DTWPurserBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:46 am

We have pretty well dissected the 777X and 787 to death so now I got to thinking about what a 797 would look like.

It seems that Boeing has a need for a 200-250 seat aircraft for domestic use with potential for increased range. My thinking is that it would be more of a 757 replacement than the 739.

So what does everyone think? When do you think Boeing will turn their attention forward past the existing models? It would be a huge capital investment.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
thekennady
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:00 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:53 pm

With the 739max upcomming, a 200 seat 757 replacement aircraft may not be in the running for boeing anytime soon. The 797 would be more of a niche plane that would feel the gap between the 739 and the 788. Dont know if airlines would really demand this type of plane since most of what the 757 can do is duplicated by the 739 and will be by 739max on most short and medium haul routes, albeit with less passengers and less range. Other than some niche routes, this new plane may not be a slam dunk, although i wish i was wrong.
 
DTWPurserBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:15 pm

Quoting thekennady (Reply 1):
Other than some niche routes, this new plane may not be a slam dunk, although i wish i was wrong.

You are probably correct. For those that are interested, the 757-300 is a total DOG to work on. At NW we used to call it "Satan's Bowling Alley." The 788 may fill the bill. It would not be financially viable to make a niche airplane.

Perhaps down the road Boeing will consider a total 737 replacement.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
User avatar
redzeppelin
Posts: 952
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:30 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:18 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
what a 797 would look like.

Like a 787 and E175 had a baby.  

Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if "797" never gets used. I've wondered if the next generation of Boeings will be called 8X8, both as a natural progression and as a recognition of the 787's impact on technology, not to mention A&B's recent fascination with the number 8. Don't know if they would go with 808 or something higher to start with.
 
DTWPurserBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:24 pm

IRCC correctly, the 707 got its name because it was the 707th design proposal done by Boeing's engineers. That 7-7 is iconic now.

Numbers are funny things. In Asia the number four is considered bad luck. You have to be cautious. I remember that when Boeing had the supersonic transport in their sights it was to be called the 2707.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
mark2fly1034
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:38 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:33 pm

I did the Boeing tour a few years ago and according to the tour guide Boeing already has that problem of the next number worked out and know what they would call it. I would not be surprised if the 797 ( or whatever it may be called) would be more of an MD-88 type replacement with maybe even looking at going with a UDF for the engine.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1615
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:15 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 2):
Perhaps down the road Boeing will consider a total 737 replacement.

Boeing wanted to replace the 737 with NSA already. Trouble is... airlines didn't want to wait for it. Then American got an offer for NEO they could not refuse. The rest is history....
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP OF JAROSŁAW KACZYŃSKI AND HIS PUPPET GOVERNMENT. DEMOCRACY SHALL PREVAIL.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:25 pm

Quoting Mark2fly1034 (Reply 5):
would be more of an MD-88 type replacement with maybe even looking at going with a UDF for the engine.
Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
My thinking is that it would be more of a 757 replacement than the 739.

   These are at the edges of the market. Boeing wants high volume and will concentrate on the heart of the market, accommodating the edge cases as best they can. They already cancelled the 757 once to increase 737 production capacity.

The 797 (or whatever the next airplane is) will be a 3-3 narrowbody. My guess is that it will be sized to have a high-volume variant slightly smaller than a 737-9 or A321 (199 seats all-economy), with a stretch variant getting near 757-300 territory (249 seats all-economy). The normal-size variant may have a high-MTOW, high-range version to cover the 757-200 TATL/hot/high market.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 6):
Boeing wanted to replace the 737 with NSA already. Trouble is... airlines didn't want to wait for it.

I think they will still do NSA, and it will be the next project in the queue after 777X. Offering the MAX relieved a bit of the schedule pressure but the fact is the A320 series has a better future than the 737, and they know it.
 
SkyTeamTriStar
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 2:47 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:27 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 2):
For those that are interested, the 757-300 is a total DOG to work on.

For the simple fact that the fuselage is SOO long? Is that the primary reason??
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23709
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:01 pm

IMO, the 797 will be the NSA and will replace the 737 MAX and 757-200. It will sit higher off the ground then the 737 and will have a cabin similar in width to the A320. The fuselage will come in three lengths: 34m, 40m and 46m and I think the wingspan will be 38m (same as the 757 and 2m wider than the 737) as that should still be able to fit in most any gate, but will help improve performance.
 
DTWPurserBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:02 pm

Quoting SkyTeamTriStar (Reply 8):
For the simple fact that the fuselage is SOO long? Is that the primary reason??

It is, combined with claustrophobic seating, makes it a difficult airplane to work. You do not want to be in the back galley in turbulence. I have bounced off the ceiling more than once. It is very reminiscent of the old DC-8-61/71 and -63/73's but at least the 8's had some space between the rows.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:04 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
34m, 40m and 46m

Do you think the 34 m version would sell any copies? I don't, particularly. We are already seeing this with the near-failure of both the 737-7 MAX and the A319neo.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
I think the wingspan will be 38m

Could folding wingtips be possible, if those on the 777X work out, for a folded span of 35.8 m (same as the 737W) and an unfolded span of 40-42 m?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23709
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:13 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
Do you think the 34 m version would sell any copies? I don't, particularly. We are already seeing this with the near-failure of both the 737-7 MAX and the A319neo.

I guess it depends on how many 737-7 WN ends up buying.  

Otherwise, we'll probably see 40m and 46m.



Quoting seabosdca (Reply 11):
Could folding wingtips be possible, if those on the 777X work out, for a folded span of 35.8 m (same as the 737W) and an unfolded span of 40-42m?

It could be a possibility.
 
Clydenairways
Posts: 1127
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:27 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:40 pm

It will be optimised as a 737 replacement starting at around the capacity of the 738 and growing on from there. It's performance will be optimised to give the best ecomomy at the current ranges of the 737MAX, this is the main bulk of the market so it needs to be as efficient as possible over these shorter ranges. It should also give adequate performance at the market fringes, just like the 737 today.
Physically it will probably look very much like a narrowbody 787.
I wouldn't expect any new comfort features either, Airlines will want this airframe to be designed to be all about the lowest operating costs possible.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6781
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:03 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
will have a cabin similar in width to the A320.

So then another single aisle aircraft? I thought the twin aisle concept was really gaining steam before they decided on the Max.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23709
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:06 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 14):
So then another single aisle aircraft? I thought the twin aisle concept was really gaining steam before they decided on the Max.

Going dual-aisle would add a fair bit of mass for not much benefit (loading/unloading is still going to be constrained by using a single door).
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:23 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
IMO, the 797 will be the NSA and will replace the 737 MAX and 757-200. It will sit higher off the ground then the 737 and will have a cabin similar in width to the A320. The fuselage will come in three lengths: 34m, 40m and 46m and I think the wingspan will be 38m (same as the 757 and 2m wider than the 737) as that should still be able to fit in most any gate, but will help improve performance.

I share a similar opinion    . Ive even came up with possible specifications as well (not really calculated ones, but something similar to what you have)
Please let me know... If you know this is the end of the world, Let me know... If you know the truth...
 
Yflyer
Posts: 1283
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 4:05 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:33 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 4):
IRCC correctly, the 707 got its name because it was the 707th design proposal done by Boeing's engineers. That 7-7 is iconic now.

The story I heard is a little more boring. Everything Boeing makes has a model number, even military aircraft, satellites, etc. Back in the 1950s Boeing decided to set aside model numbers 700-799 for jet powered commercial transports. Someone in marketing decided "Boeing 700" just didn't really have right ring to it, and "707" did, and the 7X7 model numbers stuck.
 
Yflyer
Posts: 1283
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 4:05 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 7:53 pm

It's too late to edit my last post, but this article on Boeing's web site confirms what I said: http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers...chive/2004/february/i_history.html
 
Wingtips56
Posts: 791
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:26 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 7:56 pm

Whatever number they settle on, isn't the next new build likely to be a "lightweight" composite like the 787? I thought I'd read Boeing had been looking at a composite aircraft to replace the 737 series, whether it turned out to be a narrow body or middle-wide body. That all got sidetracked with the 737Max response to the A32x-Neo. Too bad, or they might already be making progress on the new clean sheet design.

Just my opinion, but with Boeing's success at offering different length variations on a base product, I envision a NB that could fill both the 737 and 757 missions, with the economy and range both enhanced by the composite frame.
Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines (Retired)
 
Mcoov
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 8:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:32 pm

Quoting Yflyer (Reply 17):

This is the right story.
I'm just wondering what Boeing will use once the 7X7 series has been filled.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23709
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:35 pm

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 19):
Whatever number they settle on, isn't the next new build likely to be a "lightweight" composite like the 787?

That was the original presumption, however CFRP does not appear to offer as much weight-saving benefit for a small narrowbody compared to a large widebody. Alcoa has also developed new, lighter Al alloys. So NSA (and Airbus' NSR) may end up being Al (at least for the fuselage - they may have CFRP wings and stabilizers).
 
tjh8402
Posts: 643
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:41 pm

Quoting Yflyer (Reply 18):

That confirms what I thought I remembered, which was that even before the 707, many Boeing designations ended in 7. I would expect that after the 797, we'd move on to 807.
 
EddieDude
Posts: 6387
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:30 pm

I wish we would see, after all the members of the A350 family, the refreshed A380-800 and all the members of the 787 and 777X families enter service, a wave of next-gen aircraft with new design elements and new engine technologies. I am a huge fan of the Lockheed Martin Box Wing concept (the looped winged, twin-engined plane that does not stray too far apart from the basic shape of current planes), and would love to see L.M. or one of the existing commercial aircraft manufacturers do something like that.
Upcoming S4 0221 LIS-PDL A310-300!!!
 
jfk777
Posts: 6050
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:47 pm

Boeing's current portfolio has the 737, 747, 767, 777 and 787. The low end is well handled by the 737 Max family and the higher 400 passenger end will be handled by the 777X. The 787 after a difficult development has its sea legs in the 250 to 350 people medium to long haul. The 748 I will be dead soon, sadly. The 767 will be around a few more years but probably retired by 2020. SO what will mission is needed for a 797 ?

Another 250 - 300 seat 3000-8000 mile range jet is NOT what is needed. It could be a composite 737 replacement after 2030 since the MAX is a new plane. The 797 could a be a bigger then 777 long haul composite airplane seating 500 people with huge twin engines, this seems a more like scenario. Doubtful Boeing will make a 4 engine long haul jet again or something as large as the A380. The 2020 Portfolio will be the 737 Max, the 787 and the 777X.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6781
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:05 pm

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 24):
The 797 could a be a bigger then 777 long haul composite airplane seating 500 people with huge twin engines, this seems a more like scenario.

The A380 and 747-8i have both entered service in the last 10 years and are not exactly setting the world on fire. Why do you think Boeing needs to launch another ~500 seat aircraft?

I agree with other posters that a 737 NSA is probably the next clean sheet program.

tortugamon
 
TaniTaniwha
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:04 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:20 pm

I'm throwing my hat into the replacement Narrow Body ring. I believe the work Boeing has already put into the 'replacement' for the 737 will continue. Personally, I'm hoping for the twin aisle narrow body concept Boeing has patented but in reality, I suspect it will be something much more mundane but incredibly efficient, taking the learning's from the 787 and taking it to the next level. Carbon Fiber everywhere, electric architecture, etc. etc.
[photoid][/photoid][photoid][/photoid]
 
DTWPurserBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:21 pm

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 23):
I am a huge fan of the Lockheed Martin Box Wing concept (the looped winged, twin-engined plane that does not stray too far apart from the basic shape of current planes), and would love to see L.M. or one of the existing commercial aircraft manufacturers do something like that.

Lockheed built some of the most incredible transports. The Constellation, my personal favorite airplane of all time, was a great success. The Electra did reasonably well and was viewed as a "pilot's airplane" due to its incredible power and agility and the Tristar was well received by both passengers and crew, if not exactly a financial success.

When Boeing bought McDonnell-Douglas competition within the commercial aircraft industry in the United States effectively ended. That really is a shame. I wish Lockheed would reconsider their position and come back. It would keep Boeing on their toes, not that Airbus does not already do so. Being a sole-source does not make for great completion. I would wager that we would not see over 5,000 A320 family aircraft in service. McDonnell-Douglas could teach Boeing a few things about aircraft strength and long-term viability. Moving forward, composites seem to be the name of the game but I have to admit that I am not looking forward to the day (and it will come) that a mostly composite-built aircraft is involved in a serious accident.

IMHO the 737 is vulnerable to extinction because it essentially is the same basic wing that was on the first 737-100. Over the years Boeing has improved instrumentation and power plants but at the heart of it is the same basic 1960's airplane. I have to give credit where credit is due--the 737 is a great airplane and to think that Boeing was considering shutting down the line at one point is impossible to contemplate. But you can only stretch and rehash the same design over and over again for so many times.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:25 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 27):
it essentially is the same basic wing that was on the first 737-100.

The 737NG wing was all-new, and is arguably better than the A320 wing. The aircraft will have trouble competing with the A320 in the long term mostly because of gear height and systems.
 
flyinggoat
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:38 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:33 pm

I don't know if the 797 will be a 737 or 777 replacement. I would suspect a 737 replacement before a 777 replacement, so here are my thoughts:

797 as a 737 replacement:

-3-3 seating a bit wider than current 737.
-Three variants: 160, 190, and 230 pax.
-Higher landing gear for larger fan diameters
-GTF engines with hotter cores
-CFRP wings, possibly with folding tips
-2 wings? Probably doubtful, but I'd like to see two variants, one optimized for 2000nm flights, and the other for longer flights.
-Who knows....maybe it'll be a prop

797 as a 777 replacement:

-3-4-3 seating a bit wider than the 777x
-CFRP wings with folding tips and CFRP fuselage
-Two variants: 360 and 430 pax. Possibly a third 310 seat variant
-6 wheel MLG on the 310 and 360 pax variant, and possibly 8 wheel MLG or 6+4+6 MLG for the 430pax variant
-Twin engine

Just my opinion.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6781
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:46 pm

Personally I cannot see how they will launch a NSA while producing 737 NG/MAX at ~50/month. I would like to see them do the 200-220 two class seating 4,000nm small aircraft (single aisle or twin aisle) out of CFRP in Charleston while Renton is doing what Renton does then gradually work backwards into the 162 seat bread and butter 737 replacement market when the kinks are worked out.

Quoting FlyingGoat (Reply 29):
Three variants: 160, 190, and 230 pax.

Why would Boeing make their most popular size 737 the shrink version? That is usually the most inefficient frame of the family (787, 767, 737-100/500/700/MAX7, 772, etc.)

Quoting FlyingGoat (Reply 29):
Possibly a third 310 seat variant

Why would they make a 777 that fits in between the 787-9 and -10? Presumably those aircraft will be around for 20 years or so.

Quoting FlyingGoat (Reply 29):
6 wheel MLG on the 310 and 360 pax variant, and possibly 8 wheel MLG or 6+4+6 MLG for the 430pax variant

If the 787 needs just 4-wheel mlg, why would a 310 seat 777 need 6?

tortugamon
 
N62NA
Posts: 4069
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:10 pm

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 24):
The 2020 Portfolio will be the 737 Max, the 787 and the 777X.

And that will truly be a sad day for us spotters. Boring!!!!
How come I can't upload an avatar photo to my profile?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:48 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 30):
Why would Boeing make their most popular size 737 the shrink version? That is usually the most inefficient frame of the family (787, 767, 737-100/500/700/MAX7, 772, etc.)

The trend in sizing is upward. Coupling that with the increasing global LCC wave, I think the sweet baseline spot in the future is a frame optimized for 199 economy passengers for typical airlines. That probably means a frame just a bit smaller than a 737-9. My view is that such a frame will be the baseline NSA and there won't even be a shrink.
 
JHwk
Posts: 439
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:11 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:13 am

Quoting TaniTaniwha (Reply 26):
Personally, I'm hoping for the twin aisle narrow body concept

A while back it was stated that one problem with the 737 is the lack of container cargo handling and the impact on working regulations. A narrow widebody seems to help with this problem, maybe something along the lines of a 14-15' diameter fuselage.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
That was the original presumption, however CFRP does not appear to offer as much weight-saving benefit for a small narrowbody compared to a large widebody. Alcoa has also developed new, lighter Al alloys. So NSA (and Airbus' NSR) may end up being Al (at least for the fuselage - they may have CFRP wings and stabilizers).

Another good reason to go with the narrow widebody?
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6781
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:27 am

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 32):
The trend in sizing is upward.

No doubt about it.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 32):
That probably means a frame just a bit smaller than a 737-9.

The 900ER represented less than 6% of the sales for the past six years and that should become nearly the baseline size? There is no doubt that this frame size is gaining in popularity but that is a big jump in just 15 years time.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 32):
My view is that such a frame will be the baseline NSA and there won't even be a shrink.

In the past 15 years 70% of all 737s sold were in the 40m 160 seat 2-class format and you think it is wise to no longer even offer a frame that is that size?

I could see a 1-2m stretch of the 737-8 (42m) and a 48m '-9' but unless parking spaces change in size or folding wings are introduced I have a feeling we are looking at a 40m and 46m NSA if it is indeed a single aisle.

tortugamon
 
ghifty
Posts: 891
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:31 am

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 27):
But you can only stretch and rehash the same design over and over again for so many times.

The 737 is a derivative of the 707.. and the 707 has been around since 1958. Seeing as to how the 737 is the best selling commercial jet and the 707 is one of the first, with the 707-current timespan it really does appear that you can keep stretching and rehashing the same design and still make money. It seems like airframe performance mostly matters on OEW, wing and powerplants.

Going off of that, seeing as to just how marginal the performance difference is between the 737NG and A320 how much of an affect does the actual fuselage shape have on efficiency? Confusing, I know.. I think a better way to frame what I'm asking would be along the lines of: if Boeing chose to build a carbon-fibre 767 fuselage with next-gen wings and engines how would that compare to the 787?
Fly Delta (Wid)Jets
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:35 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 34):
The 900ER represented less than 6% of the sales for the past six years and that should become nearly the baseline size?

I think the -900ER is just a hair too big. In the end I think it will be about having the most seats you can with four FAs on board. Of course different airlines with different hard products would need different amounts of floor space for 199 seats, which is why I think the ultimate configuration will be somewhere in between 199 at 29" pitch (a 738 with an extra row and a reconfigured aft galley area) and 199 in two-class configuration (a slightly extended 739). I think in the end the baseline will be 41.5 m or so, assuming comparable space efficiency to the 737.

The "stretch" would similarly be optimized for 249 passengers, and would be 49 m or so. Folding wings would be a big help here, if they can be implemented on a narrowbody scale at a reasonable weight penalty.
 
User avatar
Braybuddy
Posts: 5971
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 8:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:42 am

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Thread starter):
What Would A 797 Look Like?

Another underwing twin.   
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:59 am

Quoting Braybuddy (Reply 37):
Another underwing twin.   

Sadly we spotters cant always get what we want.... It wont stop me from going spotting though, so I wont complain  
Please let me know... If you know this is the end of the world, Let me know... If you know the truth...
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6781
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:02 am

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 36):
I think in the end the baseline will be 41.5 m or so,

I think the Max 9 is coming in at only 42.1m which may end up being the difference of one row. .6m is a large hair  . Its sales are impressive but still only represents 30% of the orders. The UA and DL orders for the MAX 9 and 900ER are support domestically but Asia (where the growth is) has not fully come on board. If this size is so close to being the baseline for the future NSA then I think we need to see sales pick up.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 36):
The "stretch" would similarly be optimized for 249 passengers, and would be 49 m or so.

If they could start with this frame and work smaller then they may be able to get what is left over of the 757 replacement market that is not rightfully filled by the Max 9/321 NEO. While not dramatically impacting MAX 9 sales and smoothly working in the ramp up and ironing out problems before getting to the smaller core frame.

tortugamon
 
YXwatcherMKE
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 3:06 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 1:59 am

Excused my lack of knowledge here on the this but I have seen this term used before and did not know what it meant other than a Plane concept. So what does "NSA" stand for?
I miss the 60's & 70's when you felt like a guest on the plane not cattle like today
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:13 am

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 40):
So what does "NSA" stand for?

New Small Airplane
International Homo of Mystery
 
flyinggoat
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:38 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:44 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 30):
Personally I cannot see how they will launch a NSA while producing 737 NG/MAX at ~50/month. I would like to see them do the 200-220 two class seating 4,000nm small aircraft (single aisle or twin aisle) out of CFRP in Charleston while Renton is doing what Renton does then gradually work backwards into the 162 seat bread and butter 737 replacement market when the kinks are worked out.

What you describe here is almost a 757 replacement. I would love to see a 757 replacement (especially if it's a twin isle), but I don't think the market is large enough for a dedicated 757 replacement. I do, however, feel that a 797 stretched to the size of a 757 would have a better market than a 797 sized as a 737-7 replacement, especially with the CS300 on the horizon.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 30):

Why would Boeing make their most popular size 737 the shrink version? That is usually the most inefficient frame of the family (787, 767, 737-100/500/700/MAX7, 772, etc.)

Good point, but like I mentioned above, I think a 757 sized 797 will be more popular than a 737-7 sized 797. Aside from Southwest, are there any airlines ordering the 737-700 or 737-7 in large numbers? Numerous thread here on A.net suggests the economics of the 737-700 and 737-800 are close enough that many airlines are opting for the larger frame. If Boeing can keep the economics of the 160 seat 797 close to that of a 190 seat 797, it might work. That is a big IF, and I admit, you make some good points.

The other option is two different wings. One wing for a 130, 160, and 190 seat variant. Use another wing for a HGW 190 seat variant and a 230 seat variant. Frankly, I think this is the best route to go, but designing two wings will be a large expense.

Doesn't the A345/6 use a very similar wing to the A342/3, but with root extensions added? I believe the AN-225 also uses a modified AN-124 wing with large root extensions as well (and two extra engines, obviously). To save cost, perhaps Boeing could do something similar with two different wings for the 797.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 30):

Why would they make a 777 that fits in between the 787-9 and -10? Presumably those aircraft will be around for 20 years or so.

A 310 seat version would compliment the 787-10, and be larger than the current 777-200ER. Most 777-200ER operators seem to have 250-280 seats on their 777-200ER. I believe the 787-10 will be a hot plane, but it doesn't have the legs for longer trips. My hypothetical 777 replacement aircraft would offer better range and payload capabilities than a 787-10, but to be honest, the A359 would probably cover this role better.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 30):

If the 787 needs just 4-wheel mlg, why would a 310 seat 777 need 6?

My hypothetical 310 seat 777 replacement would be heavier than a 787-10 and may need 6 wheel MLG. Maybe a spread out 4 wheel MLG similar to the A359 would work.

Just my random thoughts...
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:28 am

A model in the size between the 738 and the 739 as base model, remember CS500 coming to make life harder at 160 seats?

A larger model in the 752 size. Al-Li tube CFRP wings, the base wing 36m and the 752 sized model has folding tips adding another 4m of span.

The base 752 sized model has a 787-10 approch and then a ER model for those long and thin routes. 3 aircraft in one go?
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 4296
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:37 am

IMO, what Boeing should do, is try to go for the 100-120 seat market. More of a true 717 replacement and a CSeries rival. Something with 1500-1700nmi range. The current trend of having all planes needing to have TATL range needs to end, and something needs to be done with the lower end of the 100-seat spectrum.
And for my next miracle, I'm gonna turn water into funk!
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:51 am

Considering that a "797"/NSA is at least 15 years out it is too early to speculate with any accuracy what configuration the aircraft will have. On the one hand will be the changing dynamics of the airline industry and on the other hand will be OEM/supplier technology advancements.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6781
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 4:59 am

Quoting FlyingGoat (Reply 42):
What you describe here is almost a 757 replacement.

Hopefully with smaller engines, a lighter fuse and wing, and about 50% of the operating costs and a slightly smaller capacity.

Quoting FlyingGoat (Reply 42):
The other option is two different wings. One wing for a 130, 160, and 190 seat variant. Use another wing for a HGW 190 seat variant and a 230 seat variant. Frankly, I think this is the best route to go, but designing two wings will be a large expense.

Three variants two wings could definitely be the way to go.

Quoting FlyingGoat (Reply 42):
My hypothetical 777 replacement aircraft would offer better range and payload capabilities than a 787-10, but to be honest, the A359 would probably cover this role better.

Very true.

Quoting FlyingGoat (Reply 42):
My hypothetical 310 seat 777 replacement would be heavier than a 787-10

Smaller and heavier is not the best combination in the world  . The 777-8X is only about 10% bigger than the 787-10 and has the range. I think these were positioned so close together (15% was closer to normal spread) because of the range differences. Not sure how successful the =8x will be as currently envisioned though.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 44):
IMO, what Boeing should do, is try to go for the 100-120 seat market

And watch their margins dive to single digits? I would place very large quantities of money on this not happening. They could have been in that market with de Havilland and they sold it, then they could have stayed in it with the 717 after they aquired McD but then they shut that down as well. Margins are too small and competition too tough especially when there are much easier ways to make money.

tortugamon
 
YXwatcherMKE
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 3:06 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:59 am

Well Thanks AeroWesty for the info. I can't believe that did not figure it out myself.
But if I were to do a new N/B I would go with a 200-230 seat, 2-2-2 twin isle A/C that is about 8" to 10" wider than the 737 body. Also the cargo areas are bigger (height) to hold a small containers to make loading easier and faster. 3600 to 4000nmi range. Or if they do a 200 seat then a 230/240 seat a/c then they should be 3000 nmi. and a 4000/4200nmi. range respectively. I think Boeing should stay away from to MD 80/90/717 A/C let that to the C-Series E-jets and the like.
I miss the 60's & 70's when you felt like a guest on the plane not cattle like today
 
PHX787
Posts: 7883
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:06 am

I don't think the 797 will materialize for another 20 years, especially with all of the replacement models for many current models.

I don't think the 97 either will be a 57 replacement....maybe in my opinion, it will be the final bridge between the 777 and 747. I always imagined it with 4 engines as well. I mean, they can only make the GE90 so big...
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
bavair
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:51 pm

RE: What Would A 797 Look Like?

Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:11 am

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 47):
But if I were to do a new N/B I would go with a 200-230 seat, 2-2-2 twin isle A/C that is about 8" to 10" wider than the 737 body. Also the cargo areas are bigger (height) to hold a small containers to make loading easier and faster. 3600 to 4000nmi range. Or if they do a 200 seat then a 230/240 seat a/c then they should be 3000 nmi. and a 4000/4200nmi. range respectively. I think Boeing should stay away from to MD 80/90/717 A/C let that to the C-Series E-jets and the like.

What's the advantage of going 2-2-2 over 3-3 except that you have a bit more cargo capacity, and possibly a tiny advantage on the turn around times, but you're looking at significantly higher fuel burn due to increased drag I would think. Does anyone have estimates on this?

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