JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 12:21 am

Planeflyer wrote:
JoeCanuck, are you sure AB can use the barrel method? I thought B had and fairly deep IP moat around this method.

Now weather this confers any advantage to B is a n open question. I suppose the 797 will give us some clues to the answer.


I wasn't specifically writing about Airbus and Boeing sharing exactly the same processes...but they don't have to. As has been shown on the 350 and 787, there is more than one way to skin a fuselage.

My point is that when it comes to making airframes, if one can do it, the other can as well. They may just have different, yet equally efficient ways to make similar products.
What the...?
 
2175301
Posts: 1225
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 3:27 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
Planeflyer wrote:
JoeCanuck, are you sure AB can use the barrel method? I thought B had and fairly deep IP moat around this method.

Now weather this confers any advantage to B is a n open question. I suppose the 797 will give us some clues to the answer.


I wasn't specifically writing about Airbus and Boeing sharing exactly the same processes...but they don't have to. As has been shown on the 350 and 787, there is more than one way to skin a fuselage.

My point is that when it comes to making airframes, if one can do it, the other can as well. They may just have different, yet equally efficient ways to make similar products.


I don't know if it is true or not in regards to barrels vs skin on frames; or even different ways to make barrels. But the history of technology innovation and changes tells us that it may be entirely plausible: What if one method turns out to be more efficient than the other method(s). The market has demonstrated time after time again what the results are. What if Boeing has figured something out with barrels... I find it amazing that so many people seem to deny that such a concept that one method might turn out to be more efficient than another - and affect aircraft assembly cost. My personal observation is that the majority of those denying the possibility tend to be more Airbus centered.

Now I don't know if Boeing has done that or not. I don't know if the 797 will be barrels or panels on a frame. But, I have seen far to many technology changes in the world in my 4 decades of engineering to not consider that as a real possibility; and to think through the market effects of that if it were true.

I wish all the best,
 
User avatar
JackMeahoff
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:12 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 3:47 am

keesje wrote:
If an Aluminum fuselage is a better idea for this type of aircraft, because it reduces risks, time to market and upfront investments, eases MRO and pulls forward ROI, why not?

Image



I keep on seeing this image. It looks like a 757 with new wings. I thought the 797 was going to be wider than a narrowbody?
 
Prost
Posts: 2196
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:01 am

These aren’t emanating from Boeing. These are Keesje’s educated guess drawing for illustrative purposes only.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 5635
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:18 am

JackMeahoff wrote:
I keep on seeing this image. It looks like a 757 with new wings. I thought the 797 was going to be wider than a narrowbody?


You're being fooled by the big windows and nacelles and the short height of the ovoid fuselage. That aircraft is definitely wider than a narrowbody. It's like a 767-200 that went on a diet.
 
User avatar
JackMeahoff
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:12 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:21 am

seabosdca wrote:
JackMeahoff wrote:
I keep on seeing this image. It looks like a 757 with new wings. I thought the 797 was going to be wider than a narrowbody?


You're being fooled by the big windows and nacelles and the short height of the ovoid fuselage. That aircraft is definitely wider than a narrowbody. It's like a 767-200 that went on a diet.


I get my vision tested next month, I'll have to remember this. :smile:
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1047
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:32 am

Stitch wrote:
Assuming Airbus is even interested in pursuing monolithic barrels. Their (and their supplier's) experience with panels may encourage them down that road.


Yep that’s a fair point. AB might be as efficient or more so but I doubt it.

The barrel or intergrated approach eliminates seams and many components all of which require their own tooling. I’d bet it adds a point or two of margin on each frame and probably 3-4 points in a few more years.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3005
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Boeing officially forms program office to flesh out 797 plans

Wed Apr 25, 2018 5:10 am

Revelation wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Wasn't Boeing problem with manufacturability on the 787 due to the extensive use of composites and plain lack of knowledge on the issue? If so, sounds like they have learned from that aspect, and that the 797 will be composite instead of aluminum.

Yes, but dealing with what went wrong with 787 is not what I was getting at.

Let me quote http://aviationweek.com/paris-air-show- ... -timetable for an idea of what I was getting at:

“Today we are very early in a program that’s not launched, and we already know what the production system looks like,” says Delaney. “We already know what the assembly sequence looks like, we are already starting to build parts in the computer. Because we are trying to build the first couple of hundred in the computer – that’s the power of the digital thread,” he adds.

The work is key to helping Boeing make fundamental changes in its production process to enable the NMA to be built for lower cost than previous twin-aisle designs.

Everyone knows if 797 costs as much as 787 does to build, it will fail.

It will be interesting to see what Boeing comes up with.

They'll use a CFRP wing mated to an Aluminum Alloy Fuselage. More than likely with the Advanced GE or Rolls engines (or even a Pratt and Whitney GTF)
I suspect it will be Proven Technology with Fly By wire Digital engine and flight controlls and have advanced features to aid in troubleshooting and repairs.
It would be overkill to load it with advanced features like the B787 when it's going to replace the B767 in operational function. And? I suspect Boeing might want to even offer it as a freighter at some point. Especilly since Airbus seems to not be building a dedicated Freighter anytime soon.
(which they damn sure should be building...)
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 5:38 am

seabosdca wrote:
JackMeahoff wrote:
I keep on seeing this image. It looks like a 757 with new wings. I thought the 797 was going to be wider than a narrowbody?


You're being fooled by the big windows and nacelles and the short height of the ovoid fuselage. That aircraft is definitely wider than a narrowbody. It's like a 767-200 that went on a diet.

Yes the ovoid shape would make it look skinnier from the side view.

This is partly why I think 8ab for a cleansheet oval will not look short and stubby. From the top view it would look short and stubby like an A310 but from the side view it would look perfectly fine.

From a loading perspective of a tube it's the vertical height that is the most important. So with an oval design it would be the reduced height measurment that would determine the perfect structural length. The perfect fineness ratio would then be lower and overall stubbier.

That's why I believe a cleansheet oval would most definitely be 8ab in A310 and A300 lengths.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:41 am

From a loading perspective of a tube it's the vertical height that is the most important. So with an oval design it would be the reduced height measurment that would determine the perfect structural length.


From a loads perspective, a higher, narrower fuselage would be lighter / better.. like on the 707, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75 & 767.

I would not be suprized if Boeing goes for low costs, proven technology, high value, a 20 yrs production run and fast return on investment. And taking that as a starting point, CRFP mandrel fuselage production technology might fall of the table. Panels, longerons & formers might be easier & cheaper to design, certifiy, produce, move & repair.

About in-house, will the fuselages no longer be outsourced to Spirit ? I doubt it. They do a good job on the 787, A350, CSeries and 737 / 777x.
Last edited by keesje on Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
huuthe93
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:13 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:46 am

There will be no boeing 797 because boeing is developing 777x
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 7:52 am

huuthe93 wrote:
There will be no boeing 797 because boeing is developing 777x


Yes, it'll fly next year & Airbus might move forward regardless, while UA, DL & AA are looking for medium frames.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
huuthe93
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:13 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 8:03 am

keesje wrote:
huuthe93 wrote:
There will be no boeing 797 because boeing is developing 777x


Yes, it'll fly next year & Airbus might move forward regardless, while UA, DL & AA are looking for medium frames.

So what version of airbus will develop similar to boing 797?
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Apr 25, 2018 9:19 am

huuthe93 wrote:
keesje wrote:
huuthe93 wrote:
There will be no boeing 797 because boeing is developing 777x


Yes, it'll fly next year & Airbus might move forward regardless, while UA, DL & AA are looking for medium frames.

So what version of airbus will develop similar to boing 797?


Welcome to a.net :wink2: https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1362655&start=950
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 18617
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 2:03 pm

http://aviationweek.com/program-managem ... -suppliers says:

Each of the companies hold details of the agreements close to the vest, but based on interviews with executives and publicly made comments, a clearer picture of the supply chain’s new life is beginning to emerge. That new life includes working closer with Boeing—perhaps closer than outside suppliers ever have before—and securing long-term commercial revenue streams. But it also entails cutting production flow by 10%, and meeting an imperative to perform and keep cost-cutting to ensure a place on any New Midmarket Airplane (NMA) that Boeing could pursue. The master agreements expire before the NMA would be produced.

“It is a baseline requirement to be considered,” says Brian Baird, vice president for supply chain operations at Boeing Commercial Airplanes. “We’ve been very clear about that; yes, I think they understand that.”

Boeing is really exercising its leverage here.

If you even want to be considered for NMA (and, implicitly, whatever that follows it) you better meet price and performance targets on 737, 787, etc.

And yet, since NMA is not a done deal, none of the recently done contracts have explicit NMA work share in them.

I guess it's "business as usual", but it reminds me of "that's a cute kid you have there, wouldn't want anything bad to happen to it"...

On the other hand, the authors chose to describe this as "the supply chain’s new life"...
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2805
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 2:49 pm

Revelation wrote:
Boeing is really exercising its leverage here.


It's another lense through which to view the seemingly imminent Embraer acquisition as well: tighten the screws on suppliers by consolidating duopoly control. I assume Airbus is exerting similar pressure or will be soon. Most big suppliers are somewhat diversified firms that do more than aero supplies, but even for them exit from this market isn't really an option. So they'll have to play along.

btw - the term "monopolist" has the analogue "monopsonist" for firms that are the sole prospective employer. Duopolist and duopsonist would probably apply as well. Does anyone know the term, if any, where a firm has a monopoly on supplier business?
 
bigjku
Posts: 1654
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 3:23 pm

Revelation wrote:
http://aviationweek.com/program-management-corner/boeing-signs-master-supply-deals-top-tier-suppliers says:

Each of the companies hold details of the agreements close to the vest, but based on interviews with executives and publicly made comments, a clearer picture of the supply chain’s new life is beginning to emerge. That new life includes working closer with Boeing—perhaps closer than outside suppliers ever have before—and securing long-term commercial revenue streams. But it also entails cutting production flow by 10%, and meeting an imperative to perform and keep cost-cutting to ensure a place on any New Midmarket Airplane (NMA) that Boeing could pursue. The master agreements expire before the NMA would be produced.

“It is a baseline requirement to be considered,” says Brian Baird, vice president for supply chain operations at Boeing Commercial Airplanes. “We’ve been very clear about that; yes, I think they understand that.”

Boeing is really exercising its leverage here.

If you even want to be considered for NMA (and, implicitly, whatever that follows it) you better meet price and performance targets on 737, 787, etc.

And yet, since NMA is not a done deal, none of the recently done contracts have explicit NMA work share in them.

I guess it's "business as usual", but it reminds me of "that's a cute kid you have there, wouldn't want anything bad to happen to it"...

On the other hand, the authors chose to describe this as "the supply chain’s new life"...


The most intriguing part is this to me.

“I’d say in our history we’ve had limited ability to see really what’s going on from a performance standpoint with each of the suppliers,” Baird says. “Over the course of time in working with them—demonstrating that we’re doing the same things inside our factories and our offices and then building the trust—it has enabled us to get insight into how each of our suppliers are actually performing,” he continues. “Making the data of performance more transparent and available to us has given us really good insight and allowed the teams to focus in the right areas,” he says.”

In short it becomes a somewhat easier demand when you show the vendors you are hacking away as well. I think this is the new normal for this business. The full product line duopoly is still a relatively new thing. Think about it.

Historically Boeing has some planes, Douglas had some planes and Airbus had some planes along with others. But I would argue there was probably less competition across product lines then than there is now. The 747 was long on its own. There was competition among smaller planes, sort of. But even back then many aircraft almost seem to have started as bespoke designs for certain customers and the 727, DC-9 and 737 were all somewhat different.

Then we saw a bunch of ideas on what should come below the 777 and over some years got a lot of solutions in that market. The losers quit the business. And the winners had the 767/777 and the A330/A340. I would argue Boeing got to what we would recognize a a complete product lineup first with the 737-757-767-777-747 lineup. Airbus got there when it added the A380 and certainly the addition of the 787 and A350 made things even more crowded.

The 787 seems to me the first time other than maybe the A320 where builders were forced to launch a product directly into a competing modern product in the jet airliner industry. Even then with the A320 you still had multiple builders out there in that space and the 727 was still out there in numbers. The A350 followed down that path as well. There don’t appear to be great efficiencies to be gained beyond the two engine tube and wings structure that anyone is willing to try yet.

Basically in an environment where you have competitive jets of similar layout from the smallest passenger jets up to the biggest the only thing you can really do is compete on cost to build. When you had a 777 or A330 up against an MD-11 you wiped the floor with it and cost just wasn’t as much of an issue. Now it’s about the only way to compete.

The industry is going to commoditize until someone breaks the mold of aircraft design. This drive on suppliers and OEM’s will be the new normal.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 3:52 pm

I think Boeing feels a bit threatened by suppliers like UTC, Safran, RR, GE and Honeywell. Suppliers that make good money in the Aftermarket, own IP, supply all integrators and say they only invest in new "win-win" programs if they feel good about risks and ROI. With programs like 787 & Partnership for Success as reference. Maybe not the kind of partnerships Boeing is looking for at this stage.
Last edited by keesje on Mon Apr 30, 2018 4:12 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25642
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 3:54 pm

In addition to working with suppliers, Boeing is buying some of them, as well. They're closing on a $4 billion-plus deal to take over aerospace-parts specialist KLX Inc., which sells components for commercial, military and business jets and provides logistics services.
 
User avatar
UAL747422
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:44 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 4:12 pm

huuthe93 wrote:
There will be no boeing 797 because boeing is developing 777x


That is unlikely, as Boeing has already made a program office for the NMA meaning they are actually somewhat serious. The 777x cant really replace the 757/767 in the way that the NMA is trying to do, the same thing with the 787-8 wasn't the best replacement for the 767.
I just love the 747, as you already may have noticed.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1654
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 4:13 pm

keesje wrote:
I think Boeing feels a bit threatened by suppliers like UTC, Safran, RR, GE and Honeywell. Suppliers that make good money in the Aftermarket, own IP, supply all integrators and say they only invest in new "win-win" programs if they feel good about. Not the kind of partnerships Boeing is looking for at this stage.


Clearly. This is penetrating insight really.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1654
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Apr 30, 2018 4:24 pm

UAL747422 wrote:
huuthe93 wrote:
There will be no boeing 797 because boeing is developing 777x


That is unlikely, as Boeing has already made a program office for the NMA meaning they are actually somewhat serious. The 777x cant really replace the 757/767 in the way that the NMA is trying to do, the same thing with the 787-8 wasn't the best replacement for the 767.


The 77X design is pretty close to in the can for both of the variants from what I am told. There isn’t a lot left to do other than build it.
 
chiki
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu May 17, 2018 9:49 am

 
mzlin
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:32 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri May 18, 2018 8:17 am

Boeing's plans for a tasty new mid-market airplane
http://australianaviation.com.au/2018/0 ... -airplane/

Boeing adds managers, engineers to new mid-market airplane program as 797 effort accelerates
https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... tails.html
 
parapente
Posts: 2650
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri May 18, 2018 9:39 am

Thx Mzlin for the 'Australian' article.Well written,but I particularly enjoyed the quality and maturity of the discussion that followed it.
One guy at the end summaries it well I thought stating that it was two distinct markets rolled into one plane family.The oversized for capacity and the undersized for range.Seems logical.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 18617
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri May 18, 2018 12:37 pm

mzlin wrote:
Boeing's plans for a tasty new mid-market airplane
http://australianaviation.com.au/2018/0 ... -airplane/

I agree it's a well executed summation of what we already know.

mzlin wrote:
Boeing adds managers, engineers to new mid-market airplane program as 797 effort accelerates
https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... tails.html

The article is interesting and shows a dilemma for professionals: what can you say in social media about your role working on an unannounced product?

Personally I think there are ways to do this without using the actual code word ("NMA") or alleged model ("797") of the product, and it's more professional to make the effort to do so.

Also there are ways to say you're working in a given technology space without calling out the actual technology you're using, which is another no-no.

What's to gain by bragging publicly unless you're looking for another job, and if that's the case, your next employer might not appreciate how loose you are with insider information.

Don't people get training on this stuff? I know I sat through many training sessions and signed "code of business conduct" documents many times in my career.

My new job involves working on some (relatively) sexy (within my industry) technology and I'd kind of like bragging rights but I'm going to wait till the product is announced.

Bottom line is I don't see the upside in pre-announcing my employer's stuff before they do.

Just saying some of the buzz words will give competitors a very good idea of where my employer is heading so doing so is unprofessional, IMHO.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
User avatar
UAL747422
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:44 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 11:17 pm

New question: The probability of US airlines being the launch customer for the 797?
I just love the 747, as you already may have noticed.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 11:23 pm

UAL747422 wrote:
New question: The probability of US airlines being the launch customer for the 797?


Well they're the only left flying sizeable 757/767 fleets..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
UAL747422
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:44 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 11:26 pm

keesje wrote:
UAL747422 wrote:
New question: The probability of US airlines being the launch customer for the 797?


Well they're the only left flying sizeable 757/767 fleets..


True, and they really want the NMA to fly to small European cities where the demand isn't as high.
I just love the 747, as you already may have noticed.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 11:50 pm

Question is which will sell more; capacity or range? The past has shown that capacity wins since the CASM is better due to similar operating costs, although this wasn’t the case with the 752/753. I imagine with 4000+ nautical miles of range for the larger version that this would be practical for flying relatively short transatlantic flights, although it would face troubles currently experienced by 757s; strong headwinds, mostly in the winter.

UAL747422 wrote:
keesje wrote:
UAL747422 wrote:
New question: The probability of US airlines being the launch customer for the 797?


Well they're the only left flying sizeable 757/767 fleets..


True, and they really want the NMA to fly to small European cities where the demand isn't as high.


And that’s why I feel like te 797 is too big sometimes; 220-270 seats /dual/ class? Maybe single class, but that looks like a 777 to me (the 789 we received in AUS seated about 220 ish).
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25642
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 12:13 am

CarlosSi wrote:
And that’s why I feel like te 797 is too big sometimes; 220-270 seats /dual/ class? Maybe single class, but that looks like a 777 to me (the 789 we received in AUS seated about 220 ish).


Well we need to remember that this would be in a Boeing OEM configuration. The 767-200 family, for example, seats 216 with 18 First seats at 38" pitch and 198 Economy at 34" pitch. The 767-300ER seats 261 with 24 First at 38" pitch and 237 Economy at 34" pitch.

Using United 767s as an example, then one would expect closer to ~170 on the "797-7" and ~210 for the "797-8" in a mixed Polaris Business, Premium Economy and Economy configuration.
 
B764er
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:19 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 1:25 am

Boeing can go whichever way they see fit:
I only ask that they use a modern style windshield on the 797, a la 787. On the renderings Ive seen they should just name it "757neo." I'm not happy with that one detail.
They will build a winner no doubt, but they have to move forward. Specially since it is getting it own "7x7" number.
 
User avatar
UAL747422
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:44 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 2:30 am

CarlosSi wrote:
Question is which will sell more; capacity or range? The past has shown that capacity wins since the CASM is better due to similar operating costs, although this wasn’t the case with the 752/753. I imagine with 4000+ nautical miles of range for the larger version that this would be practical for flying relatively short transatlantic flights, although it would face troubles currently experienced by 757s; strong headwinds, mostly in the winter.

UAL747422 wrote:
keesje wrote:

Well they're the only left flying sizeable 757/767 fleets..


True, and they really want the NMA to fly to small European cities where the demand isn't as high.


And that’s why I feel like te 797 is too big sometimes; 220-270 seats /dual/ class? Maybe single class, but that looks like a 777 to me (the 789 we received in AUS seated about 220 ish).


To be honest, I think the NMA is aiming to replace the 757 in its trans Atlantic routes. Maybe the 767, but you can replace it with 787 or A330 etc. if you really needed to. That's what AA is doing I believe, dumping some of their 763's for newer widebodies. With a 737 MAX, your kind of pushing it, and with a 777 or 787 or A330 etc. its overkill. The NMA will be made probably to do only those types of flights the 757 is kept alive by today, and be built for that purpose only, as the new 737's are taking over the 757's routes that it was made for originally. Boeing will most likely make it a reasonable size, a 2-2-2 layout would be nice.
I just love the 747, as you already may have noticed.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 2:52 am

UAL747422 wrote:
To be honest, I think the NMA is aiming to replace the 757 in its trans Atlantic routes. Maybe the 767, but you can replace it with 787 or A330 etc. if you really needed to. That's what AA is doing I believe, dumping some of their 763's for newer widebodies. With a 737 MAX, your kind of pushing it, and with a 777 or 787 or A330 etc. its overkill.


In terms of size, a 787 is just about right, but it's range/MTOW is overkill. AA doesn't seem to mind as much, ordering a slew of them to replace the 767, but United has been pretty clear it wants something less... overcapable. It's definitely too big for a 757 replacement.

UAL747422 wrote:
Boeing will most likely make it a reasonable size, a 2-2-2 layout would be nice.


Certainly would be nice :) , but that's too comfortable! Why would an airline want an airliner with extra width/drag without having the chance to add seats?

Big question is whether it'll be commonly flown as 2-3-2 or 2-4-2. Making it a tight 2-3-2 would restrict the fuselage to be longer so it can seat that target 220-270. Making it 2-4-2 means the aircraft would have to be stubbier to be 220-270. Perhaps what hasn't been asked is whether airlines are going to fly these aircraft at that target capacity with 7 or 8 abreast; that's one thing that'll define the fuselage length. Boeing can make it XX long and YY wide to hold 220 PAX, but if airlines can add a row/column, it becomes 220+extra seats. I suppose that would make fares cheaper, although why not just build it at one target width/abreast count and leave it at that? I'm sure Boeing will get this sort of input from the airlines when designing.
 
dampfnudel
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:42 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 6:25 am

UAL747422 wrote:
New question: The probability of US airlines being the launch customer for the 797?


DL/UA will be at the head of the line for sure.
A313 343 B703 722 732 73G 738 739 741 742 744 752 762 76E 764 772 CR9 D10 DHH DHT F27 GRM L10 M83 TU5

AA AI CO CL DE DL EA KL LH N7 PA PQ SK RO TW UA YR
 
Flyglobal
Posts: 516
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:25 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 am

In Europe it's said that Boeing's 797 'may land at Airlines' probably around 2027.
At least Steve Udvar-Hazy says so.
Link in German:.
http://www.aero.de/news-29218/Boeing-An ... -2027.html

Further: Lessors ask for engine choices, but engine makers may have trouble for early developments.

Flyglobal
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 7255
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 11:07 am

Can we please do away with the legend of 757s flying TATL, we are talking about a small number of frames and the A321LR can do this just as well or better. It will be interesting to see what Boeing comes up with, as I think the market place is difficult and open for attack from below and above.

The 2027 time frame makes sense, when you look at the engines.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8108
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 11:35 am

Well, how many A321's in any version have or are doing TATL, until they do, the 757 is the only one we can talk about, the 737-XX and A3XXX n/b a/c are custom configured to run TATL.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 7255
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 11:38 am

Yet, still there are not nearly enough 757s flying TATL to make a business case for a new plane.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 7255
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 12:52 pm

WOW air does not fly TATL, they stop in the middle.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 12:55 pm

par13del wrote:
Well, how many A321's in any version have or are doing TATL, until they do, the 757 is the only one we can talk about, the 737-XX and A3XXX n/b a/c are custom configured to run TATL.


Reality is catching up in an unfair way? https://wowair.us/about-us/wow-aircraft/meet-the-wow-fleet/

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 18617
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 1:33 pm

seahawk wrote:
The 2027 time frame makes sense, when you look at the engines.

I don't think it will take eight years to make a LEAP derivative, and from what we read that's the most likely launch engine.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7383
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 1:42 pm

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
The 2027 time frame makes sense, when you look at the engines.

I don't think it will take eight years to make a LEAP derivative, and from what we read that's the most likely launch engine.


You need the engine a year before first flight for testing, that again is a year before EIS. So if you expect EIS in 2027, the engine has to be ready about 2025. 2025 minus 2019 are 6 years. Furthermore, were was it fixed, that the not yet launched 797 will be equipped with a LEAP derivative?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 18617
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 3:16 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
The 2027 time frame makes sense, when you look at the engines.

I don't think it will take eight years to make a LEAP derivative, and from what we read that's the most likely launch engine.

You need the engine a year before first flight for testing, that again is a year before EIS. So if you expect EIS in 2027, the engine has to be ready about 2025. 2025 minus 2019 are 6 years. Furthermore, were was it fixed, that the not yet launched 797 will be equipped with a LEAP derivative?

C'mon, man, I used the words "most likely" not "fixed". Please calm down. You don't get points for making stuff up.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 3:23 pm

Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I don't think it will take eight years to make a LEAP derivative, and from what we read that's the most likely launch engine.

You need the engine a year before first flight for testing, that again is a year before EIS. So if you expect EIS in 2027, the engine has to be ready about 2025. 2025 minus 2019 are 6 years. Furthermore, were was it fixed, that the not yet launched 797 will be equipped with a LEAP derivative?

C'mon, man, I used the words "most likely" not "fixed". Please calm down. You don't get points for making stuff up.


No, no Revelation, you won't get away that easy. Me, mjoelnir and many others clearly sensed you are fixing 797 / CFM EIS here, shame on you.. :stirthepot:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
mffoda
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 4:19 pm

Here's one of the articles for FG regarding the potential CFM Leap derivative...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ne-446993/

"A CFM International engine for Boeing’s New Mid-market Airplane (NMA) would be a growth version of the Leap series turbofan, suggesting a balance between a derivative and a clean-sheet design, says GE Aviation chief executive David Joyce.

“It will be bigger,” Joyce told a JP Morgan investment conference on 14 March. “It’s advancing [on the Leap technology] not a full generation but a half-generation.”"
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 18617
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 4:39 pm

mffoda wrote:
Here's one of the articles for FG regarding the potential CFM Leap derivative...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ne-446993/

"A CFM International engine for Boeing’s New Mid-market Airplane (NMA) would be a growth version of the Leap series turbofan, suggesting a balance between a derivative and a clean-sheet design, says GE Aviation chief executive David Joyce.

“It will be bigger,” Joyce told a JP Morgan investment conference on 14 March. “It’s advancing [on the Leap technology] not a full generation but a half-generation.”"

Indeed. I don't think it's a big leap (see what I did there!) to suggest that CFM is the most likely launch engine for the 797. I could also see a 2nd engine if the market insists on it.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 7255
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 5:16 pm

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
The 2027 time frame makes sense, when you look at the engines.

I don't think it will take eight years to make a LEAP derivative, and from what we read that's the most likely launch engine.


Only if you can achieve the performance goals with an engine only half a generation more advanced than the competition. Being 2 years later might be preferable if the engine gives you another 5% fuel burn reduction.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 439
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 5:29 pm

keesje wrote:
par13del wrote:
Well, how many A321's in any version have or are doing TATL, until they do, the 757 is the only one we can talk about, the 737-XX and A3XXX n/b a/c are custom configured to run TATL.


Reality is catching up in an unfair way? https://wowair.us/about-us/wow-aircraft/meet-the-wow-fleet/

Image

Yeah nice try, but you could had waited for the LRs to enter service for a better example. Your example requires 2 A321s to cross the Atlantic.
 
iceberg210
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed May 23, 2018 6:03 pm

seahawk wrote:
Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
The 2027 time frame makes sense, when you look at the engines.

I don't think it will take eight years to make a LEAP derivative, and from what we read that's the most likely launch engine.


Only if you can achieve the performance goals with an engine only half a generation more advanced than the competition. Being 2 years later might be preferable if the engine gives you another 5% fuel burn reduction.

Blind speculation on my part but I think it'll be launched with two options for engines, LEAPX+ and EITHER Ultrafan or GTF. But the latter two will have a two year later EIS. Maybe the way you get tricky with it is make the 797-7 the launch model with the 8 following with the two engine options while the 7 gets the engine option later. We'll just have to see...
Erik Berg
Defying Gravity

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