Guest

Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:14 am

Look to the boeing site! its an incredible new design, i cant find any more words for this awesome bird..

just look to the latest news releases..
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:28 am

"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:30 am

I'd bet that this is probably the transition aircraft between the "7" series and the B.W.B.
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
teahan
Posts: 4992
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:18 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:31 am

Hey,



What do you think? I need to digest it!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Kind Regards,
Jeremiah Teahan
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
 
alitis
Posts: 233
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 11:20 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:36 am

The tail looks very much like the SR-71!
 
mandargb
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:48 am

Yep,
For last couple of days there had talks on the net about this. Looks like finally the new is out from Boeing.

This picture and the news resembles the talks that were on.

They were something like this
0.95 Mach, delta winged.


Bye the way from schematic it looks like 2 engined : so can we guess about 300 PAX or less?

This long range means we will have across globe (half way across the world) flights in about 15 hours?

Also wings look to too much on the aft side of the fuselag.
Will this be a issue of wing strike on takeoff / landing?

May be this is just the artists's rendering of the concept.

News is very exciting though.
Regards.
 
teahan
Posts: 4992
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:18 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:53 am

Hey,

After looking at it and digesting it for a few more minutes, I came to a few more conclusions:

-- It looks more like a starship than a plane.
-- I definitely can see it on longhaul flights but I have very serious doubts about seeing it on very short hops the B757/B767 is often used for. Neither can I see your average A330 charter passenger airline using it.
-- With a capacity of 300, I could see it replaceing B777s on longhaul flights.

Kind Regards,
Jeremiah Teahan
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:57 am

Some press reports have Boeing saying the development costs will be 9 billion (less than A380 and only ~2x as much as deriving the 747X from the 747.)
Excuse my scepticism at this but Boeing has done this before with the 2707 in the `60s.
Good luck Boeing but I wouldn't be surpised if this is a big disinformation ploy or attempt at raising share `value' before Mullaly, Condit et al bail out of their stocks, and the company.
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
widebody
Posts: 1107
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2000 5:08 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:57 am

Ultra Long Range aircraft with 100-300 pax? As Teahan said, are they not eating into the 777 market?
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3961
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:57 am

All i can say is wow.... thats amazing... I cant wait to see what comes of this. It looks that the engine intakes are on the underside of the wing from this rendering.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
desertjets
Posts: 7574
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 7:03 am

From the looks of it I like it a lot. The concept really does fit well into Boeing's idea of "Shrinking the world." I see this a being much more of a revolutionary design as opposed to the A380's evolutionary approach. As for cost I think that the Yellowstone may actually be a bigger gamble than the A380.

I think it has a lot of promise... I just wonder how long it will take to get it from the artists rendition to a flying prototype.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
 
JumboClassic
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2000 4:37 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 7:05 am

What about the Tu-144 style canards? That explains why Boeing was part of a test program involving a Tu-144 back in 1997, together with MDD and Tupolev. I have always wondered why they chose the russian Tupolev, and not the Concorde for the supersonic testing. Well, there is one thing that Concorde doesn't have - canards!
 
teahan
Posts: 4992
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:18 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 7:40 am

Hey,

I know that this is just a pure sketch and that they are miles from the final design if there is one. Just how on earth will the jetway reach door 1 with those canards?

Anyway here are the comments of the ILFC CEO on the new plane:

Los Angeles, March 29 (Bloomberg) -- John Plueger, chief operating officer of International Lease Finance Corp., comments on Boeing's potential development of a new aircraft that could fly at close to the speed of sound.

"It's an interesting concept. If you can whack an hour off going from Los Angeles to New York, then that's significant. If you can shave three hours off going from Los Angeles to Singapore, that's significant.''

"What it comes down to, as anything else, is the price. If airlines can have lower trip and lower seat-mile costs, primarily because of the fuel savings, and Boeing can produce it cheaply enough, it ought to go well.''

"Technologically, we need to see a little bit more understanding of how they're going to make it work. You get these Mach buffets and other phenomena at that speed. Presumably this would be a high-altitude airplane. It would fly routinely about 45,000 feet. That would be absolutely critical in order to avoid as much as possible the air infrastructure.''

"The fact they're coming up with this new high-speed airplane shows that they're trying to think outside the box. The criticism of Boeing has been, 'All your products are aging and all you're doing is making derivatives of the same basic products.' Granted, the derivatives are in many cases greatly improved, but a 767-400 is still a 767, and a 757-300 is still a 757. Even the next-generation 737 is based upon a design that's now 25 years old.''

"Boeing was right when they said there's not room for two A380s. The fact is, Airbus decided it was going to build the A380, not Boeing. In that large, big-jet size, there probably is only room for one provider -- and Airbus decided they wanted it, and Boeing decided it was too much risk.''

"The only airplane Boeing has produced in the last 15 years that's been a clean sheet of paper design from day one is the 777, and it's their best-selling widebody. In fact it's the real success in the Boeing product line. Boeing is perfectly capable of building an excellent airplane that can leapfrog technology, be state of the art and in demand. I think that's what they're trying to do on this high-speed, high-altitude airplane.''


KInd Regards,
Jeremiah Teahan
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
 
Samurai 777
Posts: 2000
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 2:56 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:04 am

Holy cow!

This is a cool-looking pic of the new plane! It is a very exciting time, that's for sure, but I have a feeling that costs may be greater than the A380 due to the newer technology and design. It smacks suspisciously of a revival of the Boeing 2707 project, which got axed in 1971 over concerns about noise, sonic boom and pollution.

If this thing's going to be able to go faster than Mach 0.95, then that means a potential sonic boom problem and so the craft will not be allowed to do that unless it goes over the Pacific, the Atlantic Ocean or the Arctic Ocean (on polar routes).

Hopefully, Boeing can make it quiet enough at takeoff and landing to meet Stage IV noise requirements as promised.

About range, it's well known that manufacturers often exaggerate claims about the ranges of their a/c, I'm not sure about this. If the new plane can really go at least 16,000 km, then this will be great for nonstop routes like JFK-SYD or LHR-HKG. The plane would most likely be used for long intercontinental routes. Transcon routes might not be likely, mainly due to worries over sonic booms.

The plane looks like a widebody, probably about the same width as the 767 (maybe a 2-3-2 or 2-2-2 seating in economy?), given how fat it looks in the artists rendering.

I wonder which airlines will be interested in it? Most likely, they will be airlines that currently operate very long-range routes, such as: Qantas, Singapore, JAL, BA and UAL.
 
User avatar
boeingrulz
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 1999 2:55 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:08 am

Adding to Samurai's list of customers. This craft is way to sexy to not catch Branson's eye!

Carolyn
 
Guest

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:35 am

If I may ask a dumb question, how would a jetway pull up to the door with those canards sticking out?

And another dumb question relating to the SR-71 comment made earlier: inasmuch as the SR-71 is known for ultra-high altitude (approx. FL 8000), is there an altitude above which you would not hear a sonic boom on the ground? Could Yellowstone fly supersonic at a high enough altitude without the sound effects that got the Concorde banned over the United States?
 
teahan
Posts: 4992
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:18 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:48 am

Hey,

WNBoy, about supersonic etc..., special engines must be developed to make it go supersonic, and that costs huge sums of money and increases fuel comsumption. IF (a BIG if), we see this plane, it certainly won't be supersonic!

Kind Regards,
Jeremiah Teahan
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
 
777X
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 12:44 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:50 am

Sonic booms will travel varying distances depending on many factors, but if the boom is small enough, and the a/c is high enough, the shockwave won't reach the ground.

I would imagine that any sonic boom created by such a craft would be small as most of the airframe would be subsonic, with only a minority in the transsonic/supersonic range.

rgds
777x
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 9:43 am

After seeing the picture of the Yellowstone proposal, I have only one thing to say:

EE-YOW!  Wow!

They were right when this plane was going to have a pretty radical design. It looks like something out of a science fiction novel or some hair-brained idea you would see in Popular Science or Popular Mechanics magazines from the 1950's to early 1970's.

If the plane seats about 275-300 passengers, maybe Boeing ought make this as the 767-400/777-200 replacement after 2011.

I can just see the eye-opening looks from observers at airports after 2013 when it enters service. The most likely airlines to order this plane? Try AA, CO, DL, and UA.
 
wingman
Posts: 2829
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 10:51 am

Another question to consider is whether Boeing can upgrade this fuselage when new engine technology is available to make it a true long-range SST. If so, the case seems very strong. Get a jump start on the mnaufacturing technology and offer an interim .95 jet and then use the same basic design to go for an SST. They cede the VLA market but perhaps get a critical jump start on a truly revolutionary leap in air travel. Airbus will only be able to come up with so many 12-18 blliion dollar projects over the next 20 years. Looks like they are each staking out their turf.
 
Oz777
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 9:48 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 5:33 pm

I think that Boeing is further down the track with this design than we think.

They have been researching the proposal for over three years and all their airline "questions" that they have been putting to operators over that time points to the new aircraft.

Dont expect it to be flying LAX-SFO - with the range quoted as it is, the Boeing forecast of greater point - to - point intercontinental/international operations fits nicely with this design.

The A380 will end up a hub aircraft, the proposed Boeing design will cut down the need for international hubs by providing direct routes and far quicker transit times.

The option may be fly QF on the A380 SYD-LAX and take 15 hours or the AN Boeing 808 and take 10. Guess what will have more appeal. (Remember the most and consistently profitable airline in the US keeps away from hubs). Perhaps that is really what passengers want.

Expect to see the first 808 in 2006, after a 30 + 30 aircraft commitment from a large (non US) carrier.

OZ777
 
SailorOrion
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 5:47 pm

Think Boeing realized a very important fact: The airplane market is growing so fast that it's not any good to start a war. So while airbus concentrates on the hub-hub market with the A380, Boeing takes the 'bypass' market with this aircraft. I do not think that an airline which has already the A380 on order will also order this one right away, it would be a little risky....
I really hope to see it fly quickly, be most likely not before 2009
 
Oz777
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 9:48 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 5:53 pm

I think that Boeing is further down the track with this design than we think.

They have been researching the proposal for over three years and all their airline "questions" that they have been putting to operators over that time points to the new aircraft.

Dont expect it to be flying LAX-SFO - with the range quoted as it is, the Boeing forecast of greater point - to - point intercontinental/international operations fits nicely with this design.

The A380 will end up a hub aircraft, the proposed Boeing design will cut down the need for international hubs by providing direct routes and far quicker transit times.

The option may be fly QF on the A380 SYD-LAX and take 15 hours or the AN Boeing 808 and take 10. Guess what will have more appeal. (Remember the most and consistently profitable airline in the US keeps away from hubs). Perhaps that is really what passengers want.

Expect to see the first 808 in 2006, after a 30 + 30 aircraft commitment from a large (non US) carrier.

OZ777
 
Fly-by-pilot
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2000 10:45 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:39 pm

Why not go all the way and put on a supersonic friendly nose and afterburners. Where are the intakes? Are they below or does the top open douring takeoff. I think this is the future not that unnecessary A380. What happens to the 777LR? Boeing needs to give us more answers because this is the coolest thing since the Concorde.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:16 pm

I think the Yellowstone project could be a huge boon for Boeing.

Remember, the plane is designed to reduce flight times at a rate of 60 minutes/3,000 statute miles compared to a 777-200. This could make it possible to cut flying times on really long routes like SFO-HKG as much as three hours.

I envision the following airlines lining up to buy the plane:

American Airlines (AA)
British Airways (BA)
China Eastern Airlines (MU)
China Southern Airlines (CZ)
Continental Airlines (CO)
Delta Airlines (DL)
South African Airways (SA)
United Airlines (UA)
VARIG Brazilian Airlines (RG)

If these airlines give strong interest to the plane, I won't be surprised Boeing gives the go-ahead at the upcoming 2001 Paris Air Show and officially designates the plane the Boeing 787.

 
na
Posts: 9170
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:35 pm

Although I don´t believe in this project to be a real threat for the Jumbo-sized long-haul airplanes its almost sure this will be a cannibal mainly for
the Long-Range 777-versions currently under development (and the 767 of course). I don´t understand Boeing here, building a competitor to an airplane they don´t even have in the air. Being the looser for the first, and that in the most prestigious market, they desperately try to come out with something. And what do they do: confuse their customers if ordering the 777 LR was a failure.

But I have to say I like the looks. Its a civil-version of the Blackhawk. Sadly its a papertiger. Its looks are like that of a new Concorde, its speed only slightly obove the one of a 747. It just saves one hour if you fly FRA-JFK. Not impressive if you think about it will most likely be a single-aisle-plane, what generally is not at all competitive in the long-range-market.
A Porsche with the engine of the VW Golf GTI.
 
airsicknessbag
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 8:52 pm

I have to agree with Na: this a/c will never be built. It would burn twice the amount of fuel of a standard plane, but you´d gain only a speed increase from Mach 0.85 to 0.95. That just doesn´t justify the enormously higher operating costs.
By the way, I understand this is supposed to be a three holer, so there must be a third engine somewhere hidden.

Daniel Smile
 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 9:00 pm

To be fair, even Airbus' Leahey thinks the fuelburn will be 40% higher. So even if his anti-marketing is exagerrating by a factor of 100% then Boeings new plane is still a 20% greater gas guzzler.
So I agree...it will not sell.
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
airsicknessbag
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Voodoo

Fri Mar 30, 2001 9:04 pm


Well, I have that 100% more fuel burn from today´s WSJE as well, and I think if they´re biased it would be certainly PRO Boeing.

Daniel Smile
 
Guest

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 10:26 pm

Nice try Boeing. But this will not stop the Airbus buying spree the world sees at the moment.

The plane is downright ugly, will have very limited passengerappeal - due to low visibility from rerar pax seats. Higher ticket prices due higher fuel costs

Airport operator will not like it due to fitting airport jetways etc.

Enviromentalist will not like due to more fuelburn=higher pollution factors, high speed= sound pollution.

Sorry folks this is a publicity stunt, concieved in order to drag attention away from the fact that Boeing has lost the battle of high capacity plane development to Airbus.
 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

Boeingcorde's Greater Fuel Burn

Fri Mar 30, 2001 10:29 pm

Interesting.
Whether its Leahey quoting WSJE or vice versa, it does look like a greater fuel burn could kill Yellowstone in the end. If it were -considerably- faster it might not matter and it really could be `son of Concorde' but if its just 10-15 % faster then all an e.g., A380, operator has to do is add sleeper cabins and the speed increase on any overnight segment becomes moot.
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
United Airline
Posts: 8771
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:24 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 10:57 pm

Can't wait to see!

 Smile
 
aduum
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2000 5:24 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Fri Mar 30, 2001 11:22 pm

I think im gonna agree with KRP. It looks like a bit of a rushed design to attract attention.
Just what it has done. So if thats what Boeing intended it worked well.
 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

Aduum

Fri Mar 30, 2001 11:30 pm

It has attracted attention in the same way a concept car at a car show can. But airliners are not cars with a very shallow image-consumer relationship, so the attention may backfire when the rest of the product line is so far removed from the concept.
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 1:40 am

Folks,

I have news for all of you.

Boeing would never seriously consider this project if the fuel burn on a seat-mile basis is going to be way higher than the 777-200ER.

I think you are forgetting that the combination of improvements in high-bypass engine design of the last ten years and the highly-aerodynamic design of the Yellowstone plane will likely mean at the Mach 0.95-0.97 cruising speed the seat-mile costs will be comparable to the 777-200ER.

Remember, the plane has a design maximum of 9,000 nautical miles range, which means LHR-SYD non-stop in both directions becomes viable for the first time. And it won't be a 19-hour experience, either--most likely it'll fly this route in about 14 hours maximum. I'll almost bet that British Airways (BA), very likely heavily consulted on the design, wanted this capability.
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 2:18 am

Lets me ask all of the detractors of this aircraft a question. Do any of you possess a degree in aerospace engineering or can you see 20 years into the future? Unless you can answer yes to either one, then shut up about how this aircraft is already a flop and the A380 is the most successful plane since the Wright Flyer. I would put good money that Boeing has considered all of these issues and will make sure the aircraft lives up to promises. As for the picture of the plane, it is nothing more then a computer generated picture. There is no finalized design for this new aircraft.
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 3:08 am

A very nice drawing I must say, but then that's all it is.
Let's all be fair, we have all seen tens of such futuristic drawings from Boeing, Airbus and several other manufacturers and of course both have done research in the new fields of aerodynamics.
Boeing just seems to be the only one that comes out with it, probably as a last desperate offensive against the A380. (It's like saying to the potential airlines: don't buy the A380, because in less then ten years you'll be flying an really oldfashioned bird, guys...)

In an industry where even a winglet was considered a revolution, a folded wing -like first proposed on the B777- was already one step too far for all airlines.
That's why I don't see a change for such a bird in the first 30 years.
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 3:11 am

I bet if Airbus was proposing this, all the Boeing detractors would be drooling over it and saying how great is would be and how it would cause the death of Boeing.
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
Pilot1113
Posts: 2276
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:42 pm

We All Agree On One Thing--

Sat Mar 31, 2001 3:17 am

We all agree that the modern airliner is going to have to undergo a major change in the future and by someone.

Why can't it be Boeing and why can't it be now?

If Boeing can heavily advertise this as the "future of air travel" (ie: TV commericals aimed at the "Average Joe"), I'm sure that they'll pursade some airlines to sign up.

When your average person sees this at their airport, they'll feel like they've really stepped into 2000.  Big thumbs up I'm sure that more than a few people would want to fly on that, just for this reason.

- Neil Harrison
 
hkgspotter1
Posts: 5750
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:43 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 3:28 am

Hey its Thunderbird 10 !!!
 
Guest

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 3:32 am

Doesn't it look like a catfish?
 
Guest

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 3:35 am

I agree with B757300.

Did anyone see the show 'Inventors' on this subject on Discovery Wings last night? Very intersting! Oz777 is correct in saying that Boeing/Nasa is further down the track with this desing than we think. The tests on the skins for the aircraft, have proven succesfull. The project looks well on its way. It is my opinion ofcourse that faster is the way of the future, at least for me.
For example, anyone who says that they're rather get in a plane with 600+ pax on a 14 hour flight to Tokyo from New York instead of a plane that could take you there in 4 hours are lying to themselves. Think about it 4 vs 14?

In no way can this be compared with the 2707. Technology has improved a bit since then, to say the least.

"What it comes down to, as anything else, is the price. If airlines can have lower trip and lower seat-mile costs, primarily because of the fuel savings, and Boeing can produce it cheaply enough, it ought to go well.'' John Plueger, chief operating officer of International Lease Finance Corp. You are correct!

Rico
 
cwapilot
Posts: 1085
Joined: Mon May 01, 2000 7:10 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 3:43 am

Some of you guys are being rediculous. Since when has the A380 suddenly become the center of the aviation universe? Have you ever heard the phrase "It's not always about YOU!"? Boeing does not make all of its decisions based on reacting to the A380...sorry, it isn't so. As has been said many times, the A380 is a great plane, or can be, and it incorporates many new technologies in both systems and production...however, they are all add-on technologies to the same, basic airliner concept, brought to its largest size yet...and there is nothing wrong with that. However, people touting this also bash Boeing for not innovating anymore...well, they have with this new design, and it is actually a step in the evolution of airliners into a new generation of jetliners. A true breakthrough in aviation. People should be excited that the envelope is finally being pushed instead of merely having more stuffed into it. I think Boeing is serious about this project and that there are interested airlines. I also think they are serious about the BWB concept, and that there are interested airlines. I see this new design as a step towards the BWB concept....just when this design will begin to get old is when Boeing projects the need for a NLA, and the time at which they would be ready for production on the BWB....
Southside Irish...our two teams are the White Sox and whoever plays the Cubs!
 
777X
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 12:44 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 4:41 am

Well said Cwapilot!

 
N312RC
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 10:58 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 4:42 am

WN Boy,

As I read down, I didnt see anyone answer your question about the canards and the jetway. If someone did, please disregard this post.


Like on the TU-144, the canards probably will be retracted to be flush with the fuselage, therefore eliminating any parking problems.
N/A
 
widebody
Posts: 1107
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2000 5:08 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 4:44 am

As with all you A380 know-all's CWAPilot, I'll ask you to list some of these add-on technologies that you mention......and for Christ sakes don't give me shape as an answer......

Rgds,
WB.
 
Flaps
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2000 1:11 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 4:54 am

20%, 40%, 100% greater fuel burn?????

Could just one of you people cite your sources for these fuel burn estimates? Have any of you studied aerodynamics? Have all of you Airbus freaks that have cried all these years about military technology transfer among Boeing programs suddenly and conveniently forgotten your own arguments?

It is certainly possible that a 777 class engine (as Boeing has stated would be used) could provide this speed without a significant increase in fuel burn. Aerodynamics play a huge part in determining the speed and fuel burn of an aircraft. Think about your statements before you throw yourselves out on that stage. Boeing could well flop with this program but they might also have just caught Airbus with their blinders on and their pants down.
 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 4:59 am

Uh the press releases have already mentioned Boeing saying that the `fuel burn would be higher'.
And Boeing talks of a 2007 entry date..not 20 years into the future.
That smacks of snake-oil salesmanship to me purely designed to counter A380 hype.
This plane is just another cover from Popular Mechanics magazine with no more substance behind it than before except vague and empty specifications that even Boeing says they can't know yet.
We've seen this sort of thing for 50 years and nothing has ever come of it.
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
widebody
Posts: 1107
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2000 5:08 pm

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 5:04 am

The extra fuel burn will probably be cancelled out by the reduced journey time.....the question is how economic the engines will be operating at the higher altitude...I'd guess sufficient progress has been made to overcome this....

As for catching Airbus with their pants down, depends, Airbus (Aerospatiale) are the only company to have produced a commercial supersonic jet....I'd guess again that they have acquired a great deal of knowledge in the area.....I know they have been looking at a Concorde replacement, but doubt they have touched upon this subsonic jet......

You could look at this from very different angles......perhaps Airbus will find away to counteract the sonic boom, and will produce a jet similar to Boeing, but with the possibility of more speed....perhaps Airbus have been badly caught out, and Boeing have come across a new breed of aircraft......who knows.....

The future will most likely be in BWB's, both companies have chosen different routes to this goal......
 
cwapilot
Posts: 1085
Joined: Mon May 01, 2000 7:10 am

RE: Boeing Yellowstone Great News

Sat Mar 31, 2001 5:12 am

New nav system, new hydraulic system, new fuselage skin.....etc, etc....if you would have taken the time to read, you would notice I was not bashing either product, so I am not sure why you have your panties in a bunch.
Southside Irish...our two teams are the White Sox and whoever plays the Cubs!