Boeings goal is to bring a super lean MoM Aircraft that is "cheap" and does not need too much new technic upgrades over current aircraft (as said by Boeing) to gain a massive advantage over existing aircraft, and also be competitive 10-15 years after EIS it has to be designed narrow, so only 1-2 versions. All currently sold aircraft model ranges have only one or two really good selling versions (B787-9/10, A320/321, B737-8, A350-9 and soon -10, etc.) while the other family members are niche if not even outright gone.
Therefore Boeing should and hopefully will design the aircraft into the narrow gap of the MoM with a two model version, either a -6/-7 or the -7/-8. This will be really hard to beat for any other manufacturer. If you go broad you kill off one of your own models or a product of another manufacturer will just fit at least one of the specs better.
The 797-6 (BTW why are we not starting with traditional -200, -300 and -400 instead of this new MBA driven daft naming?) would not be able to compete with A321 over mission lengths < 3000 nm. That is a given.
I will look forward to NMA -6, -7 whatever it will be called empty weight
. Knowing that OEW I will get a pretty good picture at purchasing & operating costs. I'll put aside twin aisle at NB costs as a marketing slogan. The vast majority of flights in this category are up to 2-3 hours. If a Boeing NMA can't effectively compete in that arena, because it needs to be oval, two aisle, and be able to do 280 people 5000NM also, it will become a niche aircraft, driving up cost per unit.
We can try convince each other all is set & Boeing knows exactly what it wants and look for straws (sketches, qoutes) confirming that. But in the end the market decides. Last year, even before the 737 MAX dramas, a big majority of 200 airlines indicated they wanted 150-250 seats. Ignore your customers, modify their requirements & sooner or later you hit the wall. https://aviationweek.com/awin-only/airl ... definition
United, Delta & AA need an affordable efficient 757 replacement & asked Boeing. If Boeing comes back presenting them they really want a composites oval 2 aisles, up to 320 seats, craddle to grave MRO included, those airlines will think Boeing didn't listen & order A321s soon after.
It's not that Boeing doesn't understand this, contrary, it is the reason they didn't close the business case in 2016, 2017 and 2018 and told us 2020 even before the MAX drama. There's a gab between market requirements & the aircraft Boeing has on the drawing table. The manufacturer says it has 1,000 people working on the aircraft design. That could be 10% of their jobs next to other tasks / projects. Mark Jenks leaving the 797 ship & Mike Sinnett adding it to his repsonsibilities is not an indication of increased focus.
I think Boeing should put their money where their mouth is (~175-225 seats) & then build an NMA based on that. Not the other way around. We can do without another shrink nobody wants.
Boeing’s preference for a widebody NMA has surprised many within the industry, given the popularity of the single-aisle 757 and challenge of widebody production costs. “For me, a single-aisle up to 230-250 seats is all they need, and then they get the pricing right,” says Phil Seymour, CEO of consultancy IBA.
“They’re building a twin-aisle and giving it twin-aisle capabilities yet trying to capture some of the single-aisle market—that’s an enormous challenge in terms of operating economics and production economics,” says Richard Aboulafia, vice president for analysis at the Teal Group.
Last edited by keesje
on Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:23 am, edited 2 times in total.