N79969
Topic Author
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 1:29 am

I like the 'can-do' attitude that comes through from Boeing:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/134687003_7e7boeing01.html
 
BlatantEcho
Posts: 1820
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2000 10:11 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 1:42 am

a hint of the Boeing of years past. I like the can do, "kick airbus' ass" (no offense to Airbus fans) attitude.

It's healthy competition, and maybe the boys of the Northwest can give Airbus a run for their money.

I love aviation.


George
They're not handing trophies out today
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 1:57 am

"common airplane systems and common cockpits"

Hmm.. sound familiar.. anyone?
Step into my office, baby
 
Marcus
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2001 5:08 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 2:00 am

Very familiar.......I just hope we don't see another link to some news article in the future were ex MDD execs what to get their way.
Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 2:06 am

Didnt Boeing at one point say the common cockpits didnt really saved that much money to operators? Is it me or this article sound like an acceptance that they have to play catch up?

Hey the first step is to accept something, then you do something about it. Hopefull that will happen
Step into my office, baby
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 9078
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 2:34 am

Hey the first step is to accept something, then you do something about it. Hopefull that will happen

agreed Mt99.

My only worry is that it is a bad time to do the investments. Shrinking business put aside a lot of usefull aircraft. Second hand values for these aircraft puts pressure on any business case.

On the other han´t Boeing can´t wait much longer... Airbus has already taken over the #1 position and will strenghten this in the next 5 years .....
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
ScooterTrash
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 10:39 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 2:50 am

But they'd be significantly cheaper for airlines to buy, maintain and operate because of a common streamlined, heavily-outsourced manufacturing process...

This is an important quote. It will be interesting to see how the labor unions at Boeing look at greater outsourcing on the 7E7 product. No doubt they will fight outsourcing large components (like the wing) tooth and nail.
 
bobrayner
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:03 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 3:38 am

There seem to be a few distinct strategy ideas blended in there; it would be nice to see more detail.

There's no shortage of pundits, of course, but FWIW I'd say their product lineup needs massaging, rather than completely rebuilding.

At the moment the 737 is (deservedly) selling in large numbers, but the rest of the sales sheet is almost blank despite having competent, fresh designs. Starting a whole new range of planes from a blank page, with a completely new production paradigm, will require a lot more time and investment before it produces anything saleable. They would be able to thrash Airbus in 2010 if it succeeds, but how will they cope in the meantime?

Boeing are still proving their ability to produce lots of tantalising samplers of faraway technologies (the phantom works website always has some eyecandy), but somebody really should stop daydreaming and start the design & build process, or just wave a magic wand to make the 767 & 777 more attractive to customers.  Big grin
Cunning linguist
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 4:00 am

or just wave a magic wand to make the 767 & 777 more attractive to customers.

Last I checked, the 777 was the leader in its market... and the USArmed Forces had all but waved that wand for the 767
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
bobrayner
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:03 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 4:18 am

(repeat post, sorry)

Having thought about it over a cup of tea  Smile I'm convinced there's more meat in this, and that news article is only giving us glimpses of some issues.

Extensive use of advanced materials would mean fewer, larger parts. Large subassemblies would be shipped in and snapped together
This really sounds like a push to use technologies pioneered elsewhere in the Boeing empire; improved design & production for large composite structures, and cunning technologies for joining and forming composites.
Perhaps the c17 tail redesign was such a success (cheaper, simpler, lighter, and faster to produce) that they want to try exactly the same thing with large chunks of airliners.  Smile
Cunning linguist
 
jbangert
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 2:35 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 6:14 am

It looks as if Boeing has learnt something from Airbus: planes family, compatibility, tie-up with suppliers, not to mention the fuselage diameter substantially identical to that of the A 330/340 allowing for the preferred 2-4-2 seating arrangement in economy and for the effective use of cargo containers.
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2435
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 6:44 am

A new approach like this is definitely needed for Boeing to continue competing effectively with Airbus, particularly in cost reduction. Boeing needs to streamline its' entire production process to get costs down, hopefully it will be able to sidestep the unions on outsourcing, a necessary part of the new discipline. Boeing must be able to match or beat Airbus on price, as well as deliver outstanding product in order to gain back or even hold onto market share. The unions will have to conceed on this, it's necessary for Boeing's survival in the commercial airliner business.
 
LMP737
Posts: 4933
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 7:20 am

Mt99:

Yes it does sound familiar, the 757 and 767.  Smile
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
heavymetal
Posts: 4443
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 7:46 am

and the USArmed Forces had all but waved that wand for the 767

It's thinking like that that has this country in trouble.

You know as well as I do BOEING waved its' magic political wand in an absolutely disgusting display of corporate welfare.....a deal, by the way, which is far from done and PROMISED to be killed by a collection of House & Senate heavyweights led by Senator John McCain.

We live in age when we congratulate ourselves on devising new & better shennanigans to keep the balance sheet looking profitable....paying no heed whatsoever to our ingenuity in actual creation.

I foresee a time when Boeing designs and builds the 7X7.....the latest, most hi tech, most cost effective standard twinjet family in the world. I think the first hundred or so will just be hitting the world's airways when Airbus, or some Euro-Russian conglomorate.... perfects the Sonic Cruiser idea that got axed through an amazing lack of vision by Boeing, build aircraft a quarter to a third faster and making the 7X7 obsolete before its' 5th birthday.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 8:51 am

You know as well as I do BOEING waved its' magic political wand in an absolutely disgusting display of corporate welfare.....

Any why not? The the technique works very well for Airbus  Insane



a deal, by the way, which is far from done and PROMISED to be killed by a collection of House & Senate heavyweights led by Senator John McCain

If you have that much faith in anything McCain says... I really dont know what to tell you  Laugh out loud
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
CX Flyboy
Posts: 6056
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 6:10 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 10:56 am

When companies come out with smarmy cocky comments like that it just makes you want them to fail. I fly a Boeing plane and I love it. I don't want to fly an Airbus at all, however when I read comments like the ones in the article, all high and mighty, I cringe. How can you finally figure out that the way forward is the way your competitor has been advocating for years and years, then fob it off, as your great idea thats going to wipe out the competition. What cheek.
 
cloudy
Posts: 1613
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 3:23 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 11:11 am

You know as well as I do BOEING waved its' magic political wand in an absolutely disgusting display of corporate welfare.....a deal, by the way, which is far from done and PROMISED to be killed by a collection of House & Senate heavyweights led by Senator John McCain.
-----

The 767 is a better pick than the A330 for the tanker role due to its smaller ground footprint and many other factors, according to the Pentagon. The lease deal is because the Pentagon does not have the money to buy outright and because they want to keep some flexibility.

The corporate welfare is not in the 767 order. It is in the higher than market price that would be paid. The government ought to be able to extort a killer deal out of Boeing for an order like this in times like these. But they havn't done this. The government is paying prices that would have made sense four years ago but not today. That is where the corporate welfare comes in.
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 11:22 am

I agree with Cx flyboy,

Suddenly Boeing trumpets ideas that Airbus have pioneered and implemented for 20+ years (commonality, advanced materials), as if it is something brand new that will create a huge advantage for Boeing. Especially since they have been spending the last 20+ years explaining how unimportant such things are.

I don't know wether to call it laughable or tragic.

Boeing has great talent and expertise. That's what makes it so sad that most of their efforts seem to have been moved from engineering to public relations lately.
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 1:51 pm

""common airplane systems and common cockpits"
Hmm.. sound familiar.. anyone?"

"Very familiar.......I just hope we don't see another link to some news article in the future were ex MDD execs what to get their way."

Yes, 737-600, -700, -800, -900.
777-200, -300
757-200, -300, 767-200, -300.
737-100, -200
737-300, -400, -500

And now 7E7-100, -200, -300.

Guess what, Boeing's been doing that for decades... It's called an aircraft family and other manufacturers have successfully copied the idea.
I wish I were flying
 
CX Flyboy
Posts: 6056
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 6:10 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 3:02 pm

Jwenting,

Boeing has done it a little, but nowhere near to the extent Airbus have taken it. We had pilots in Cathay that were cross qualified on A320s, A330s and A340s. You could have pilots that fly the A319/A320/A321/A330-200/A330-300/A340-200/A340-300/A340-500/A340-600. Boeing isn't even close except with the 757/767, and even then, can they fly the 767-400?
It isn't so much the fact that one manufacturer is better than the other, it's the attitude that Boeing has. They're arrogant and cocky about it and that just pisses me off. It doesn't matter if their product is better or not. It's the attitude.
 
MD-11 forever
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:15 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 3:04 pm

@Jwenting, when you say:
"Yes, 737-600, -700, -800, -900.
777-200, -300
757-200, -300, 767-200, -300.
737-100, -200
737-300, -400, -500

And now 7E7-100, -200, -300.

Guess what, Boeing's been doing that for decades... It's called an aircraft family and other manufacturers have successfully copied the idea."

I agree with you on that, but guess what, Airbus not only copied the idea, but improved it.....
Also, I agree with CX_flyboy, that it's a bit a sour grape strategy that Boeing goes. What makes them so sure to "kick Airbus's butt"? The plane isn't flying yet, not to think about reached the performance targets that they set. Also, I remember that they said once that the engines are accountable for the largest share in efficency inprovement....... Who thinks that AI can't adapt those engines to their planes as well and have a benefit?

Last but not least, I really hope that Boeing succeeds to build those family, as competition always stimulates the business!

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

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 4:25 pm

Who thinks that AI can't adapt those engines to their planes as well and have a benefit?

Well, for starters, I'd say the lawyers who'll be working on the exclusivity contract...  Laugh out loud
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
MD-11 forever
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:15 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 4:34 pm

"Well, for starters, I'd say the lawyers who'll be working on the exclusivity contract... "
----------------------------------

Who thinks that any engine manufacturer, which are all struggling to make some money, would agree on that? Provided indeed the engines as a whole are "protected" by an exclusivity agreement, I don't think you can stop any technology swap to the other products............

In my opinion, those kind of agreements are not a sign of confidence in the "superiority" of your product as a whole...........

Cheers, Thomas
 
SQ325
Posts: 1274
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:54 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 4:43 pm

If we pull this off, we'll ruin Airbus. We'll reinvent the whole business," said one senior technical employee. "

Megalomania
Airbus still is the better product and with one new production line Boeing will be far away from ruining Airbus!

It is like saying Swiss is going to ruin Lufthansa
 
na
Posts: 9211
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 6:28 pm

It´s sounds like turning Mercedes into Toyota. Horrible outlook. Such a family of generic jets will certainly help to loose my interest in aviation. Boring skies ahead
Boeing might not be the best on the field of economic production right now with their very diverse product family, yes, but this sounds bad, and overall completely leaves the top end of the market to Airbus.
 
dragogoalie
Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 3:58 pm

Re:

Fri May 02, 2003 6:46 pm

Hey now, you can bash boeing, you can bash airbus...but dont start bashing the people who made my car. Thats personal...you dont mess with a man's car  Big grin

There she is: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1231801

--dragogoalie-#88--
Formerly known as Jap. Srsly. AUSTRALIA: 2 days!
 
na
Posts: 9211
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 7:02 pm

O yeah, "a man´s car" is a wasp´s nest. Let´s say turning a Mercedes E-class into a Corolla then. I don´t think anyone with some taste and market knowledge can be really entusiastic about a Corolla.
 
bobrayner
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:03 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Fri May 02, 2003 7:11 pm

Hmm.

I'll try to compress my rant into a few words  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Boeing and Airbus both have their own respective strengths and weaknesses in how they build planes. Now, if Boeing keep their strengths (and only scatter production lines according to economic common sense rather than political expediency), but also learn to play the Airbus game of composites and commonality, then it's fair to assume that by 2010 Boeing planes would be way ahead of the competition.

But in the meantime, they have to sell enough 737s (and 7e7s and soft deals on tankers) to pay the rent, and Airbus isn't going to idly sit around waiting for Boeing to innovate; they'll have their own plans...
But I'll admit airbus are less capable of rapidly making big organisational changes.
Cunning linguist
 
dragogoalie
Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 3:58 pm

Re:

Fri May 02, 2003 7:20 pm

hehe, sounds much better NA  Big grin

--dragogoalie-#88--
Formerly known as Jap. Srsly. AUSTRALIA: 2 days!
 
Greg
Posts: 5539
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:11 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sat May 03, 2003 4:20 am

Not to have a totally contrary view..but Airbus responds fairly quickly to market demand (maybe not so much quickly...as accurately). More than anything else I think the 332 was their wake up call (Boeing was SO sure this was their market).

The war will be won on a single factor: who can produce the aircraft at the lowest cost. Most analysts will agree. All other factors will largely remain the same since each have the same technology available.

As immensely proud of Boeing as I am...and a shareholder, I concede that in all likelihood Airbus is winning the war on cost.

This is the single factor that must be addressed first before any other initiatives are launched.

If Boeing is going to become a consortium (why not?), they move forward and get it done--whith the single focus of driving down develpment and manufacturing cost.
 
rj777
Posts: 1554
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 1:47 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sat May 03, 2003 7:37 am

Anybody know when the final design is going to be released? I can't wait to see the imaginary liveries.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 9078
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sat May 03, 2003 8:06 am

It seems necessary all labor intensive work is outsources to countries with lower labor costs.

Agree with Greg, 332 seems to become a best seller like the 767 was before. Im afraid Boeing customers like Delta, BA and (UA) and (AA) cant wait another 6 years before buying bigger Airbusses.

Boeing with 7E7 will step into a market that is by then dominated by Airbus.

Dont be surprised if Airbus introduces improved 330 series aircraft just 2 years ahead of the 7E7. New engines, slightly bigger then 7E7 (A330-250 ?)and reduced maintenance requirements ..

Lets hope Boeing will stay a serious contender. Its a healthier situation for the market.


"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
LMP737
Posts: 4933
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sat May 03, 2003 9:07 am

Keesje:

What kind of aircraft are you referring to when you say "bigger Airbusses"?

Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2435
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sat May 03, 2003 9:51 am

"All other factors will largely remain the same since each have the same technology available."

"Dont be surprised if Airbus introduces improved 330 series aircraft just 2 years ahead of the 7E7. New engines, slightly bigger then 7E7 (A330-250 ?)and reduced maintenance requirements .."

No. Airbus will not be able to compete with the 7E7, technologywise, right away because Boeing will use a lot of new technology derived from Sonic Cruiser R&D. Boeing will make sure all of that technology, including engines, remains proprietary, unavailable to Airbus. Airbus will have to do its' own R&D to garner similar improvements for the A330 and that won't happen for awhile with its' hands full with the A380. As it stands, the A330 won't be able to compete with the 7E7's low operating costs without major improvements. It'll happen but not 2 years before the 7E7's EIS. For awhile, Airbus will have to fall back on fleet commonality and more sweetheart pricing deals to move A330s as the 7E7 quite significantly undercuts its' operating costs. Such modifications for the 330 will be so substantial, it might well warrant a largely new design-a major new program, rather than merely a new derivative. Coming on the heels of A380 expenditures, Airbus may really have to pull some major strings to get the financing, not that they can't, given their cozy arrangements in that regard.  Big grin



 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8029
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sat May 03, 2003 9:31 pm

I think the big question about Airbus with future A330 variants that will compete against the Boeing 7E7 design is will Airbus fund the design of a new wing (e.g., lighter weight and lower drag design for faster cruise speeds) for the A330.

An A330-200 with such a new wing (let's call it A330-600) will probably increase the economic cruise speed of the A330 to Mach 0.85 and possibly increase the max fuel range from 6,600 to 7,000 nautical miles. I'm sure at least both LH and AF want such a plane to fly less busy long-range international routes while maintaining as much commonality with the A330-200/300 models to keep support costs down.
 
L.1011
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:46 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sat May 03, 2003 11:21 pm

Lets face it. Boeing is going to kick Airbus's ass with the 7E7 and we all know it. It wouldn't surprise me if the 7E7 is more of a medley of Boeing's best tech from all sectors rather than completely new tech. Boeing has a big edge in all the technology its developed for military products. And its the F-22 tech thats going to ruin 'Bus.
 
travellin'man
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 1:55 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sun May 04, 2003 12:03 am

I think that for Boeing to revamp their line, and in effect, build three planes instead of six, or perhaps even one plane in different sizes, is very interesting. Like one shoe in diferent sizes, to over-simplify.

If that were physically possible, they could meet any customer's needs. Customer gives foot size, customer gets shoe! It seems generic, but that's the way of modern business; just look at containerization on ships, which has transformed a colorful industry into the boxiest, most boring thing imaginable. But it works.

If Boeing does push this full revamp, the next move is to go to radically different designs that offer major improvements in efficiency, such as the BWB. Airbus won't be able to afford the miniscule improvements that tube and wing design currently provide, and the companies will both tire of boasting of single digit performance percentage increases over each other. That's splitting hairs after a while (already strating to be!)
It is not enough to be rude; one must also be incorrect.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 9078
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sun May 04, 2003 7:20 am

Lets face it. Boeing is going to kick Airbus's ass with the 7E7 and we all know it..... Boeing has a big edge in all the technology its developed for military products. And its the F-22 tech thats going to ruin 'Bus

Thank you for this enlightening insight.

Would be great, a stealthy, thrust vectoring, terrain following Mach 2 airliner at the gate ...

 Big grin
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
L.1011
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:46 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Sun May 04, 2003 7:23 am

I know Keesje-wouldn't it be great?  Big grin
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 9078
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Mon May 05, 2003 12:46 am

Yeah great, however a unpracticle for the crew at the gates..

"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
L.1011
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:46 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Tue May 06, 2003 6:03 am

LOL  Laugh out loud Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaahazhahaahahahahahahaahah
 
cloudy
Posts: 1613
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 3:23 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Tue May 06, 2003 2:44 pm

If Boeing does push this full revamp, the next move is to go to radically different designs that offer major improvements in efficiency, such as the BWB. Airbus won't be able to afford the miniscule improvements that tube and wing design currently provide, and the companies will both tire of boasting of single digit performance percentage increases over each other. That's splitting hairs after a while (already strating to be!)
-----

From what I've read that is true. Airbus admits that most of the economic savings from the A380 will be derived from the inherent efficiencies of a large size - not from the savings possible with a new airplane.

Boeing admits that almost half of the 7E7 improvement will be from engines and not from airframe advances.

In fact - most of the advances of the 777/A340/A330/737NG generation over the DC10/MD11/A310/737 generation is not due to improved airframe design or construction. The lion's share is due to improved engines. Computers that carefully control the engines and sometimes the flight controls in order to conserve fuel in flight also play a role. In widebodies, going from 3-4 engines to 2 helps a bit. Improved airframes have given a little but they are not as important as the above-mentioned factors.

Perhaps the BIG claim that Boeing will be making for the 7E7 is not the supposed 20% increase in efficiency. It is the claim that a significant share of this improvement will come from improvements in the airframe itself. It claims to be able to this while still maintaining a conventional wide-bodied twin configuration. That is a tall order. The new materials and design techniques Boeing is porting over from the Sonic Cruiser program must really be something special.......
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Tue May 06, 2003 3:25 pm

Airbus admits that most of the economic savings from the A380 will be derived from the inherent efficiencies of a large size - not from the savings possible with a new airplane.

Airbus has said that the savings relative to the 747 are one third efficiency of size, one third engines, and one third aerodynamics.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 9078
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Tue May 06, 2003 5:00 pm

One would nearly think the 7E7 is the plane to beat now.

However it is not.

All I have is seen beautifull pictures & bold predictions.

Developing new materials & technology tends to be very expensive.
Who is paying the bill for this, Boeing, the airlines ?
 Sad

Don't be surpriced if this administration stows away the holy free market ideology and jumps in to save the day ...

Say ... 200 7E7 tanker/freight KC135 replacements ?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
bobrayner
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:03 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Tue May 06, 2003 6:56 pm

Developing new materials & technology tends to be very expensive

Boeing already have some excellent technologies that have yet to be applied to commercial aircraft.
(think I mentioned them in some other thread...)

Better composite materials, better methods for forming and machining these composites, better design methods to make the most of the composite structures. Any metal components they hang on to could benefit from (incremental) improvements in their understanding of metallurgy (and grain structure, and behaviour under stress, and...) as well as friction stir welding...

Some of the earliest details about the 7E7 production process hint that at least 3 or 4 of these will be employed.

Who is paying the bill for this, Boeing, the airlines ?
A lot of the bill has effectively been paid by the other Boeing divisions who already pioneered these.
Cunning linguist
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Tue May 06, 2003 7:35 pm

Well the KC-135s are getting old (although the re-engined ones surely won't be gotten rid of for years), and they're not as capable as the KC-10. Personally I think that tanker and AWACS 767s are a good idea.
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Wed May 07, 2003 1:54 am

An A330-200 with such a new wing (let's call it A330-600) will probably increase the economic cruise speed of the A330 to Mach 0.85 and possibly increase the max fuel range from 6,600 to 7,000 nautical miles

I don't have the numbers off-hand but isn't the max econ cruise speed of the a330 around .78 right now? That'd have to be a MAJOR wing redesign...seems almost not worth it. I don't even think the 737NG's got that kind of increase (correct me if I'm wrong).
I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
 
jbangert
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 2:35 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Wed May 07, 2003 6:35 am

You are right, Jbirdav8r: the 737NG's normal operating speed is Mach .785 agains .745 for the 737Classic. The corresponding starting point for the A330-200 is Mach .82 so .85 does not seem so unrealistic with a new wing.
 
Sonic
Posts: 1505
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2000 3:10 am

RE: 7E7- Not One Plane But Three (maybe)

Wed May 07, 2003 8:22 am

According to that article, it wouldn't be one family, but three familes using same cockpit and other things, something between A340/A330 and 757/767. Each of the families would have several planes as far as I undertsand. It is said that first family (787?) will change 717 and 737, second (7E7?) will change 757 and 767, while the third (797?) will change 777 and 747. This is an example how it could be:

787 (short/medium range narrowbody, twinjet):
787-200 ~100 seats
787-300 ~130 seats
787-400 ~160 seats
787-500 ~190 seats
probably there would be possibility for 787-100 with 70 or so seats "if market would need that".

7E7 (medium/long range widebody, twinjet):
7E7-200 ~220 seats
7E7-300 ~260 seats
7E7-400 ~300 seats
also probably there'd be possibilities for 7E7-100 and probably even for 7E7-500.

797 (long/very long range widebody, could be doubledecker, probably also twinjet, could be quadjet)
797-200 ~350 seats
797-300 ~400 seats
797-400 ~450 seats
probably possibilities for 797-500 and even -600 to compete against A380...

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