Ruscoe
Topic Author
Posts: 1577
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:38 pm

Another thread is running about a 737 replacement, Got me thinking about the next generation seating arrangement.

Personally, I would like to see 2-2-2, This gives every passenger a window or ailse seat. would also be quicker to load. Suppose the main drawback would be the extra 20" or so of fuselage width, and the associated weight.

Ruscoe
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:00 pm

I think the chances of that happening are somewhere between slim and none...

I think that 3-3 will remain - seeing that trials (and actual experience gained in service) have shown that even a B753, as the longest narrowbody currently in pax service, can be turned around in a reasonable amount of time, I doubt that any airlines are calling for more aisles in narrowbodies.

Regards,
Frank
Smile - it confuses people!
 
akelley728
Posts: 1964
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 1999 12:35 pm

RE: X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Wed Apr 21, 2004 11:34 pm

A 2-2-2 arrangement is not as farfetched as you might think. The '7J7' proposal of the mid to late 80's was being touted as a 727 replacement. Other than the unducted fanjet engines, the most distinguishing feature was the proposed 2-2-2 arrangement.
 
HUYfan
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 9:38 pm

RE: X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Wed Apr 21, 2004 11:44 pm

From a cabin crew point of view, a 2-2-2 layout would be a stupid idea when it comes to inflight service  Sad

Regards

Mike
 
Ruscoe
Topic Author
Posts: 1577
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Thu Apr 22, 2004 7:08 am

Well I wonder who will win this one, the passengers, or the airlines and crew.

I think that the first manufacturer to offer will have a distinct advantage.

Maybe "plastic" aircraft will negate the weight penalty to a certain amount.

With all the competition developing up to 130 seats, the next generation of 150 seaters, may very well cover a whole new bracket of 150-250 seaters, rather than 120-220 and make 2-3-2 attractive.

Just some ramblings if anybody is interested.

Ruscoe
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Thu Apr 22, 2004 7:56 am

Maybe "plastic" aircraft will negate the weight penalty to a certain amount.

Maybe, but you still have to worry about added drag given the increase in forward surface area. New aerodynamics could overcome this as well.

With all the competition developing up to 130 seats, the next generation of 150 seaters, may very well cover a whole new bracket of 150-250 seaters, rather than 120-220 and make 2-3-2 attractive.

The interesting thing about the 7E7 is that while the 7E7SR will most likely be an excellent domestic aircraft, it will nearly 300 passengers in domestic configuration! The 757 was seen as "too much" airplane when it debuted (225 pax) so it will be interesting to see how airlines take to the 7E7SR.

I think the aircraft that replaces the 737 must fill the 125-225 market rather than the 130-180 market it currently covers.
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:48 am

"2-3-2 attractive" - kinda 767-200NG? Would be interesting... I still believe 3-3 is nowhere to go. I'd wish only one thing to change - actually, to combine: the 320 width and 737 "shoulder room"...
 
sandiaman
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:53 am

RE: X Section Of 320/737 Replacement

Sat Apr 24, 2004 1:04 am

Whoever designs the next narrow body cross section would do well to consider changing passenger demographics.

30% of Americans are now considered obese. The percentage in other countries is less, but the figure is rising.

How does the airline/aircraft industry address this segment of the market? A wider 3-3 single aisle fuselage (wider even than the A320) might be well received despite the higher fuel burn.

30% --- that's a lot of people to ignore when designing an airplane.

PS. also, imagine the marketing advantage of having your own armrest in economy class. I can just imagine an airline commercial showing two passengers fighting over an armrest.






Who is online

Users browsing this forum: agill, art, AsiaTravel, ba319-131, Google [Bot], HAL, Miami, Noshow, olympic472, QANTAS747-438, RRTrent, Scorpio, skedguy, spiplane, StTim, thomasphoto60, Yahoo [Bot] and 219 guests