User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:07 pm

 
We're Nuts
Posts: 4723
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 6:12 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:14 pm

Next on the chopping-block, the A380 (hopefully).
Dear moderators: No.
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:24 pm

Won't happen, guys. In contrast to Boeing, Airbus has always talked about real airplanes, with a real concept, not about unrealistic hot bubbles...


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
We're Nuts
Posts: 4723
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 6:12 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:27 pm

Airbus wasn't planning on a recession to pop up overnight, though. How prepared are they?
Dear moderators: No.
 
VirginFlyer
Posts: 3890
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:39 pm

We're Nuts - may I ask why 'hopefully'?

V/F
"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
 
mirrodie
Posts: 6789
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 3:33 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:47 pm

So much for JFK-SYD in under 10 hours.
Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
 
MEA
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 8:30 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:48 pm

No airlines from the US have ordered the A380, so this should have no impact on Airbus.

The A380 is going ahead with about 100 orders from various airlines. The Sonic Cruiser had no orders & minimal interest from VS & SQ only I think.

Most of the carriers that have ordered the A380 can quite easily fill these aircraft, eg:

QF - Asia/Pacific & Kangaroo routes
SQ - Asia/Europe/Australia
EK - Europe/Asia/Australia


 
We're Nuts
Posts: 4723
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 6:12 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:54 pm

This is a world-wide recession, you know.

And I say hopefully because while I have no arguments against the basic A380-100, anything larger would be foolish and probably destroy the airport system we rely upon now.
Dear moderators: No.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 4:57 pm

I don't think Airbus will rush ahead on a larger one, yet.

A shrink is a distinct possibility. The airframe was designed to be shrunk, and they'll want to fill that 744 to A388 gap.

After the A388 is done, they're gonna refocus resources on the A300/310/767/757 size range... hopefully even before.

I'm carefully saving my Mileage Plus miles for a first class trip to HKG on SQ's A380 the very first day they offer it, if I can get on.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

N
 
Al
Posts: 584
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 1999 10:28 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:01 pm

Can I respectfully request that posters to this thread stick to the topic at hand (i.e. - THE CRUISER, not Boeing, not the A380, not Airbus). If not, yet *another* thread will degenerate into a Airbus v Boeing crapola fest. We've all heard it many times over the years, and we all know who is on who's side, and who roots for which maker. Little point in re-hashing it all yet again, and ruining yet another thread.

If the report is confirmed, it's probably something that was predicted some time ago. Sort of like a new age Concorde in some ways I guess !!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy Saw a paper report a month or two ago that said the same thing, only the replacement aircraft was to be a cross between a 747 and a 777, if that can be envisioned !!!

Respectfully. Cheers/Regards. Al.
 
United777
Posts: 2196
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 8:04 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:01 pm

Yup I know a few people who work at Boeing and the official annoucment of the sonic cruiser is expected tomorrow from what I hear.

I know that the aircraft was be studied at Everett north of Seattle.
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:02 pm

According to that report the SC would be the fastest and highest flying airliner. (Not Invented Here syndrome I suppose).
Ever heard of Concorde, not that it is a template for how to do a commercially successful programme.
However, I've heard many say the SC's problem is that it would not have enough speed to make a real difference apart from the real longer-range routes.
Yet would still cost more to operate.
 
heavymetal
Posts: 4442
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:27 pm

So the future is...another twinjet. Gotcha.

There comes a point in a large corporation's existence when they transition...from 'playing to win' ...to...'playing..not to lose'. I think it's safe to say that Boeing has reached and passed that point.

 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:48 pm

and to think we could have had this....

 
skiordie
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:20 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 5:57 pm

Thanks for the photo. I can put it to my gallery of other airliners that were proposed but never built.

That list is long and another topic on it own.

Thanks.
 
Guest

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 6:03 pm

That's too bad.

Is Boeing trending down? What else have they got up their sleave when as the their designs continues to age?

A new 747 replacement? An acquisition of one of the RJ makers? Boeing/Canadair?

An A380 competitor?

They need something.

TNNH
 
keesje
Posts: 8610
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 6:05 pm

good so

and now full speed for the alternative NG 200-250 medium ranger the market was asking for in the first place.

Boeing must hurry coming up with something better before they are blown of the civil map by Airbus ....
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 6:13 pm

What else have they got up their sleave when as the their designs continues to age?

Both Airbus and Boeings designs are starting to age. As far as asthetics, a plane is now a plane ot the average person, it is just a long tube with wings on it. The A380 is just a bigger tube, and the 777 is just a larger version of the 737, or A320 or whatever, they all more or less look the same to anyone that isnt totally obsessed with aviation.

The reality, is that other than refinements, aircraft have found their general shape that works the best, hence the reason that it isnt changing all that much after all the years.

One thing that most good designers will tell you is that there has to be a point to the change, if you just make it look different, but it is still the same operationally, then what is the point in spending on all the R&D to get that ?

Bethune also said when asked about a new starter for the 737 series that reduced the buttons from 7 down to 3 "If the customer will not pay more for their ticket because of the change, then what is the point" He said that the customer in 3L is not going to pay an extra 50 buckets per flight because you have less buttons, so why bother.

Jeremy

"Everything that can be invented – has already been invented," - Mr. Charles Duell, United States Patent Office, 1899
 
MEA
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 8:30 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 6:52 pm

I have to disagree about a worldwide recession, Australia is not in recession.

Boeing has over the last few years had no direction, they need to stop focusing on variants of existing models & start pioneering like they did with the B747.
 
MxCtrlr
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 11:22 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 7:10 pm

MEA,

For Boeing to "start pioneering like they did with the B747", they need to have an airline visionary like Pan Am's Juan Trippe. If you recall, Trippe approached Boeing for the 747 idea and they balked about it initially until Trippe issued the now-famous statement, "If you build it, I'll buy it!" Boeing literally bet the company on the 747 and it paid off in spades for them. Unfortunately, the airline industry has nothing but sheep running it - all of them trying to copy Southwest. The SC and concept like it, need vision and right now, there isn't any vision in this industry.

MxCtrlr  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.  Smokin cool
DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
 
fbwless
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2000 2:07 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 7:17 pm

Artsyman,
Mr. Duell's quote is an urban legend, you can read about this here. There are many scientific areas where the researchers are waiting for a breakthrough development and aeronautics is one of these. This is why the new airplanes look just like those designed 40 years ago - there hasn't been enough development since then to enable a radical new design.

Also, Bethune is making it a bit too simple when he says that only a customer paying more can warrant an upgrade to the systems. What about increased safety or savings in training? Economy is not just earnings..
 
DeltaMD11
Posts: 1678
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 4:56 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:44 pm

Artsyman.
Also, you misquoted Gordon Bethune. Gordon Bethune has many quotes in his book that apply to this situation. He likes to call it the "Row Five Test" (not row 3).

Bethune: (Regarding when he worked for Boeing at this point in the book, talking about the Definition of Better) When I worked there, one of my responsibilities was managing a new airplane, the 737X. I once got into a short debate with some engineers who wanted to improve the design of the start control panel on the 737. They wanted to make a better panel with a better switch techonology and fewer functions. To make it work, the pilot and the co-pilot would have to punch only two buttons instead of 8 on the current model. (Talks about it costing more, referring to Herb Kelleher and WN about how they already had 200 of the 737 type, and to have to train his pilots to use a different set-up, and upping maintenence costs due to having to buy two new switches) Saying to his design team: "I think to decide that, he's going to walk down to the back of his airplane, to the passenger in row 5, and he's going to say, 'Would you give me 50 cents more for your ticket to Amarillo today because we have a better start-control panel?'

The passenger might say, 'Well, the engines started okay. And they're both running now. And it only takes a couple of more seconds to use the old panel, and it's always worked. And it's not an emergency procedure. So to be honest, no. It's not worth another 50 cents to me."

So Gordon keyed the term 'Row Five Test', and has used it in business every since-and it is one of the things that has made him very successful at CO (at cost-cutting, without losing service).

Boeing postponed the Sonic Cruiser not because the program was a failure. They closed it because right now, the more important focus is on a new 180-250 seat replacement aircraft to take over the 757/767 lines. Boeing is trying to get a sought-after product out on the market very fast (plans to have the aircraft in service by 2004/2005). The Sonic Cruiser program is not permanantly canceled. It's been postponed (indefinitely are my thoughts).

Bryan
Chat Operator Delta767


Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:49 pm

I think the point I mentioned was the same, I just didnt spend half an hour typing it all out. Row three, Row five... a bit pedantic me thinks. The other quote was correct, and I knew it was urban legend, just thought it seemed appropriate for the time

Jeremy
 
Guest

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 8:54 pm

whether duell's quote is true or not - it only serves to undermine your point jeremy.

in 1889 duell said nothing more can be invented. clearly he was wrong.

in 2002 you just said nothing more can be invented (pertaining to airplanes), clearly you are ___n_.

tnnh
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 9:04 pm

You have totally missed my point, I always laugh at how silly his point was, it is totally ridiculous what he said, that is why I included it, for a laugh !!. As far as today, I think there will be changes, but not radical ones in the near future. Eventually we may have atmosphere skipping planes, or sound barrier regional jets, but in truth the current shape of a jet makes sense, I do not see the Boeing Borg Cube on the horizon.

As I said in my post, there will be changes, but I see them more on modifications than on total restructured design. In the future perhaps this will change, but not in the near future..

Jeremy
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 9:06 pm

in 2002 you just said nothing more can be invented (pertaining to airplanes), clearly you are ___n_.

where the hell did I say that ?

Jeremy
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5006
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 9:07 pm

YESSSSSSSSS.......
At last Boeing took sense after all!! I mean, WHO wants
the slowest "ssc"??
They´ll coming up with something better (Boeing), hopefully!
We dont know if A 388 gonna be a hit, right??
 Big thumbs up
Michael Sthlm/SE
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 10:05 pm

World Wide Recession...
Is that like the World Series of Baseball?
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1577
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 10:28 pm

What Boeing knows is that we are at a point of technology transition.
Over the next few years the technology will develop enough to build non metal aircraft at an affordable cost.

Then the costs, the shape and the performance will move to a new level.
The A380 will be the last of the great new metal airplanes.

For the present Boeing is happy to get better returns on non commercial business. Airbus is well behind in this area.
This is not good for aviation enthusiasts but it is for shareholders.
As an aside I wonder how many A380 would have sold but for the heavy discounts?

It is also interesting that Airbus can only match Boeing in deliveries, despite the fact that their designs are younger than Boeings.

Ruscoe



 
keesje
Posts: 8610
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 10:49 pm


The A380 will be the last of the great new metal airplanes

A380 is not all metal. It's made of Glare. The material is built up from alternating layers of fibreglass and aluminium bonded together. Incredibly, the Glare (GLAss fiber Reinforced) composite can take loads up to 25% higher than straight aluminium. It saves hundreds of kilos off the plane's weight. Not only is Glare light and strong, but it is also damage tolerant. Unlike many carbon fibre based composites, Glare can be repaired if damaged. It's also far more fire resistant that either aluminium or other composites.

just FYI ..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1577
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 11:05 pm

Thankyou Keesje. Unless things have changed I heard only the upper fuselage surface is skinned with Glare.

I don't want to put too fine a point on it, but the fact that the A380 has a convential configuration is largely due to the fact that it is structurally metal.
It will be the best and newest, but also the last of it's era, in VLA anyway.

Ruscoe
 
keesje
Posts: 8610
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Thu Dec 19, 2002 11:20 pm

RUSCOE

as you are obviously know about materials do you think the "787" will be non ALU ?

If so "time to market" for Boeing could become too longer then they can afford ....

I think Boeing won't get too smart with the 200-250 seater ... Stenghtened new ALU composites like Glare will push development of pure composites even further back ...

Perhaps a next generation Airbus. They will have enough work going on to pay for a 10 year development period of a new generation Airliners ...
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 12:50 am

I'm still chuckling over the "Boeing Borg Cube" comment.  Big grin

Resistance is futile.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:10 am

Well, the SC had no customers as far as I know (no price tag either?), hard to
make a new plane without customers. So if B was serious about this plane they would put a price tag on it and try to sell it (Qatar and Emirates where
intrested in the SC, don´t know about other airlines?).
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:19 am

Despite wanting to see Airbus do well, I regret the SC demise.
It could maybe in time have led to an SST, despite only a Mach 2 SST being a true Concorde replacement, Mach 1.3 or more would have been better than nothing.
But the baseline SC would have to have found acceptance first, and there would not have been much of an advantage on the North Atlantic over conventional airliners, especially flying Eastwards.
A successful SC could have stimulated Airbus, post A380 development, too.
The big question will be whether Sept 11th killed the SC, or would it have failed in a market already heading towards recession anyway.

 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 3:31 am

I'm still chuckling over the "Boeing Borg Cube" comment.

Resistance is futile.

Don't encourage them, they will start on about Boeing being assimilated by Airbus..

Jeremy
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:37 am

Here's two completely opposing press reports, released the same day..TODAY!!

Japan:
http://www.bday.co.za/bday/content/direct/1,3523,1250757-6078-0,00.html

TOKYO - Struggling US aircraft maker Boeing Co. will announce in January plans for a high-speed Sonic Cruiser commercial plane currently set to be rolled out in 2008, Boeing Japan's president said Thursday.
The introduction of the 250-passenger aircraft - designed to fly 15 to 20% faster than regular planes - was delayed for modifications to help airlines hit hard by the terrorist attacks in September 2001, said Boeing Japan president Robert Orr.

"In the post 9-11 atmosphere, these guys were hit big time by cost challenges," Orr said at a reception marking the company's 50th anniversary in Japan.

"There are some of our customers who've talked to us about, ‘How can we increase fuel efficiency?" Orr said.

"And that may result in a different kind of answer than purely a speed one in the near term."

The Sonic Cruiser's roll-out has already been delayed two years from 2006 to put more technology and more efficient engines into the plane.

Boeing has said it expected to know by the end of 2002 about how many clients would commit to buying the plane, which is designed to fly at just below the speed of sound.

The aircraft, with a distinctive pair of small wings at its front accompanying a fan-shaped wingspan at its rear, would carry passengers at between 1,150-1,186 kilometres an hour.


USA

Business & Technology: Thursday, December 19, 2002
Boeing to scrap Sonic Cruiser in shift from faster to cheaper

By David Bowermaster
Seattle Times aerospace reporter

For the second time in less than two years, Boeing plans to radically alter its product development efforts as it struggles to come up with a new jet that will appeal to the world's airlines and slow the growth of rival Airbus.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Chief Executive Alan Mulally will announce tomorrow that Boeing will cease work on its proposed high-speed Sonic Cruiser and instead develop a conventional airplane that will use lightweight materials and other technologies to operate at significantly lower costs than today's commercial jets.

Mulally is expected to deliver the news at a year-end press luncheon at Seattle's Bell Harbor Conference Center, according to an airline industry executive familiar with Boeing's plans.

A Boeing spokeswoman declined to comment.

Prior to stunning the aerospace world with futuristic images of the Sonic Cruiser on March 29, 2001, Boeing had spent several years developing a stretched version of the 747 that could compete with the 555-seat Airbus A380 due to enter service in 2006.

Boeing canceled the 747X the same day it launched the Sonic Cruiser.

A similar swap will occur tomorrow, as Mulally is expected to talk up the new "super-efficient" aircraft's ability to help financially foundering airlines improve their balance sheets by reducing operating costs 15 to 20 percent.

"There are still doubts about the (Sonic Cruiser) technology, but more importantly its economics have been overtaken by events," said Richard Aboulafia, an aviation analyst with the Teal Group, a consulting firm. "Airlines are looking for a bus with wings."

Like the Sonic Cruiser, the new plane is expected to eventually replace Boeing's slow-selling 757 and 767 models, which carry 200 to 250 passengers.

Delivery date uncertain

It is not clear when the new jet would enter service. The projected delivery date for the Sonic Cruiser was 2008, but Boeing had cautioned the date could slip to 2010 depending on the pace of the airline industry recovery.

It is also not clear what level of resources Boeing can commit to any new product in the near term. On a conference call with analysts and reporters to discuss the company's third-quarter earnings, Boeing Chairman Phil Condit said the company would not have a full-fledged launch of any airplane project until late 2003 at the earliest.

Condit also has pledged to hold research and development expenditures at 3 to 3.5 percent of revenues, even as revenues go down, so Boeing can maintain its profitability during the current down cycle. That will mean a shrinking pool of money for new projects. A new airplane model could cost upwards of $10 billion to develop.

The reluctance to bet big on new projects during a downturn runs contrary to Boeing's history and could hurt the company when the economy eventually revives, according to some observers.

"The 777 came at exactly the low point of the last cycle," said Aboulafia, noting that Boeing was recruiting launch customers for the 777 during the recession of the early 1990s. "It was just perfectly positioned for the late 1990s upturn."

Boeing has been cautiously backing away from the Sonic Cruiser business model for several months, saying it will listen to customers and deliver whatever new airplane meets their needs.

When cost controls became paramount as airlines struggled to avert bankruptcy in the spring and summer, Boeing signaled that it was contemplating an alternative to the Sonic Cruiser that would travel at the same speeds as today's aircraft, but with a lower price tag and lower fuel burn.

Additionally, Walt Gillette, the Sonic Cruiser program manager, has stated repeatedly the past six months that any new plane Boeing pursues will leverage breakthroughs in materials and production processes that have come out of Sonic Cruiser research.

Nearly all of the nine Sonic Cruiser supplier partnerships Boeing had announced are with companies that have expertise developing lightweight composite materials, for instance.

Those materials are expected to play a key role in the "super-efficient" aircraft.

"The focus will be getting the weight out of the airplane, which is everything," said the airline industry executive.

Steep airline losses

The demise of the Sonic Cruiser has been anticipated by many in the aerospace industry since last year's Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The subsequent economic downturn, which triggered more than $7 billion in losses at U.S. airlines in 2001, only heightened pessimism about the project.

Airline chiefs such as Gordon Bethune of Continental Airlines and Richard Branson of Virgin Atlantic initially gushed about the Sonic Cruiser's promise to cut travel times 15 to 20 percent. By offering such speeds at costs roughly equivalent to today's 767, the Sonic Cruiser would allow airlines to make more money by charging frequent business travelers an even greater premium over coach passengers.

That was the idea, at least. But since the dot-com bust, business travelers have stayed in their offices more and, when they travel, are paying cut-rate prices. Against that backdrop, a premium product such as the Sonic Cruiser lost much of its appeal.

United Airlines is looking for ways to cut $5.2 billion from its annual budget to emerge from bankruptcy, and American Airlines CEO Donald Carty has said his airline must cut up to $4 billion per year if it hopes to survive
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 7:56 am

"Boeing postponed the Sonic Cruiser not because the program was a failure. They closed it because right now, the more important focus is on a new 180-250 seat replacement aircraft to take over the 757/767 lines. Boeing is trying to get a sought-after product out on the market very fast (plans to have the aircraft in service by 2004/2005). The Sonic Cruiser program is not permanantly canceled. It's been postponed (indefinitely are my thoughts)."

Bryan
Chat Operator Delta767

My thoughts, too. I don't think the SC is permanently dead. It's just not top priority right now. A plane with reduced operating costs WILL sell. Boeing needs to build what the airlines really want, right now. It can return to marketing the SC when things are better for the airlines.


 
747-451
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 5:50 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:47 am

Finally Boeing has come to it's senses to worry about immediate issues as opposed to pie in the sky unrealities...

But the 757/767 isn,t the problem. The 737 and 747 are the problems that need to be faced.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:57 am

That pretty sonic impossibility is something you aren't going to see flying...ever. That basic design has serious drag issues.

I like Lehpron's webpage dealing with an alternative, Sonic Cruiser type aircraft: http://www.lehpron.homestead.com/two.html

 
houstondallas
Posts: 89
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:27 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:02 am

MD-90

How can you say the 737 is a problem? Boeing sells a ton of them. Obviously, customers think they are a good aircraft. So, what's the problem?

houston
 
DeltaMD11
Posts: 1678
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 4:56 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:09 am

747-451,
Are you friggin kidding me? The 737's, 747's, and the 777's are the only thing Boeing is selling right now. Haven't had any 757 orders for almost 9 months now. And an occasional 767 order will come through. The 757/767 needs replacing sadly (happens to be two of my very fav aircraft types), but I'm sure Boeing will replace them with something even nicer.

Bryan
Chat Operator Delta767
Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:28 am

No airlines from the US have ordered the A380, so this should have no impact on Airbus.

Last I checked, Fedex is from the U.S. and has ordered the A380F.

You're only as good as your last departure.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 7982
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:22 pm

I'm not surprised that Boeing has shelved the Sonic Cruiser.

Between the fact the plane doesn't offer that much significant time savings and the fact that the plane will only carry around 200 pax conspires against its success.

I think Boeing would be better off creating a plane based on the 767 fuselage cross section but with new nose, new tail, new wing, and the latest technology engines so we have a plane capable to seating 200-250 passengers flying 7,000 nautical miles around Mach 0.87-0.88 economical cruising speed.
 
MEA
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 8:30 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:01 pm

Sorry FDXmech, I totally forgot about Federal Express. I was only thinking of passenger carriers.
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:14 am

MD-90: That pretty sonic impossibility is something you aren't going to see flying...ever.

By calling it that, you seem to be implying that it is technically impossible.


MD-90: That basic design has serious drag issues.

Boeing's charts show the Sonic Cruiser having less fuel burn per rpk than the 747-400, so I think you are just making this up. The issue at hand is that the more efficient aircraft is even more efficient, and the airlines want that.
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Sat Dec 21, 2002 4:26 am

The 737 and 747 are the problems that need to be faced. - well, this is quite correct! 737 is a great success but I don't think there can be any "NNG" family. And it will be too late to think about replacement when it stops to sell. Much more so about 747: when there is a demand on 400+ seater again (forget about A380 shrink - the Airbus superJumbo is still too big) Boeing should have something new in this market too. It can though still use basic 747 fuselage - but I believe new Boeing narrowbody must be really new.

As for the proposed "787" - if it has the 767 fuselage cross section then it loses to 330 from the very beginning (not because "2-3-2 is worse than 2-4-2" but because of cargo space) ...
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Sat Dec 21, 2002 7:24 am

"As for the proposed "787" - if it has the 767 fuselage cross section then it loses to 330 from the very beginning (not because "2-3-2 is worse than 2-4-2" but because of cargo space) ..."

Flight International magazine's recent report on the 'super-efficient' airplane concept stated that the cross-section would indeed be wider than that of the 767. I'm sure Boeing is well-aware of it's disadvantage to Airbus in this area and will correct that in the new aircraft.
 
RickB
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 3:11 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Sat Dec 21, 2002 8:30 am

I said it before in a previous thread, but Boeing really need to stick to the fuselage width of the 777 on this new aircraft if it is to carry sufficient cargo - Boeing can ill afford to introduce yet another fuselage width with a width between the 767 and 777 - it will just increase costs and delay the introduction into service of any new aircraft.

RickB



 
AvObserver
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: Boeing Scraps Sonic Cruiser

Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:22 am

Username: Rickb
"I said it before in a previous thread, but Boeing really need to stick to the fuselage width of the 777 on this new aircraft if it is to carry sufficient cargo - Boeing can ill afford to introduce yet another fuselage width with a width between the 767 and 777 - it will just increase costs and delay the introduction into service of any new aircraft."

That would be a seemingly logical and cost-effective move to base the 'Super-Efficient' airplane on the 777 airframe but no information to date indicates this-the Flight International article (preliminary information, to be sure) hinted that it would have a cross-section width between that of the 767 and 777, meaning, yes, another all-new fuselage size from Boeing. You're right, Rick, I'd be puzzled too if they did this-the 777 would be a sensible starting point for the SE and would save money, have commonality, etc. We'll have to wait for Boeing's official announcement to find out what they'll really do.




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], cheeken, goboeing, Google Adsense [Bot], hoons90, msycajun, SCQ83, zombie and 168 guests