User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21434
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:35 pm

keesje wrote:
Frankly I've not seen much more substantiation of a twin aisle MoM efficiency than some skewed seatcount comparisons and "Boeing said so" and some people said they liked the idea. Please point out the concrete numbers..

The ones I was thinking of were the ones in replies 116, 131, 132 and related follow-ons in this thread.

keesje wrote:
I like to point out that the SonicCruiser, 787-3, 2011 NSA, 737-7, 737-9 and 747-8 were programs declared superior, launched, promoted, defended and evaporated in silence. Some were fairy tails..

Please point out which ones of these are fairy tales. The 737-9 and the 747-8 exist in real actual airplane form with real actual customers paying real actual money to buy them. The others were design proposals advanced enough to present to customers and in some cases secure actual orders. None were imaginary.

Interesting also that the 737-7 has more orders than the A330-800 and you aren't calling out the A300-800 as being a fairy tale.

We shall now all see if enzo011 chides your post for being snarky or not. So far, he's been pretty quiet on that front, only choosing to label my posts as being snarky when he has others to choose from too. I suppose I should feel special?

keesje wrote:
A twin aisle can IMO only be efficient above a certain payload-range threshold. At this stage Boeing is not comfortable below that threshold and below is a a much bigger segment than above. Usually market logic dictates what happens. Regardless of what's been said before. Boeing can't throw the towel around 200 seats transcon range.

Clearly the totality of the market for single aisle commercial transports is bigger than the market for the smallest satisfactory twin aisle, so this is not a profound revelation (™). Not sure why you raise it. The real question in a thread titled "Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept" is whether or not Boeing can make a successful program based on this smallest satisfactory twin aisle. As above I see the challenges, but I'm pretty open minded and quite interested to see if the program ends up being launched or not.

enzo011 wrote:
I will say again, Revelation changed what keesje wrote and reacted to it. Keesje said getting the economics to work on the MOM is a fairytale, not that the MOM is a fairytale. He posted that keesje thought the MOM is a fairytale, how are those two things the same?

They are exactly the same if you understand that the MOM won't exist if it has broken economics, because Boeing will not launch a MOM project that has broken economics, either they work or the program won't get launched. Most of us do understand that. This isn't like the 787 days where they were doing moon shots. They know the program has a very small window to hit and if it doesn't hit it, it won't be launched.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sat Mar 18, 2017 10:00 pm

Stitch wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
I see the Airbus response as a longer A321 with a new wing to address some of the inefficiencies that the A321 has (more fuel, able to cruise higher earlier) in the 753 length and capacity.


I wonder how popular such a plane would be, considering the 757-300's fate in the marketplace. Boeing's - and the operator's - experience with the 757-300 might be pushing them towards a twin-aisle solution.


The 753 was a strange cookie. The CASM was unbeatable (if you could fill it) until the A321WL came along, but it lacked range compared to the 752. On shorter routes the long turn around time does hurt, and it is hell with wings for the ground workers, as they have to hand load this long tube with all those suitcases. And it came out too late and too close to 9/11.

With more range, used on longer sectors and with LD3/45s in the belly, the length would not be such a problem, also not on short routes not if you board and de-board using doors at the front and back. I think if you can give it LD3/45s, 4500nm range and can use door 2 or two doors at the airport, it would be hugely popular in a modern form.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:19 am

http://247wallst.com/aerospace-defense/ ... -airplane/

Hope this link works.There is an interesting (Boeing) chart on the MOM as they saw it then(and now?).It (naturally) fails to add in one aircraft.The A321LR.But that can simply be superimposed where the 757-200 sits on the chart.It certainly does suggest that the sweet spot from a pax numbers POV is 250 in 2 classes.So I guess 270 in one? The ideal range varies quite a bit.Between 4K and 5.5k give or take.
 
StTim
Posts: 3448
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:58 am

If the 767 sits so neatly in that MoM sector one has to ask why it was not a stellar performer?
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:10 am

parapente wrote:
http://247wallst.com/aerospace-defense/2016/07/01/is-this-boeings-middle-of-the-market-airplane/

Hope this link works.There is an interesting (Boeing) chart on the MOM as they saw it then(and now?).It (naturally) fails to add in one aircraft.The A321LR.But that can simply be superimposed where the 757-200 sits on the chart.It certainly does suggest that the sweet spot from a pax numbers POV is 250 in 2 classes.So I guess 270 in one? The ideal range varies quite a bit.Between 4K and 5.5k give or take.


Rather fantastic placements all around. same for capacity assumptions.
Not really something to work from, is it?
Anyway such a graphic would gain quite a bit from going 3D and adding in a third axis : CASM
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21434
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:22 am

StTim wrote:
If the 767 sits so neatly in that MoM sector one has to ask why it was not a stellar performer?


It was a stellar performer, for its time. It started off as a good TATL aircraft and as engine tech improved it added more and more range. Selling 1000 widebodies was a laudable achievement for its era, and its development costs were shared with the 757. The thing is, as engine thrust and fuel burn improved you could afford a bigger cross-section and heavier wings with more fuel storage like the A330 has, so the 767 was beat out. As we see in the A330s life time it too has grown from having the A330-300 being somewhat range limited to now being a very long ranged airplane.

I think the same trend will happen for the MoM, and it's one reason I feel the widebody approach is gaining favor. If the MoM starts out as a very long narrowbody (needed to meet its stated number of pax requirements) then there will be no way for it to grow over time. If it starts as a relatively short wide body it can be stretched as engine tech improves.

WIederling wrote:
parapente wrote:
http://247wallst.com/aerospace-defense/2016/07/01/is-this-boeings-middle-of-the-market-airplane/

Hope this link works.There is an interesting (Boeing) chart on the MOM as they saw it then(and now?).It (naturally) fails to add in one aircraft.The A321LR.But that can simply be superimposed where the 757-200 sits on the chart.It certainly does suggest that the sweet spot from a pax numbers POV is 250 in 2 classes.So I guess 270 in one? The ideal range varies quite a bit.Between 4K and 5.5k give or take.


Rather fantastic placements all around. same for capacity assumptions.
Not really something to work from, is it?
Anyway such a graphic would gain quite a bit from going 3D and adding in a third axis : CASM


Personally, I'd add a Z axis showing number of airframes ordered. It would address the problem that this chart (which really came from AvWeek, using Boeing's data) has, showing the 767-400 and 757-300 with a same sized dot/square as other products that sold many times their number. Either that, or use capacity * sales to weight the widebodies more fairly.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:00 pm

The single aisle market will be covered by the NSA, which imho will come directly after the MoM and will feature most of the ground breaking technology matured with the MoM. Having the MoM allows Boeing to keep the NSA a bit lighter and start with a smaller shrink, allowing them to cover a larger market while still having a complete and modern product line-up from 150 - 450 seats. This move has put Airbus in a bad place. Either do their own MoM, or face the attack on the A320 successor by a NSA perfectly optimized for the classic single aisle mission and a MoM offering more range and capability. Something they imho can not win against with just one plane.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:05 pm

Revelation wrote:
Personally, I'd add a Z axis showing number of airframes ordered. It would address the problem that this chart (which really came from AvWeek, using Boeing's data) has, showing the 767-400 and 757-300 with a same sized dot/square as other products that sold many times their number. Either that, or use capacity * sales to weight the widebodies more fairly.


Sure.
You'd also have to look at sales over time too.
The 767 was a bit of a "judicious shrink for more range" replica of the short ranged A300.

Next problem is that sales reflect demand filtered by available frame sizes.
( This was rather visible in some density graph showing capacity over distance flown for NB craft. )
Murphy is an optimist
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:24 pm

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mom-mark ... zach-clark

The Airbus IRAD figures in this article are interesting.As is the reverse position for Boeing.Is Airbus not telling us something? Probably not just because they don't have to.Its a tricky financial conundrum for Boeing.Boeing have already shoved $30 bn into 'future earnings'.And some city accountants really don't like that.They have their hands ( and wallet) full with existing projects.If they do this MOM on top it just ' has' to work or they are toast.Not trying to be alarmist but numbers don't lie.Also (I think everyone excepts) we have just reached the end of the boom order cycle so there is no cavalry riding in from the distance.Boeing space division can't help them they have got their hands full of Musk.

Would it be so terrible for them just to concede the 321LR market for a while? -Say postbone for 3 years.
Or would that embolden Airbus (who have the funds and manpower) to twist the knife in further and go for a rewing.
I doubt the latter as the 'new' Airbus board us about maximising profits at low risk.
 
AngMoh
Posts: 975
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:43 pm

Revelation wrote:
StTim wrote:
If the 767 sits so neatly in that MoM sector one has to ask why it was not a stellar performer?


It was a stellar performer, for its time. It started off as a good TATL aircraft and as engine tech improved it added more and more range. Selling 1000 widebodies was a laudable achievement for its era, and its development costs were shared with the 757. The thing is, as engine thrust and fuel burn improved you could afford a bigger cross-section and heavier wings with more fuel storage like the A330 has, so the 767 was beat out. As we see in the A330s life time it too has grown from having the A330-300 being somewhat range limited to now being a very long ranged airplane.

I think the same trend will happen for the MoM, and it's one reason I feel the widebody approach is gaining favor. If the MoM starts out as a very long narrowbody (needed to meet its stated number of pax requirements) then there will be no way for it to grow over time. If it starts as a relatively short wide body it can be stretched as engine tech improves.

WIederling wrote:
parapente wrote:
http://247wallst.com/aerospace-defense/2016/07/01/is-this-boeings-middle-of-the-market-airplane/

Hope this link works.There is an interesting (Boeing) chart on the MOM as they saw it then(and now?).It (naturally) fails to add in one aircraft.The A321LR.But that can simply be superimposed where the 757-200 sits on the chart.It certainly does suggest that the sweet spot from a pax numbers POV is 250 in 2 classes.So I guess 270 in one? The ideal range varies quite a bit.Between 4K and 5.5k give or take.


Rather fantastic placements all around. same for capacity assumptions.
Not really something to work from, is it?
Anyway such a graphic would gain quite a bit from going 3D and adding in a third axis : CASM


Personally, I'd add a Z axis showing number of airframes ordered. It would address the problem that this chart (which really came from AvWeek, using Boeing's data) has, showing the 767-400 and 757-300 with a same sized dot/square as other products that sold many times their number. Either that, or use capacity * sales to weight the widebodies more fairly.


The 767-200 which sits nicely in the middle was not a stellar performer. It sold 128 aircraft and was out of production by the late 80's. It also could not do transatlantic. The 767-200ER could do that but also sold only 121 aircraft. The big seller was the 767-300ER which is definitely not MOM.
The 200, 200ER and 300 are all being phased out while the 300ER is still going strong, but that one has the 787 as a replacement.

So now we supposedly have a hot new market justifying a brand new aircraft after the 787 in gap where nothing else sold well even though the original 767-200/300 had no competition.

The only thing I see coming is a "regional" version of a cleaned-up 787-8 which has full commonality with the 787-9.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 742 743 744 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1091
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:07 pm

seahawk wrote:
The single aisle market will be covered by the NSA, which imho will come directly after the MoM and will feature most of the ground breaking technology matured with the MoM. Having the MoM allows Boeing to keep the NSA a bit lighter and start with a smaller shrink, allowing them to cover a larger market while still having a complete and modern product line-up from 150 - 450 seats. This move has put Airbus in a bad place. Either do their own MoM, or face the attack on the A320 successor by a NSA perfectly optimized for the classic single aisle mission and a MoM offering more range and capability. Something they imho can not win against with just one plane.

How often do you clean your rose-tinted spectacles?

In your view, is NSA a "smaller shrink" of the MoM? Or did I understand that wrong. If NSA is a shrink of the MoM, then MoM is the NSA, and your NSA is "son of NSA". It's great to speak in TLAs (Three Letter Anagrams)

I'm sure the guys in Toulouse are already loosing sleep, because of your prediction that Airbus is now in a bad place! Airbus is selling real aircraft, MoM (and NSA) are not even paper ones yet, but you see Airbus in a bad place. What do you smoke or drink each day?
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Topic Author
Posts: 2666
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:22 pm

AngMoh wrote:
The big seller was the 767-300ER which is definitely not MOM.


What makes it not a MOM aircraft? UA wants this new aircraft to replace it and the 757 and I bet DL and AA wouldn't mind either.

UA's 763s seat 214, DL's seat 211-226 pax depending on configuration and AA's seat 209 pax.

In my opinion this MOM aircraft is basically a true 767 replacement that can also replace 757s operating at the edge of their range.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:24 pm

NSA will use technology that the MoM will bring.

Cold cured composites, additive manufacturing, more electrical design 2.0, GTF 2.0 ...

And yes, if Boeing decides to do a 7M7 and the NSA, Airbus will have problems to fight both with just the A320 successor.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3154
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:40 pm

seahawk wrote:
NSA will use technology that the MoM will bring.

Cold cured composites, additive manufacturing, more electrical design 2.0, GTF 2.0 ...

And yes, if Boeing decides to do a 7M7 and the NSA, Airbus will have problems to fight both with just the A320 successor.


Depends on how good this new Boeing MOM is. Airbus is presently raking in a good return on the A320 NEOs and A350s, and despite what some think here, Airbus does care about profit. I am sure Airbus would like to develop a new wing for the A320 series and slap on the latest gen engines and hope that makes it competitive with any new Boeing product. Boeing has been doing that for years with the 737. But if the new Boeing MOM and following NSA is that "good", then Airbus will have to respond with a new platform of their own. Plan B and more expensive.
 
planespotter20
Posts: 174
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:26 pm

parapente wrote:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mom-market-mires-boeing-headaches-possibility-zach-clark

The Airbus IRAD figures in this article are interesting.As is the reverse position for Boeing.Is Airbus not telling us something? Probably not just because they don't have to.Its a tricky financial conundrum for Boeing.Boeing have already shoved $30 bn into 'future earnings'.And some city accountants really don't like that.They have their hands ( and wallet) full with existing projects.If they do this MOM on top it just ' has' to work or they are toast.Not trying to be alarmist but numbers don't lie.Also (I think everyone excepts) we have just reached the end of the boom order cycle so there is no cavalry riding in from the distance.Boeing space division can't help them they have got their hands full of Musk.

Would it be so terrible for them just to concede the 321LR market for a while? -Say postbone for 3 years.
Or would that embolden Airbus (who have the funds and manpower) to twist the knife in further and go for a rewing.
I doubt the latter as the 'new' Airbus board us about maximising profits at low risk.


I mean.. if Airbus sees the opportunity and thinks it's a smart move they would take it, same as Boeing. Although Boeing is backed into a corner now as I see it. They either take a shot in the dark by launching the MoM and hoping it will generate interest beyond the transatlantic market, or wait a while, although that could force it further into the corner, and see what Airbus decides to do.

Right now Boeing needs to talk to carriers all around the world and show their concept 797, as well as research it further, if they hit the nail on the head they'll have a money maker. If it turns into a 787 project who knows what we will see... but a world with an Airbus monopoly is not a nice world, innovations would stagnate, and we'd get regurgitated aircraft for decades. Let's hope both Boeing AND Airbus are successful in their MoM endeavors. Airbus definitely has room to grow their a321neo and maybe shrink the a330neo if the MoM turns out to be a twin aisle. Airbus can literally attack it by both sides, so they cover the twin aisle version and the "true 757 replacement" with a re-winged, stretched a321neo. If both happen Boeing may be in trouble..
 
embraer175e2
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:30 pm

planespotter20 wrote:
parapente wrote:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mom-market-mires-boeing-headaches-possibility-zach-clark

The Airbus IRAD figures in this article are interesting.As is the reverse position for Boeing.Is Airbus not telling us something? Probably not just because they don't have to.Its a tricky financial conundrum for Boeing.Boeing have already shoved $30 bn into 'future earnings'.And some city accountants really don't like that.They have their hands ( and wallet) full with existing projects.If they do this MOM on top it just ' has' to work or they are toast.Not trying to be alarmist but numbers don't lie.Also (I think everyone excepts) we have just reached the end of the boom order cycle so there is no cavalry riding in from the distance.Boeing space division can't help them they have got their hands full of Musk.

Would it be so terrible for them just to concede the 321LR market for a while? -Say postbone for 3 years.
Or would that embolden Airbus (who have the funds and manpower) to twist the knife in further and go for a rewing.
I doubt the latter as the 'new' Airbus board us about maximising profits at low risk.


I mean.. if Airbus sees the opportunity and thinks it's a smart move they would take it, same as Boeing. Although Boeing is backed into a corner now as I see it. They either take a shot in the dark by launching the MoM and hoping it will generate interest beyond the transatlantic market, or wait a while, although that could force it further into the corner, and see what Airbus decides to do.

Right now Boeing needs to talk to carriers all around the world and show their concept 797, as well as research it further, if they hit the nail on the head they'll have a money maker. If it turns into a 787 project who knows what we will see... but a world with an Airbus monopoly is not a nice world, innovations would stagnate, and we'd get regurgitated aircraft for decades. Let's hope both Boeing AND Airbus are successful in their MoM endeavors. Airbus definitely has room to grow their a321neo and maybe shrink the a330neo if the MoM turns out to be a twin aisle. Airbus can literally attack it by both sides, so they cover the twin aisle version and the "true 757 replacement" with a re-winged, stretched a321neo. If both happen Boeing may be in trouble..

That a321neo needs a new wing to compete with any mom model from scratch.
 
StTim
Posts: 3448
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:11 pm

Airbus will be doing continue studies, like Boeing does, into opportunities to enhance their current product range. We also see lots of things both companies are working on. One I found interesting recently was the Airbus story on a newer way to make a carbon fibre wingbox. It seems to be moving to full size demonstrator mode. What thoughts they would use this plus a new CF wing to create Keesjie's famous (or should that be infamous) plus series?

One thing is that the development cycles take so long we can see the chess games being played out. Airbus appears better placed just now but that can change. Remember back to the introduction of the 787 and the dire position Airbus appeared to be in.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26402
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:57 pm

AngMoh wrote:
So now we supposedly have a hot new market justifying a brand new aircraft after the 787 in gap where nothing else sold well even though the original 767-200/300 had no competition.


The commercial airline world of 2020 is a fair bit different than the one of 1980 when the 767-200 entered service. Back then, the only twin with similar range and capacity was the A310 family. TATL traffic was between a handful of hubs on either side served by a handful of "national" carriers. You didn't have anywhere near the domestic traffic you have now in China, Africa and Southeast Asia.

It could be this new world is far more receptive to an airframe sized around the 767 and A300/A310 then the older one was.
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:23 pm

I think the next big ting is LCCs expansion into the medium to long haul market. Currently only a few have tried, and it seems only Norwegian is successful.

"Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept" is the topic, but very little has been said about the needs of LCCs.

The LCC model means more direct flights, more airlines flying the same routes and doing so with higher cabin density. The LCC model depends on a high load factor and quick turnarounds. A flexible aircraft that can be used efficiently on number of routes, an aircraft that can fly into smaller airports.

A new MOM should address the needs of the LCCs. It seems like the current concept focuses to much on the legacy US carriers and their need for a real 767 replacement. The 787 failed as a 767 replacement, and did not kill the A330. It seems Boeing is more focused on correcting that then thinking differently and what future needs might be.

I think the worst thing that could happen is Boeing making the MOM to large. What is actually lacking in both OEMs product catalogs, are a relatively small aircraft capable of doing long haul. I think the MOM should be an aircraft capable of 10 hours scheduled flight time with 200 to 240 passengers onboard in a one class LCC configuration. The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.

The A321LR (from 2019) can take 220 passengers @ 31 pitch, but lacks range. Make it capable of reliably flying 10 hours scheduled flight time, and later do a slightly stretched version, I think we could have a hit among LCCs already flying A320 family aircraft.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:06 pm

reidar76 wrote:
The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.


Maybe that's what Boeing is after, a 787-3 done right. Fully optimized & 30t lighter than the 787-8 / A330-200.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/787%20NMA%20variants%201_zpsywejkuwq.jpg
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:12 pm

keesje wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.


Maybe that's what Boeing is after, a 787-3 done right. Fully optimized & 30t lighter than the 787-8 / A330-200.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/787%20NMA%20variants%201_zpsywejkuwq.jpg

If that is true then that is a real shame - in that case the 787 should have been built narrower (2-4-2 configuration only no 3-3-3). It could have then been a true family (the 783 would have been the MoM, the 788 would have been the 763ER/A332 replacement and the 789 would have been the A333 replacement while the 78X replaced the 772. Boeing could have then made the 778 to be not much different/larger to the 77E just better while increasing the size gap up to the 779. Boeing would then cover the 200-400 seat market very well.
59 types. 41 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26402
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:46 pm

Zkpilot wrote:
...in that case the 787 should have been built narrower (2-4-2 configuration only no 3-3-3).


If it had been, it would have been crushed by the A330neo (cheaper) and A350 (more capacity).
 
ikramerica
Posts: 14900
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:51 pm

I'm not sure why some are obsessed with beating single aisle economics. It needs to be very close and roughly a wash in desired configurations with desired passenger and cargo payloads, but it also will also fulfill requirements that a 200-220ft single aisle can't.

As for the A321LR being a direct 752 replacement, it isn't. It's 20 seats smaller. So it's close. But being 10% smaller isn't any more a direct replacement than the 797-8 model being 10-15% larger.

The 757-200 was the short range replacement for DC-8s and 707s, and the 767 the newer competitor to the dc10, a300 and l1011 for MoM routes.

Zkpilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.


Maybe that's what Boeing is after, a 787-3 done right. Fully optimized & 30t lighter than the 787-8 / A330-200.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/787%20NMA%20variants%201_zpsywejkuwq.jpg

If that is true then that is a real shame - in that case the 787 should have been built narrower (2-4-2 configuration only no 3-3-3). It could have then been a true family (the 783 would have been the MoM, the 788 would have been the 763ER/A332 replacement and the 789 would have been the A333 replacement while the 78X replaced the 772. Boeing could have then made the 778 to be not much different/larger to the 77E just better while increasing the size gap up to the 779. Boeing would then cover the 200-400 seat market very well.

But the 787 had the requirement of LD3 containers. The787 is as narrow as it can be to achieve that.

In reality it's maybe 4-5" too narrow for the now favored 9Y.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:57 pm

ikramerica wrote:
As for the A321LR being a direct 752 replacement, it isn't. It's 20 seats smaller.


These two aircraft are very similar, near identical in size if we look at the space where passenger seats can be placed. The distance between door 1 and door 4 is 31.35 meters and 29.63 meters for the 757 and A321 respectively. If we look at cabin floor space in square meters, the A321 is ever so slightly larger do to is wider fuselage. Comparably configured, these two aircraft will have the same number of seats.

Here is the technical documentation from the OEMs.

Airbus A321: http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_g ... _Jun16.pdf

Boeing 757: http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commer ... 757_23.pdf
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8524
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:03 am

ikramerica wrote:
But the 787 had the requirement of LD3 containers. The787 is as narrow as it can be to achieve that.

In reality it's maybe 4-5" too narrow for the now favored 9Y.


The A330, narrower than the 787, does LD3.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4316
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:00 am

ikramerica wrote:

Zkpilot wrote:
keesje wrote:

Maybe that's what Boeing is after, a 787-3 done right. Fully optimized & 30t lighter than the 787-8 / A330-200.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/787%20NMA%20variants%201_zpsywejkuwq.jpg

If that is true then that is a real shame - in that case the 787 should have been built narrower (2-4-2 configuration only no 3-3-3). It could have then been a true family (the 783 would have been the MoM, the 788 would have been the 763ER/A332 replacement and the 789 would have been the A333 replacement while the 78X replaced the 772. Boeing could have then made the 778 to be not much different/larger to the 77E just better while increasing the size gap up to the 779. Boeing would then cover the 200-400 seat market very well.

But the 787 had the requirement of LD3 containers. The787 is as narrow as it can be to achieve that.

In reality it's maybe 4-5" too narrow for the now favored 9Y.

A330 can take LD3 so yes the 787 could be narrower. A330 is typically configured 2-4-2.

And I just saw that mjoelnir also said this :checkmark:
59 types. 41 countries. 24 airlines.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3154
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:12 am

keesje wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.


Maybe that's what Boeing is after, a 787-3 done right. Fully optimized & 30t lighter than the 787-8 / A330-200.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/787%20NMA%20variants%201_zpsywejkuwq.jpg


If true,it would be a way to keep R&D costs in check by utilizing much of the 787 development. Could the MOM have a carbon fibre frame? Could it still be CF and still be $80 mill and profitable? Shared tech from the 787 may make it possible.The wing development will still be expensive but could be shared with the 737 replacement. Something has UA excited, and I wander could it be a single type rating with the 787, just speculating.
 
sv11
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 1999 6:26 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:13 am

The 787 fuselage may be too much to use as a starting point for MOM. As mentioned 787 holds two LD3 cargo containers size by size. I think MoM only needs to carry one. Boeing may have to meet an aggressive selling price so may go with aluminum fuselage and composite wing like 777X also.

Regards,
sv11
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 7:26 am

william wrote:
keesje wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.


Maybe that's what Boeing is after, a 787-3 done right. Fully optimized & 30t lighter than the 787-8 / A330-200.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/787%20NMA%20variants%201_zpsywejkuwq.jpg


If true,it would be a way to keep R&D costs in check by utilizing much of the 787 development. Could the MOM have a carbon fibre frame? Could it still be CF and still be $80 mill and profitable? Shared tech from the 787 may make it possible.The wing development will still be expensive but could be shared with the 737 replacement. Something has UA excited, and I wander could it be a single type rating with the 787, just speculating.


Not for 80 mio, thats for sure. But at 30t lighter it would have superior performance / cost levels/ airport compatability vs 787/A330 on short / medium flights and be able to carry 300 people and serious cargo. A super A300/767.. or 787-3 done right. It would be a serious mod/ investment though. Maybe you would need EK/ the Chinese to launch it.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 7:58 am

ikramerica wrote:
But the 787 had the requirement of LD3 containers. The787 is as narrow as it can be to achieve that.

In reality it's maybe 4-5" too narrow for the now favored 9Y.


going down to 222 inches still fits LD3 ( see A300.)
obviously Boeing wouldn't copy that X-section.
Making the 227"/237" larger by 4..5 inches brings you to the XWB X-section. :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
dare100em
Posts: 275
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:24 am

reidar76 wrote:
I think the next big ting is LCCs expansion into the medium to long haul market. Currently only a few have tried, and it seems only Norwegian is successful.

"Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept" is the topic, but very little has been said about the needs of LCCs.

The LCC model means more direct flights, more airlines flying the same routes and doing so with higher cabin density. The LCC model depends on a high load factor and quick turnarounds. A flexible aircraft that can be used efficiently on number of routes, an aircraft that can fly into smaller airports.

A new MOM should address the needs of the LCCs. It seems like the current concept focuses to much on the legacy US carriers and their need for a real 767 replacement. The 787 failed as a 767 replacement, and did not kill the A330. It seems Boeing is more focused on correcting that then thinking differently and what future needs might be.

I think the worst thing that could happen is Boeing making the MOM to large. What is actually lacking in both OEMs product catalogs, are a relatively small aircraft capable of doing long haul. I think the MOM should be an aircraft capable of 10 hours scheduled flight time with 200 to 240 passengers onboard in a one class LCC configuration. The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.

The A321LR (from 2019) can take 220 passengers @ 31 pitch, but lacks range. Make it capable of reliably flying 10 hours scheduled flight time, and later do a slightly stretched version, I think we could have a hit among LCCs already flying A320 family aircraft.


:checkmark: It is absolutely essential that the MOM addresses the requirements of LCC's starting "medium-haul" operations. And I think this is a key point in the design of the plan and very much recognized by Boeing. It could serve as a comparatively cheap solution to haul up to 300 people in a very tight 1-class configuration over, let's say, 4000 nm. The economics will be unbeatable in such a configuration. Because of that you can’t look at the actual market and come to the conclusion that the marked can’t sustain it. The marked will chance a lot like it always did.

However the outlook on classical “main-carrier” wide-bodies will get even gloomier. As a result the chance the 787 will ever get their 30b $ back will get nearly zero.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21434
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:05 am

ikramerica wrote:
I'm not sure why some are obsessed with beating single aisle economics.

Because Boeing made it a talking point which makes it a target for many here to aim at.

ikramerica wrote:
But the 787 had the requirement of LD3 containers. The787 is as narrow as it can be to achieve that.

In reality it's maybe 4-5" too narrow for the now favored 9Y.

Maybe it needs an Xtra Wide Body? :-)
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
InsideMan
Posts: 334
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:49 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:23 pm

No one is questioning the abilities of the Boeing engineers, and no one is questioning the sanity of the Boeing bean counters.
Problems arrive when the two don't match (almost any day).

As stated previously, there is a target spot in range and capacity for a MOM and of course Airlines want it.
BUT, how do you make the numbers work?

If Boeing design a completely new aircraft, they need to be able to recouperate the cost and some earnings on top.
Airbus has a cash cow below A321neoLR and a cash cow above A330neo.
So even if Boeing find the target perfectly, that target is
a) small, meaning not a lot of sales potential
b) easily undercut by selling A321s and A330s cheaper
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:39 pm

Imho the biggest problem is the price that market research sees the airlines as willing to pay. 70 to 80 Million would be challenge for a new single aisle design around A321 plus a bit size, it seems a huge challenge for a twin aisle of 762 to 763 size.

If you look at he current list prices:

737-9MAX 116,9 million
767-300ER 197,1 million
787-8 224,6 million
787-9 264,6 million

Now considering that they are probably not willing to let the average discounts grow, let us go by 50% discount.

https://theblogbyjavier.com/2015/02/26/ ... -for-2014/
https://airinsight.com/2016/05/16/aircr ... vs-market/

So the list price would have to be around 150-160 million.

737-9MAX 58,5 million
7M7-8 ~70 million
7M7-9 ~ 80-5 million
767-300ER 98,5 million
787-8 112,3 million
787-9 132,3 million

Not good times for 787-8 or 737.
 
TranscendZac
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:50 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:54 pm

keesje wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
The current Boeing MOM concept is 225-280 passengers in a three class international configuration, which to me seems like a short haul 787, or to put it another way, the 787-3 done right.


Maybe that's what Boeing is after, a 787-3 done right. Fully optimized & 30t lighter than the 787-8 / A330-200.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/787%20NMA%20variants%201_zpsywejkuwq.jpg


Interesting concept. That seems like a feasible idea actually. Much less expense in new systems and commonality around the 1,000+ 787s that will be flying for decades to come. I wonder if Boeing keeps a derivative of the GEnx/RR, or do they go for a new engine from PW or RR? Not sure if GE has anything they are working on that would work thrust wise.
Zac
 
ikramerica
Posts: 14900
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:46 am

seahawk wrote:
Imho the biggest problem is the price that market research sees the airlines as willing to pay. 70 to 80 Million would be challenge for a new single aisle design around A321 plus a bit size, it seems a huge challenge for a twin aisle of 762 to 763 size.

If you look at he current list prices:

737-9MAX 116,9 million
767-300ER 197,1 million
787-8 224,6 million
787-9 264,6 million

Now considering that they are probably not willing to let the average discounts grow, let us go by 50% discount.

https://theblogbyjavier.com/2015/02/26/ ... -for-2014/
https://airinsight.com/2016/05/16/aircr ... vs-market/

So the list price would have to be around 150-160 million.

737-9MAX 58,5 million
7M7-8 ~70 million
7M7-9 ~ 80-5 million
767-300ER 98,5 million
787-8 112,3 million
787-9 132,3 million

Not good times for 787-8 or 737.

Sure, everyone would like to have an aircraft that carries 50-75% more pax than a 739 at a distance 50-100% further with far more cargo abilities for less than a 763ER. Not going to happen.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 5:55 am

ikramerica wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Imho the biggest problem is the price that market research sees the airlines as willing to pay. 70 to 80 Million would be challenge for a new single aisle design around A321 plus a bit size, it seems a huge challenge for a twin aisle of 762 to 763 size.

If you look at he current list prices:

737-9MAX 116,9 million
767-300ER 197,1 million
787-8 224,6 million
787-9 264,6 million

Now considering that they are probably not willing to let the average discounts grow, let us go by 50% discount.

https://theblogbyjavier.com/2015/02/26/ ... -for-2014/
https://airinsight.com/2016/05/16/aircr ... vs-market/

So the list price would have to be around 150-160 million.

737-9MAX 58,5 million
7M7-8 ~70 million
7M7-9 ~ 80-5 million
767-300ER 98,5 million
787-8 112,3 million
787-9 132,3 million

Not good times for 787-8 or 737.

Sure, everyone would like to have an aircraft that carries 50-75% more pax than a 739 at a distance 50-100% further with far more cargo abilities for less than a 763ER. Not going to happen.


So what does the mean for the MoM? Will airlines gladly pay more? Will they pay more than what Airbus wants for an A330?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21434
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:08 am

seahawk wrote:
So what does the mean for the MoM? Will airlines gladly pay more? Will they pay more than what Airbus wants for an A330?

You would think that is exactly what will end up happening, because AIrbus's main response to a highly optimized MOM will be to cut the price on the A330, and yes, that means the MOM program with its expensive new tech is quite vulnerable to competition.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:24 am

seahawk wrote:
ikramerica wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Imho the biggest problem is the price that market research sees the airlines as willing to pay. 70 to 80 Million would be challenge for a new single aisle design around A321 plus a bit size, it seems a huge challenge for a twin aisle of 762 to 763 size.

If you look at he current list prices:

737-9MAX 116,9 million
767-300ER 197,1 million
787-8 224,6 million
787-9 264,6 million

Now considering that they are probably not willing to let the average discounts grow, let us go by 50% discount.

https://theblogbyjavier.com/2015/02/26/ ... -for-2014/
https://airinsight.com/2016/05/16/aircr ... vs-market/

So the list price would have to be around 150-160 million.

737-9MAX 58,5 million
7M7-8 ~70 million
7M7-9 ~ 80-5 million
767-300ER 98,5 million
787-8 112,3 million
787-9 132,3 million

Not good times for 787-8 or 737.

Sure, everyone would like to have an aircraft that carries 50-75% more pax than a 739 at a distance 50-100% further with far more cargo abilities for less than a 763ER. Not going to happen.


So what does the mean for the MoM? Will airlines gladly pay more? Will they pay more than what Airbus wants for an A330?


I guess that depends how cost efficient it is. If it's much lighter, Cat D, uses 10-20% less fuel, has a good rest value (Ref. cargo, A300) and full 787 cockpit commonality it could become a good replacement for A310, A330, 788, 789, A300, 767, 772 and other overspecified WB's doing 200-3000Nm flights today.

Image
Major 200-3000NM flights from LHR.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:29 am

Well, according to the market research airlines want, near single aisle economics for that price. The question is how flexible are airlines when it comes to the aircraft being more expensive or the aircraft being less efficient. Many of those routes can be done by an A321.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3154
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:43 am

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
So what does the mean for the MoM? Will airlines gladly pay more? Will they pay more than what Airbus wants for an A330?

You would think that is exactly what will end up happening, because AIrbus's main response to a highly optimized MOM will be to cut the price on the A330, and yes, that means the MOM program with its expensive new tech is quite vulnerable to competition.


Airbus can lower the price now, the A330 is not exactly flying off the shelves now. If the A330 fitted their needs for a MOM aircraft more would be ordering them now. Why would Airbus wait with the softening of WB orders?
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:46 am

A 787 based MoM would be significantly larger than an A321. Fully optimized, galleys & lavatories below deck and single class, maybe double, seat limit 375.

A regular Economy/First short medium haul cabin would be around 300 seats. The versions below are a little shorter and longer cabins than 787-8.

Image

This strong MoM variant would basically replace the 787-8 in the Boeing portfolio and finally "kill" the A330,
because better in everything but range & comfort. For the weakhearted; "insulting" John Leahy slide:
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Figure-2-Airbus-v-Boeing-MOM.png


..

For the books, the catchy "787-3 Done Right" typification is made by reidar76 :silly:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:59 pm

keesje wrote:
better in everything but range & comfort.

And acquisition costs, especially given that every 787 sold will have to cover 10s of millions of deferred costs.

... which could go quite some way towards covering a difference in operating costs.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3154
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:30 pm

keesje wrote:
A 787 based MoM would be significantly larger than an A321. Fully optimized, galleys & lavatories below deck and single class, maybe double, seat limit 375.

A regular Economy/First short medium haul cabin would be around 300 seats. The versions below are a little shorter and longer cabins than 787-8.

Image

This strong MoM variant would basically replace the 787-8 in the Boeing portfolio and finally "kill" the A330,
because better in everything but range & comfort. For the weakhearted; "insulting" John Leahy slide:
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Figure-2-Airbus-v-Boeing-MOM.png


..

For the books, the catchy "787-3 Done Right" typification is made by reidar76 :silly:


While such an aircraft seems possible, it would not come close to the operating costs of any present day narrow body.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3144
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:10 pm

Boeing needs to write off those deferred production costs of the 787. A problem is that the next several years of production may include them. (unhappy customers ?) The 787 was suppose to be efficient and cheap enough to eliminate the gap between it and the newer narrow body plane. If Keesje's mini 787 could be produced cheaply enough and with enough efficiency it might resurrect some of that strategy.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:54 pm

william wrote:
keesje wrote:
A 787 based MoM would be significantly larger than an A321. Fully optimized, galleys & lavatories below deck and single class, maybe double, seat limit 375.

A regular Economy/First short medium haul cabin would be around 300 seats. The versions below are a little shorter and longer cabins than 787-8.

Image

This strong MoM variant would basically replace the 787-8 in the Boeing portfolio and finally "kill" the A330,
because better in everything but range & comfort. For the weakhearted; "insulting" John Leahy slide:
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Figure-2-Airbus-v-Boeing-MOM.png


..

For the books, the catchy "787-3 Done Right" typification is made by reidar76 :silly:


While such an aircraft seems possible, it would not come close to the operating costs of any present day narrow body.


We have to realize this isn't a heavy WB's miss- used by a lack of alternatives. It's 30t lighter than a A330-200 and has high density 9 abreast cabin. A NB comes no-where close in capacity and revenue potential.

Looking at the use of current A330, 767 and 787 fleets there a huge market 500-3000NM.
Assuming this 787 variant would have a state of the art short/medium range wing / layout.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 5:15 pm

When UH was recently discussing the MOM he said 'we might as well call it the 797 since that is what it will be called."Would he have said that if it was in fact a variant of the 787 family?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21434
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 5:20 pm

william wrote:
Airbus can lower the price now, the A330 is not exactly flying off the shelves now. If the A330 fitted their needs for a MOM aircraft more would be ordering them now. Why would Airbus wait with the softening of WB orders?

Why shouldn't they keep charging the market rate for A330s till market conditions makes it clear that the price needs to go lower? They have a healthy backlog of A330 CEO + NEO to build. No need to leave a lot of money on the table at this point in time, IMHO.

It's pretty clear that A330 that comes closest to what the high end of the MoM market might be, but some customers prefer something that's a closer match to 753/763 payload/range characteristics. Time will tell if Boeing decides that market is big enough to support an all-new entrant, or if they decide it'll get squeezed out from above and below by cheap A330s and A321NEOs. We know what a certain John Leahy's opinion on this is.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
LightningZ71
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:59 pm

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:32 pm

That sounds a lot like a market that a conjectural shrunken A330-200 ceo with the neo's aero and weight improvements would easily satisfy.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26402
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Airlines interested in Boeing MOM concept.

Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:04 pm

LightningZ71 wrote:
That sounds a lot like a market that a conjectural shrunken A330-200 ceo with the neo's aero and weight improvements would easily satisfy.


It would probably hit the same issue the 787-3 did - a frame optimized for high operating weights and fuel loads being asked to perform missions that require neither.

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