Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (12 years 6 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1971 times:
Hey everyone. Just for fun I was thinking of sharing my thoughts on an all new Boeing line. I haven't thought of names/model numbers but I put them in different groups. Please join in! Here are my thoughts so far, and remember, these are all new aircraft.
Aircraft seating 70 - 100 - 130 passengers in dual class configuration. Transcontinental range. Basically a DC-9-10 thru MD-88 replacement.
Aircraft seating 150 - 180 - 220 passengers in dual class. Basically the 757 line with the addition of a "757-100". Circular fuselage. Up to 5,000 nm range.
Aircraft seating 250 - 300 - 350 - 400 passengers in dual class. I had some confusion on fuselage width on this group. (between 777 and A300/340) I think the A310 thru A346 type of aircraft would work best though. Up to 9,000+ nm range.
Aircraft seating 450 - 550 passengers in tri-class seating. 9,000+ nm range. OK you fellow 747 lovers out there. Here's my idea. An aircraft that retains the classic profile of the 747. The main deck would be 22.5' wide to accommodate a 3-5-3 across layout with 777 width economy seats. The upper deck would be lengthened very slightly with a cabin width of the 767.
That's what I've got so far. I'd love to hear your thoughts and ideas.
Tbonecapalbo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 6 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1928 times:
1) A group of 30-50 seater airliners in a 1 X 2 seating configuration in one class. These would be similar to the embraer / canadair regional jets in appearance. Range would be around 1000-2000 nm. These would be a good replacement for some of the smaller turboprop and regional airliners.
2) A group of 70-100 seat airliners. There seems to be a lack of a common family of airliners in this seat range. Many airlines have something along the lines of a Dash-8-400, or a Canadair regional jet at the lower end of this size range, and full sized jet liners such as the smaller 737s and A318s. Airlines seem to be heading toward regional jet-type aircraft for anything 100 seats or smaller. These would be essentially large regional jets, but with a more mainline cabin feel. Possibly 2x2 or 2x3 seating, with the provision for a two-class configuration if necessary. Range would be around 2000nm, with the option to have an extended range version for thin, point-to-point transcon routes.
3) A group of airliners similar to the A32X/737NG family. A single family of aircraft ranging from the 73G/319 to the 739/321 has proven to be very popular. In fact, I wouldn't propose anything too different from the current aircraft available in this range.
4) A group of smaller widebody airliners ranging in size from slightly larger than the 752, to around the size of the 764. Seating in coach would be 2x3x2 or 2x4x2. Seating in two classes would be ranging from around 200 to around 300, or around 180-250 in three classes. (similar to the current A300/767 series). This would be offered in both a domestic, two class configuration, and a long-haul, three-class variety.
5) A group of large, long-haul, widebody aircraft. Ranging in size from the A330/777 to the 346/747. Seating would be 3x4x3 in coach. The smaller end would seat around 300 in 3 classes with a range of around 9000nm, while the large end would seat around 450 in three classes, and have a range around 6000-7000nm.
This lineup would allow the world's largest carriers to replace all of their mainline and regional aircraft types with only 5 types (3 mainline types). This would suffice for most airlines. However, there are two specialized types that would be required for the airlines that like to have the more impressive types in their fleet:
1) A group of double decker airliners similar to the A380 series. Seating would range from 500-700 in a three-class configuration. Seating would be 3x5x3 on the main deck, and 2x4x2 on the upper deck. Range would be from 7000nm-9000nm.
2) A next-generation supersonic transport. seating would range from 100 to 150 in a 2x3 configuration. Range would be 6000-8000nm.
Cmk10 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 513 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (12 years 6 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1862 times:
I made a 787 idea, it had the body of a 767, exact same seating, 2-3-2 in coach, 2-1-2 in first and a small upper deck with 6 rows of 2-2 C class seating, far fetched I know but it was 8th grade Health class.
"Traveling light is the only way to fly" - Eric Clapton
Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 6 months 5 days ago) and read 1832 times:
I keep coming up with ideas after signing off!
The entire line would have cockpit comminality. From 70 thru 550 seats, the pilot could, at his discression, fly any of these aircraft. Engine cominality would be applied as much as possible. Also, 777 type interiors would be used throughout the fleet. Connection by Boeing too. I'll probably come up with more ideas after signing off knowing my luck.
Srbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 6 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1718 times:
Perhaps a new generation of Boeing narrowbodies that cover a wide range of seating ranges. Ditch the 717, 737, and 757 for this new program. My codemane for it would be the Boeing 1000 series.
The line up:
B1000-075: 75 seat setup (one class; mixed setup, 65) in a 3X3 layout.
B1000-100: 100 seat setup (one class; mixed setup, 90) in a 3X3 layout.
B1000-150: 150 seat setup (one class; mixed setup 135) in a 3X3 layout.
B1000-175: 175 seat setup (one class; mixed setup, 160) in a 3x3 layout.
B1000-200: 200 seat setup (one class; mixed setup, 185) in a 3X3 layout.
B1000-225: 225 seat setup (one class; mixed setup, 210) in a 3X3 layout.
B1000-250: 250 seat setup (one class; mixed setup, 230) in a 3X3 layout.
You would have a baseline design that could be lengthened and shortened to a customer's preference, which would be accomplished by adding or removing sections from the main fuselage area during the design and construction phase. Each fuselage section would have X number of seats, so building an aircraft to an airlines' own specs would be easier and would not require a new design or even a new certification process.