you can also see that it doesn't seem to matter for single aisle aircraft.

However, an interesting point is that he says the neo is not so good for AF, because their short haul fleet flies 1h30 average sectors, so the gain in fuel burn is not so great.

I guess Boeing is in the game if they can provide a significantly lighter plane, which doesn't seem that easy.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2258 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 15490 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
I think it means something.

Me too.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
Folks on here are carping about Boeing not slapping the GTF or LEAP-X on the 737NG and how Boeing will lose major customers if they don't do so by the end of the year. They also claim that a new airplane is a waste of money and effort since it can't be much better than an A320neo.

And yet here we have a large Airbus narrowbody cusrtomer who hasn't ordered the A320neo and is expressing interest in a new Boeing narrowbody.

I have always said that a 5% better 797 would do very well on the market. It would at least keep Boeing's market share. And it would not be too late, except maybe for the MD80 operators.

In fact only keeping the market share hardly justifies a new design. Boeing must be able to attract Airbus customers with a newly designed NB. Otherwise the effort for the new design would not look very compelling compared with the effort for say a proper 737NG. Boeing could bring a 737NEO and have 50% market share for another 15 years (because once 737 and A320 are re-engined the status quo could become very solid again for a long time, with small incentives to break out from it for either OEM). In that light the investment for a new design must allow Boeing to break into Airbus' customers base. Otherwise the new design would look rather stupid. Or ultimatively proove that the 737 was "end-of-life", not any further material upgrade.

Thus it is not a bonus to attract A320 customers with the 797. It is a must for Boeing.

Airbus can counter it by promising to bring a newly designed A320NEO replacement just some years later. It would have big impact in the long term if Boeing's 797 baseline will be some percent points inferior vs. Airbus' A360 baseline that will come out some years later.


User currently offlinevfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 4030 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 15436 times:

Quoting fd728 (Reply 2):
As soon as the 737 successor is out, the neo's days of huge orders are numbered. It shows how well a new Boeing narrowbody would be received by major airlines. Bring it on, Boeing!

Define "is out". In the light of the 787 debacle, it will be interesting to see if airlines will be more reluctant to put their eggs in the 797 basket before Boeing has proven that they can deliver what they promise - i.e. if we will indeed see huge orders as soon as the 797 is announced.


User currently offlineSASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 15419 times:

Who says that the French are chauvinistic? 

User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 15365 times:

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 11):
Who says that the French are chauvinistic?

Those who claim that European airlines only by Airbus due to political pressure. Every airline CEO who slept and missed the A320NEO order rush has to justify to his shareholders why - we will see hundreds of similar statements.


User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1642 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 15154 times:

If AF really want a plane that is optimised to sector lengths of 1.5 hours then Bombardier (nearly French!) C300 is the obvious answer. They don't need to wait for A or B.Boeings issue (last time I heard) was the opposite.They want to optimise around an aircraft that can do "bigger and longer" (2x3x2) and drop out of the 140 seat short haul,which according to B & A sales is a reducing part of their portfolio.I believe I am right in saying that there is only one 319NEO sale and that was the strange "doubled up" orer with an existing "C" order. Take that out of the equasion and it's zero.

User currently offlineSASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 14891 times:

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 12):

Like American airliners only Boeing aircraft (the best example is the initial order of the American army that placed a huge order at EADS and after substantial pressure, they swaped the order in favour of the Boeing planes). OK, except for US Airways, Vigin America, Jet Blue and Hawaian. 

Anyway, if you have missed an opportunity to allocate space for the A320NEO (which is full until 2018???), the statement of the AF CEO makes sense.

Quoting parapente (Reply 13):

A French name does not imply that it actually comes from France......


User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 758 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 14604 times:

Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 1):
"If Boeing offers a very attractive plane in response to the A320 Neo, why not buy by 2020" - I think you could ask enyone and you would get that answer. If the plane is better and there is a good offer, why not...

You will get that answer from some airlines but not all depending on their circumstances. It depends on when their fleet is due for renewal - some cant wait until 2020 (or later for any reasonable quantity). The 797 may offer superior performance but it will come at a price (need to pay for that $12B R&D somehow). When ownership costs are taken into account the 320Neo could constitute a better business case for some airlines depending on how long they keep the frames (LCC's churn them over quite quickly).

Quoting fd728 (Reply 2):
As soon as the 737 successor is out, the neo's days of huge orders are numbered.

People have been saying that about the 330 for the past 15 years.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 9):
Boeing could bring a 737NEO and have 50% market share for another 15 years

  
Correct - so they have to think carefully if the extra $8B R&D for the 797 is going to win more sales.


This whole "797 wiping the floor against all competitors" argument is sounding very reminiscent of the nonsense that was put around when the 787 was launched. Boeing (and their customers) are still licking their wounds from 787 delays so we need some healthy skepticism about another "game changer" and what it might do to the NB market.


Regards,
StickShaker


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 14459 times:

Airlines that need planes between 2015 and 2020 will order the A320NEO, and maybe those orders will stretch into 2021 and 2022.
If the airlines have more time, they will wait - but every month Boeing keeps its noisy silence another airline may time out.

Airbus on the A320s still has a carbon wing box + large AlLi panels as option for the NEO++ , another 3 billion investment...


User currently offlinefd728 From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 14342 times:

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 10):
In the light of the 787 debacle, it will be interesting to see if airlines will be more reluctant to put their eggs in the 797 basket before Boeing has proven that they can deliver what they promise

Well, every manufacturer has had its fair share of project delays, so it would be foolish to trust Airbus alone. Surely the NEO isn't that big of a challenge for Airbus as the 797 might be for Boeing, but if the latter promises better economics than the NEO, then it certainly could be worth the wait. The 787 took a long detour, but in the end they got it right.

Besides, Boeing has learned alot from the 787 development, many mistakes won't be made again on a new project.

Quoting StickShaker (Reply 15):
People have been saying that about the 330 for the past 15 years

The 787 surprised many for being delayed so often. And surely the same may happen with the NEO and the 797. If the new Boeing NB gets delayed, it will be the NEO's success.

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 16):
Airlines that need planes between 2015 and 2020 will order the A320NEO, and maybe those orders will stretch into 2021 and 2022.
If the airlines have more time, they will wait - but every month Boeing keeps its noisy silence another airline may time out.

Exactly


User currently onlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12801 posts, RR: 46
Reply 18, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 13389 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting fd728 (Reply 2):
As soon as the 737 successor is out, the neo's days of huge orders are numbered.

Let's say Boeing can get the 797 delivered from Jan 2020 and in the first 6 months it's on sale, they sell 3,000. Even if they start production at 50 per month, they've just sold out for 5 years, meaning the earliest you could get one would be 2026. All of a sudden the A320neo available in 2020 doesn't look such a bad deal, does it?

Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 3):
I can acctually see also quite a few cancellations from the NEO in favor of the 797.

Why? Do you really think the airlines and leasing companies that ordered the neo did so without considering that Boeing might launch the 797? All those neos currently on order will have been delivered long before Boeing gets the first 797 out the door.

Quoting flyingAY (Reply 5):
Naturally any airline would be interested in a "very attractive plane",

You'd think so, wouldn't you? You'd also have to think that the A320neo seems to be pretty attractive.

Quoting flyingAY (Reply 5):
but so far we don't know if Boeing's response to the A320neo will be a very attractive plane...

It seems even Boeing doesn't know what it will be at the moment.

[Edited 2011-07-08 05:00:00]


Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 13240 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 18):
It seems even Boeing doesn't know what it will be at the moment.

At the moment, they do not know whether it will be a wide body or a narrow body, nor a composite or an AlLi construction, or if they know they tell it to nobody. Still more probably there are design concepts for all options, and behind the scenes there is a bloody fight of management against each others which way to go, which already lasts too long now and seems to continue...


User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1642 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12724 times:

Burkhard

Airbus on the A320s still has a carbon wing box + large AlLi panels as option for the NEO++ , another 3 billion investment...

Spot on.Right now it appears that Airbus did not even spend the 1st billion if various reports are correct - in that they got the 2 competing engine companies to stump up the cash - clever buggers. Obviously 3Bn is a guess which I appreciate.But the point is (AlLi) that a new Boeing may well not be able to supass the 320 on weight grounds. It is accepted by both A&B that carbon's weight advantage diminishes with size.Indeed we can see that in many of the decisions taken by countries (who are building new narrowbodied aircraft) that absolutly do have this technology.Russia,Canada,Japan.(Not sure what technology level China is at right now).But they have chosen to only go "part C"

Indeed Boeing have "Still (ever)"? not released the performance figures( inc weight ) of the much larger 787 - we may well be disappointed/surprised at what it weighs.

If we believe Alcoa and their new family of 3 advanced AlLi alloys (and why not).They seem to be saying that these new alloys are 10% lighter and have (near enough) identical manufacturing and operational properties to the present generation of advanced Al alloys.

Since the 320 is a "metal" plane it should (in theory) be well possible to swap out Al alloys for AlLi alloys and take a clean weight saving.Whilst I feel sure it cannot be true - I cannot see where additional R&D / Retooling costs come in to this (if Alcoa is correct in their claims).

What AF say they want is a very efficient short (1 -! 1/2 hour sectors) aircraft. For such sectors weight is key - so AlLi would be great. As for a plastic wing box - well why not.But yes that would cost.

I feel that these (and other) developments will stay "in the box" until they see in good detail just what Boeing have to offer. After all 2015 - 2020 is effectively sold out already.But they (Airbus) have stated that the technologies that they are looking for as true replacement technologies will not be mature until 2025. As such it is not unreasonable to envisage a "NEO - Lite" to take them through to whatever replaces the 320 mid next decade.

I think Boeing will be hard pushed to beat this strategy ( particularly as they could bring it to the left (in time terms) if necessary .Hence the (so far) 3 year delay on any meaningful announcement.

Note Boeing stated so many times (as did Airbus) about 5 years ago that all studies showed that no "meaningful" advantage could be gained via a new airframe. This appears to remain true does it not?


User currently offlineWisdom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12364 times:

All it means is that AF want Boeing to react with anything so AF can get a better offer on NEO's.
Everyone knows that there isn't a drastically new engine technology available yet to justify a new airplane.
Without a new engine, Boeing will spend 15 billions to beat the A320NEO by 5% on operating costs.

Boeing will probably either offer an upgraded 737NG or go for a landing gear redesign and re-engining.

Airbus isn't very likely to give AF a good price on NEO's if they order a large amount of 787's.


User currently offlineyeogeo From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 887 posts, RR: 14
Reply 22, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12365 times:

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 19):
behind the scenes [at Boeing] there is a bloody fight of management against each others which way to go, which already lasts too long now and seems to continue...

A great deal of conjecture there ... except the "seems to continue" part which seems to drive everyone crazy!

But consider, "When you're a first mover, your competitors know your strategy. Right now, Boeing knows the strategies of Airbus, Bombardier and Comac." Perhaps there's a little truth in that? I don't understand all this impatience!

(quote during the Paris show from Damien Lasou of Accenture's Aerospace and Defense practice)

yeo



Yokoso! to my world
User currently offlineCentre From Canada, joined Mar 2010, 490 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 10412 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
I think it means something.

with this

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
And yet here we have a large Airbus narrowbody cusrtomer who hasn't ordered the A320neo

My personal view tells me that AF is asking for a better deal on the NEO.

I'm still of the opinion that Boeing doesn't have enough resources to launch a new program at the moment, and they were caught off guard with the NEO, thus they were playing down any idea of re-engining/revamping the current A&B narrowbodies with GTF and LEAP-X.
The only game they have right now, is keep customers away from ordering the NEO until we figure out what we need to do, and that's not going to be very soon.



I have cut 4 times, and it's still short.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31250 posts, RR: 85
Reply 24, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 10408 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 9):
Airbus can counter it by promising to bring a newly designed A320NEO replacement just some years later. It would have big impact in the long term if Boeing's 797 baseline will be some percent points inferior vs. Airbus' A360 baseline that will come out some years later.

Airbus have stated they do not believe such a plane is possible, which is why they are not pursuing it.

While it is clear Airbus have A30X ideas in the server farm, they are likely not ready for a quick industrial launch. Airbus could find itself in the position with the 797 that they were with the 787 - caught off guard without an immediate response ready.

Like the A350, the A30X could take around a decade to bring to market as Airbus first considers additional changes to the A320neo (the "scope creep" they currently are dead-against) and then being forced to actually bring a new narrowbody to market.

And if Boeing has some proprietary/patented technology or design that Airbus doesn't know about that does indeed make such a plane possible, that could hamper Airbus as they would have to develop a non-infringing replacement.


Again, not claiming, implying or suggesting in any way that Airbus could not bring a brand new narrowbody to market, but I do not believe they can do so with a snap of their fingers, which would give Boeing a not-insignificant window of opportunity to secure a not-insiginificant number of 797 orders.


25 YULWinterSkies : It means that he is only moderately interested in the 320 NEO for the moment, because the claimed 15% fuel economy of the NEO essentially becomes rea
26 YTZ : Seriously. I don't get why they are discounting Bombardier. Not just CS300 either. I think both CSeries birds would make a lot of sense for Air Franc
27 Post contains images Tancrede : Sorry, but at that stage nobody is able to know if the 797 will be that good as we don’t even know if it will exist one day And the same statement,
28 YTZ : All that depends on how small you go. Let's say Airbus and Boeing decide not to play in the shallow end and set the floor at the 320/738 size class.
29 AirNZ : Except that only holds if the successor is significantly better. Considering that no-one knows anything about it how is it possible to either judge a
30 scbriml : If Boeing does go for the 797, as above, as soon as they've sold 3,000 any other airline is probably looking at 2026 before they can get one. At that
31 YTZ : I can. Just look at the A320NEO. It's not really getting Airbus any new customers. It's just preventing them from defecting and encouraging them to f
32 tootallsd : There is so much complaining about Boeing being late to the party but I think the statement above misses a huge issue. If the 797 is anything like th
33 scbriml : I think you've misunderstood what I said - the comparison isn't between the new plane (whether 797 or 737re) and the current 737NG, but whether the 7
34 astuteman : I don't think that analogy actually stands up to close scrutiny. The analogy to me is that of having the "old A350" (AKA the A320NEO) already in serv
35 Stitch : So am I. Hence why I had to preface my original comment with a statement that Boeing would have to discover something (or a group of somethings) that
36 Post contains links travelhound : I think one area that hasn't been discussed is the heart of the market. If the heart of the market is for an aircraft 7% larger than today's aircraft
37 Post contains images BMI727 : I'd tend to agree. Who at this point wouldn't be interested? An airline might look a bit silly taking delivery of NEOs in 2020 when they could have a
38 Aesma : Indeed I think the CS300 for AF makes sense, and the CS100 for Regional, Britair, Cityjet, too. He's not discounting them, he didn't talk about them
39 DocLightning : Numbered, but quite possibly numbered at much higher than zero. If the aircraft isn't available until 2020, that gives the A320 NEO, available in 201
40 Post contains images astuteman : Which has an interesting relevance to events in the UK this week. Which aren't relevant to this thread of course I'm guessing that it means that beca
41 scbriml : Even once the 797 is being delivered, as soon as Boeing has a large backlog, availability and potential for lower price will make the neo an attracti
42 SchorschNG : Correct. And Air France is not the only one, routes in Europe are notoriously short in distance. A new Boeing single aisle would probably have more r
43 Post contains images astuteman : The CS300? Rgds
44 SchorschNG : Yes, and I wonder so airlines are so careful about the C-Series. European airlines are flying a lot of A319s with 130-140 seats, and even these aircra
45 Post contains images astuteman : It hasn't got a track record or support infrastructure in place. Yet. And they have to consider the risks associated with that. But it will one day.
46 Stitch : This applies not just to the airframe, but the engine as well. So that's likely making airlines very conservative. A trouble-free flight test program
47 ytz : That's a simplistic view of ROI is it not? There's also the threat of Boeing simply losing business in the long run if the re can't doesn't deliver o
48 ytz : Like I suggested above...competition. If they can invest while Boeing can't, they'll certain have an advantage. Where? Boeing has to worry about two
49 scbriml : Those exact same things apply to the 797, and Boeing has to spend 3 times as much to bring it to market in 2020 using the same engines that Airbus is
50 Post contains images astuteman : For exactly the same reasons that some of us are suggesting Boeing should/will launch a 737NEO. If Airbus create a new plane that is only moderately
51 scbriml : Yes, of course. This is one of those "barriers" to joining the current duopoly we've discussed before.
52 mdword1959 : How much, if any, will the "advanced technologies" introduced on the 787 (i.e. electrical architecture) "change the game" operationally over the next
53 Stitch : While I am on record as favoring the 737RE instead of the 797, it is possible that Boeing - and their customers - are hoping "magic can happen twice"
54 mdword1959 : 5+ years ago Boeing's long-term goal was to reduce the development/design/delivery cycle to 36 months with the production methods adopted beginning w
55 Stitch : Boeing seems to want to continue with that plan for the NSA/797, just bring it all into a central geographic location. But with the costs involved, I
56 SchorschNG : The RE will come. I think Boeing is working behind the scenes to get the engine right, possibly they in discussions to get their own tailor-made engi
57 StickShaker : Reading between the lines I dont think Boeing really want to be putting a 797 into service as early as 2019 - to do so would contradict their recent
58 Post contains images astuteman : And I think there are lots of good reasons for that, other than a "lazy" manufacturer. Like low risk, speed of execution, commonality with existing f
59 travelhound : But I think there was a degree of first mover advantage in those A320NEO orders ...... especially when considering the NEO is, relatively speaking a
60 astuteman : If you remember, the A320 went through a bit of a lean patch last year, prior to the A320NEO announcement. I think there's a tendency for the airline
61 yeogeo : Interesting... Could you expand upon this? I'd appreciate it. By "resources" are you referring to product or manpower? (or both?) Why this time frame
62 Burkhard : The most efficient short range aircraft I'm aware of is the A321-100. Havinf MTOW and OEW lower than the -200, it is good for all short hops ( includ
63 ytz : With what's coming out from the AA negotiation, I'm starting to wonder if the A320neo is simply starting to erode Boeing's margins going forward. At s
64 travelhound : I researched year 2010 A320 orders thinking the same thing. Airbus ended up selling 420 A320's, so they turned out a fairly solid number considering
65 rheinwaldner : IMO this is quite cheap marketing spin. Airbus just seems to tell us fairy tales that support their case (the NEO decision). Very similar like Boeing
66 Post contains images Stitch : The case to launch the 737 with the PW1000G and LEAP-X families is clear to us, but none of us order airplanes for an airline for a living. I really t
67 Post contains images SEPilot : I do not disagree; however there are many things Boeing can do with a clean sheet of paper that become very difficult and expensive to do with an exi
68 Post contains images scbriml : Or maybe if one of their blue-chip customers orders a boat-load of A320 classics/neos (*cough* AA *cough*).
69 Post contains images astuteman : You certainly won't find me disagreeing with this But what does "beat the A320NEO" mean? That it's more efficient? That it gains 55% of the 797/A320N
70 Post contains images Stitch : If 737 customers start buying A320s, by definition that will result in 737 orders "drying up".
71 woodsboy : This (and any announcement, article or whatever) simply tells us that given the current schedule for the 320NEO and as of yet no announcement from Boe
72 Stitch : Not with the same 80" fan diameter planned for the A320neo, no. So the engines for a 737neo would have a smaller fan (around 70" with the nose of the
73 SEPilot : I am referring to overall operating costs; with fuel economy being the leading one. This is indeed the question, and the fact that the answer is not
74 Stitch : Another advantage of taking "the big gamble" is if they can be confident they won't need to do it all over again in 15 years to compete with the "A30X
75 SEPilot : And this is a big question; there are many members of this forum who are convinced that some new breakthrough (OR being the one most often mentioned)
76 Stitch : I think Open Rotor is going to be too slow to be viable for missions beyond about 1000nm, so say nothing for those over 2000nm. At this point, kessje
77 QFA787380 : Maybe, maybe not. Boeing will continue the 737NG line until mid next decade(or that is what they have said). They may even re-engine the NG and have
78 frmrCapCadet : Boeing may know more components of the answer than you, but suspect that if they (and or their customers) really knew the answer they would have made
79 QFA787380 : I honestly think that's up to the airlines to decide and for Boeing to try and deliver. The airlines that are buying the plane will have to be prepar
80 Post contains images StickShaker : How about ownership costs, training/re-training costs along with the costs of adding a new type. There's more to the equation than just fuel efficien
81 lexer : This.
82 astuteman : Airlines will always decide that they want a brand-new everything imaginable, with all the bells and whistles and no risk to them. Boeing's job is to
83 travelhound : It has been said airlines are asset managers first and airlines second. Considering buying a new aeroplane is a 20 year decision and it takes a long
84 Post contains images StickShaker : Yes - I agree. But if those extra 12 seats are provided by a clean sheet design then Boeing will have $10-12B of R&D costs to amortise as opposed
85 ytz : I don't know how much that argument holds. If that's the case, Boeing and Airbus would never launch new airplanes. Now, personally, I'm 50-50 (like B
86 Glareskin : I don't see anything special here. In the short or mid term the A320 classic and NEO are the better products for the airlines. As long as Boeing is no
87 pylon101 : I think it is not a typical situation for The Duopoly. The Duopoly was based on A-320 and B-737. If Boeing shifts to sector 180 + with two aisle 797 (
88 QFA787380 : Boeing are in the business of providing the best possible product for their customers. There is surely a balance between what Boeing wants to do and
89 Post contains links travelhound : Yes, but if Boeing can command an extra $3.3 million per aircraft over a 737 than after 3300 deliveries the program has been paid for. I know 3300 sa
90 travelhound : Sorry my mistake, picked the year 2026 number instead of the 1369 deliveries number. A re-hash of post 89. The market for NB's during the 2020-30 per
91 SEPilot : From a strictly business case, this may carry the day. However, what I see is that at present the 737NG beats out the A320 slightly on short range mi
92 Post contains links StickShaker : Sorry travelhound - I didn't read your intial post closely enough. The 320Neo has a price premium of around 8 or 9 million dollars over the 320 class
93 SEPilot : This is assuming that Boeing will be unable to realize substantial manufacturing cost savings over the 737; and this is supposed to be one of the big
94 SchorschNG : So far neither B787 or A350 have demonstrated any cost saving. The opposite is true: both programs are far far away from their original production co
95 rheinwaldner : Great post. This certainly could be their aim. However I thought the first tough challenge with CFRP production would be to lower production cost jus
96 travelhound : Another area I can see a 797 having an advantage over a 737NG is the potential to significantly improve the flying experience for the public. If a 79
97 ytz : Perhaps. But if Boeing has learned their lessons with the 787 and they apply those lessons well to the 797, then they will most certainly be able to
98 parapente : Much of this debate (and the very good flightblogger article) turns on the ability for Boeing to produce a killer App for the new gen3 plane.In the sa
99 ytz : I think the big question is how much they have learned with the 787 with respect to the performance of composite materials and barrel manufacturing. T
100 Post contains images Baroque : Does it not!!! All the arguments about a 797 work for an A32x replacement, except that at present it looks as if Airbus have a bit longer to think ab
101 SEPilot : Yes, CFRP does require fasteners, but the number is a factor of nearly 100 less. With Al you have a rivet every couple of inches along every place tw
102 Stitch : Jon Ostrower tweeted that Boeing's Jim Albaugh stated that BCA are considering increasing 737NG production from the planned 42 per month to anywhere u
103 StickShaker : Savings on production costs would certainly help but I suspect Boeing would be inclined to pocket those and still charge a premium for a new platform
104 Baroque : Do we know anything more about rejection rates on 787 barrels, or on required remediation work? That too would give an indication of possible cost ch
105 Stitch : I don't recall hearing of any barrel being rejected. Alenia was having issues with de-lamination around Door 3 a couple of years back, but that was f
106 Post contains links mdword1959 : Here's a link to Mr. Ostrower's news article on the Flightglobal site: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...istantly-at-60-737s-per-month.html
107 scbriml : It will - the increase from 31 to 42/month is a 3-year process. To add another 50% increase in production on top of that will be a huge effort. I thi
108 Post contains links Baroque : Does not seem to be much since about 2009. Which either means that it is going exceptionally well, or just has not got a mention in with other proble
109 Burkhard : Completly agree. My impression is that Boeing wants to add smaller cheap improvements to the 737 AND increase production rate to be able to lower the
110 Post contains images mdword1959 : Very Dr. Strangelove - one can hear General Turgidson in the board room warning of a "Ramp-Up Gap!"
111 Baroque : Are you implying that "they" are putting something into the resin?
112 QFA787380 : Not sure why Airbus chose panel v barrel. Could be that Boeing had patents on the process or that Airbus was not convinced about barrel CFRP producti
113 Post contains images mdword1959 : Speaking of ramp-ups... Dow Jones 07/15/11: Dr. Strangelove sez: Vee cannot allow a "ramp-up gap" to develop!
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...
LH And AF Interested In Superjet.. posted Sun Nov 2 2008 06:59:57 by Beaucaire
AF Interested In Bombardier's C Series posted Fri Jun 24 2005 16:37:10 by YUL332LX
JAL Interested In 737-900X posted Mon Feb 7 2005 11:57:02 by Atmx2000
LH And AF-KL Interested In A380-900 posted Thu Aug 28 2008 11:30:01 by Desediez
AF-KLM Interested In Austrian Airlines posted Mon May 26 2008 02:37:43 by LifelinerOne
LH, AF, TG Interested In Garuda posted Sat Jan 7 2006 06:49:57 by JoFMO
HF Interested In Boeing 737-900X posted Wed Mar 13 2002 15:53:54 by F+ Rouge
Ryanair Interested In A A320.5 NEO? posted Wed Dec 15 2010 01:34:44 by keesje
TU Interested In Joining Star Alliance posted Tue Oct 12 2010 23:38:17 by Ota1
Ryanair Interested In Up To 300 A320 NEOs posted Mon Oct 4 2010 16:55:37 by keesje