morrisond
Posts: 1171
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:36 pm

RJMAZ wrote:

Now this is the problem. 58m long and a 4.2m high fuselage would be skinnier than the 757-300.

Going to 2-4-2 and hitting the 228 and 267 two class values would require 43m and 48m lengths with the future 797-8 then being 53m long. With 4.5m fuselage height gives a nice 11.7 side aspect fineness ratio for the 797-8.

The obvious concern with 2-4-2 is the 797-6 would be too stubby at 4.5m height and 43m length gives a fineness ratio of 9.55. That is actually skinnier than an A320 which is has ratio of 9.08!

So even with 8ab the shortest 797-6 will be skinnier than an A320.


RJAMZ - even if your numbers are right (and they might be we are all just guessing) - how do you get to an 4.5M Fuselage Height with 8W and only 4.2 M on 7W?

Are you assuming a different size container in the belly? If not why would Boeing be so inefficient to add that unneeded fuselage height on 8W?

The 7W will probably need to be a little thicker than 4.2M anyways - that is only 2" more than an A320 - even if they stick to an LD3-45 (I assume it will be a new container to take advantage of the extra belly width plus maybe a few inches higher) that seems like it would be hard to hit that number (4.2M) with the crown height they need in the Middle to account for the overhead bins over the middle seats. It will probably need to be at least 4.3M and maybe up to your 4.5M.

In any case - assuming you are right (and I would still suggest you start with a 737-10 at about 195 2 class to get to an 797-6 at most the same length of about 44M then 48M for the -7 and 52M for the -8) on all your assumptions you still aren't allowing for the possibility that Carbon's inherent stiffness advantages could easily allow for longer fuselages.

BTW - if you are right and 8W is the way they go - that means even shorter than my 7W assumptions - you probably wouldn't pick up much in the front as it would still be 2x2x2 in the front Domestic Business - but it would make 1x1x1 sleepers or possibly 1x2x1 easier - and the extra seat width in the back probably means 3-4 rows less - call it 3M less - so an 8W 797 would be something like 41m, 45m and 49m in -6,-7,-8 sizes.

All seems possible. But remember they are shooting for Single Aisle Efficiency in an Dual Aisle - they will need to be as efficient as possible in there fuselage design (as low and and narrow and short as possible) to keep weight down if they are going to compete in this space with a possible rewing/stretch A322.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:01 am

morrisond wrote:
[RJAMZ - even if your numbers are right (and they might be we are all just guessing) - how do you get to an 4.5M Fuselage Height with 8W and only 4.2 M on 7W?

Are you assuming a different size container in the belly? If not why would Boeing be so inefficient to add that unneeded fuselage height on 8W?

The 7ab with the 4.2m height would fit the LD3-45 nicely. Remember the wider fuselage means the curve of the lower half has a bigger radius allowing the container to sit slightly lower in the fuselage.

Cabin width for the 7ab would be 4.5m for the 7ab with a 4.8m exterior width. 22cm or 10inchs less than the 767. Basically bringing the 18inch 767 seats down to 17inch seats and knocking an inch of each aisle. So a 4.2m high fuselage that is 4.8m wide is a 12.5% reduction in height.

Cabin width for the 8ab would be 5.0m with 5.3m exterior. 28cm wider than the 767 and 28cm narrower than the A330. This allows standard 17inch Boeing seats with aisles an inch or two narrower than the A330. With the 4.5m height fuselage it is a 17% reduction in height. The 8ab can get a bigger percentage reduction because it would most likely use the same LD3-45 container height. The container might be custom and slightly wider, but it would not surprise me if they used LD3-45's and just used the space on the sides of the container to add extra floor supports. The reduced height design even with a double bubble will cause the floor to bend.

The Boeing rendering actually makes more sense if the design was just a normal circular fuselage. This would explain the stubby look of the picture. A 7ab circular fuselage with a 4.8m diameter would need a custom container. A 8ab circular fuselage with the 5.3m diameter fuselage believe it or not is a perfect fit for the 767's LD2 containers.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~1300subbox/767-797.jpg

If i had to estimate the chance of what the 797 cross section would be I would say:
50% 8ab educed height
30% 8ab circular
10% 7ab circular
5% 7ab reduced height
5% 787 9ab cross section
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:37 am

It seems that the business case is getting smaller for the 797. The source is CNN so it is a bit sensational. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/13/business/boeing-737-max-797-plans/index.html

"They're now not going to be in position to make an announcement until 2020 at the earliest," said Grant. "That gives Airbus a huge head start."
If Boeing does go forward with its plans for the new plane, it still hopes to have it in the air by 2025. But Muilenburg said that Boeing will first have to decide whether if it makes sense to spend $15 billion to develop the plane.


It really seems to come down if Boeing will be able and also can justify spending 15B in the wake of the Max crisis. The bill for fixing the Max and developing the 797 could come to 30B+ what might not make investors happy, especially when the 787 is still in the red (deferred production costs) and the 777X delayed. This will weight on the cash flow as well.

On top of this Airbus is squeezing the MOM with the A321XLR and also puts heavy pressure on the 777X with the speculated A350-1000ULR. Hard times for the Boeing Management, especially as their chairs are not the safest.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13016
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:56 am

RJMAZ wrote:

If i had to estimate the chance of what the 797 cross section would be I would say:
50% 8ab educed height
30% 8ab circular
10% 7ab circular
5% 7ab reduced height
5% 787 9ab cross section


I think the chances of 797 cross section 6ab circular is growing. To save weight, cost, ease supply chain and give airlines the option to convert MAX orders. Boeing needs a strong business case, can't afford a questionable one. The situation changed a lot in 2019. https://fm-static.cnbc.com/awsmedia/chart/2019/7/6/BA_chart%20(11).1565102905348.jpeg

Image

"We're going to make sure the business case make sense for us and our customers.

If it does, we'll go, if not we've got other investments we can make."


Interesting, what other investments could we think of? ..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:33 am

keesje wrote:
"We're going to make sure the business case makes sense for us and our customers.

If it does, we'll go, if not we've got other investments we can make."[/size]

Interesting, what other investments could we think of? ..


Dusting off the plans for another new joint wb/nb program instead of a standalone wb program which could not solely cure the ailments of their entire product offering. Doing so would solve the prolonged MAX image issue, be far less costly than two separate (yet inevitable) consecutive programs, assure airlines of not only effective commonality throughout the entire mainline spectrum sooner rather than later (nsa-nma-787-777x), but a much newer overall product series than its main competitor whose product, at best, is hedged to 2 newer types (A220-A350), two 30-year old wings with new engines (A320NEO-A330NEO), and less overall commonality for the foreseeable future while the A220 is still a thing.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
JonesNL
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:15 pm

KFLLCFII wrote:
Interesting, what other investments could we think of? ..


Dusting off the plans for another new joint wb/nb program instead of a standalone wb program which could not solely cure the ailments of their entire product offering. Doing so would solve the prolonged MAX image issue, be far less costly than two separate (yet inevitable) consecutive programs, assure airlines of not only effective commonality throughout the entire mainline spectrum sooner rather than later (nsa-nma-787-777x), but a much newer overall product series than its main competitor whose product, at best, is hedged to 2 newer types (A220-A350), two 30-year old wings with new engines (A320NEO-A330NEO), and less overall commonality for the foreseeable future while the A220 is still a thing.[/quote]

Well NMA and NSA will cost Boeing at least 30B while Airbus got the A220 for free and the A350 cost 12B. The cost of the MAX issue will only increase the advantage of Airbus regarding available cash for investments. With a small investment the A220-500/700 can be created by Airbus to replace the A320 line. And with another small investment the A350 can have an shrink to phase the A330 out and extend to compete against the 777x-10. Only the A321 needs a clean sheet design as the A220 can't be extended that much. In such case the line up of Airbus looks quite promising and lean:
A220-100
A220-300
A220-500 (XLR)
A220-700 (XLR)
A321 (XLR)
A350-800 (ULR)
A350-900 (ULR)
A350-1000 (ULR)
A350-2000 (ULR)

But lets see, maybe Boeing can do some Apollo like engineering magic to create the perfect design cheap and fast which would corner Airbus offerings.
 
Oykie
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:07 pm

I’m sure Boeing is reviewing their portfolio after buying the commercial side of Embraer and with the grounding. It makes no sense for Boeing to engineer something to directly replace the still high in demand 737. For me it makes sense that they make a bigger Embraer at the bottom as well as the 797 from the top. That would close in on the 737 from top and bottom. Maybe a 5 abreast Embraer together with the (hopefully) 797 would be a good long term solution for the eventual replacement of the 737?
Last edited by Oykie on Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
Checklist787
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Aug 15, 2019 8:15 pm

keesje wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:

If i had to estimate the chance of what the 797 cross section would be I would say:
50% 8ab educed height
30% 8ab circular
10% 7ab circular
5% 7ab reduced height
5% 787 9ab cross section


I think the chances of 797 cross section 6ab circular is growing. To save weight, cost, ease supply chain and give airlines the option to convert MAX orders. Boeing needs a strong business case, can't afford a questionable one. The situation changed a lot in 2019. https://fm-static.cnbc.com/awsmedia/chart/2019/7/6/BA_chart%20(11).1565102905348.jpeg

Image

"We're going to make sure the business case make sense for us and our customers.

If it does, we'll go, if not we've got other investments we can make."


Interesting, what other investments could we think of? ..



The surprise of a plan B.
But it is clear that the NMA is a plan they do not want to give up...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20892
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Aug 15, 2019 8:59 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
But it is clear that the NMA is a plan they do not want to give up...

It seems QF is still looking forward to what they think of as “the perfect aircraft” for Australian domestic operations.

In comments from August 9th, QF's CEO said:

Mr Joyce described Boeing’s proposed New Midsize Airplane (NMA) as “the perfect aircraft” for Australian domestic operations. He said the twin aisle aircraft holds the ability to operate Melbourne-Sydney with a turnaround time of 30-35 minutes and slot in to the carrier’s current schedule to provide “massive growth”.

Ref: https://blueswandaily.com/qantas-sees-r ... lan-joyce/

Seems potential operators of the aircraft find a lot of value in the twin aisle reducing turnaround times and maximizing slot usage.
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
 
Checklist787
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:17 pm

Revelation wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
But it is clear that the NMA is a plan they do not want to give up...

It seems QF is still looking forward to what they think of as “the perfect aircraft” for Australian domestic operations.

In comments from August 9th, QF's CEO said:

Mr Joyce described Boeing’s proposed New Midsize Airplane (NMA) as “the perfect aircraft” for Australian domestic operations. He said the twin aisle aircraft holds the ability to operate Melbourne-Sydney with a turnaround time of 30-35 minutes and slot in to the carrier’s current schedule to provide “massive growth”.

Ref: https://blueswandaily.com/qantas-sees-r ... lan-joyce/

Seems potential operators of the aircraft find a lot of value in the twin aisle reducing turnaround times and maximizing slot usage.


If the NMA is performing Sidney-Melbourne missions just under an hour then let's be sure that it will upset the market by completing or replacing a lot of Narrowbody routes.

I bet the potential sales
is at least 4,500 units over 20 years. (2021-2040)

Add the unprecedented profit that the assembly line should generate, which should calm the Boeing bean counters ...

:hyper: :stirthepot: :stirthepot: :stirthepot:
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:42 am

The biggest falsehood is when peoppe say there is no market for a small widebody. That is because there is no cleansheet small widebody to show market demand.

The widebody size sweetspot is getting smaller each year. It is probably already at 787-8 and A330-800 as the perfect widebody size but both designs are not optimised. In 10 years the 797 might be in the middle of the sweet spot and outselling the 787.
 
TObound
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:00 am

I've always been curious how twin aisles improve turn time when most airports will use a single door. If it can achieve narrowbody economics on short-haul like Sydney-Melbourne that's huge.
 
planecane
Posts: 990
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:48 am

TObound wrote:
I've always been curious how twin aisles improve turn time when most airports will use a single door. If it can achieve narrowbody economics on short-haul like Sydney-Melbourne that's huge.

It speeds up deplaning because on a single aisle gaps develop when people are slow getting out of their seat or getting their stuff out of the bin. With one aisle there isn't a continuous flow through the doorway.

For boarding it's similar. People clogging one aisle hold up the whole plane.

Neither will be twice as fast but a twin aisle will board and deplane faster than a single aisle of the same capacity with the same door location.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:41 am

RJMAZ wrote:

  The widebody size sweetspot is getting smaller each year. It is probably already at 787-8 and A330-800 as the perfect widebody size but both designs are not optimised.


Bingo! You defeated the devil with this question! The lukewarm sales of the A330-200's / -800's / 787-8 's do not indicate that there is no "sweetspot". The only thing I see is a similar size but morphed differently. Fuselage, wings, engines smaller and lighter, but a fuselage longer.

On the other side the 737-8 outsells the A320neo but the A321neo outsells the 737-8 is a clear proof that the focus is in a 200-seater in recent years and will be for decades to come...

 
planecane wrote:

  Neither will be twice as fast but a twin aisle will board and deplane faster than a single aisle of the same capacity with the same door location.


While adding seats. That's the advantage of widebody and a small-widebody here ...

I flew two hours in A330-200 early in the year, and I would never trade that experience against the A320 in my return flight

Boeing sees right but the problem is that his image of beans counter spoils everything ...

:bouncy: :stirthepot: :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13016
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:55 am

Checklist787 wrote:
On the other side the 737-8 outsells the A320neo but the A321neo outsells the 737-8 is a clear proof that the focus is in a 200-seater in recent years and will be for decades to come...


Does the 737-8 outsell the A320NEO? I don't have the numbers..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:01 pm

keesje wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
On the other side the 737-8 outsells the A320neo but the A321neo outsells the 737-8 is a clear proof that the focus is in a 200-seater in recent years and will be for decades to come...


Does the 737-8 outsell the A320NEO? I don't have the numbers..



According to them sources probably do not:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320neo_family#Orders_and_deliveries
http://www.pdxlight.com/neomax.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boeing_737_MAX_orders_and_deliveries

It is important to note that the MAX has around 1600 unknown orders (not disclosed which version). But the Max -8 has 2704 and the 320Neo has 3902 orders. From the 1600 unknown 1200 would have to be MAX -8 to outsell the A320 Neo. 75% of the Max orders are -8. If we apply this to the 1600 unknown orders the Max -8 and the 320neo are on par with around 3900 orders each. So no outselling in this versions. Other versions of the Max (-9 -10) can not compete against the A321neo at all.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:36 am

FluidFlow wrote:
keesje wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
On the other side the 737-8 outsells the A320neo but the A321neo outsells the 737-8 is a clear proof that the focus is in a 200-seater in recent years and will be for decades to come...


Does the 737-8 outsell the A320NEO? I don't have the numbers..



According to them sources probably do not:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320neo_family#Orders_and_deliveries
http://www.pdxlight.com/neomax.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boeing_737_MAX_orders_and_deliveries

It is important to note that the MAX has around 1600 unknown orders (not disclosed which version). But the Max -8 has 2704 and the 320Neo has 3902 orders. From the 1600 unknown 1200 would have to be MAX -8 to outsell the A320 Neo. 75% of the Max orders are -8. If we apply this to the 1600 unknown orders the Max -8 and the 320neo are on par with around 3900 orders each. So no outselling in this versions. Other versions of the Max (-9 -10) can not compete against the A321neo at all.


If you read me well you will understand (despite my misallocation of sales between the Neo's and Max's) that all versions above the A320neo / 737-7MAX ie 737-8Max / -9 / -10 / A321neo's are more sold than the A320neo (150 seater)

So that validates what I said in my comment above...


FluidFlow wrote:

[b]Other versions of the Max (-9 -10) can not compete against the A321neo at all.[/b]


Max-10 can not compete against the A321neo?
I don't agree with that

The Max-10 is a young chick. You compare the incomparable. Orange to Apple?

Please reconsider your hasty judgment...

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