Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13829
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Thu Aug 30, 2018 10:20 pm

© Leeham News: As time goes by, the Middle of the Market airplane appears to have become the Muddle of the Market.

Boeing can’t seem to close the business case on its Middle of the Market airplane, the New Midmarket Aircraft, or NMA.

And Airbus continues to stir the pot with talk of an A321XLR and the ever-present A321neo Plus.

Summary
    - Boeing’s been talking about the MOM for six years—an extraordinarily long time.
    - The aircraft evolved from a 757 replacement to a 767 replacement—something the 787 was billed to be.
    - The business case remains unclear.
    - The Airplane definition is still a matter of debate.
    - The MOM was defined by Boeing as above the 737-9 and below the 787-8—but now there’s the 737-10 at the small end, for capacity, and renewed interest in the 787-8 at the upper end.
    - Airbus is pushing the A321LR and nearing a decision whether to proceed with the A321XLR.
    - Engine makers remain cool to the NMA.
    - The supply chain is unenthused about the NMA because Boeing wants to capture the aftermarket and hold the intellectual property rights.
    - The supply chain is in melt-down

Other than this, everything is fine.

https://leehamnews.com/2018/08/30/the-muddle-of-the-market-aircraft-no-this-isnt-a-typo/

:arrow: I can still see Boeing downsizing the NMA now that a twin aisle at NB costs maybe is a fata morgana after all.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
downdata
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Thu Aug 30, 2018 10:46 pm

eh the most important pieces arebehind paywall...
 
airzona11
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:05 am

Same story different day. There is no new information here. There has been a huge boom in new build aircraft. Major airlines have been pushing or right sizing orders, maybe the airlines and Boeing are waiting to see what the next down turn yields.
 
User avatar
QuarkFly
Posts: 369
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:20 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:15 am

I wouldn't be surprised if we stopped hearing about this MoM El Dorado. This sized aircraft may not fit the world we live in...geography combined with economics may result in little demand for a 250 passenger mid-range aircraft that can carry limited cargo.

B should start taking a look at below 150 passengers along with its partner Embraer and begin preparing the technology to eventually replace the 737 with a 150-225 passenger narrowbody to offer in about a decade.
Always take the Red Eye if possible
 
Sooner787
Posts: 2692
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:26 am

IMHO...... Boeing should be working on a 787-3 V2.0 to cover whatever the upper
end of the MOM market is and save their $$$$$$$$ for a true clean sheet 737 replacement.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23899
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:22 am

airzona11 wrote:
Same story different day. There is no new information here.

Keesje and Scott Hamilton have something in common: they regurgitate old news hoping to get clicks.

I'm not sure how it benefits either of them to do so, but the pattern is clear.
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
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:25 am

Revelation wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Same story different day. There is no new information here.

Keesje and Scott Hamilton have something in common: they regurgitate old news hoping to get clicks.

I'm not sure how it benefits either of them to do so, but the pattern is clear.


Not sure, either, but I feel like I should get my flyswatter ready just in case.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 19696
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:30 am

Revelation wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Same story different day. There is no new information here.

Keesje and Scott Hamilton have something in common: they regurgitate old news hoping to get clicks.

I'm not sure how it benefits either of them to do so, but the pattern is clear.

Agreed. However, I have seen Boeing hiring the types of engineers they would want for a production/design shift. More materials with directional strength (CRFP and 3D-printed parts). There is no news, but there seems to be development. If the worst people do is name calling, we shall see.

The market has become a market of extreme economies of scale. Every time production is doubled, cost per unit goes down 13%.
Hayes also revealed that each doubling of the GTF engine production rate results in a 13 percent production-cost reduction per engine, so by doubling the rate in 2018, the company should achieve a per-engine production cost approximately 13 percent lower than in 2017.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... production

Below the market is the extremely mass produced NEO and MAX.
Above is the highly produced A350 and even higher produced 787.

This actually makes the VLA market very challenging as the unit rates are so low compared to the mass produced types. Same with the smaller aircraft such as A220 and E2 jets, they are competing against incredible economies of scale.

It is the success of today, in my opinion, slowing the official middle of the market launch.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3641
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:55 am

Revelation wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Same story different day. There is no new information here.

Keesje and Scott Hamilton have something in common: they regurgitate old news hoping to get clicks.

I'm not sure how it benefits either of them to do so, but the pattern is clear.


It kinds of feels that way, although I think Scott Hamilton is fed information directly from Airbus to post. I think the smear campaign he posted to try to claim the 787 was offered to Hawaiian below Airbus production costs could only have come from Airbus.

3 of the last 10 articles posted on Leeham have some negative publicity for the NMA. Perhaps Airbus is worried that the NMA is getting closer to launch, so they are feeding Leeham some stories.
 
jagraham
Posts: 1067
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:07 am

Boeing pushed it with the NSA, then Airbus kicked their butts with the A320NEO . . Boeing needs to get their act together. Fortunately for Boeing, Airbus has indigestion with the A320NEO and A350 programs right now.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13829
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 5:48 am

I think Scott is the first one who dares to say Boeing is in a deadlock with the NMA.

"dares" because this won't give him any popularity points / invites for press events / interviews with the local aircraft manufacturer.

Contrary to the wine zipping, yes nodding enthousiasts colleagues that have been repeating anything the VP's say, avoiding difficult question and singing along the irrealistic can-do plans that everyone loves to hear.

Since Farnborough it has become remarkable quiet. Better be positive or shut up. :worried:

Or you have dudes like Revelation after you, that specialize in endless personal attacks, trying to discredit everybody they disagree with. Maybe a sign of times..

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
chiad
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 6:51 am

keesje wrote:
I think Scott is the first one who dares to say Boeing is in a deadlock with the NMA.

"dares" because this won't give him any popularity points / invites for press events / interviews with the local aircraft manufacturer.

Contrary to the wine zipping, yes nodding enthousiasts colleagues that have been repeating anything the VP's say, avoiding difficult question and singing along the irrealistic can-do plans that everyone loves to hear.

Since Farnborough it has become remarkable quiet. Better be positive or shut up. :worried:

Or you have dudes like Revelation after you, that specialize in endless personal attacks, trying to discredit everybody they disagree with. Maybe a sign of times..

Image


Thanks Keesje.
I think this issue with MOM progress, or lack of it, is worth paying attention to.
When a program hyped like MOM suddenly become this quiet it deserves some attention.
Personally I hope we'll get to see the MOM, the A321XLR and A321neo Plus launched. What would be better for A-net than this?
 
chiad
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 7:02 am

jagraham wrote:
Boeing pushed it with the NSA, then Airbus kicked their butts with the A320NEO . . Boeing needs to get their act together. Fortunately for Boeing, Airbus has indigestion with the A320NEO and A350 programs right now.


Seems like Boeing has the "same" issues now.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... in-renton/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ory-logjam

What is the status on the A350 and NEO's? I read somewhere, I think, that the A350 was pretty much out of the woods, and that the NEO gliders are decreasing.
According to Planespotters there has been 30 NEO deliveries so far this month (August),
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3542
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:27 am

Can't find anything in the article to really disagree with, whilst anyone can see that there is a gap in the market, the evolution of airframe design has made it exceedingly difficult to arrive at an economic design to slot in to it. 737's and 320's have grown hugely from their first inception and have the advantage of economies of scale that their original designers would never have believed. Widebody twins have to be of a sufficient size to overcome the additional structure weight that comes from the extra aisle and the larger fuselage sections.
So how do you fill the "Middle of the market" ? A narrowbody that will need additional material in the structure to stop it bending in the middle and taller undercarriage to allow it to rotate, with lower production volumes, all of which would fail to translate into lower seat cost over its smaller stablemates, or a smaller widebody also with poor manufacturing economics and poorer operating costs due to dragging that extra aisle around.
Is it any wonder that Boeing have spent six years on this and Airbus don't seem to have come up with a counter proposal if they do.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4899
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:47 am

keesje wrote:
© Leeham News: As time goes by, the Middle of the Market airplane appears to have become the Muddle of the Market.

Boeing can’t seem to close the business case on its Middle of the Market airplane, the New Midmarket Aircraft, or NMA.

And Airbus continues to stir the pot with talk of an A321XLR and the ever-present A321neo Plus.

Summary
    - Boeing’s been talking about the MOM for six years—an extraordinarily long time.
    - The aircraft evolved from a 757 replacement to a 767 replacement—something the 787 was billed to be.
    - The business case remains unclear.
    - The Airplane definition is still a matter of debate.
    - The MOM was defined by Boeing as above the 737-9 and below the 787-8—but now there’s the 737-10 at the small end, for capacity, and renewed interest in the 787-8 at the upper end.
    - Airbus is pushing the A321LR and nearing a decision whether to proceed with the A321XLR.
    - Engine makers remain cool to the NMA.
    - The supply chain is unenthused about the NMA because Boeing wants to capture the aftermarket and hold the intellectual property rights.
    - The supply chain is in melt-down

Other than this, everything is fine.

https://leehamnews.com/2018/08/30/the-muddle-of-the-market-aircraft-no-this-isnt-a-typo/

:arrow: I can still see Boeing downsizing the NMA now that a twin aisle at NB costs maybe is a fata morgana after all.

Boeing is Not going to cannibalize it's market just to put out an airplane. It might have been better to just build the B787-3 and call it a day. That way they'd have a range of B787's for every range and need. Above the B737 and Below the B777. I still don't think they'd want to field an airplane until Pratt and Rolls get their Geared Fan engines perfected. .
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:09 am

Revelation wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Same story different day. There is no new information here.

Keesje and Scott Hamilton have something in common: they regurgitate old news hoping to get clicks.

I'm not sure how it benefits either of them to do so, but the pattern is clear.


If old news is still current it looks like all the PR blabla from Boeing on
homesteading the uncanny valley of the MOM space
doesn't get real traction.

Unsurprising.
The efficiency abyss between single aisle and twin aisle layout is real
and it is not a Boeing valiantly goes where no airframer has trodden before.
Murphy is an optimist
 
smartplane
Posts: 1467
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:32 am

lightsaber wrote:
However, I have seen Boeing hiring the types of engineers they would want for a production/design shift. More materials with directional strength (CRFP and 3D-printed parts). There is no news, but there seems to be development.

Think many of those hires are for production resilience, and because yet more suppliers are activating exit clauses so Boeing needs to bring in-house. Suppliers are very busy, but margins are wafer thin, or less.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13829
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:43 am

First tier suppliers have been doing detailled proposals for the NMA over the last year.

The factors Scott mentions ; Engine makers hesitating, suppliers being unenthused on aftermarket and the supply chain facing serious ramp up issues, seem to be kicking in at board level.

Maybe the UTC's, Spirit's, Honeywell's, GE's and RR's of this industry can't be forced to take risk, invest billions and be sidelined in the aftermarket. Maybe the Partnership4Success, $50Bill aftermarket strategy weren't well timed / communicated? The employees & stockholders loved the concept, but now the chickens come home to roost.
Last edited by keesje on Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4206
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:47 am

IMHO, the gap between the A321/737-10 and the A330-800/787-8 can't be bridged in any efficient manner. This is an issue stemming from legal requirements, specifically the requirement that no seat be more than 2 seats away from an aisle. The optimum design for a MOM plane is going to require something like 7 or 8 abreast seating. You can't do a 3+4 or 4+4 seating configurations legally, so that means you have to include an extra aisle, and aisles don't generate revenue. Simple.

And in Boeings case, the above-mentioned means that any efficient clean-sheet design will be spaced so closely to either the 787 or the 737-10 that it will cannibalize and kill one of those models.
 
StTim
Posts: 3684
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:47 am

I do think the very aggressive approach to take over the after market activity from the suppliers was going to hit Boeing hard. Many companies rely on the after market to actually make money.

I am not sure if they have got to the point where they will walk away but it is possible. They are in business to make money for their shareholders.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 11:08 am

Boeing plugged the regional 757 gap in their portfolio with the 737-10.They covered the longer 'er' range market of the 767 with the 788 (and indeed have recently announced production improvements).So 'today' the only bit missing is the regional 767 size market up to 5knm 'ish ( and the 180-200 seat TATL 757 - but they've lost that now To the 'LR').
The business case for a $10bn clean sheet can only be closed with a forecast of major growth in this 767 type/class of aircraft.
Who knows? Certainly I don't!But it's certainly not that obvious to anybody or it would have happened by now (4 years talking).

But I still remain a little surprised that they have never made mention of a 767NEO with the genx2b developed for the 748.They must be very good reasons for this I am sure but- the aircaft remains in production,the cockpit (7779x) is brand new,no doubt the wing/b winglets can be tweaked a little.No real. competition in that space.But obviously am 100% wrong or they would have done it.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3641
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:09 pm

Meanwhile Boeing is building up its avionics capability and it is speculated that this may be for the NMA with recent news coming out on that expanded division

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/08/1 ... echnology/

There is also recent discussion going on with the governor of Washington creating a council on aerospace infrastructure and how that could play into the decision on where the NMA is built

http://www.tacomadailyindex.com/blog/wh ... e/2443749/

Things are going on, but they certainly are not making big splashy public announcements. I am really curious what is going on behind the scenes. Things may be kept quiet for a reason. Some will speculate that is because the airplane isn’t viable, others will speculate it is so that Airbus isn’t tipped off to what they are actually going to launch when the decision comes. Boeing doesn’t appear to have a blogger like Scott Hamilton where they selectively release information.

WIederling wrote:
Revelation wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Same story different day. There is no new information here.

Keesje and Scott Hamilton have something in common: they regurgitate old news hoping to get clicks.

I'm not sure how it benefits either of them to do so, but the pattern is clear.


If old news is still current it looks like all the PR blabla from Boeing on
homesteading the uncanny valley of the MOM space
doesn't get real traction.

Unsurprising.
The efficiency abyss between single aisle and twin aisle layout is real
and it is not a Boeing valiantly goes where no airframer has trodden before.


I don’t know what you are talking about. A 220 and 270 seat widebody is almost exactly the same size as the 767-200 and 767-300. Boeing has built over 1,000 airplanes in this area.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3641
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:29 pm

keesje wrote:
First tier suppliers have been doing detailled proposals for the NMA over the last year.

The factors Scott mentions ; Engine makers hesitating, suppliers being unenthused on aftermarket and the supply chain facing serious ramp up issues, seem to be kicking in at board level.

Maybe the UTC's, Spirit's, Honeywell's, GE's and RR's of this industry can't be forced to take risk, invest billions and be sidelined in the aftermarket. Maybe the Partnership4Success, $50Bill aftermarket strategy weren't well timed / communicated? The employees & stockholders loved the concept, but now the chickens come home to roost.


The supplier relationships are definitely quite complex. Revisions to the Boeing Product Support Assurance Agreement usually close loopholes that suppliers use to maximize profit at airline expenses. Signing up for the latest revision and requirements usually is required to be able to bid on new contracts. There is probably a lot going on. Suppliers like GE and UTAS have been buying up companies to flex their muscle but Boeing is responding with in house competition and continuing to expand the supply chain. This is a fascinating game to watch in the industry.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:36 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
I don’t know what you are talking about.


understandable.
Understanding would collide with your task.
A 220 and 270 seat widebody is almost exactly the same size as the 767-200 and 767-300. Boeing has built over 1,000 airplanes in this area.


... in the ( distant ) past.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Byron1976
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:52 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:43 pm

As far as I understand, the MOM bet that Boeing wants to do with just 1 model, is very, very ambitious. That big ambition is complicating the resolution of the case. Boeing needs to understand that to fill the gap that they want to cover, is needed 2 models with diferences between them, as happened between the 737 and the 757.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:05 pm

There is really nothing new in this article that we didn't already know.

Boeing is discovering that you can't bully around your suppliers and expect them to continue to tow the line too. They have to make money just as much as mother boeing does. Otherwise why bother. I've even heard rumors of Airbus looking to take advantage of Boeing's bullish behavior to gain more "market share" among some of Boeing's traditional Tier 1 suppliers. To be fair, most of these suppliers already do Airbus work, but why not take advantage and fill a bigger void.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3641
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:11 pm

WIederling wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I don’t know what you are talking about.


understandable.
Understanding would collide with your task.
A 220 and 270 seat widebody is almost exactly the same size as the 767-200 and 767-300. Boeing has built over 1,000 airplanes in this area.


... in the ( distant ) past.


There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23899
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 3:56 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable

True. The real rub is producing this all-new NMA at a price that the customers find attractive and yet still allows Boeing to make a profit. However that's been the rub since the very beginning of this program. If you don't believe me, read one of the countless threads we've had on this topic, yet people act as if Leeham is carrying the tablets down from the mountain.
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
49Paralell
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:05 pm

Maybe I am just being not seeing it myself, but I have a feeling these two (Airbus and Boeing) got so good at making planes that their own products truly swallowed the need to make yet another plane that is not needed. I have pointed it out before and maybe someone can shed light on this. Have a look:

B 777LR - 16,417 KM range or 8,864.4 nm
B 787-8 - 14,100 or 7,613 nm
A350-1 - 15,557 or 8,400 nm
A338 neo - 15,094 or 8,150 nm

So is it just me or did their middle products ate their own long-haul market planes? It's more evident with the example of the A338 vs. the A350 that it is with Boeing where both planes have the same range virtually.

If Airbus does not develop the A350 URL in a manner that properly makes sense to the long-haul market, I predict that once the A338neo proves itself for TAP and AirAsia in operational costs, it will eat the A350. It will be the same story on Boeing's side. with the 787 vs. the 777. Airlines are able to serve European hubs from the US west coast with the 787 with low operational costs at capacity. Now if the operational costs are lower with that plane, why buy the 777? One can ask the same question by replacing the 338 with 350s or vice-versa. Maybe I am not seeing something that you all see?

Is it not AA that decided to serve short and medium haul high density routes with the 737 variant while long haul will be served with 787s? I believe to keep costs down in pilot training and staffing, maintenance, and overall operational costs this is the way to go if you are a global airway server. Diverse fleets like Lufthansa will (sadly for us spotters) be a thing of the past. An operator will be more like TAP using the 320 family for short and medium haul and A338s for medium to long haul...please fell free to replace Boeing products in this equation.

Am I looking at it right?

I believe that until manufacturers can offer Qantas an option to serve Sydney - London and Sydney - New York non-stop with relatively lower operational costs...what we see in the manufacturer's websites will be it for a long while. Until then, I believe the demise of the 777 and the 350 are imminent as the 797 will be only a wish that we carry to spot something different in airports around the world.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1278
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:08 pm

How is it such a deadlock if they just got the engine rfp data to analyze in the past 30-60 days? Surely Boeing is being aggressive with tier 1 and other suppliers: grumbling there is inevitable as a result. I notice the usual Boeing detractors have utterly forgotten now the positive airline comments that did come out when briefed on the models planned. Delaying the front end to avoid a 787 style issue early in is fine with me, logical, and probably appreciated by their customers too.

“Not enthusiastic” is pretty comical. It’s big business. Ge and Pratt are working hard to get the business I would bet.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1278
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:10 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I don’t know what you are talking about.


understandable.
Understanding would collide with your task.
A 220 and 270 seat widebody is almost exactly the same size as the 767-200 and 767-300. Boeing has built over 1,000 airplanes in this area.


... in the ( distant ) past.


There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable


If Boeing did give up or had any intention to do so, further, on the MOM then they would promptly be revisiting their decision not to move forward with United’s request to sell more pax 767 and update the aircraft appropriately.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13829
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:17 pm

I think Boeing has opportunity for a new big NSA/NMA single aisle that is less clear for Airbus.

- A NSA/NMA able to use high BPR engine (>80 inch)
- A NSA/NMA able to use standard AKH cargo containers (satisfying EMEA/ ASIA customers)
- A NSA/NMA able to start off with Leap / PW GTF engines (reducing risk & investment)
- A NSA/NMA able providing growth to comfortably fly 250 people single class 4200NM
- A NSA/NMA topping existing NB in comfort, noise and flexibility
- A NSA/NMA beating the 30 yr A320 design in weight, materials and MRO

EIS wouldn't before 2025, hardly hurting the 737MAX but prevent A321 achieving total dominance later next decade.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:22 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable


You've written the same before.

It still does not fit today.

Back then the initial 767(-200) was the A300 fuselage scaled down, shortened to allow more fuel percentage to achieve longer range with about the same engines the A300 sported ( availability ) while the A310 fixed that via a better wing. ( but at the time did not have the market share clout to turn it into a big success.)

it was ~ the best rangewise you could do at the time keeping the objectives in mind.
scaling effects allow larger planes to have more range.
These are still valid, only the engine efficiencies have expanded the limits significantly.

B continued to work on the 767 while A turned its attention to the A320 closely followed by A340/A330.
Last edited by WIederling on Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Murphy is an optimist
 
glbltrvlr
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:28 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:24 pm

keesje wrote:
    - The supply chain is unenthused about the NMA because Boeing wants to capture the aftermarket and hold the intellectual property rights.
    - The supply chain is in melt-down


This, a thousand times over. Ya think they might be related? Combined with Boeing's plan to compete with their own suppliers for avionics, apus, actuators, etc., It's no wonder they can't make the business case work.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 4:35 pm

glbltrvlr wrote:
This, a thousand times over. Ya think they might be related? Combined with Boeing's plan to compete with their own suppliers for avionics, apus, actuators, etc., It's no wonder they can't make the business case work.


it is the 787 all over again ( outcome for suppliers ) only this time Boeing is up front
forthcoming that they want to dork the suppliers in the process. .-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 19696
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 5:14 pm

trpmb6 wrote:
There is really nothing new in this article that we didn't already know.

Boeing is discovering that you can't bully around your suppliers and expect them to continue to tow the line too. They have to make money just as much as mother boeing does. Otherwise why bother. I've even heard rumors of Airbus looking to take advantage of Boeing's bullish behavior to gain more "market share" among some of Boeing's traditional Tier 1 suppliers. To be fair, most of these suppliers already do Airbus work, but why not take advantage and fill a bigger void.

I'm hearing rumors of the same. Vendors are busy. They are scrambling in the NEO, A220, A350, MAX, 777x and 787. When vendors cannot handle the current workload, the bid higher.

For example, the 777x gear is not being built by a traditional tier 1 as the terms were onerous (Boeing took away rebuild).

But Airbus doesn't always play nice. They are squashing down A220 component pricing. No vendor sides with one airframer.

I'm sure vendors will demand bthe A350 model where tools and other high cost work is paid by Boeing upfront (or the engine vendor).

This is the only new build plane in play. There is a proven market for a smaller widebody of reduced range (see A300 and 767).

Thanks,
Neil
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 5:18 pm

lightsaber wrote:

I'm sure vendors will demand bthe A350 model where tools and other high cost work is paid by Boeing upfront (or the engine vendor).

This is the only new build plane in play. There is a proven market for a smaller widebody of reduced range (see A300 and 767).

Thanks,
Neil


Exactly! This is why I think Boeing is having trouble making the numbers work. They say they need to bring aftermarket sales back in house so they can make the lower sale price work out. But to do that means taking on their suppliers who used to use that same revenue to make THEIR numbers make sense. This is just a giant shell game of who gets what chunk of money to be profitable. In doing so all Boeing has done is disrupt their supply chain. Which is really something you shouldn't be doing when you're having trouble getting planes finished on time at such a high rate!
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3641
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 5:51 pm

Revelation wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable

True. The real rub is producing this all-new NMA at a price that the customers find attractive and yet still allows Boeing to make a profit. However that's been the rub since the very beginning of this program. If you don't believe me, read one of the countless threads we've had on this topic, yet people act as if Leeham is carrying the tablets down from the mountain.


Very true. I also have seen what sounds like a misinformation campaign trying to say the 737MAX is at the end of its life despite it having around 5000 orders.

It seems like Airbus is trying to tell the story NMA is not worthwhile (since the A321 is so great) and also that the 737 is almost at the end of its like (again, go buy the A321 since it is so great). Some A.net members are repeating this general belief about how great the A321neo is and help feed the Airbus marketing narrative just like how Scott Hamilton does
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 19696
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 5:55 pm

trpmb6 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:

I'm sure vendors will demand bthe A350 model where tools and other high cost work is paid by Boeing upfront (or the engine vendor).

This is the only new build plane in play. There is a proven market for a smaller widebody of reduced range (see A300 and 767).

Thanks,
Neil


Exactly! This is why I think Boeing is having trouble making the numbers work. They say they need to bring aftermarket sales back in house so they can make the lower sale price work out. But to do that means taking on their suppliers who used to use that same revenue to make THEIR numbers make sense. This is just a giant shell game of who gets what chunk of money to be profitable. In doing so all Boeing has done is disrupt their supply chain. Which is really something you shouldn't be doing when you're having trouble getting planes finished on time at such a high rate!

It is a high stakes poker match on who received revenue. Many vendors now sell at a loss and make their profits on service. They will only buy in if the total business case adds up.

It also occurred to me we are existing a lost decade in engineering (2008 to start of 2018, the prior one was 1992 to 2002 and was a super cycle) where companies have cut engineering staff to the bone. My friends in robotics, automotive, aerospace, machine tooling, and oil are all screamsign times and manufacturing ramp rates. Every company downsized to survive with minimal innovation as the demand wasn't there. Now we are in a giant manufacturing musical chairs. This isn't helping Boeing.

I would say that Boeing, Airbus, Pratt, and CFM/GE all show signs of an overstressed supply chain. Add the C-series in there. We are finally exiting the lost decade.

I wish this didn't happen in engineering, but it does and the 797 is being impacted.

The slack was taken out of the system. :( Introducing new stuff is a skill little valued. The people who did that learned on the 787 (yes, the industry was down to long), jumped to the A350 and haven't been let go.

Interesting times...

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 6:06 pm

Yeah. I'm seeing a ton of movement right now in the engineering industry. I've moved around quite a bit myself. Thankfully able to stay in the same town as my wife is also an engineer - making moves to new companies complicated. (Did have one big company offer to bring both of us on interestingly enough though - but the total package wasn't enough to justify the pain of moving). Defense sector seems to be doing quite strong right now though, which has helped to take some of the sting out.

Need to see general aviation pick up and I'd love to see a new commercial program soon.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 6:33 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I don’t know what you are talking about.


understandable.
Understanding would collide with your task.
A 220 and 270 seat widebody is almost exactly the same size as the 767-200 and 767-300. Boeing has built over 1,000 airplanes in this area.


... in the ( distant ) past.


There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable


Just that it was not small at the time and the market was totally different.

The 737 ended with the 737-400. Then you had the 757 and the 727 filling the next gap in size and range, followed by the 747 in the Boeing line-up.

That looks very different today. The 737 covers most of the market up to the 757 and the 787 and 777 cover everything from 767-300ER to 747 at the time the 767 was designed.

The big question for me still is: What would customers buy if there is no 797?
 
jagraham
Posts: 1067
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:09 pm

chiad wrote:
jagraham wrote:
Boeing pushed it with the NSA, then Airbus kicked their butts with the A320NEO . . Boeing needs to get their act together. Fortunately for Boeing, Airbus has indigestion with the A320NEO and A350 programs right now.


Seems like Boeing has the "same" issues now.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... in-renton/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ory-logjam

What is the status on the A350 and NEO's? I read somewhere, I think, that the A350 was pretty much out of the woods, and that the NEO gliders are decreasing.
According to Planespotters there has been 30 NEO deliveries so far this month (August),


It's the backlog. Technically, a new order would have to wait a decade to receive either aircraft. Airbus is publicly pushing up the A320 rate, and not so publicly pushing up the A350 rate.

Note that for the A320NEO, both Pratt and CFM are having big problems.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23899
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:26 pm

seahawk wrote:
Just that it was not small at the time and the market was totally different.

The 737 ended with the 737-400. Then you had the 757 and the 727 filling the next gap in size and range, followed by the 747 in the Boeing line-up.

That looks very different today. The 737 covers most of the market up to the 757 and the 787 and 777 cover everything from 767-300ER to 747 at the time the 767 was designed.

We can all look at it however we want. I see a market where the 737 really does not cover many important routes that the 757 and 767 covers, and the 787 ends up flying routes twice as long as the 757 does. In my view there is definitely a middle of the market gap.

Yes the market has changed since the times of the 737-400 and the A300. There definitely are different, highly competitive products in the market. But there definitely is a much bigger market, with many more city pairs demanding service and many more frequencies on the older city pairs that have had service, and maybe some that emerge with a better targeted aircraft. This means while the NMA has competitors above and below it, it also has a much bigger opportunity to feed into. If it turns out to be more efficient than 737/A320 below and 787/A330/A350 above, it will make its market grow, regardless of the roles 737-400 and A300 once served.
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
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:32 pm

VSMUT wrote:
IMHO, the gap between the A321/737-10 and the A330-800/787-8 can't be bridged in any efficient manner. This is an issue stemming from legal requirements, specifically the requirement that no seat be more than 2 seats away from an aisle. The optimum design for a MOM plane is going to require something like 7 or 8 abreast seating. You can't do a 3+4 or 4+4 seating configurations legally, so that means you have to include an extra aisle, and aisles don't generate revenue. Simple.

And in Boeings case, the above-mentioned means that any efficient clean-sheet design will be spaced so closely to either the 787 or the 737-10 that it will cannibalize and kill one of those models.


I believe this is 100% correct. None of what we are hearing so far makes enough sense.

As you are saying, the gap between A321LR and A339 is a result of single aisle vs dual aisle regulations and resultant economics. It is not that Airbus did something wrong. They actually offered short A330s. No one really wants them.


7Y... this is one theory. Do an absolute optimized 220 seat / 5000nm 7Y airplane, with an upsized model at 250 seats. This is a possibility. I really question if it will be compelling enough but it WILL have a set of routes where it is the king.

Otherwise, I don't think Boeing will do another 8Y new airplane, and if we are talking 6Y, well, instead of calling it MOM why don't we just call it "a correction of our failed 737 strategy." And I respect the fact the 737 Max is selling fine. But if you want to compete on innovation and performance, that is a completely different deal and a repudiation of the 737 Max.
Last edited by Flighty on Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:34 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable

True. The real rub is producing this all-new NMA at a price that the customers find attractive and yet still allows Boeing to make a profit. However that's been the rub since the very beginning of this program. If you don't believe me, read one of the countless threads we've had on this topic, yet people act as if Leeham is carrying the tablets down from the mountain.


Very true. I also have seen what sounds like a misinformation campaign trying to say the 737MAX is at the end of its life despite it having around 5000 orders.

It seems like Airbus is trying to tell the story NMA is not worthwhile (since the A321 is so great) and also that the 737 is almost at the end of its like (again, go buy the A321 since it is so great). Some A.net members are repeating this general belief about how great the A321neo is and help feed the Airbus marketing narrative just like how Scott Hamilton does


It must really hurt for a Boeing fan boy.

Is the A321 great? Perhaps or perhaps not, but it really sells. First the A321 outsells the 737-900/900ER by 3.2 to one. Than the A321neo outsells the 737-9 and 737-10 combined. The situation is so bad that Boeing is not giving any longer the sales for single model numbers, but is trying to hide the numbers of the bad selling models behind the numbers of the well selling 737-8. The A321neo has sold 1969 frames, what is the number for 737-9 and -10 combined 600, 700? Again about 3 to 1 for the A321neo. Both together, A321 and A321neo are getting near to 4000 frames.
And now comes the hammer, Airbus fans impinge on the future world beating A321 destroyer, the 797 or MOM or NMA. Eagerly awaited by Boeing fans to be launched at Paris, did not happen, to be launched at Farnborough, did not be happen, but now really really to be launched very soon, perhaps next year.

And now somebody is talking about if the NMA will really come, or perhaps just be a paper frame forever.
 
2175301
Posts: 1763
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:37 pm

My information is that the 797 will be a go. 3 keys being worked out:

1) Boeing is investing a lot of up front money into design and production process so that they have a much more accurate idea of the final cost of manufacture (at less than half the risk value of before).

2) Boeing and the suppliers are working out their issues on how to make adequate profit. I don't know the final; but I suspect in some cases Boeing will pay for at least partial intellectual rights up front. In other cases the supplier will retain the rework/parts with perhaps a % going back to Boeing. It's a new reality of squeezed margins in today's business environment; and they will work it out (and Airbus will face the exact same issues for their next aircraft or major modification).

3) Engine availability issues are being worked out (which is affected by item 2 above). An interesting possibility: What if Boeing sinks $X Billion into engine development, and then the engine can be used by other aircraft makers... how much of a % does Boeing get of those sales. This reduces the risk to the engine maker - and adds future income to Boeing.

All these issues are solvable... and will be. Boeing and the Suppliers are working to ensure that initial investment and risk sharing is proportionate to future profit; and both sides are being very careful as both sides have been burned in the last decade or so. The old rules no longer work (and they did not work well for the last several new aircraft programs - regardless of Aircraft Manufacturer).

Have a great day,
 
xdlx
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:42 pm

Wish someone said lets clone the 752/3 in carbon fiber and call it a MAX. 73 line should have never gone beyond the 800. And a 783 shrink would be too heavy!
 
jagraham
Posts: 1067
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:43 pm

seahawk wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
WIederling wrote:

understandable.
Understanding would collide with your task.


... in the ( distant ) past.


There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable


Just that it was not small at the time and the market was totally different.

The 737 ended with the 737-400. Then you had the 757 and the 727 filling the next gap in size and range, followed by the 747 in the Boeing line-up.

That looks very different today. The 737 covers most of the market up to the 757 and the 787 and 777 cover everything from 767-300ER to 747 at the time the 767 was designed.

The big question for me still is: What would customers buy if there is no 797?


Without a 797, or an Airbus equivalent (which the A321LR is not), airlines will continue to buy 787s and A330NEOs.

On a transatlantic flight, a 767A uses up almost all of its 16000 gallon capacity. 787s and A330NEOs use 12000 to 13000 gallons for the same trip. With a few more passengers.
But these planes are designed and built for 7000 to 8000 nm trips, and then some. It shows in their OEWs; the 763A OEW is 86t (and the A300-600 is 88t), while the 788 is 120t and the A338 is 132t. The A338 is 4.8 m longer than the A300, so most of the OEW increase is in range / payload capability and not size.
The possibility exists to go back to 767A / A300 weights, put on new high aspect ratio wings, and use upsized GTF or LEAP engines in the mid 40K range. There would be a wingspan / wingsweep / flap size and complexity / thrust / takeoff length tradeoff to be made. But it could happen. The 763A used 48000 lb engines even with a 70s wing hampered by LaGuardia limitations; a better wing would make a LEAP or GTF quite feasible.

Such a plane should be able to do a TATL flight for 10000 gal or less; which is a big enough deal to cause most TATL flights to switch to such a plane. When it finally gets done.

Also, some cargo airlines and Asian carriers want 5t more cargo capability, even if they lose some range.

I do wish Boeing would give the cargo guys and Asians what they want (for large orders of course) and close the business case.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27087
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:50 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
There were over 1000 767s built and the freigther version is still in production. The 767 proved that a small widebody is viable


It was viable until a larger widebody arrived with better overall operating economics (the A330-200) and then it wasn't. As keesje noted, the earliest design studies for the 7E7 / 787 were sized around the 767-300 (7E7-8) and A330-200 (7E7-9). Customers quickly pushed Boeing to size the -8 around the A330-200 and the -9 around the A330-300/A340-300/777-200.



Frankly, if NMA goes the way of the 747X and Sonic Cruiser, it's no real skin off Boeing's nose. As much hay is made by the Airbus Aficionados about how dominant the A321neo is, Boeing is seeing real interest from operators with the 737-10 and once that model's availability opens up, I expect sales to grow significantly. And we know if NMA never flies, NSA will offer the necessary sizes to address the "middle of the market" to a major extent and will not have any of the "legacy drawbacks" of the 737 family.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23899
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: The Muddle of the Market aircraft (No, this isn’t a typo)

Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:06 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Is the A321 great? Perhaps or perhaps not, but it really sells. First the A321 outsells the 737-900/900ER by 3.2 to one. Than the A321neo outsells the 737-9 and 737-10 combined. The situation is so bad that Boeing is not giving any longer the sales for single model numbers, but is trying to hide the numbers of the bad selling models behind the numbers of the well selling 737-8. The A321neo has sold 1969 frames, what is the number for 737-9 and -10 combined 600, 700? Again about 3 to 1 for the A321neo. Both together, A321 and A321neo are getting near to 4000 frames.
And now comes the hammer, Airbus fans impinge on the future world beating A321 destroyer, the 797 or MOM or NMA. Eagerly awaited by Boeing fans to be launched at Paris, did not happen, to be launched at Farnborough, did not be happen, but now really really to be launched very soon, perhaps next year.

Since you directed yourself at me, I'll tell you that I'm a very happy aviation fanboy.

I don't really care about the narrow body relative sales numbers you use to pump yourself up. I know Boeing has as many orders as it can fill for a decade or so going forward. I see how healthy they are financially and how high their stock price is. I know if they wanted a bigger share of the narrow body market they could choose to invest in more production facilities like Airbus did with XFW #4 but they choose not to. I think they're content with what they have. I think there's danger of over producing. And I'm very happy that Airbus is financially secure and making great aircraft. I can't wait for my future trip to TLS to view A320 #1 and all the other things they have in the museum there.

I don't care if NMA becomes another paper frame forever, just like I didn't care when Sonic Cruiser turned out to never materialize. It's been far far far from a done deal every step of the way, in case you haven't noticed. I'm fascinated to see what ideas they are trying out, and what things they suggest are important going forward. I'm sure they are learning things that will be useful with or without a NMA.

I'm also fascinated to see what Airbus is doing with the A321 going forward. You may have noticed my posts in the threads about where to add additional fuel. It'd be really fascinating to see if they end up reviving the double bogie as Jon O mentioned.

I'm puzzled why Airbus fans like you and the K-man enjoy making posts suggesting that others are suffering. I guess it goes along with the victimization complex you keep propping up. Oh well, whatever gets you through the day...
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
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

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