Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Boeing Make A Double Decker Someday?  
User currently offlinepiedmont727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 108 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 14693 times:

with airbus making the a380 do you think boeing will ever pull for 2 decks or just a more extended 747 , i know right now they dont have time for it with the company at risk with the 787s issuses but what do you think?

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAA94 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 569 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 14604 times:

I'm not sure it's really a risk issue (a la 787), but simply the fact that airlines don't have a continuing need for new VLAs like the A380/747-8.

Boeing's foray into the Extended 747 market has already been executed, with the introduction of the 747-8. As you may well know, the passenger variant hasn't really caught on. Lufthansa is the largest operator with 19 frames ordered, while KE, W3, and CA ordering smaller subfleets.

It seems to me that the industry is generally shifting to frequency versus capacity, with the exception of some major, slot-controlled routes (like DXB-JFK/LHR on EK, where the A380 works well). Airbus introduced the A380 at the right time and sold it to the right customers, and it has been successful.

But in my opinion, the market for these types of aircraft is drying up, and Boeing has already made their move. Perhaps in the future conditions will be different, and there will be a need for a variant VLA to be introduced. But that time is not now, and Boeing will stick to what they're good at.



Choose a challenge over competence / Eleanor Roosevelt
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2122 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 14563 times:

Been there, done that  
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © RAScholefield Collection
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mel Lawrence



User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 14522 times:

I can see Boeing making a double decker aircraft, in like 20-30 years. As AA94 says, Airbus really got the timing right on it and it may seem that around 260 orders doesn't seem like a lot, but right now, that's all the market can hold.

That said, with new technologies coming out and engine performance only getting better, Boeing will most likely create one, and it won't surprise me. Just the time isn't right, yet.

Maybe it will be the 7107, with the moniker, "Double the digits, double the decks." And with 4 GE-90-115B's!!!



Go coogs! \n//
User currently onlineWingtips56 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 353 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14295 times:

Wasn't one of the 747-X proposals showing the full-length upper deck extension, after Airbus first proposed what became the A380? They determined it was too big.


Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5416 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 14169 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 3):
And with 4 GE-90-115B's!!!

It likely won't be a quad but rather a twin. Do people here remember Keejse and the ever popular "Ecoliner"?


Then there is this that is attributed as a Boeing design but I don't know the veracity of that.


Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1811 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13962 times:

The market is way too small to make the huge investment, if even a 757/767 replacement NB is not viable the even smaller VLA market is totally absurd to even think of.

User currently offlineenginebird From United States of America, joined May 2007, 341 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 13948 times:

Quoting AA94 (Reply 1):

It seems to me that the industry is generally shifting to frequency versus capacity, [...]

This is certainly a very US-centered perspective, where such a development no doubt seems to take place. Outside the US and on longer routes, the lower seat mile costs and, as you said, the need for fewer slots when using VLAs are certainly attractive for many airlines.

When we take a look at the list of airlines that operate and/or have ordered VLAs, it is not surprising that a European manufacturer took the lead...


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2596 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 13768 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting piedmont727 (Thread starter):
with airbus making the a380 do you think boeing will ever pull for 2 decks or just a more extended 747

If it happens, I don't think it'll happen for quite some time. I think Boeing made the right call not to launch an all new "VLA" to combat the A380 because of the dearth of orders at that end of the market. If Boeing ever go down that route, I think it will be aimed as an A380 replacement, maybe 20 years down the track.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 13664 times:

Anybody remember the MD-12?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Md-12-2.png



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlinea380900 From France, joined Dec 2003, 1101 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 13108 times:

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 4):
Wasn't one of the 747-X proposals showing the full-length upper deck extension, after Airbus first proposed what became the A380? They determined it was too big.

This was never in the cards. A double decker 747 has a new wingbox. New wingbox means new aircraft. That's all there is to it.

The A380 did not kill the 747 because of the mismanagement of the program (dropped freighter). It is a disgrace (if you invest as much as Airbus did, you certainly hope to kill the 40yo competition). Now maybe it is a blessing in disguise for Airbus because the fact that the 747 is still alive is giving Boeing a full line-up. So the slowly disappearing 747 (at this point, maybe it can pick up more sales) may be a fig leaf for hiding that Boeing pretty much gave that away to Airbus.

If Boeing had no plane bigger than the 777, it would clearly look like a number two compared to Airbus (whatever the yearly fluctuations in sales). Now maybe you're gonna say: "It's a business, not a schoolyard". But then I'd suggest you examine why Airbus launched the A380 in the first place and can you be really certain that prestige had no place in the equation?

Anyway, if the 747 had been stopped, I would have said Boeing would have launch a VLA by 2025. With the 747 still around, I'd say there won't be a new Boeing VLA before 2035.

And let's not forget that traffic is increasing every year. There is room from everybody, including an airplane making the most of the 80mX80m parking spots. This size is covered by the A380 and it will prevent Boeing to play the "Airbus card" by making something slightly bigger than the competition. If they want to do bigger than Airbus, they have to change airports around the world.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1811 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 13070 times:

Only a double decker BWB I see no tube and wing at B in that size class. It is really a tiny market, way less than 500 frames in 20 years!!

Stupidity to go after this micro segment!


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12779 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 11):
Only a double decker BWB I see no tube and wing at B in that size class.

My opinion too.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineWolbo From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 485 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12594 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 11):
Only a double decker BWB I see no tube and wing at B in that size class. It is really a tiny market, way less than 500 frames in 20 years!!

Stupidity to go after this micro segment!

Markets aren't static, they develop and usually change. Realistically the time-frame for a Boeing double decker (or BWB) would be 2030-2035. What is now a 'micro', but still multi-billion dollar market, can easily turn into a very sizeable one (not in market share but in value) given a projected doubling of passenger traffic by that period. Frequency increase can only take you so far.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1811 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 12553 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 12):

The ongoing NASA/Boeing X48C test flights are not just for fun, I think they see a clear advantage in the BWB shape of aircraft and cabins of non circular shape working now that composite materials become mainstream. I envision a freighter first, aft ramp loading no nose door.

And if and when the industry is ready to take the step we might see a passenger BWB being built. Doing a double decker of a BWB is less painful as the body is quite suited from the start, fat but not very long.


User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11963 times:

One of the early 747 design studies was for a double decker a/c:



Boeing in the 1990s did study a double decker a/c design that was not based on the 747 called the New Large Airplane (NLA) but opted to pursue new variants of the 747.

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 4):
Wasn't one of the 747-X proposals showing the full-length upper deck extension, after Airbus first proposed what became the A380? They determined it was too big.


There was a more recent design study for a double deck 747 (At least enough of one to commission a model.):

http://airchive.com/galleries/19082.jpg

Supposedly the costs to develop this version were going to be in the $5 billion range (mainly because of the costs to design and certification of a new wingbox) and Boeing opted against pursuing it in favor of less radical designs.

The 747 variants Boeing proposed after the 744 (747-500X, 747-600X, 747-700X, 747X) did not have a full upper deck but in some of the proposals, the upper deck had increased capacity as the fuselage was stretched and this allowed for a longer upper deck.


User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11642 times:

Quoting piedmont727 (Thread starter):
boeing will ever pull for 2 decks

2 decks ? in case of the A380 it is 2 decks on the passenger side, but only ONE deck for cargo+mail. Boeing might win the day with a double-double plane, which means not only double-deck above but also two decks below !


User currently offlinehOmsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 10384 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 15):
There was a more recent design study for a double deck 747 (At least enough of one to commission a model.):

When was that model produced? It may just be the lighting/colors blending in the background, but it looks like that model has JT-9D engines.



I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently offlineEASTERN747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 514 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 9659 times:

Well Boeing and Airbus have one thing in common....VERY UGLY double decker aircraft.....lololol

I'm not sure what an wing box is and presume it's where the wing attaches to the fuselage and inter connects with the landing gear. The drawing of a 2 engine Boeing double decker has the engines looking VERY BIG and high off the ground.
How tall would the gear have to be!!!!!!!


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30546 posts, RR: 84
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 9399 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting hOmsar (Reply 17):
When was that model produced? It may just be the lighting/colors blending in the background, but it looks like that model has JT-9D engines.

Those were Boeing's house colors in the 1990s and early 2000s, so I would expect that is a concept developed between the 747-700X of 1996 and the 747X Stretch of 2000.

As for the engines, I would expect they are either Engine Alliance GP7000 or Rolls-Royce Trent 600 as those were the options being considered for those airframes.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1811 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 9323 times:

The one with a full length upper deck looks like a LCF   But it is too narrow on the top I know, just the looks.

In a BWB we would see many more aisles, up to 8 or ten and then maybe 2 floors equal sized. Now that would be one big whopper!


User currently offlinerwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2311 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 8126 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sweair (Reply 11):
Only a double decker BWB I see no tube and wing at B in that size class. It is really a tiny market, way less than 500 frames in 20 years!!

A BWB is almost certainly going to be very wide in terms of seating, and not two decks. A major lower limit on the size of a BWB airliner is the need to humans to fit vertically into the cabin section, having a double deck would push you into an absolutely huge size. It's likely that not even cargo will be carried under the passenger section, rather it will go into compartments in the "wing" further outboard from the passenger section.


User currently offlineplatinumfoota From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 6985 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Who says it has to be a wide body??  Wow!   


Never forget United 93
User currently offlinecornutt From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 338 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6834 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 2):
Been there, done that

I was about to throw in for the 377... can't help but wonder how that would have worked out if Boeing had given it turboprops instead of the 3350s.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4801 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6727 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 14):

And if and when the industry is ready to take the step we might see a passenger BWB being built. Doing a double decker of a BWB is less painful as the body is quite suited from the start, fat but not very long.

   my thoughts exactly.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlinecanyonblue17 From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6948 times:

Any chance a Boeing (or Airbus for that matter) double decker could be used efficiently enough to justify them on short haul routes? For example, if you could load 600-800 pax and the matching cargo/bags in the same time it would take to board say a 737, would it make sense on short-haul routes? I understand this would require multiple jet bridge loading and increased ramp/customer service staff, but if the infrastructure was developed, are the economics feasible? I would think there are plenty of US domestic and other routes that already have the pax demand to fill that size aircraft.

User currently onlineprebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6385 posts, RR: 54
Reply 26, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6895 times:

Quoting cornutt (Reply 23):
I was about to throw in for the 377... can't help but wonder how that would have worked out if Boeing had given it turboprops instead of the 3350s.

No need to wonder. The B377-SG (Super Guppy) flew for many years with Allison 501 turboprops.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24796 posts, RR: 22
Reply 27, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6894 times:

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 26):
Quoting cornutt (Reply 23):
I was about to throw in for the 377... can't help but wonder how that would have worked out if Boeing had given it turboprops instead of the 3350s.

No need to wonder. The B377-SG (Super Guppy) flew for many years with Allison 501 turboprops.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLLL_noavn8


User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4912 posts, RR: 43
Reply 28, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6908 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 2):
Been there, done that

I have to guess that is a staged photo of the passengers boarding into the rear of an American Overseas Airlines, B377.

That door led to the rear cargo hold. Although possible, as at the front of the rear cargo hold was a door to the lower lounge and from the lower lounge there was a spiral staircase to the main deck ... but it seems odd to board your passengers through the cargo hold!



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineBureaucromancer From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5832 times:

It might be a real possibility for a 777 replacement, so yes, conceivable but a long way out. Assuming enough other improvements to justify a new frame a double deck twin in the 777-300/777-9x/747 size range could deal with some of the ground handling problems the 777s and A340-600s run into with length. OTOH it won't do anything about wing span, which is also increasing in just about every paper design at this point. Of course in the kind of time lines that would justify such a thing there is only going to be an increase in the familiarity with and facilities intended for very long aircraft so at the end of the day I'd say the 777 replacement could go either way; on balance it probably depends on how the A380 does. Double deck has some advantages if it's not a ground handling problem in itself, but at this point probably just complicates things unless you need an appreciable increase in size above and beyond the 747.

All that said, I wouldn't count the VLA out yet, especially in terms of a medium timeline, say 10-15 years. Yes, at the moment frequency and long thin routes are the direction things are going, but especially if fuel costs start heading up shorter distance wide body ops could very easily make a return as CASM really starts to dominate everything. Of course the kind of cost structure changes that would provoke a shift big enough to significantly affect the air frame market are going to be incredibly destructive to an industry so invested in smaller hulls, and is exactly the sort of thing liable to make new designs less palatable for everyone. A full length 747 upper deck will always be on the table as long as there are new passenger aircraft on offer, but it's a nearly 50 year old design and I have a really hard time seeing it happen.

Basically, yes, could happen, but not soon and don't count on it in any case. There are advantages to double decks, but things aren't good for VLAs right now, and if they get better new frames aren't really needed now or likely to be desired for decades. The 777 is really just too good a platform to make a white paper design in it's vicinity sensible for Boeing barring big economic shifts and an industry looking for lots of new hulls.

[Edited 2013-02-10 19:12:00]

User currently onlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5607 posts, RR: 6
Reply 30, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5755 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 28):
That door led to the rear cargo hold. Although possible, as at the front of the rear cargo hold was a door to the lower lounge and from the lower lounge there was a spiral staircase to the main deck ... but it seems odd to board your passengers through the cargo hold!

A cargo hatch with an air stair door? That seems unlikely. Maybe there were different configurations available?

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4912 posts, RR: 43
Reply 31, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5720 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 30):
A cargo hatch with an air stair door? That seems unlikely. Maybe there were different configurations available?

Yes, both the forward and read cargo holds had the same type of door.
When a belt loader was used, it was over the stairs.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineajhYXE From Canada, joined May 2011, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5485 times:

Quoting a380900 (Reply 10):
if you invest as much as Airbus did, you certainly hope to kill the 40yo competition

Just like how the A320 killed its 20 year old competition, the Boeing 737.  
Quoting a380900 (Reply 10):
I'd suggest you examine why Airbus launched the A380 in the first place and can you be really certain that prestige had no place in the equation?

Airbus launched the A380 because they believed they could make money with it. Just because individuals are interested in pissing contests like "Who builds the bigger plane?" doesn't mean the companies that make them are too.

Quoting canyonblue17 (Reply 25):
Any chance a Boeing (or Airbus for that matter) double decker could be used efficiently enough to justify them on short haul routes?

Airlines have generally found they make more money by offering more frequent flights using smaller aircraft. However, the concept of using large aircraft on short haul flights has been used somewhat (e.g. airlines utilizing 747SR aircraft).

To answer the original question, unless the BWB concept really takes off (no pun intended), the only time Boeing may consider launching a new VLA will be when the A380 needs replacement. Many aircraft manufacturers did VLA studies in the 90s and determined the market isn't large enough for two different aircraft.



Saskatchewan Roughriders, 2013 Grey Cup Champions! "GO RIDERS GO!"
User currently offlineLH707330 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 721 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5339 times:

Quoting cornutt (Reply 23):
I was about to throw in for the 377... can't help but wonder how that would have worked out if Boeing had given it turboprops instead of the 3350s.

Boeing used the PW R4360s while the Connie and DC-7 used the Wright 3350. Although the 3350 had its share of issues, the 4360 was more unreliable and had cooling issues (4 rows of 7 cylinders in a "corncob" versus 2*9 in the 3350), which is one of the reasons it didn't do well in the marketplace.


User currently offlinecornutt From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 338 posts, RR: 1
Reply 34, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5330 times:

Quoting ajhYXE (Reply 32):
However, the concept of using large aircraft on short haul flights has been used somewhat (e.g. airlines utilizing 747SR aircraft).

AFAIK, the 747SR was a special for the Japanese domestic routes. Japan is a pretty unique market with all the inter-island flying. I've heard that they did not hold up well because the basic airframe and the gear weren't meant to withstand that many cycles.


User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4912 posts, RR: 43
Reply 35, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4951 times:

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 33):
Boeing used the PW R4360s while the Connie and DC-7 used the Wright 3350. Although the 3350 had its share of issues, the 4360 was more unreliable and had cooling issues (4 rows of 7 cylinders in a "corncob" versus 2*9 in the 3350), which is one of the reasons it didn't do well in the marketplace.

Also, both the Connie and the DC-7 were offered to airlines with a turboprop version. As jets were being delivered, these versions of course, didn't sell. I don't think the B377 was ever offered as a turboprop, although of the three, it would probably have benefited the most.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineSCAT15F From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 402 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4651 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):
Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 26):
Quoting cornutt (Reply 23):
I was about to throw in for the 377... can't help but wonder how that would have worked out if Boeing had given it turboprops instead of the 3350s.

No need to wonder. The B377-SG (Super Guppy) flew for many years with Allison 501 turboprops.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLLL_...oavn8

Also, the YC-97J, which had the same fuselage size as the Model 377 passenger version and much more powerful 5700 hp YT-34 turboprops. Giving it a cruise speed of well over 400mph. Imagine the speed if it had been fitted with the final T-34 P-9W with 7600 hp!





User currently offlineSemaex From Germany, joined Nov 2009, 823 posts, RR: 2
Reply 37, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4314 times:

Quoting ajhYXE (Reply 32):
Airlines have generally found they make more money by offering more frequent flights using smaller aircraft. However, the concept of using large aircraft on short haul flights has been used somewhat (e.g. airlines utilizing 747SR aircraft).

How about we start talking Global and not North-American?
The US and Canada are certainly very unique markets, but you can not generalize the "smaller aircraft + more freqs = more money" strategy. There are numerous examples worldwide where the short-haul small-size fleet eats up money and only the 1-daily longhaul WB makes the big buck.



// You know you're an aviation enthusiast when you look at your neighbour's cars and think about fleet commonality.
User currently offlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 38, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4133 times:

Quoting piedmont727 (Thread starter):
do you think boeing will ever pull for 2 decks

This again?.....   .

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...hy-would-boeing-design-a-mid-.html



Didn't say it had to be a VLA or quad...    .

Quoting rwessel (Reply 21):
A BWB is almost certainly going to be very wide in terms of seating, and not two decks.

Twinjet or trirotor?   .....




[quote=Polot,reply=2]Been there, done that

The whalejet's ancestor.....   

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © R.A.Scholefield
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter Seemann




"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
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...
How Many Pax 747 Will Boeing Make/deliver In 2003? posted Fri Jan 24 2003 19:52:26 by Bobcat
Boeing's 747 LCF-Then New 747 Double Decker? posted Fri Feb 25 2005 09:17:42 by Singel09
How Long Until Boeing Builds A Full Double-decker? posted Sat Jan 29 2005 20:54:28 by Thrust
Why No Double Decker From Boeing? posted Fri Oct 22 2004 22:31:23 by 7E72004
Boeing Will Not Make A Bigger 717 With Greater... posted Thu Mar 13 2003 15:11:36 by Clickhappy
Will Boeing Have To Stop The 787 Line For Now? posted Sun Jan 27 2013 19:42:51 by jlbmedia
When Will Boeing Know If 787 Design Details Worked posted Sun Jul 22 2012 08:14:19 by 2175301
Why Not A Full Double Decker 747? posted Sun Jul 15 2012 19:03:10 by kl692
Why No Boeing Full Double-decker Super Jumbo posted Mon Nov 28 2011 08:00:24 by ljupco
Will Boeing Assemble 737's At GEG? posted Sat Nov 12 2011 18:19:00 by gegtim