Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:12 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
The biggest problem for Airbus will be having suitable engines.

If Boeing goes with a full carbon 8AB MOM it will probably be fairly light with a 150T MTO. Engine thrust would be around 45,000lb.

A shortened smaller wing A330 would struggle to get down to 150T MTO. The Airbus model would ideally need more thrust. So to use the same engines the A330 version would either need to have approx 20% less range at the same capacity or be shrunk to have 20% less capacity with the same range.

The A310-400NEO, A330-700NEO or whatever you want to call it would be cheaper to develop and produce. It would keep Boeing honest and mainly compete on price.


Chances of Airbus responding with a completely new widebody aircraft are pretty small, and would be the wrong move IMO.

Instead, Airbus should stretch the A321 (as the Reuters article suggests) and put a new wing and powerplant on the entire A320/A321/A322 family. Not only the investment costs will be much lower, the new family will cover both narrowbody and MOM markets. As long as Boeing focuses heavily on the development of its new MOM aircraft, it won't be able to address the 737 successor.


It will be very difficult to cover both the narrowbody and MOM market with the same wing. The only way I see that working is if they keep the Cseries to cover the smaller end of the narrowbody market and end up with two airplane families to cover the market like what Boeing is proposing.

I think a new wing for an A320/A321/A322 family may not be a good thing. The average flight for the A320 is only about 2 hours and most airplanes aren’t flying around near MTOW. A larger wing may hurt the economics around the core 500-1500mile market where most A320s fly. That may end up extending the life of the 737 since it will be more optimized around short haul. Airbus has to be careful not to touch the core A320neo market with any stretches to go after the MOM. I see Airbus needing a new wing only for the larger versions like Keesje has been proposing and keeping the A320neo as is.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:09 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
I think a new wing for an A320/A321/A322 family may not be a good thing. The average flight for the A320 is only about 2 hours and most airplanes aren’t flying around near MTOW. A larger wing may hurt the economics around the core 500-1500mile market where most A320s fly.

100% spot on.

To stretch the A321LR and add 1000nm extra range would require a wing 30-40% larger and new engines that don't exist yet. It would need to wait until the Boeing MOM's engines are ready. This large wing could never be clipped to fit code C gates. We all remember the 787-3, heavily clipped wings never work.

To compete with the MOM and narrowbody market Airbus will need two completely separate wing, wingbox, landing gear and engine sizes. Next to no commonality besides the cockpit and fuselage diameter makes this a costly and poor option.

The only logical way forward would be to accept the A322 would have shorter range than the A321LR. Just like Boeing's Max10. You could then use one wing and the current engines. This would be able enter service before Boeing's MOM.

Currently we have:

A319 - 33.8m - 75T - 124m2
A320 - 37.5m - 79T - 124m2
A321/A321LR - 44.5m 97T - 128m2 double slot flaps

The CS500 allows the A319 to be discontinued. We can upsize to a carbon fibre wing that is 5-10% larger in area and fuel volume. The A321 and A321LR would be separated with one being a shorter range people mover and the other being a heavier long ranged model. Double slot flaps are kept for the heaviest takeoff weights

A320X - 39m - 85T - 135m2 - 4000nm
A321X- 44.5m - 85T - 135m2 - 3000nm
A321LRX - 44.5m - 105T - 150m2 - 5000nm - DS flaps
A322X - 50m - 105T - 150m2 - 4000nm - DS flaps

The 150m2 square wing in addition to the double slot flaps would have raked blended wingtip extensions that put it into code D gates. They could also fit the four wheel MLG which already exists. As the wing is larger the current 35,000lb thrust engines could be used.

You would launch the A322X first as a quick response to the Boeing MOM. It will beat it to market as the engines and fuselage already exists.

The A321LRX would then come second as a simple shrink and replace the current A321LR. Customers could simple swap over.

The carbon wing with single slot flaps and slightly shorter sharklets would then come to the lower models. It would use the lighter structure and landing gear of the A320 to form two lengths.

As the CS500 would have range well below 3000nm the A320X would sit perfectly above with more range and capacity.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:25 am

I agree a new wing for A320/321 NEO doesn’t make sense, it doesn’t seem required.

This old graphic foresses a new wing for two larger XR variants.

Image

I don’t think a NMA was discussed then, maybe Airbus would make the XR bigger winged ones larger than suggested here, if market requirements grew.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 3:26 am

I've never seen that graphic before, but it's very similar to what I just posted.

With the A319 out of the picture a derivative of the XR wing could now be used across all models.

The A321XR in that graphic would make the A321 redundant. The bigger wing would offer better lift to drag and offset the small weight difference even on short flights.

That's why doing a simple stretch of the lighter A320 to create the two smallest models would be the way to go.

The 737 already has an advantage on shorter sectors. Making a new A321 as a simple stretch of the much lighter A320 will work well.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5837
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 6:18 am

It could be used but it does not need to be used.
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1352
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:04 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
A larger wing may hurt the economics around the core 500-1500mile market where most A320s fly. That may end up extending the life of the 737 since it will be more optimized around short haul. Airbus has to be careful not to touch the core A320neo market with any stretches to go after the MOM.

The core A320neo market is absolutely not endangered. Airbus has covered it basically twice. If the A320NEO core market is served best with the original A320 design, it will simply stay in production. Any update will either make the A320 also better or just be complementary. With the CS150 and a A320.5 there are even several low hanging fruits, that could easily be done in addition to the solution that addresses the MOM.

The possibilities that Airbus has are so attractive, that IMHO Boeing should be worried about the core 737 market. There is zero headroom for the 737 to become better anymore. My forecast would be, that if Boeing launches the MOM and Airbus just adds CS150 and A320.5, the 737 market share would drop to dangerous levels. As in Boeing headquarters this possibility should be very carefully weighted, I assume that the appetite for the MOM on Boeings side will decrease and cease.

If that happens, Airbus would probably just also do nothing, because they should avoid anything that causes Boeing to react with a real 737 replacement. If you think about the market dynamics, a new real 737 replacement would be worse for Airbus than status quo. It is better having the today 60/40 lead than having to spend 15bn (because the A320 would have to be replaced then as well) just to establish 50/50 again.
 
parapente
Posts: 1989
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:24 am

Re the so called A320.5.One can see the 'tidy' logic of adding a extra -what- one row of seats to make the magic 200.But I wonder how magic it is.Yes Ryanair wanted it,but who else? Doesn't seem to be a major part of Boeings marketing drive or indeed other airlines talking about it.
For the cost and break in commonality with multi thousands of 320's is it really worth the trouble other than being 'neater'?
Have Airbus ever talked about it? Think they have bigger fish to fry personally.

In actual fact they have got two big developments coming out over the next 18 months.Firstly the totally new door arrangements that will become the new standard config' over time.It creates new/better seating options.Following closely on its heals is the Long Range version.
Don't think they will want to confuse the undoubtedly large sales drive by talking about something new/better at this point in time,clients would just wait and watch rather than 'buy'.
This is less true if you offer something different.
A 'simple' stretch of the 321 to a 322 ie 250 pax (say 29" pitch) would allow you to use the existing engines,wing and MLG but really go after all 757 (even some 767) shorter range domestic type routes and an incredibly low purchase price and operating cost.It would also be available 'now' ie 2-3 years.Something the sales team could get their teeth into.
They can always add the new (LR) wing/MLG/engines later to match any Boeing MOM move if it comes.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 4:06 pm

parapente wrote:
Re the so called A320.5.One can see the 'tidy' logic of adding a extra -what- one row of seats to make the magic 200.But I wonder how magic it is.Yes Ryanair wanted it,but who else? Doesn't seem to be a major part of Boeings marketing drive or indeed other airlines talking about it.
For the cost and break in commonality with multi thousands of 320's is it really worth the trouble other than being 'neater'?
Have Airbus ever talked about it? Think they have bigger fish to fry personally.


An A321 is a whopping 7 meters/rows longer than a A320. For reference, a 737-10 will be just 4 meters longer than a 737-8.. The -9 is in between.

On top the A321 is much heavier, more expensive.

If you want to replace a large A320CEO fleet, an A321 provides 40 more seats. Or you stick with the same size A320CEO for another 20 years. An A320 plus could offer moderate growth, 3-4 more rows ~24 seats. Offering 200 seats in a realistic non-29 inch pitch ultra slim lay out.

There are thousands of A320NEO's on order. Converting half to Plus versions for a suitable premium would IMO easily close the business case.

Only real risk, as mentioned, is that it could pull the NSA trigger at Boeing which would see it's bread & butter 737-8 being robbed of its niche. No doubt Boeing is able to build a 10% bigger, cheaper and lighter A320 like aircraft. A320 is nearly 30 years old.. That would shorten A's golden years in this huge segment.

Image

Somebody (RMAZJ ?) pointed out the A320 is pretty optimized. A 3-4 meter stretch wouldn't only reduce range but create payload range restrictions early on. The A321 wing / landing gears are available as well as suitable engine versions. An A320NEO Plus probably would become a kind of hybrid, using both A320 and A321 structural assemblies and dedicated ones.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
WIederling
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:08 pm

keesje wrote:
Somebody (RMAZJ ?) pointed out the A320 is pretty optimized. A 3-4 meter stretch wouldn't only reduce range but create payload range restrictions early on. The A321 wing / landing gears are available as well as suitable engine versions. An A320NEO Plus probably would become a kind of hybrid, using both A320 and A321 structural assemblies and dedicated ones.


The A321 wing is expensive. High lift is much more complex than on the smaller sisters.
I'd expect Airbus, if they go to a new wing, to also simplify that new design.
Murphy is an optimist
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Sat Dec 02, 2017 5:15 pm

For a A320 variant in between A320 and A321, I think we'll not see the size directly in the middle. It will either be a stretch of the A320 or a shrink of the A321, both by about the size of a single LD3-45W. The A320.5 will hold 8 or 9 LD3-45Ws.
Most likely a simpel stretch of the A321 (A322) would hold 12 LD3-45Ws.
Image
Image
Both stolen from internet.

Edit the A321 is 200pax @ 32" with standard lavatories.
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Sat Dec 02, 2017 5:52 pm

Let's also add that I think a A321XR will be about a seat-row longer, because of the larger wing and deeper wingbox.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Sat Dec 02, 2017 11:59 pm

[photoid][/photoid]
CFRPwingALbody wrote:
For a A320 variant in between A320 and A321, I think we'll not see the size directly in the middle. It will either be a stretch of the A320 or a shrink of the A321, both by about the size of a single LD3-45W. The A320.5 will hold 8 or 9 LD3-45Ws.
Most likely a simpel stretch of the A321 (A322) would hold 12 LD3-45Ws.
Image
Image
Both stolen from internet.

Edit the A321 is 200pax @ 32" with standard lavatories.


One LD3-45 is 153 cm deep. The lenght difference between A320 and A321 is 694 cm. At least a 3 meter stretch / 3 rows seems reasonable. CG optimization plays a role too.

Image

Beefing up the A320 would probably better then shrinking the A321 from an efficiency standpoint.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:02 am

Landing gear strength is determined by a combination of landing speed/sink rate and weight. If a new slightly larger but lighter carbon wing is fitted it would provide lower takeoff and landing speeds. So the weights can go up a bit without any strengthening.

Also in terms of wing root bending having weight in the fuselage itself puts more load on the wing box than having the weight in the wings.

The A321X I posted a dozen posts up would have the centre fuel tanks disabled/removed. Using only the larger wing tanks. This allows the current lighter A320 structure to be used as a stretch.

The A321LRX and A322X with the double slot flaps, stronger gear would have the centre tanks activated.

Jetstar has 180 passengers in their A320. So I added enough length for 2 more rows for the A320X.
 
Sancho99504
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:44 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:41 am

With Airbus owning a majority stake in the C-Series, they could spend a few bucks to get it to share a common type rating with the A32X family. This would give them the ability to green light the CS500, end the A320 and focus on the current A321NEO and the oft talked about A322. This would give Airbus a dominant position in the 100-250 seat market, allowing Toulouse the ability to focus on maximizing the A321 and A322 while Montreal can focus on the C-Series. The cost for all of this would probably approach $3 billion, but we'll worth it.
kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out-USMC
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 14843
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:58 am

Leeham suggesting that Airbus will have a lot more time to consider any response to NMA. Sources reporting that EIS has now been pushed back to 2027. :shock:

https://leehamnews.com/2017/12/04/boein ... 7-sources/
Officially, Boeing says the New Midmarket Aircraft (NMA, or 797) entry-into-service will be around 2024-25 if the program is launched.

LNC has learned the target date now being discussed is 2027.

This means the 737 replacement likewise slips, with EIS after 2030 instead of late next decade or in 2030.
Last edited by scbriml on Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1444
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:14 am

scbriml wrote:
Leeham suggesting that Airbus will have a lot more time to consider any response to NMA. Sources reporting that NAM EIS has now been pushed back to 2027. :shock:

https://leehamnews.com/2017/12/04/boein ... 7-sources/


That's good.

It hopefully means Boeing are re-evaluating what the CSeries acquisition means.


I'd imagine it means Boeing will make their NMA a single aisle. Along with:

- Long range wing option
- Short range wing option
- At least 4 fuselage lengths (possibly even changing fuselage diameters if they can make a common wingbox work with that)
- Lightweight undercarriage
- Heavyweight undercarriage
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:23 am

Amiga500 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
Leeham suggesting that Airbus will have a lot more time to consider any response to NMA. Sources reporting that NAM EIS has now been pushed back to 2027. :shock:

https://leehamnews.com/2017/12/04/boein ... 7-sources/


That's good.

It hopefully means Boeing are re-evaluating what the CSeries acquisition means.


I'd imagine it means Boeing will make their NMA a single aisle. Along with:

- Long range wing option
- Short range wing option
- At least 4 fuselage lengths (possibly even changing fuselage diameters if they can make a common wingbox work with that)
- Lightweight undercarriage
- Heavyweight undercarriage


That is a lot to draw from such a rumor. Boeing has over 4,000 737MAX to build, the 737 is more popular than ever and has 43% of the backlog NEO vs MAX. I doubt they have any interest working on a replacement for that plane now. I think Boeing wants to focus between the A321 and A330neo still even if there is a two year program delay.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1444
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:39 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
That is a lot to draw from such a rumor. Boeing has over 4,000 737MAX to build. I doubt they have any interest working on a replacement for that plane now


They won't.

In an ideal world, Boeing want to:
(i) build a replacement for the 757-200
(ii) build a replacement for the 757-300 (and I suppose, heading toward capacity of 767-300)
(iii) de-risk technologies for the 737 replacement
(iv) de-risk systems on the 737 replacement
(v) de-risk the production ramp up on the 737 replacement

By starting at the very high end of the single-aisle envelope, they are in a relatively low order territory (but with higher margins). That means they don't have to hit the ground like Usain Bolt!

If they can keep the wingbox attachment points common, then learned lessons from the initial long-ranged/high-capacity variants can be worked backwards into the shorter ranged meat of the market single-aisles... and almost like cars, Boeing can offer airlines their choice of some fuselage/wing/engine combinations that best meet their needs.

For me, its the logical next progression in commercial airliner production - rather than just changing a few fuselage lengths. Single aisles are at production rates higher than many niche cars.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1444
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:47 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
That is a lot to draw from such a rumor.


It is. I'm probably wrong but hopeful.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:59 am

Amiga500 wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
That is a lot to draw from such a rumor. Boeing has over 4,000 737MAX to build. I doubt they have any interest working on a replacement for that plane now


They won't.

In an ideal world, Boeing want to:
(i) build a replacement for the 757-200
(ii) build a replacement for the 757-300 (and I suppose, heading toward capacity of 767-300)
(iii) de-risk technologies for the 737 replacement
(iv) de-risk systems on the 737 replacement
(v) de-risk the production ramp up on the 737 replacement

By starting at the very high end of the single-aisle envelope, they are in a relatively low order territory (but with higher margins). That means they don't have to hit the ground like Usain Bolt!

If they can keep the wingbox attachment points common, then learned lessons from the initial long-ranged/high-capacity variants can be worked backwards into the shorter ranged meat of the market single-aisles... and almost like cars, Boeing can offer airlines their choice of some fuselage/wing/engine combinations that best meet their needs.

For me, its the logical next progression in commercial airliner production - rather than just changing a few fuselage lengths. Single aisles are at production rates higher than many niche cars.


I think that is the ideal world for Airbus, not Boeing.

When you said 4 fuselage lengths on a narrowbody, I assumed you believed they were going for a 737 replacement. Every indication from Boeing is that they want to make a widebody, so I don’t understand why people on this website keep assuming it will be a narrowbody. Making it a narrowbody and 757 sized makes it easier for Airbus to compete with a stretched A321. I think Boeing also wants to go after the A330neo, so I don’t see a narrowbody coming or how a program delay increases the probability of it being a narrowbody. I don’t think multiple fuselage diameters on the same platform is cost effective.
 
Eyad89
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 12:12 pm

scbriml wrote:
Leeham suggesting that Airbus will have a lot more time to consider any response to NMA. Sources reporting that EIS has now been pushed back to 2027. :shock:

https://leehamnews.com/2017/12/04/boein ... 7-sources/
Officially, Boeing says the New Midmarket Aircraft (NMA, or 797) entry-into-service will be around 2024-25 if the program is launched.

LNC has learned the target date now being discussed is 2027.

This means the 737 replacement likewise slips, with EIS after 2030 instead of late next decade or in 2030.



Could it be because of the timing of newer engines development?
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5837
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 12:25 pm

Well it would give them a good 10 year advantage over the MAX and NEO, which the plane will need.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1444
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 12:47 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
I think Boeing also wants to go after the A330neo,


Boeing just spent about $20-30B USD going after the A330!?!?! (Indeed, they have probably put out $50-60B USD and are hoping to claw half that back down the line.)

What on earth would make you think they want to revisit that?


A 7-abreast MoM will be dead on, or shortly after, arrival. No amount of "composite/elliptical/new tech" pixie-dust can affect the fundamentals that inevitably lead to that conclusion. So Boeing are reduced to two choices (in economy):

(i) 3+3 in 6-abreast
(ii) 2+4+2 in 8 a-breast.

The 787 is 8-abreast (although most run it as 9) and has been around since 2007.
The 737 is 6-abreast and has been around in one form or another since 1966.

If Boeing are for launching a new 8-abreast about a decade after they launched another 8-abreast, at massive costs to the company, then its a shocking admission of just how wrong Boeing got the top level requirements of the 787 and how bad their 2000-2005 strategic decision makers were when they mapped out the Yellowstone Project (that or they failed to keep their minions on plan and allowed themselves to be sidetracked by the argument of "if we make it a few inches wider, we can squeeze 9 in and win on CASM").
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1444
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 1:13 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
When you said 4 fuselage lengths on a narrowbody, I assumed you believed they were going for a 737 replacement.


Eventually, **very** modified derivatives would become the 737 replacement.

Initially, though, it'd be something like (i) the 757-300 in fuselage and (ii) an ~58m stretch (total aircraft length) of the ~54m baseline, with an MTOW of around 130 tonnes and a wing area of ~185 sqm.
One is the long range MoM, the other the high capacity MoM, swapping range for payload.

Down the line, derivatives at 49m length, 44m length and 40m length would be released with wing areas of ~130 sqm (MTOW 80T) & possibly a TE-extension variant of ~135 sqm (MTOW 90T). Different engines (same family), different undercarriage. Same cockpit, same systems, possibly narrower fuse diameters. Same production systems (i.e. out of autoclave composites and likely Al-Li fuselage).


Newbiepilot wrote:
Making it a narrowbody and 757 sized makes it easier for Airbus to compete with a stretched A321. .


The initial models would be beyond the capabilities of the A321 (without a big re-wing).



I'll freely admit, its not perfect and is somewhat vulnerable to an Airbus counter-effort, but unfortunately, this is the corner Boeing have backed themselves into by not renewing the 737 properly and instead going with the NG. At some point, they are going to have to bite a big sour bullet and renew the 737, or risk sliding into irrelevance in the narrowbody market as Comac and Irkut get up to speed.
 
mat66
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 1:34 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
A 7-abreast MoM will be dead on, or shortly after, arrival. No amount of "composite/elliptical/new tech" pixie-dust can affect the fundamentals that inevitably lead to that conclusion
Amiga500 wrote:
I'll freely admit, its not perfect and is somewhat vulnerable to an Airbus counter-effort, but unfortunately, this is the corner Boeing have backed themselves into by not renewing the 737 properly and instead going with the NG. At some point, they are going to have to bite a big sour bullet and renew the 737, or risk sliding into irrelevance in the narrowbody market as Comac and Irkut get up to speed.


Those two assessments, which I totally agree with, are in my opinion the reason the 797/MOM is not launched yet. I am actually beginning to doubt it will be launched at all. Boeing is screwed either way. I could be dead wrong but then there is still the question of the costs of developement and size of the market.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 1:40 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I think Boeing also wants to go after the A330neo,


Boeing just spent about $20-30B USD going after the A330!?!?! (Indeed, they have probably put out $50-60B USD and are hoping to claw half that back down the line.)

What on earth would make you think they want to revisit that?


A 7-abreast MoM will be dead on, or shortly after, arrival. No amount of "composite/elliptical/new tech" pixie-dust can affect the fundamentals that inevitably lead to that conclusion. So Boeing are reduced to two choices (in economy):

(i) 3+3 in 6-abreast
(ii) 2+4+2 in 8 a-breast.

The 787 is 8-abreast (although most run it as 9) and has been around since 2007.
The 737 is 6-abreast and has been around in one form or another since 1966.

If Boeing are for launching a new 8-abreast about a decade after they launched another 8-abreast, at massive costs to the company, then its a shocking admission of just how wrong Boeing got the top level requirements of the 787 and how bad their 2000-2005 strategic decision makers were when they mapped out the Yellowstone Project (that or they failed to keep their minions on plan and allowed themselves to be sidetracked by the argument of "if we make it a few inches wider, we can squeeze 9 in and win on CASM").


I have posted this many times on this very thread that I think the 7 abreast dead on arrival cabin width is a complete myth and cabin width significance is way exaggerated on this forum. I think that logic is coming from posters like Keesje who actively try to discredit the MOM proposals.

The 787 targeted longer missions for the A330, but there is still a decent number of A330s being used on routes under 3000 miles where the 787 doesn't compete particularly well. A new airplane with smaller wing optimized around lower weights could erode the high capacity regional market that the A330 has success in.
 
morrisond
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:00 pm

If Airbus was to put the Wing and Engines from the A321 on the A320 or A320.5 with the A321LR's MTOW - what kind of range could they get out of it?

Or is it's Fuel Capacity so restricted that the range wouldn't be any more than the 321LR that to go farther you would have to use up even more LD3-45 positions in the belly for fuel making it a really bad idea.
Last edited by morrisond on Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 6124
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:52 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I think Boeing also wants to go after the A330neo,


Boeing just spent about $20-30B USD going after the A330!?!?! (Indeed, they have probably put out $50-60B USD and are hoping to claw half that back down the line.)

What on earth would make you think they want to revisit that?


People talk about 20-30 billion USD, but there are the development cost and the deferred production cost. If we assume 15 or 20 billion USD development cost, than we have to add 30 billion deferred production and unamortized tooling and other non-recurring cost. So the hole dug was quite a bit deeper than most think.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 6124
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:54 pm

morrisond wrote:
If Airbus was to put the Wing and Engines from the A321 on the A320 or A320.5 with the A321LR's MTOW - what kind of range could they get out of it?

Or is it's Fuel Capacity so restricted that the range wouldn't be any more than the 321LR that to go farther you would have to use up even more LD3-45 positions in the belly for fuel making it a really bad idea.


The A321 wing does not carry more fuel than the A320 wing. One of the properties of a new wing would be to store more fuel. It does also not help a lot to raise the MTOW of the A320, again were do you store the additional fuel.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1444
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:11 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
I have posted this many times on this very thread that I think the 7 abreast dead on arrival cabin width is a complete myth and cabin width significance is way exaggerated on this forum.


How many airlines run the 787 in 8 abreast compared to 9 abreast?

How does the CASM comparisons to A330 look when calculating at 8 and calculating at 9 abreast? Consider that the comparison from 6 to 7 is much worse as you need to carry an aisle (even if its 2 smaller aisles) and you see how it just doesn't add up.

I don't want to be demeaning but, unfortunately your belief it is "a complete myth" is reflective of a lack of knowledge depth on the subject matter. Run the numbers yourself comparing any realistic 7-abreast cross section to 6 or 8 (if you want to use an elliptical fuselage, then you need to include the extra floor cross-beam weight to stop the floor buckling under pressure loads). Your giving up ~5% fuse wetted area per passenger to 8-abreast (~10% to 6 abreast), your internal floor efficiency is ~5% worse than 8-abreast and ~10% worse than 6-abreast. Those fundamental numbers cascade through both drag and weight - they simply aren't recoverable against a comparative technology product.

No one in here who is what you'd deem a SQEP, is saying the 7 abreast is a good idea. Indeed, the others whose opinions I'd listen to are saying the opposite.


Newbiepilot wrote:
The 787 targeted longer missions for the A330, but there is still a decent number of A330s being used on routes under 3000 miles where the 787 doesn't compete particularly well. A new airplane with smaller wing optimized around lower weights could erode the high capacity regional market that the A330 has success in.


That may, or may not, be true.

For arguments sake, we'll say it is. But, even if it works, its a massive investment in money into a very dead end project that can* only ever serve a relatively small niche in the market.


*if it develops a capability above this niche, then its likely to be overbuilt (aka overweight) to the point of being not superior enough to justify its existence in the first place.

Doing it as 8-abreast is such a tight box Boeing are starting in. Doing it as 7-abreast is bat-sht mental. Doing it as 6-abreast and the beachhead to a new 737 replacement makes much more sense.
 
Eyad89
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:14 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I think Boeing also wants to go after the A330neo,


Boeing just spent about $20-30B USD going after the A330!?!?! (Indeed, they have probably put out $50-60B USD and are hoping to claw half that back down the line.)

What on earth would make you think they want to revisit that?


A 7-abreast MoM will be dead on, or shortly after, arrival. No amount of "composite/elliptical/new tech" pixie-dust can affect the fundamentals that inevitably lead to that conclusion. So Boeing are reduced to two choices (in economy):

(i) 3+3 in 6-abreast
(ii) 2+4+2 in 8 a-breast.

The 787 is 8-abreast (although most run it as 9) and has been around since 2007.
The 737 is 6-abreast and has been around in one form or another since 1966.

If Boeing are for launching a new 8-abreast about a decade after they launched another 8-abreast, at massive costs to the company, then its a shocking admission of just how wrong Boeing got the top level requirements of the 787 and how bad their 2000-2005 strategic decision makers were when they mapped out the Yellowstone Project (that or they failed to keep their minions on plan and allowed themselves to be sidetracked by the argument of "if we make it a few inches wider, we can squeeze 9 in and win on CASM").


I have posted this many times on this very thread that I think the 7 abreast dead on arrival cabin width is a complete myth and cabin width significance is way exaggerated on this forum. I think that logic is coming from posters like Keesje who actively try to discredit the MOM proposals.

The 787 targeted longer missions for the A330, but there is still a decent number of A330s being used on routes under 3000 miles where the 787 doesn't compete particularly well. A new airplane with smaller wing optimized around lower weights could erode the high capacity regional market that the A330 has success in.



That’s the thing that I don’t get.

If 797 is to carry about the same number of passengers as 787-8/9 with a lower OEW and smaller wings, does the saved fuel here really justify investing at least $10-15 billions into designing a clean sheet plane?

What CASM improvent should the 797 achieve over 787 in order to make it worth the new design investment? If CASM improvement isn’t that big, wouldn’t Boeing and airlines be better off by lowering the price of 787 rather than spending $15 billions to design a brand new 797?
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:14 pm

.
I have the feeling Airbus might not wait until 2027,
to sell a derivative making a ton of money without competition.

Why wait for Boeing :confused:

What about 2022-23 ? It seems engineering will be sitting on their hands
and free cash flow ( ;) ) is everywhere.


Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:00 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I have posted this many times on this very thread that I think the 7 abreast dead on arrival cabin width is a complete myth and cabin width significance is way exaggerated on this forum.


How many airlines run the 787 in 8 abreast compared to 9 abreast?

How does the CASM comparisons to A330 look when calculating at 8 and calculating at 9 abreast? Consider that the comparison from 6 to 7 is much worse as you need to carry an aisle (even if its 2 smaller aisles) and you see how it just doesn't add up.

I don't want to be demeaning but, unfortunately your belief it is "a complete myth" is reflective of a lack of knowledge depth on the subject matter. Run the numbers yourself comparing any realistic 7-abreast cross section to 6 or 8 (if you want to use an elliptical fuselage, then you need to include the extra floor cross-beam weight to stop the floor buckling under pressure loads). Your giving up ~5% fuse wetted area per passenger to 8-abreast (~10% to 6 abreast), your internal floor efficiency is ~5% worse than 8-abreast and ~10% worse than 6-abreast. Those fundamental numbers cascade through both drag and weight - they simply aren't recoverable against a comparative technology product.

No one in here who is what you'd deem a SQEP, is saying the 7 abreast is a good idea. Indeed, the others whose opinions I'd listen to are saying the opposite.


Newbiepilot wrote:
The 787 targeted longer missions for the A330, but there is still a decent number of A330s being used on routes under 3000 miles where the 787 doesn't compete particularly well. A new airplane with smaller wing optimized around lower weights could erode the high capacity regional market that the A330 has success in.


That may, or may not, be true.

For arguments sake, we'll say it is. But, even if it works, its a massive investment in money into a very dead end project that can* only ever serve a relatively small niche in the market.


*if it develops a capability above this niche, then its likely to be overbuilt (aka overweight) to the point of being not superior enough to justify its existence in the first place.

Doing it as 8-abreast is such a tight box Boeing are starting in. Doing it as 7-abreast is bat-sht mental. Doing it as 6-abreast and the beachhead to a new 737 replacement makes much more sense.


We discussed this in the Boeing thread. Here's a quote from that thread:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1374685&start=50

Revelation wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I think figuring out what payload to optimize the wing and engine combination for is the big challenge.

I think what you're writing is going right over the heads of most of the posters here.

It bears repeating, with some emphasis:

Newbiepilot wrote:
Airliners.net spends a lot of time talking about cabin width. A lot of casual aviation fans don't see much more than the interior of an airplane and a paint scheme from afar. I think that might be why there is so much discussion on width of the cabin and efficiencies from 6, 7, 8 etc abreast seating and 17inch vs 18 inch wide seats. What else are you going to think about while on a long flight sitting in economy? Not as many people pay close attention to the exact geometry of the wing, how many spoilers there are, if the flaps are double slotted and how the wing high lift devices work at low speeds to maximize payload.

In the bigger picture, the fuselage structure is just 10-15% of the entire airframe weight. The added weight of a 7 abreast cabin vs 6 abreast is going to be very small. The engineers can optimize the length, width and diameter of the fuselage for the number of passengers they intend to carry. There is lots of flexibility and shorter fuselages have some positive features as well as narrower fuselages.

What I think really maters is payload and that depends on size of the wing and engines chosen. The 787 wing is 3 times the size of the 737 and the engines have almost 3 times as much thrust. That is where there is a huge gap. Splitting the difference in wing area with a 2500 sq ft wing and engines with 50k lbs thrust could allow a smaller version to have close to the range of a 767 and a larger version to have less range but very low CASM on missions under 2500 miles.

A MTOW in the 250-350K range could open up a lot of sales opportunities for the Asian market. The Asian market that we have today barely existed when the A300 and A310 were designed (Beijing's airport had 12 gates when the A300 entered service and now has over 100). The result is that there are A330s, 787s, and 777s being used on flights under 2000 miles all across Asia. These airplanes have overpowered engines and too large of wings to be efficient in this segment compared to a clean sheet design. Even without step changes in engine technology and optimized wing and engine combo could sell very well.

I think we probably will see a widebody design so that the airplane can have enough capacity to compete against an A330neo flying regional flights between the Middle East and India or regionally in East Asia between destinations like SIN, HKG, TPE, PVG, PEK, CAN, ICN, NRT, KIX, HND etc. The Japanese airlines will have a plane better suited for their short haul market while US carriers will have a lower capacity version best suited for point to point transatlantic and Hawaii.


I think Airbus is going to have to compete with a small widebody that has lower acquisition and operating costs and capacity than the A330neo that will pretty well optimized for short to medium high capacity flying. Airbus will also have to compete with an airplane that is larger than the A321, but with much more range. An A322 may have difficulty unless it has new wing.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 25817
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 5:58 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
I think Airbus is going to have to compete with a small widebody that has lower acquisition and operating costs and capacity than the A330neo that will pretty well optimized for short to medium high capacity flying.


Unlikely to happen as the market space doesn't warrant two clean-sheet programs.

Airbus will also have to compete with an airplane that is larger than the A321, but with much more range. An A322 may have difficulty unless it has new wing.


A322 with a new wing is more likely, see at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... SKBN185101

Saying:

Airbus’s so-called A321neo-plus-plus would be rolled out if Boeing does go ahead with plans for an all-new plane seating 220-260 passengers. It would involve a new carbon-composite wing to make the biggest Airbus single-aisle jet cheaper to fly.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 25817
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:03 pm

keesje wrote:
.
I have the feeling Airbus might not wait until 2027,
to sell a derivative making a ton of money without competition.

Why wait for Boeing :confused:

What about 2022-23 ? It seems engineering will be sitting on their hands
and free cash flow ( ;) ) is everywhere.



If Airbus launches early, we may see a repeat of what happend in 2010 (Boeing launching the 737 MAX instead of clean-sheet 737 replacement).
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:11 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I think Airbus is going to have to compete with a small widebody that has lower acquisition and operating costs and capacity than the A330neo that will pretty well optimized for short to medium high capacity flying.


Unlikely to happen as the market space doesn't warrant two clean-sheet programs.

Airbus will also have to compete with an airplane that is larger than the A321, but with much more range. An A322 may have difficulty unless it has new wing.


A322 with a new wing is more likely, see at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... SKBN185101

Saying:

Airbus’s so-called A321neo-plus-plus would be rolled out if Boeing does go ahead with plans for an all-new plane seating 220-260 passengers. It would involve a new carbon-composite wing to make the biggest Airbus single-aisle jet cheaper to fly.


I didn't say there would be two clean sheet programs. I am envisioning two models of a new airplane from Boeing. The shorter one with more range competes against the A321LR on medium haul (transatlantic) and the longer one with less range competes against the A330neo on short haul (regional flying within Asia).
 
WIederling
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:18 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
If Airbus launches early, we may see a repeat of what happend in 2010 (Boeing launching the 737 MAX instead of clean-sheet 737 replacement).


Only there is no NG around to pimp, is there?

IMU 767 PAX rebirth floated is underpinning for MOM/NMA/XYZ just around the corner. Maybe some one at Boeing found out customers balked at the NSA offer because it was in reality too far out and no bridge visible over the void.
see that the 767 rumor was started just ahead of Boeing being more open about project EIS having to go further into the future.
Air Berlin buys more 787 4 days ahead of the damning NTSB battery report. Method gets a bit state?
Murphy is an optimist
 
packsonflight
Posts: 337
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 2:55 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 7:38 pm

Obviously Boeing has a hard time closing the MOM buisness case, or/and for some reason they are moving the NSA forward.

Standby for Sonic Cruiser like cancelation of the MOM project, to coinside with the launch of the NSA
 
JoergAtADN
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:01 pm

scbriml wrote:
Leeham suggesting that Airbus will have a lot more time to consider any response to NMA. Sources reporting that EIS has now been pushed back to 2027.


I don't that this means more time to consider for Airbus, instead I think it means more development to do for Airbus.

If Boeing needs 3 years more time, this means they think, more new technology must be put into the NMA, to get an edge on the A321neo. Than the response means more work for Airbus - in other words a clean sheet design instead of a rewinged A321plus-plus. And this would mean at least 3 years additional development work for Airbus.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:14 pm

packsonflight wrote:
Obviously Boeing has a hard time closing the MOM buisness case, or/and for some reason they are moving the NSA forward.

Standby for Sonic Cruiser like cancelation of the MOM project, to coinside with the launch of the NSA


What I keep hearing is they are slowly and methodically coming up with a new plane concept. Nothing seems to indicate they are abandoning the project. They keep adding people to the project

http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/20/news/co ... index.html

If it will take two more years than initially projected that either gives Airbus an advantage to beat Boeing to the market with A321 or A330neo updates or that the new airplane will be more innovative and possibly harder for updated older designs to compete. I’m not sure which scenario is more likely.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1444
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:53 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
We discussed this in the Boeing thread. Here's a quote from that thread:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1374685&start=50

Revelation wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I think figuring out what payload to optimize the wing and engine combination for is the big challenge.

I think what you're writing is going right over the heads of most of the posters here.

It bears repeating, with some emphasis:

Newbiepilot wrote:
Airliners.net spends a lot of time talking about cabin width.

In the bigger picture, the fuselage structure is just 10-15% of the entire airframe weight. The added weight of a 7 abreast cabin vs 6 abreast is going to be very small. The engineers can optimize the length, width and diameter of the fuselage for the number of passengers they intend to carry. There is lots of flexibility and shorter fuselages have some positive features as well as narrower fuselages.

What I think really maters is payload and that depends on size of the wing and engines chosen. The 787 wing is 3 times the size of the 737 and the engines have almost 3 times as much thrust. That is where there is a huge gap.


No, no, no, no.

You are not getting it. Either of you.

Yes, a 7-abreast design focused in on carrying 275 passengers 4000 nm will be better than the current A330neo or 787. Yes, it will also be by default better than the A321, as it simply cannot do that payload.

But, it is not better than a single aisle also designed and sized to carry 275 passengers 4000 nm. That is the bit you two aren't getting. The fuselage of that single aisle can be shrunk and then it can carry the same amount of passengers 4500-5000nm.

Even worse, with that 7-abreast design will go no further than carry (for example) either (i) 275 passengers 4000 nm or (ii) 250 passengers 4500 nm. Its a dead-end development. By comparison, starting with a single aisle platform allows Boeing to reuse a whole truck load of the technology in the 737 replacement. As I mentioned, if they can make common wingbox attachment points, then they could potentially modularise the thing.


Path 1.
Boeing build a 7-abreast MoM and release as two aircraft family. Airbus counter with a rewinged A322 with fuselage extension. They are competitive in range and capacity against the shrink of Boeings MoM, but cannot match the capacity of the stretch of Boeings MoM. With a single aisle being lighter by default, the A322 has lower trip costs and CASM. Since airlines are unlikely to order both Boeing family members, but most will have single aisles so the A320/321 is already quite likely to be present reducing risks, do you think Boeing don't stand to lose more than 25% of the market to the upgrade (particularly if Airbus can price low due to lower development costs)? At which point, where is Boeing's return on investment?

Path 2.
Boeing build a narrowbody MoM and release as a 797-600 (275 pax 4000nm) and 797-500 (250 pax 4500 nm). Airbus counter with the same A322 development. But since it doesn't have a new Al-li fuselage, it isn't lighter and thus loses on trip costs and CASM. Boeing make clear the 797 family will replace the 737 family and will have much commonality in maintenance procedures and type ratings. Even if Boeing split more of the immediate market with Airbus' A322, they have probably shortened development time of the 737 replacement by 3-4 years, de-risked much of it and got airlines on board. So the overall return on investment would be much higher.


Boeing might strike gold with a MoM if it somehow is in some magical zone where airlines want thousands and Airbus cannot place an A322. But if they pursue that route, it'll be on very shakey foundations - indeed, even if it ends up being the right decision, it would get there on unsound reasoning.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:26 pm

I don’t get why people are convinced it will be 7 across rather than 2-4-2 which seems much more likely.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:34 pm

bigjku wrote:
I don’t get why people are convinced it will be 7 across rather than 2-4-2 which seems much more likely.


I think it could be either. I am just arguing that I think Boeing can optimize the fuselage around the capacity needs that the airlines want and get out of the mindset that only narrowbodies are the solution up to 275 seats.

Cabin width is not a constraint for Boeing. It is a variable that they get to use when optimizing the airplane. Cabin width is a constraint for Airbus since they are looking at stretching the existing A321, which is why I think some people are busy trying to convince everyone that a narrowbody is the best solution since it is the only realistic option for Airbus. I’m not seeing much rotation angle, flap configurations, tail skids, bending moment, load study, empennage dimensions, landing gear height/weight/density, length vs width comparisons, inclusion of longer wire runs, fuel lines, hydraulic tubes, etc in the analysis coming from those saying that narrowbodies are the best design up to 275 seats. I keep seeing anecdotal comments about impact of a second aisle and/or pictures of A321 stretches.

Airbus has to build a 6 abreast plane if it is based on the A321 whereas Boeing can choose whatever width is best optimized for the capacity they are designing for and if a narrowbody is the best option for a 797, then that is most likely what it will be. It may also be 7, 8 or 9 abreast. People far smarter than me will decide what is best. I don’t claim to be an expert, I am questioning those who past as if they are and have already decided that narrowbodies are more efficient at these capacities.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10329
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:49 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
If Airbus launches early, we may see a repeat of what happend in 2010 (Boeing launching the 737 MAX instead of clean-sheet 737 replacement).


Maybe that is already happenjng. Airbus completing a design, discussing with a few large, discrete airline customers. While the other guys closely dissemilate 6,7,8,9 abreast options, commercial trade-offs, long term market needs, business models, working groups to fully understand what the airlines really need and in the end appear to mainly listen to themselves. To find out the airlines refuse to wait, Airbus sold 1000 and they need to launch an alternative 2 years ago.

Speculation ? Yes. It happened to the NSA/MAX, 737-9/10, SC/787 and 777x though. Including the crowd loyal agreeing with Boeing, dismissing everybody else. Untill Boeing publicly changed their mind / progressively finetuned their offerings. :duck:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 16649
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:09 am

scbriml wrote:
Leeham suggesting that Airbus will have a lot more time to consider any response to NMA. Sources reporting that EIS has now been pushed back to 2027. :shock:

Maybe they can use the extra time to find a Chief Technical Officer that the "French elite" can stand to work with? :biggrin:
The gun is NOT a precious symbol of freedom
It is a deadly cancer on American society
Those who believe otherwise are consumed by an ideology
That is impervious to evidence
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 1672
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:53 am

A modestly tight 8 abreast would also allow an economy plus 7 abreast, and an American first class domestic 6 abreast. JetBlue might love it. WN would do the 8 abreast with a little extra leg room.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 284
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 3:20 am

I thought we all came to the agreement that Boeing's MOM would be a tight 8ab?

With the same cabin length that provides 88% the capacity if the 9ab 788. The longest MOM member would be shorter, so at most 85% capacity of the 788. Then the shorter length MOM's would probably be 65% and 75% capacity of the 788. That's clearly half way between a 737-10 and 787-8. So 8AB isn't too wide.

Saying the 797 is Boeings second attempt at killing the A330 is drawing a long bow. The 787 beats the A330 in nearly every way. Sure, a very low purchase price can bring the A330 up to par of the 787 on short flights but I consider that very niche.

Most of the A330neo orders would be because the 787 has a 5 year backlog of orders and they already operate A330ceo.

A short/medium range 8AB 797 is not an admission of failure of the long range 9AB 787. They cater for completely different markets. The 787 is a sales success and will sell 2000+ frames easily.

The 797 could easily sell 2000 frames by simply taking the top 5-10% of the narrowbody market. There are so many short thick routes.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6640
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:10 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
packsonflight wrote:
Obviously Boeing has a hard time closing the MOM buisness case, or/and for some reason they are moving the NSA forward.

Standby for Sonic Cruiser like cancelation of the MOM project, to coinside with the launch of the NSA


What I keep hearing is they are slowly and methodically coming up with a new plane concept. Nothing seems to indicate they are abandoning the project. They keep adding people to the project

http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/20/news/co ... index.html

If it will take two more years than initially projected that either gives Airbus an advantage to beat Boeing to the market with A321 or A330neo updates or that the new airplane will be more innovative and possibly harder for updated older designs to compete. I’m not sure which scenario is more likely.


Still feels to me like Boeing are having a hard time finding a sweet spot that is big enough to justify the investment.

The project office says they're serious about MOM, but that doesn't mean they'll do it just for the hell of it.

Rgds
 
astuteman
Posts: 6640
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:35 am

RJMAZ wrote:
I thought we all came to the agreement that Boeing's MOM would be a tight 8ab?

With the same cabin length that provides 88% the capacity if the 9ab 788. The longest MOM member would be shorter, so at most 85% capacity of the 788. Then the shorter length MOM's would probably be 65% and 75% capacity of the 788. That's clearly half way between a 737-10 and 787-8. So 8AB isn't too wide.

Saying the 797 is Boeings second attempt at killing the A330 is drawing a long bow. The 787 beats the A330 in nearly every way. Sure, a very low purchase price can bring the A330 up to par of the 787 on short flights but I consider that very niche.

Most of the A330neo orders would be because the 787 has a 5 year backlog of orders and they already operate A330ceo.

A short/medium range 8AB 797 is not an admission of failure of the long range 9AB 787. They cater for completely different markets. The 787 is a sales success and will sell 2000+ frames easily.

The 797 could easily sell 2000 frames by simply taking the top 5-10% of the narrowbody market. There are so many short thick routes.


I suspect most readers think MOM is going to be a tight 7ab with limited to nil cargo space - because Boeing have told us that is what they think it is going to be.

I really struggle to understand why, if a tight 8ab was the answer to a market that is so big, we haven't already got a 767NEO.
The market seems to suggest that there is no space for such a plane.
The market preferred the A330 over the 767 - no reason to suggest that NEO's would be different.
The market also preferred the 787 over a 767NEO - the 787 started off at 767 size, but the airlines demanded that it got bigger.

I think the MOM gap has existed, and still exists for a good reason - there is a space where it is better and more convenient to either stretch the legs of a narrowbody, or abuse a widebody (a proper one). Either option allows airlines to plug the gap with mainstream volume products that have the economics and flexibility to do everything else the airline wants to do, without requiring another family.
Has this gap grown large enough to put a dedicated small widebody in?
I think the jury's still out on that.
I'm not saying it won't happen, but I don't think it's the slam-dunk some seem to think, and the recently announced delay looks like a behaviour that supports this.

Reality also suggests that despite "beating the A330 in nearly every way", the 787 has not killed off the A330, as large parts of a-net expected it to.
You already posit two reasons why the A330 will continue - availability and incumbency, although I don't think availability is as big an advantage as it once was. Price is a third.
The A330NEO is a very fine aeroplane, and however the 787 beats it, it does not beat it by enough to "kill it", not in the way the 77W did to the A340NG.
The A339 seems to have similar operating costs to the 787-9. The A338 seems to be a tad more expensive to operate than the 787-8, but in a niche which is either saturated or not required by the market any more

I don't think the 797 will kill the A330NEO either.
If as you say, the 787 caters for a different market, then by definition so does the A330 NEO.
And frankly, the gap, if any, between the 787 and A330NEO is small enough that anything that does "kill" the A330NEO will damage the 787 pretty badly too.
I don't see it.

Rgds
 
dare100em
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:05 am

astuteman wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
I thought we all came to the agreement that Boeing's MOM would be a tight 8ab?

With the same cabin length that provides 88% the capacity if the 9ab 788. The longest MOM member would be shorter, so at most 85% capacity of the 788. Then the shorter length MOM's would probably be 65% and 75% capacity of the 788. That's clearly half way between a 737-10 and 787-8. So 8AB isn't too wide.

Saying the 797 is Boeings second attempt at killing the A330 is drawing a long bow. The 787 beats the A330 in nearly every way. Sure, a very low purchase price can bring the A330 up to par of the 787 on short flights but I consider that very niche.

Most of the A330neo orders would be because the 787 has a 5 year backlog of orders and they already operate A330ceo.

A short/medium range 8AB 797 is not an admission of failure of the long range 9AB 787. They cater for completely different markets. The 787 is a sales success and will sell 2000+ frames easily.

The 797 could easily sell 2000 frames by simply taking the top 5-10% of the narrowbody market. There are so many short thick routes.


I suspect most readers think MOM is going to be a tight 7ab with limited to nil cargo space - because Boeing have told us that is what they think it is going to be.

I really struggle to understand why, if a tight 8ab was the answer to a market that is so big, we haven't already got a 767NEO.
The market seems to suggest that there is no space for such a plane.
The market preferred the A330 over the 767 - no reason to suggest that NEO's would be different.
The market also preferred the 787 over a 767NEO - the 787 started off at 767 size, but the airlines demanded that it got bigger.

I think the MOM gap has existed, and still exists for a good reason - there is a space where it is better and more convenient to either stretch the legs of a narrowbody, or abuse a widebody (a proper one). Either option allows airlines to plug the gap with mainstream volume products that have the economics and flexibility to do everything else the airline wants to do, without requiring another family.
Has this gap grown large enough to put a dedicated small widebody in?
I think the jury's still out on that.
I'm not saying it won't happen, but I don't think it's the slam-dunk some seem to think, and the recently announced delay looks like a behaviour that supports this.

Reality also suggests that despite "beating the A330 in nearly every way", the 787 has not killed off the A330, as large parts of a-net expected it to.
You already posit two reasons why the A330 will continue - availability and incumbency, although I don't think availability is as big an advantage as it once was. Price is a third.
The A330NEO is a very fine aeroplane, and however the 787 beats it, it does not beat it by enough to "kill it", not in the way the 77W did to the A340NG.
The A339 seems to have similar operating costs to the 787-9. The A338 seems to be a tad more expensive to operate than the 787-8, but in a niche which is either saturated or not required by the market any more

I don't think the 797 will kill the A330NEO either.
If as you say, the 787 caters for a different market, then by definition so does the A330 NEO.
And frankly, the gap, if any, between the 787 and A330NEO is small enough that anything that does "kill" the A330NEO will damage the 787 pretty badly too.
I don't see it.

Rgds


I'm not sure this is really the case. The facts ATM speak for themselves. The A330neo had a moderate start and since then not much. That may change or may not change - we'll know probably in about a year or two. Beside Delta - which got deep discounts when rumours are true - there are very few if any BlueChip Customer for the A330neo. With the 787 going to 14/month changes are not zero that the A330neo hasn’t that much future.

So "killing" may be a little exuberated - it just send the A330 on life support ;)

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos