User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8349
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:49 pm

bikerthai wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?


There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


15-20% is way too much for an airliner. 5% would be good more would a huge success, especially if the metal frame uses additive manufacturing - aka 3D Printing. With the use of the latest alloys and 3D printing, the metal frame might even end up fully competitive if not lighter.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20576
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:59 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?

And the fundamental advantage that a narrow body has could only be overcome if the technology that is applied to allow this aircraft to achieve these claims can be uniquely applied to a wide body.

Boeing are the people who I would give most chance of pulling this off, I just see no evidence beyond marketing sound bites at this stage.

I’m not saying Boeing cannot do it, just like I cannot prove god does not exist, but for me to believe either there would need to be some evidence of technical plausibility.

I’m just a sceptic is all...

My guess is that it will turn in to “Widebody ‘comfort’ at narrow body costs” and it will be a single aisle. This aircraft is to the next Boeing program as the sonic cruiser was to the 787.

Fred

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you are taking things too literally by applying the standard "the technology that is applied to allow this aircraft to achieve these claims can be uniquely applied to a wide body".

They're just saying this new light wide body will have costs similar to what current narrow bodies have.

Reaching that standard will be hard.

Achieving your standard of making that statement true for all time is of course impossible.

They're even trying to find ways to distance themselves from the original statement.

For instance, the slides I posted above use the term "crossover economics".

It seems this or something similar will be the favored terminology going forward.

bikerthai wrote:
There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.

That's another good way of looking at it.

It seems the pre-launch period is also being used to tune the message as well as the product.

Hopefully the message is clear by launch time (presuming it does get launched).
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12912
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:35 pm

bikerthai wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”8
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?


There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


I think we can not assume that new technology on a new WB aircraft would off set the cost of a extra aisle. Sooner than later that same technology shows up at single aisles designs too, adding that efficiency on those. And the other way around, e.g. GTF's on WB's.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
monomojo
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:39 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 8:04 pm

keesje wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”8
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?


There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


I think we can not assume that new technology on a new WB aircraft would off set the cost of a extra aisle. Sooner than later that same technology shows up at single aisles designs too, adding that efficiency on those. And the other way around, e.g. GTF's on WB's.


And by then Boeing has sold a couple thousand 797s, recouped their project costs, and are the dominant incumbent in the segment and can aggressively compete on price and perceived widebody comfort. No one says the 797 will be the bestest for ever, it just has to be the bestest for long enough to make it worth the effort. As long as Airbus appears to want to make no effort to compete for the juicy center of the unfulfilled MoM segment, it's Boeing's for the taking, and stealing some of Airbus's long range narrowbody marketshare is just gravy.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 8:26 pm

monomojo wrote:
keesje wrote:
bikerthai wrote:

There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


I think we can not assume that new technology on a new WB aircraft would off set the cost of a extra aisle. Sooner than later that same technology shows up at single aisles designs too, adding that efficiency on those. And the other way around, e.g. GTF's on WB's.


And by then Boeing has sold a couple thousand 797s, recouped their project costs, and are the dominant incumbent in the segment and can aggressively compete on price and perceived widebody comfort. No one says the 797 will be the bestest for ever, it just has to be the bestest for long enough to make it worth the effort. As long as Airbus appears to want to make no effort to compete for the juicy center of the unfulfilled MoM segment, it's Boeing's for the taking, and stealing some of Airbus's long range narrowbody marketshare is just gravy.


1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1125
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:24 pm

keesje wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”8
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?


There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


I think we can not assume that new technology on a new WB aircraft would off set the cost of a extra aisle. Sooner than later that same technology shows up at single aisles designs too, adding that efficiency on those. And the other way around, e.g. GTF's on WB's.


The cost of the extra aisle is most likely offset by 50% more Premium Seats in 2x2x2 Domestic First Class or 1x1x1 Sleepers possibly even 1x2x1 and 50%+ more Cargo Volume.

Isn't the combined Wisdom of A-net that the premium seats is where all the profit is and Y is breakeven at best? Then kick in some extra revenue from Cargo and you have a winner in a tight light 7W - which could be something like an 170"x188" Oval - which cross section is only 25% more than A320. A320 is 10% over 737 and that doesn't seem to hurt it that much.

A 7W oval gives you 16.7% more Y seats and 50% more premium seats - a pretty good trade off for a cross section potentially only 25% bigger.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12912
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:13 pm

morrisond wrote:
keesje wrote:
bikerthai wrote:

There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


I think we can not assume that new technology on a new WB aircraft would off set the cost of a extra aisle. Sooner than later that same technology shows up at single aisles designs too, adding that efficiency on those. And the other way around, e.g. GTF's on WB's.


The cost of the extra aisle is most likely offset by 50% more Premium Seats in 2x2x2 Domestic First Class or 1x1x1 Sleepers possibly even 1x2x1 and 50%+ more Cargo Volume.

Isn't the combined Wisdom of A-net that the premium seats is where all the profit is and Y is breakeven at best? Then kick in some extra revenue from Cargo and you have a winner in a tight light 7W - which could be something like an 170"x188" Oval - which cross section is only 25% more than A320. A320 is 10% over 737 and that doesn't seem to hurt it that much.

A 7W oval gives you 16.7% more Y seats and 50% more premium seats - a pretty good trade off for a cross section potentially only 25% bigger.


I would't kick in some extra revenue from cargo. If you are comparing a "hybrid" cross section with AKH containers, a NB with the same seat capacity (e.g. 250 seats) would be ~6 rows / a few containers longer then a WB.

Premium seats are profitable per seat. But short-medium haul is very different. Look at # F seats on most 757/739s domestically US. In Europe mostly middle seats are blocked, a bit of catering, curtains. Single class flights take a big share of the short/medium markets. I expect that is where Boeing wants to sell NMA's to make the numbers.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
monomojo
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:39 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:24 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
monomojo wrote:
keesje wrote:

I think we can not assume that new technology on a new WB aircraft would off set the cost of a extra aisle. Sooner than later that same technology shows up at single aisles designs too, adding that efficiency on those. And the other way around, e.g. GTF's on WB's.


And by then Boeing has sold a couple thousand 797s, recouped their project costs, and are the dominant incumbent in the segment and can aggressively compete on price and perceived widebody comfort. No one says the 797 will be the bestest for ever, it just has to be the bestest for long enough to make it worth the effort. As long as Airbus appears to want to make no effort to compete for the juicy center of the unfulfilled MoM segment, it's Boeing's for the taking, and stealing some of Airbus's long range narrowbody marketshare is just gravy.


1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.


1. Of course they will. But the longer they take to respond with something in between the A321XLR and A338, the longer Boeing has to establish a hold on the segment.
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.
 
jagraham
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:29 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?

And the fundamental advantage that a narrow body has could only be overcome if the technology that is applied to allow this aircraft to achieve these claims can be uniquely applied to a wide body.

Boeing are the people who I would give most chance of pulling this off, I just see no evidence beyond marketing sound bites at this stage.

I’m not saying Boeing cannot do it, just like I cannot prove god does not exist, but for me to believe either there would need to be some evidence of technical plausibility.

I’m just a sceptic is all...

My guess is that it will turn in to “Widebody ‘comfort’ at narrow body costs” and it will be a single aisle. This aircraft is to the next Boeing program as the sonic cruiser was to the 787.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



The presumption would be an A321LR with 200 seat cost. The wide body comparison has to be made with the A321LR seats in the widebody, especially up front. Under those conditions, wide body at narrowbody CASM is possible, especially for the larger plane.. The plane has to use uprated narrowbody engines because the widebody engines are too heavy. And no way does it get half way around the world. Even Europe to USA west coast doesn't happen without severe restrictions. Then the plane can get within 15% of an A321LR MTOW weight per pax.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:00 pm

monomojo wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
monomojo wrote:

And by then Boeing has sold a couple thousand 797s, recouped their project costs, and are the dominant incumbent in the segment and can aggressively compete on price and perceived widebody comfort. No one says the 797 will be the bestest for ever, it just has to be the bestest for long enough to make it worth the effort. As long as Airbus appears to want to make no effort to compete for the juicy center of the unfulfilled MoM segment, it's Boeing's for the taking, and stealing some of Airbus's long range narrowbody marketshare is just gravy.


1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.


1. Of course they will. But the longer they take to respond with something in between the A321XLR and A338, the longer Boeing has to establish a hold on the segment.
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


I guess my point is that I don’t think B will get a couple thousand units down the road before Airbus responds in multiple ways. They are really set from the A321 down and the A359 up - throw in an enhanced A321 as well as an A322 by the time the 797 first flies, and possibly a launch of an A360 covering the A321-789 range around 797 EIS and it only gets more challenging for Boeing. However, I think we’re probably basically in the same ballpark.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
monomojo
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:39 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:49 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
monomojo wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:

1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.


1. Of course they will. But the longer they take to respond with something in between the A321XLR and A338, the longer Boeing has to establish a hold on the segment.
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


I guess my point is that I don’t think B will get a couple thousand units down the road before Airbus responds in multiple ways. They are really set from the A321 down and the A359 up - throw in an enhanced A321 as well as an A322 by the time the 797 first flies, and possibly a launch of an A360 covering the A321-789 range around 797 EIS and it only gets more challenging for Boeing. However, I think we’re probably basically in the same ballpark.


I think we're close too, Airbus is far too competent to let Boeing just have their way without some kind of spoiler, and I'd love to see what a A360 could be. That said, if the 797 really is what I think it to be (a 7.5ab ovoid CFRP fuselage with folding wingtips), I can't see anything based on the A320 series being anything more than a spoiler providing a check on Boeing's pricing at the bottom, and a A360 finding a very tough row to hoe between a well established 797 beneath it and a very well established 787 (not to mention the A330NEO) above. That's going to be an extremely fine gap to find room in, which is probably entirely what Boeing intends. They'd rather be the one putting the pressure there than the one receiving it.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8528
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:59 pm

Revelation wrote:
I too wonder about the impact of Boeing's enormous defense business.

In terms of how it would / does affect the commercial side, we may need to look at Boeing's enormous defense business in more detail.
A lot is in satellite and missile technology, in terms of a/c the C-17 is done, the P8 is based on the civilian 737 just as the KC-46 is based on the 767, the F-18 and F-15 any variant are not using much design engineers, all efforts for new / improved variants have gotten no takers in the US military.
So yes the business is enormous, but in terms of demand for human resources, I would say the contracts just won especially for the new trainer will compete with the 797 for resources, now I guess we will see how much work they were doing on the 797, it has been on their plate for a while.
 
tealnz
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:29 am

There's a lot of talk about cargo up thread. We have to assume Boeing have done their homework and have good reason to think the lightweight flat oval 2-3-2 is going to be the heart of the market – driven by passenger capacity and seat-mile cost.

That doesn't mean there isn't a serious market for a medium-range aircraft with LD-3 capacity. Some of it will obviously be picked up by A330s/787s/777s etc. But an obvious option – entirely dependent on what the market analysis throws up – is a rewinged A300-length A330 variant. We know how much Asian carriers love their A330s. Their capacity needs may be a click higher than what Boeing have in mind for the 797. And they certainly seem to want serious hold capacity for LD-3s.

Whether that's enough to persuade Airbus to look at a further A330 derivative depends on a host of variables: engine availability and lead-time; development, certification and production cost for a new CRFP wing and wingbox plus new gear; impact on A338/339 and A321XLR market etc.

As far as I'm aware we have had no hints that Airbus are looking at this option. Should we read into this a decision they're not interested in a new-generation A300? That the numbers are marginal? Or just that they want to keep their options under wraps until Boeing makes a decision on a 797? They surely have a bunch of engineers with not a lot to do once the XLR design is finalised...
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3638
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:49 am

keesje wrote:
morrisond wrote:
keesje wrote:

I think we can not assume that new technology on a new WB aircraft would off set the cost of a extra aisle. Sooner than later that same technology shows up at single aisles designs too, adding that efficiency on those. And the other way around, e.g. GTF's on WB's.


The cost of the extra aisle is most likely offset by 50% more Premium Seats in 2x2x2 Domestic First Class or 1x1x1 Sleepers possibly even 1x2x1 and 50%+ more Cargo Volume.

Isn't the combined Wisdom of A-net that the premium seats is where all the profit is and Y is breakeven at best? Then kick in some extra revenue from Cargo and you have a winner in a tight light 7W - which could be something like an 170"x188" Oval - which cross section is only 25% more than A320. A320 is 10% over 737 and that doesn't seem to hurt it that much.

A 7W oval gives you 16.7% more Y seats and 50% more premium seats - a pretty good trade off for a cross section potentially only 25% bigger.


I would't kick in some extra revenue from cargo. If you are comparing a "hybrid" cross section with AKH containers, a NB with the same seat capacity (e.g. 250 seats) would be ~6 rows / a few containers longer then a WB.

Premium seats are profitable per seat. But short-medium haul is very different. Look at # F seats on most 757/739s domestically US. In Europe mostly middle seats are blocked, a bit of catering, curtains. Single class flights take a big share of the short/medium markets. I expect that is where Boeing wants to sell NMA's to make the numbers.


If the competition is the A321LR, the NMA probably has an advantage for cargo. The A321LR must be bulk loaded just to fit passenger bags since the aux fuel tanks take up too much space in the cargo holds. LD3-45s reduce useable cargo volume.

We can also see that Airbus has assumed non LD3-45 loaded passenger bags. The bags simply does not fit for 206 passengers in a containerized concept with normal assumptions for bags per passenger and bags per container. It requires nine containers free and we would only have seven after the three fuel tanks have been installed. With bulk-loaded bags, including using the bulk cargo area, the bags for 206 passengers will fit with a bit of room to spare.

https://leehamnews.com/2015/01/15/airbu ... ats-there/

If containers and cargo matter, the A321LR is not a good choice, which opens up the opportunity for the NMA since we would expect it to take at least a normal load of passenger bags in containers.

Image
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:06 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.

I don't think that will be the Airbus response.

The A321 is slightly larger and more capable than the 737.
The A350 is slightly larger and more capable than the 787.

I expect Airbus to launch something slightly larger and more capable than the 797 which will also be a great replacement for the struggling A330NEO.

If Boeing is stupid enough to go 7 abreast with the 797 then Airbus will definitely launch a similar technology 8 abreast aircraft. We will have a repeat of the 767 versus A330.

The A321 can not cover the 500nm short haul market and the 5000nm medium haul market efficiently.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:21 am

RJMAZ wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.

I don't think that will be the Airbus response.

The A321 is slightly larger and more capable than the 737.
The A350 is slightly larger and more capable than the 787.

I expect Airbus to launch something slightly larger and more capable than the 797 which will also be a great replacement for the struggling A330NEO.

If Boeing is stupid enough to go 7 abreast with the 797 then Airbus will definitely launch a similar technology 8 abreast aircraft. We will have a repeat of the 767 versus A330.

The A321 can not cover the 500nm short haul market and the 5000nm medium haul market efficiently.


I addressed that further down, and agree.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
tealnz
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:38 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
If the competition is the A321LR, the NMA probably has an advantage for cargo. The A321LR must be bulk loaded just to fit passenger bags since the aux fuel tanks take up too much space in the cargo holds. LD3-45s reduce useable cargo volume.


But the competition is now going to be the XLR. Which will have an extra ~700nm range, lower OEW, higher MTOW... and two LD3-45 slots opened up in the forward hold. So we’ll see how much of an advantage there really is.

Somehow I don’t think Boeing will be marketing the 797 as a serious cargo solution (any more than Airbus will with the XLR – both are basically going to be sold on the basis of pax capacity, range and economics).
 
brindabella
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 1:05 pm

seahawk wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?


There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


15-20% is way too much for an airliner. 5% would be good more would a huge success, especially if the metal frame uses additive manufacturing - aka 3D Printing. With the use of the latest alloys and 3D printing, the metal frame might even end up fully competitive if not lighter.


Interesting, isn't it?

I keep having these (CENSORED) thoughts that the NSA will have the Spirit 737-fuse: :eek:

Shock!
Horror!

cheers
Billy
 
brindabella
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 1:17 pm

Revelation wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?

And the fundamental advantage that a narrow body has could only be overcome if the technology that is applied to allow this aircraft to achieve these claims can be uniquely applied to a wide body.

Boeing are the people who I would give most chance of pulling this off, I just see no evidence beyond marketing sound bites at this stage.

I’m not saying Boeing cannot do it, just like I cannot prove god does not exist, but for me to believe either there would need to be some evidence of technical plausibility.

I’m just a sceptic is all...

My guess is that it will turn in to “Widebody ‘comfort’ at narrow body costs” and it will be a single aisle. This aircraft is to the next Boeing program as the sonic cruiser was to the 787.

Fred

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you are taking things too literally by applying the standard "the technology that is applied to allow this aircraft to achieve these claims can be uniquely applied to a wide body".

They're just saying this new light wide body will have costs similar to what current narrow bodies have.

Reaching that standard will be hard.

Achieving your standard of making that statement true for all time is of course impossible.

They're even trying to find ways to distance themselves from the original statement.

For instance, the slides I posted above use the term "crossover economics".

It seems this or something similar will be the favored terminology going forward.

bikerthai wrote:
There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.

That's another good way of looking at it.

It seems the pre-launch period is also being used to tune the message as well as the product.

Hopefully the message is clear by launch time (presuming it does get launched).


A couple of generations back this would have been called:

"The Dance of the Seven Veils". :yes:

AKA: "Now you see it -- now you don't!". :yes:

cheers :D
Billy
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20576
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 1:17 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
I guess my point is that I don’t think B will get a couple thousand units down the road before Airbus responds in multiple ways. They are really set from the A321 down and the A359 up - throw in an enhanced A321 as well as an A322 by the time the 797 first flies, and possibly a launch of an A360 covering the A321-789 range around 797 EIS and it only gets more challenging for Boeing. However, I think we’re probably basically in the same ballpark.

It's a pretty basic thing that you need to plan based on your competitor's capabilities.

I think if we as amateurs can project these responses that are well within Airbus's capabilities, so can Boeing.

I think one thing that is extending the pre-launch period is the time needed to make sure the product can be a success in the face of such responses.

par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I too wonder about the impact of Boeing's enormous defense business.

In terms of how it would / does affect the commercial side, we may need to look at Boeing's enormous defense business in more detail.
A lot is in satellite and missile technology, in terms of a/c the C-17 is done, the P8 is based on the civilian 737 just as the KC-46 is based on the 767, the F-18 and F-15 any variant are not using much design engineers, all efforts for new / improved variants have gotten no takers in the US military.
So yes the business is enormous, but in terms of demand for human resources, I would say the contracts just won especially for the new trainer will compete with the 797 for resources, now I guess we will see how much work they were doing on the 797, it has been on their plate for a while.

My thoughts were more along the lines of where the C-Suite/Board would decide to allocate assets looking forward.

Boeing is trying hard to change the relationship it has with its customers and its supply chain in the commercial space.

It has won a few different defense related competitions recently and is in the mix for more.

It may find that it can get the type of terms and conditions it wants on the defense side so the executives may favor investing in that sector more than commercial.

Or it may use the defense sector to provide its commercial vendors and customers a model of how it expects future relationships to be structured.

Either way it should be interesting to see how things evolve as Boeing tries to capture more of the 70% of life cycle profits now captured by its vendors.
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
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:02 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
monomojo wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:

1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.


1. Of course they will. But the longer they take to respond with something in between the A321XLR and A338, the longer Boeing has to establish a hold on the segment.
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


I guess my point is that I don’t think B will get a couple thousand units down the road before Airbus responds in multiple ways. They are really set from the A321 down and the A359 up - throw in an enhanced A321 as well as an A322 by the time the 797 first flies, and possibly a launch of an A360 covering the A321-789 range around 797 EIS and it only gets more challenging for Boeing. However, I think we’re probably basically in the same ballpark.


So Airbus will respond by making two new wings and gear setups and a whole new fuselage during the time period it takes Boeing to do one wing and fuselage? Seems ambitious to me.

I also think people undervalue that Airbus is talking NEO on the A350 already. Does that help you move up into the 777X range? Sure, maybe it does. But the program also has a bad recent sales record. You picked up 30 orders from EK but lost 42-62 from Etihad and 10 from Air Asia X that seem unlikely as well as 16 dead orders from Iran on the books as well. And people can moan and groan all they want but I am not sure United will take its 45 frames either. So that order book to me doesn’t look that great and the order momentum is not where you would want it.

This year is critical as they need to pickup order intake pace. If the 787 scores big again in Korea and Germany, and Airbus may well know where it sits on those already, then a NEO is less of an offensive move than it is a defensive one. Moreover I think a NEO there simply creates an engine that lets the 787 eat the lunch of the A350 in the meat of the market.

If I am Airbus I don’t feel particular good about any product I have other than the A320neo family. The 797 threatens to take the premium rate and some steam from the top of that family and probably destroys the A330neo entirely. The best optimized products to move around lots of people in Asia will either be a 797 if you don’t need cargo or a 787-10 if you do. Airbus can try to wedge something into that gap but if the NMA gap is tight that one will be much much tighter.

Airbus in my mind has made 3 major mistakes on its program positioning.

1. The A350 is too big and capable compared to the 787 and won’t age as well as TSFC drops on engines unless you rework the frame or stretch it to the point airlines may fear filling it.

2. The A350 wasn’t big enough to kill the 777 entierly and this has left some portion of the large twin market to that frame.

3. The A330neo was an abject mistake when they didn’t rework the wing and bring down the weights. It’s too mixed up in the A350/787 battle and it shouldn’t have been. Airbus got lazy because it worked on the A320neo and made a costly mistake.

NMA will drop in to take a large share of the A330 regional replacements that comprised a ton of its late in life orders during the 787 spin up drama. It will also create some new market space for itself. The 787-10 will gobble up most of the rest of the regional widebody orders. Airbus effectively will have two options once NMA drops. Going head to head with NMA or the 787 and simply beating them on technical merits or trying to find a market gap to put something in. I just don’t see a substantial gap. You going to find a ton of orders for a frame with a higher CASM than NMA and that hauls less cargo than a 787-10?
 
ewt340
Posts: 691
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:09 pm

bikerthai wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?


There is two possible "cost". Operating and purchasing.

Operating cost for the most part relates to fuel burn which in part relates to frame weight. If one estimate that a composite frame would be %15-20 lighter than an equivalent metal frame, then the correlation would be that the weight saving from going to composite offset the weight of the extra aisle.

The purchasing cost comparison would most likely be the result of improve manufacturing techniques they will be using for on the T-X and Navy drone. I suppose they are banking on this cost saving to offset the inherent cost of going composite.


bt


But honestly, I don't think Boeing could easily offered narrow-body prices for B797. Especially if it's 7-abreast. It's probably the operation cost. Because this plane were meant to have extremely low fuel consumption comparable to A321neo.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8349
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:15 pm

If you offer the 797 for narrow body prices, the prices for the 737 and 787 would drop accordingly.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:32 pm

bigjku wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
monomojo wrote:

1. Of course they will. But the longer they take to respond with something in between the A321XLR and A338, the longer Boeing has to establish a hold on the segment.
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


I guess my point is that I don’t think B will get a couple thousand units down the road before Airbus responds in multiple ways. They are really set from the A321 down and the A359 up - throw in an enhanced A321 as well as an A322 by the time the 797 first flies, and possibly a launch of an A360 covering the A321-789 range around 797 EIS and it only gets more challenging for Boeing. However, I think we’re probably basically in the same ballpark.


So Airbus will respond by making two new wings and gear setups and a whole new fuselage during the time period it takes Boeing to do one wing and fuselage? Seems ambitious to me.

I also think people undervalue that Airbus is talking NEO on the A350 already. Does that help you move up into the 777X range? Sure, maybe it does. But the program also has a bad recent sales record. You picked up 30 orders from EK but lost 42-62 from Etihad and 10 from Air Asia X that seem unlikely as well as 16 dead orders from Iran on the books as well. And people can moan and groan all they want but I am not sure United will take its 45 frames either. So that order book to me doesn’t look that great and the order momentum is not where you would want it.

This year is critical as they need to pickup order intake pace. If the 787 scores big again in Korea and Germany, and Airbus may well know where it sits on those already, then a NEO is less of an offensive move than it is a defensive one. Moreover I think a NEO there simply creates an engine that lets the 787 eat the lunch of the A350 in the meat of the market.

If I am Airbus I don’t feel particular good about any product I have other than the A320neo family. The 797 threatens to take the premium rate and some steam from the top of that family and probably destroys the A330neo entirely. The best optimized products to move around lots of people in Asia will either be a 797 if you don’t need cargo or a 787-10 if you do. Airbus can try to wedge something into that gap but if the NMA gap is tight that one will be much much tighter.

Airbus in my mind has made 3 major mistakes on its program positioning.

1. The A350 is too big and capable compared to the 787 and won’t age as well as TSFC drops on engines unless you rework the frame or stretch it to the point airlines may fear filling it.

2. The A350 wasn’t big enough to kill the 777 entierly and this has left some portion of the large twin market to that frame.

3. The A330neo was an abject mistake when they didn’t rework the wing and bring down the weights. It’s too mixed up in the A350/787 battle and it shouldn’t have been. Airbus got lazy because it worked on the A320neo and made a costly mistake.

NMA will drop in to take a large share of the A330 regional replacements that comprised a ton of its late in life orders during the 787 spin up drama. It will also create some new market space for itself. The 787-10 will gobble up most of the rest of the regional widebody orders. Airbus effectively will have two options once NMA drops. Going head to head with NMA or the 787 and simply beating them on technical merits or trying to find a market gap to put something in. I just don’t see a substantial gap. You going to find a ton of orders for a frame with a higher CASM than NMA and that hauls less cargo than a 787-10?


I have no argument if you say my timeframes are off. I guess it depends on what they do and how they do it. My broader point was that they certainly won’t be standing still while Boeing launches, builds, sells, and delivers a few thousand 797’s.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
Dupli
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:29 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:43 pm

monomojo wrote:
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


In my opinion, you are looking too much at the a321-mom market segment. What is the effect of a rewinged and updated a320 on 737 sales?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8528
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:57 pm

Dupli wrote:
In my opinion, you are looking too much at the a321-mom market segment. What is the effect of a rewinged and updated a320 on 737 sales?

When would be my question, they just put out the A320NEO and are struggling to deliver them to customers and have them running as efficiently as the CEO, and now they will be talking about a new wing?

Boeing can start talking about a 737 replacement now since everyone knows it is obsolete, is not as modern as the A320, cannot be upgraded, etc etc etc.
Whether true or not, Boeing has lost market share on the NB front and all of it is not due to the A321 / 737-9?? front.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3631
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:58 pm

bigjku wrote:
Airbus in my mind has made 3 major mistakes on its program positioning.

1. The A350 is too big and capable compared to the 787 and won’t age as well as TSFC drops on engines unless you rework the frame or stretch it to the point airlines may fear filling it.

2. The A350 wasn’t big enough to kill the 777 entierly and this has left some portion of the large twin market to that frame.

3. The A330neo was an abject mistake when they didn’t rework the wing and bring down the weights. It’s too mixed up in the A350/787 battle and it shouldn’t have been. Airbus got lazy because it worked on the A320neo and made a costly mistake.


1) It seems that A350 has been positioned quite well, considering sales to date. And the 777 replacement cycle has yet to get going into full swing.

2) The more the second part of 1) becomes reality (TSFC drop), the less 2) will be an issue, as this will position A350 even deeper into 777 territory.
PS> Why are folks so focused on "killing" the competition? One only has to crawl reasonably into part of the competition's market, to cause pain, and reduce their margins . . .

3) A330 neo is a cheap and quick fix (if it weren't for RR), buying Airbus time to think out their strategy and/or wait for Boeing to commit into 797. . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:00 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
bigjku wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:

I guess my point is that I don’t think B will get a couple thousand units down the road before Airbus responds in multiple ways. They are really set from the A321 down and the A359 up - throw in an enhanced A321 as well as an A322 by the time the 797 first flies, and possibly a launch of an A360 covering the A321-789 range around 797 EIS and it only gets more challenging for Boeing. However, I think we’re probably basically in the same ballpark.


So Airbus will respond by making two new wings and gear setups and a whole new fuselage during the time period it takes Boeing to do one wing and fuselage? Seems ambitious to me.

I also think people undervalue that Airbus is talking NEO on the A350 already. Does that help you move up into the 777X range? Sure, maybe it does. But the program also has a bad recent sales record. You picked up 30 orders from EK but lost 42-62 from Etihad and 10 from Air Asia X that seem unlikely as well as 16 dead orders from Iran on the books as well. And people can moan and groan all they want but I am not sure United will take its 45 frames either. So that order book to me doesn’t look that great and the order momentum is not where you would want it.

This year is critical as they need to pickup order intake pace. If the 787 scores big again in Korea and Germany, and Airbus may well know where it sits on those already, then a NEO is less of an offensive move than it is a defensive one. Moreover I think a NEO there simply creates an engine that lets the 787 eat the lunch of the A350 in the meat of the market.

If I am Airbus I don’t feel particular good about any product I have other than the A320neo family. The 797 threatens to take the premium rate and some steam from the top of that family and probably destroys the A330neo entirely. The best optimized products to move around lots of people in Asia will either be a 797 if you don’t need cargo or a 787-10 if you do. Airbus can try to wedge something into that gap but if the NMA gap is tight that one will be much much tighter.

Airbus in my mind has made 3 major mistakes on its program positioning.

1. The A350 is too big and capable compared to the 787 and won’t age as well as TSFC drops on engines unless you rework the frame or stretch it to the point airlines may fear filling it.

2. The A350 wasn’t big enough to kill the 777 entierly and this has left some portion of the large twin market to that frame.

3. The A330neo was an abject mistake when they didn’t rework the wing and bring down the weights. It’s too mixed up in the A350/787 battle and it shouldn’t have been. Airbus got lazy because it worked on the A320neo and made a costly mistake.

NMA will drop in to take a large share of the A330 regional replacements that comprised a ton of its late in life orders during the 787 spin up drama. It will also create some new market space for itself. The 787-10 will gobble up most of the rest of the regional widebody orders. Airbus effectively will have two options once NMA drops. Going head to head with NMA or the 787 and simply beating them on technical merits or trying to find a market gap to put something in. I just don’t see a substantial gap. You going to find a ton of orders for a frame with a higher CASM than NMA and that hauls less cargo than a 787-10?


I have no argument if you say my timeframes are off. I guess it depends on what they do and how they do it. My broader point was that they certainly won’t be standing still while Boeing launches, builds, sells, and delivers a few thousand 797’s.


Agree with that. It’s a very interesting market above the narrows right now. Seems like there isn’t anything right now technology wise that would let one just leapfrog a 787 in efficiency. That was the real ballsy part of the 787. Boeing chose to launch it into the teeth of the A330. If someone wants to go after the 787 it will require a similar tech leap I would think.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 14836
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:07 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.

I don't think that will be the Airbus response.

The A321 is slightly larger and more capable than the 737.
The A350 is slightly larger and more capable than the 787.

I expect Airbus to launch something slightly larger and more capable than the 797 which will also be a great replacement for the struggling A330NEO.

If Boeing is stupid enough to go 7 abreast with the 797 then Airbus will definitely launch a similar technology 8 abreast aircraft. We will have a repeat of the 767 versus A330.

The A321 can not cover the 500nm short haul market and the 5000nm medium haul market efficiently.

A repeat of the 767 vs A300/310 you mean? Actually the 766 vs A300/310+DC10+L1011. The 767 won that battle hands down because it was newer, despite the claimed disadvantage of 7Y.

The A330 was newer still and eventually killed off the 767, though Boeing never bothered to update it much post A330 launch. They offered some good ideas but ended up with the 764.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:48 pm

PW100 wrote:
bigjku wrote:
Airbus in my mind has made 3 major mistakes on its program positioning.

1. The A350 is too big and capable compared to the 787 and won’t age as well as TSFC drops on engines unless you rework the frame or stretch it to the point airlines may fear filling it.

2. The A350 wasn’t big enough to kill the 777 entierly and this has left some portion of the large twin market to that frame.

3. The A330neo was an abject mistake when they didn’t rework the wing and bring down the weights. It’s too mixed up in the A350/787 battle and it shouldn’t have been. Airbus got lazy because it worked on the A320neo and made a costly mistake.


1) It seems that A350 has been positioned quite well, considering sales to date. And the 777 replacement cycle has yet to get going into full swing.

2) The more the second part of 1) becomes reality (TSFC drop), the less 2) will be an issue, as this will position A350 even deeper into 777 territory.
PS> Why are folks so focused on "killing" the competition? One only has to crawl reasonably into part of the competition's market, to cause pain, and reduce their margins . . .

3) A330 neo is a cheap and quick fix (if it weren't for RR), buying Airbus time to think out their strategy and/or wait for Boeing to commit into 797. . .


The A350 sold a lot, entered service and has struggled since sales wise. We can ascribe whatever reason we want for it but the longer sales stay low the less reasons like backlog and replacement cycles hold up.

The 77W replacement cycle thing I think is oversold around here. The biggest 77W operator is on the books for 150 77X. The next biggest split it’s repalcment plan and has 21 77X on order. The next biggest has 60 77X on order. I am not sure if Air France has ordered those replacements yet. Turkish is down for the 787 and A350 and possibly hasn’t replaced its 77W’s yet so there is another one. Singapore is replacing 27 77W with 20 77X. ANA has 28 77W with 20 77X on order.

I think the 777 repalcment race is already well underway. Of other big operators I expect to see a Korean order this year which I expect to go 787 and 77X. You then have your late arrivals to the 77W party in American and United who took some. Add to that whatever the Chinese do. What operators are we waiting on at this point that will really move the needle? Name an operator who is looking for a program starting number of orders on a plane larger than an A359 that isn’t already bought into the 77X.

I also think it’s revisionist history to say the A330neo was just a quick fix to make a 797 more difficult. Airbus talked openly about a 10 monthly rate on the program. They expected quite clearly to go to an overall rate of 23 on the A350/A330neo combo as thy discused rate 10 on one and rate 13 on the other. There are public statements that they were aiming for that. Instead combined their production rate this year will be lower than the 787. And the NMA threatens to close the last little bit of breathing. room the A330neo may have had as a cheap regional aircraft in Asia (it’s really only viable at 9 across which only Asian low cost carriers and charter carriers have tried).

To me that’s the tactical issue here. I don’t think Airbus is up for a bloodbath competenting directly 1-1 with the 787. No one will make money and Boeing is already sitting there with a product that represents a substantial bar to hop over tech wise. The gap between NMA and the 787-10 ain’t going to be very big. I think Airbus could win above the A359 with stretches but I am not sure the market justifies the investment. It certainly the path of least resistance and you probably can be the winner in that marketplace. But I am not sure it’s hugely profitable to do so.

I am hugely interested in the response Airbus does make and how they juggle the A220/320/330 space. They do have options there. When people discuss an A360 in that space I have to think it’s the same gameplan Boeing has. Launch something to start spinning up the A320neo repalcment supply chain so you can hit the ground running there. To me it makes the most sense to accept a margin bloodbath and compete with NMA direct and feed that into the new narrow. I don’t see an A220 future really. You need A320neo like scale on any new narrow and taking a chunk of the market to a nonstandard aircraft cuts your scale.

It will be an interesting 10 years for sure.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17496
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:58 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
1. Airbus will respond.
2. They will sell many hundreds more A321's - including the A321neoLRalphabet soup - into the face of the 797 launch.
3. Boeing may have a winner, but they aren't going to have it without a serious fight.

I don't think that will be the Airbus response.

The A321 is slightly larger and more capable than the 737.
The A350 is slightly larger and more capable than the 787.

I expect Airbus to launch something slightly larger and more capable than the 797 which will also be a great replacement for the struggling A330NEO.

If Boeing is stupid enough to go 7 abreast with the 797 then Airbus will definitely launch a similar technology 8 abreast aircraft. We will have a repeat of the 767 versus A330.

The A321 can not cover the 500nm short haul market and the 5000nm medium haul market efficiently.


I addressed that further down, and agree.

For LD3s (cargo), the 787 has shown the market needs 9 across. Another 8-across is unlikely to be competitive unless Airbus really flattens the bottom of the cross section.

The 767 sold well. A really optimized 7-across, low cargo should have a market. We find out at Paris.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Dupli
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:29 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:04 pm

par13del wrote:
When would be my question, they just put out the A320NEO and are struggling to deliver them to customers and have them running as efficiently as the CEO, and now they will be talking about a new wing?

Boeing can start talking about a 737 replacement now since everyone knows it is obsolete, is not as modern as the A320, cannot be upgraded, etc etc etc.
Whether true or not, Boeing has lost market share on the NB front and all of it is not due to the A321 / 737-9?? front.


5-6 years ago, widebody demand also seemed to outstrip production forever. Now, not anymore.

Airbus (and Boeing) might have increased narrowbody production by that time. The market could change. Boeings MOM should also lower demand for large narrowbodies, freeing up narrowbody production.
The 737 could be the victim, being less attractive than a rewinged a320, a321 and MOM. Boeing would have to launch this narrowbody program when busy with MOM.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2867
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:47 pm

seahawk wrote:
If you offer the 797 for narrow body prices, the prices for the 737 and 787 would drop accordingly.


Who was it that said to paraphrase . . . It's better for you to take business from yourself than have someone else take business from you :scared:

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6424
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:56 pm

bigjku wrote:
The A350 sold a lot, entered service and has struggled since sales wise. We can ascribe whatever reason we want for it but the longer sales stay low the less reasons like backlog and replacement cycles hold up.

The 77W replacement cycle thing I think is oversold around here. The biggest 77W operator is on the books for 150 77X. The next biggest split it’s repalcment plan and has 21 77X on order. The next biggest has 60 77X on order. I am not sure if Air France has ordered those replacements yet. Turkish is down for the 787 and A350 and possibly hasn’t replaced its 77W’s yet so there is another one. Singapore is replacing 27 77W with 20 77X. ANA has 28 77W with 20 77X on order.

I think the 777 repalcment race is already well underway. Of other big operators I expect to see a Korean order this year which I expect to go 787 and 77X. You then have your late arrivals to the 77W party in American and United who took some. Add to that whatever the Chinese do. What operators are we waiting on at this point that will really move the needle? Name an operator who is looking for a program starting number of orders on a plane larger than an A359 that isn’t already bought into the 77X.


That airline that already has 150 77X on order. No, seriously. And in general I don't think that an existing 77X order is a death blow for Airbus's prospects with an airline, especially where that airline is also ordering A350s.

With the A380 cancellation they still don't have enough capacity on order, even with the replacement Airbus orders. Assuming they absorb EY's and possibly some of QR's 777X slots in the near term, speeding delivery of their 77X order, they will need more lift right around the timeframe that people are bandying about for the A350neo. Would not be shocked to see them be a launch customer of the A350-1000neo (or the stretch variant!) with 50 orders.

Other airlines that I think could order significant numbers of A350neo are BA, AF, CX, TK, BR, JL, and the Chinese. Also SU might be interested in a European 777 replacement for political reasons if there is an electoral backlash to the current Kremlin-cozy US president.

To sort of get back toward the topic. I see this as a much more likely and much more profitable venture for Airbus than an all-new widebody A330neo replacement. Airbus's way to compete with the 797 is from below. One new A320 series wing, not two, is enough.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3745
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:04 pm

Revelation wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
Neither Airbus and certainly not Boeing foresaw that the 737 and 320 were really a 1000 to 3000+ nm plane. They are not efficient given modern engines as 100-150 passengers below 1000 miles

Airbus's John Leahy said (when asked about NEO and MAX) that going to an all-new aircraft would bring 3% reduction in fuel burn, all the rest of the improvement would come from engines.

I think that means the existing NB aircraft are pretty darn efficient.

I think NMA will do better since aero improvements pay off better on longer flights, and it will have the luxury of aiming for the bigger payload/range values right from the start.

The $12B question is if Boeing can make enough money in that market segment to justify the big spend.

I think Boeing is still waiting for the Engine Technology to happen so they can introduce it into the B797 IF in fact Pratt is allowing GE to use their GTF technology?
That airplane coupled with a GTF Engine? Would be a "Monster"! The Range would be astounding the fuel economy would be stellar.
 
User avatar
monomojo
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:39 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:09 pm

Dupli wrote:
monomojo wrote:
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


In my opinion, you are looking too much at the a321-mom market segment. What is the effect of a rewinged and updated a320 on 737 sales?


In the period of time before the NSA is expected to be announced? Probably not much, the 737 will continue to be very cost effective within its short range sweet spot, and a somewhat more capable and expensive A320 won't change that. Maybe a few airlines will pass up the 737MAX for a refreshed A320 family for longer missions, but that's the market the 797 is supposed to attack anyways. I expect the launch of the NSA to have the more significant effect, and so Boeing will continue to sell as many as they can make for the next few years and then when the NSA is announced start planning that transition. Lots of discounts will likely be had to keep the line running until the end. Boeing can't afford to worry too much about what happens to the 737 because of the 797 though, it's at the end of its lifecycle and not worth protecting in favor of other aircraft just beginning theirs.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3066
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:21 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
Neither Airbus and certainly not Boeing foresaw that the 737 and 320 were really a 1000 to 3000+ nm plane. They are not efficient given modern engines as 100-150 passengers below 1000 miles

Airbus's John Leahy said (when asked about NEO and MAX) that going to an all-new aircraft would bring 3% reduction in fuel burn, all the rest of the improvement would come from engines.

I think that means the existing NB aircraft are pretty darn efficient.

I think NMA will do better since aero improvements pay off better on longer flights, and it will have the luxury of aiming for the bigger payload/range values right from the start.

The $12B question is if Boeing can make enough money in that market segment to justify the big spend.

I think Boeing is still waiting for the Engine Technology to happen so they can introduce it into the B797 IF in fact Pratt is allowing GE to use their GTF technology?
That airplane coupled with a GTF Engine? Would be a "Monster"! The Range would be astounding the fuel economy would be stellar.


Never read this rumor before,why on earth would Pratt allow GE use of their tech? GTF is about to start printing money for United Tech.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomp ... 77212e7e94
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:44 pm

Revelation wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
I guess my point is that I don’t think B will get a couple thousand units down the road before Airbus responds in multiple ways. They are really set from the A321 down and the A359 up - throw in an enhanced A321 as well as an A322 by the time the 797 first flies, and possibly a launch of an A360 covering the A321-789 range around 797 EIS and it only gets more challenging for Boeing. However, I think we’re probably basically in the same ballpark.

It's a pretty basic thing that you need to plan based on your competitor's capabilities.

I think if we as amateurs can project these responses that are well within Airbus's capabilities, so can Boeing.

I think one thing that is extending the pre-launch period is the time needed to make sure the product can be a success in the face of such responses.

par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I too wonder about the impact of Boeing's enormous defense business.

In terms of how it would / does affect the commercial side, we may need to look at Boeing's enormous defense business in more detail.
A lot is in satellite and missile technology, in terms of a/c the C-17 is done, the P8 is based on the civilian 737 just as the KC-46 is based on the 767, the F-18 and F-15 any variant are not using much design engineers, all efforts for new / improved variants have gotten no takers in the US military.
So yes the business is enormous, but in terms of demand for human resources, I would say the contracts just won especially for the new trainer will compete with the 797 for resources, now I guess we will see how much work they were doing on the 797, it has been on their plate for a while.

My thoughts were more along the lines of where the C-Suite/Board would decide to allocate assets looking forward.

Boeing is trying hard to change the relationship it has with its customers and its supply chain in the commercial space.

It has won a few different defense related competitions recently and is in the mix for more.

It may find that it can get the type of terms and conditions it wants on the defense side so the executives may favor investing in that sector more than commercial.

Or it may use the defense sector to provide its commercial vendors and customers a model of how it expects future relationships to be structured.

Either way it should be interesting to see how things evolve as Boeing tries to capture more of the 70% of life cycle profits now captured by its vendors.


The 787 debacle prevented Boeing from doing the clean sheet NSA back 12 years ago, Airbus did the Neo and Boeing was forced to respond with the MAX. In all the 738 leads the A320 but the A321 is leading the 739 & -10, advantage differences of like 5% one way or another depending on the given use - basically a tie but if the A320 backlog wasn't so big it would be a 55%-45% market split in favor of the A320.

If and when Boeing does the 797 it will be positioned somewhere between the current A321 and the 767. Size wise like the 767 but significantly less range to allow for the least weight. Boeing got the chance with the 787 to select their preferred location in the lineup, a bit above the 330 but below the 77W. Excellent position. A couple decades ago Boeing was able to select the 777 position and they chose wisely. The A350 found a good spot, filling in where the A340 was and is able to compete against both of Boeing's. The end of the A380 does mess up a bit the upper end lineup, but above the 787 there is now a low return on pips and updates. There are a lot of near current planes in this segment one needs to compete against.

Boeing can be setting up Airbus into investing in the A320 lineup for a response that will be A320neo Tech with its investment. But on a lifecycle case this response will be between the clean sheet NMA and NSA that will probably be CFRP. CFRP may be more expensive now compared to Al, but it will be much closer cost wise 2 decades out. The key is to make assembly the most cost effective.

Airbus has some financial constraints currently, I believe that JL was pricing deals a bit too competitive along with the production bottlenecks currently, the A320 is not printing cash like it should be. Coupled with the A380, the 350 getting the production curve improvements yet (they will, it will be much more profitable once 6-700 have been made), and the slow start for the A330neo, their overall margins are running about half of Boeing's. It is a good time for Boeing to strike with the 797 once they get all their ducks in a row.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20576
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:32 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
The 787 debacle prevented Boeing from doing the clean sheet NSA back 12 years ago, Airbus did the Neo and Boeing was forced to respond with the MAX. In all the 738 leads the A320 but the A321 is leading the 739 & -10, advantage differences of like 5% one way or another depending on the given use - basically a tie but if the A320 backlog wasn't so big it would be a 55%-45% market split in favor of the A320.

If and when Boeing does the 797 it will be positioned somewhere between the current A321 and the 767. Size wise like the 767 but significantly less range to allow for the least weight. Boeing got the chance with the 787 to select their preferred location in the lineup, a bit above the 330 but below the 77W. Excellent position. A couple decades ago Boeing was able to select the 777 position and they chose wisely. The A350 found a good spot, filling in where the A340 was and is able to compete against both of Boeing's. The end of the A380 does mess up a bit the upper end lineup, but above the 787 there is now a low return on pips and updates. There are a lot of near current planes in this segment one needs to compete against.

Boeing can be setting up Airbus into investing in the A320 lineup for a response that will be A320neo Tech with its investment. But on a lifecycle case this response will be between the clean sheet NMA and NSA that will probably be CFRP. CFRP may be more expensive now compared to Al, but it will be much closer cost wise 2 decades out. The key is to make assembly the most cost effective.

Airbus has some financial constraints currently, I believe that JL was pricing deals a bit too competitive along with the production bottlenecks currently, the A320 is not printing cash like it should be. Coupled with the A380, the 350 getting the production curve improvements yet (they will, it will be much more profitable once 6-700 have been made), and the slow start for the A330neo, their overall margins are running about half of Boeing's. It is a good time for Boeing to strike with the 797 once they get all their ducks in a row.

I agree with most of what you wrote (especially how Boeing hopes Airbus responds to NMA with A32x family tech), but this being a.net, there will be differences of opinion. Here's my opinion.

The A380 debacle caused Airbus to shelve their original plan, which was to do a A330neo (the much discussed "A350 Mk1") first, use that to undermine/overlap the 787 whilst filling some of the middle-of-the-market, and then go all out with a clean sheet that would overlap 777. IMHO this would have put them in a better spot than they are today, where the A350 had to attempt to cover the A358 market (which failed) and had to get wing and engine tweaks to try to be competitive in the 77W's market space. As bigjku points out, the A350 is not on the growth trajectory Airbus had hoped for, and the A330neo has left room for NMA that an earlier/better "A350 Mk1" would have probably filled a long time ago.

Overall, I agree with bigjku that Airbus probably is disappointed with where it finds itself in the wide body market.
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
 
texl1649
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:06 pm

Airbus isn't really "disappointed" as they are not a thinking/sentient human, as an organization, but I think in moments of quiet/private candor, Leahy would admit that he would have in retrospect preferred the A330NEO sooner, and a follow on larger all new variant. The "dogs breakfast" of not quite right for the market all happened on essentially his watch/requests, though he was fortunate, surely, with the absolute brilliance of the original A320 design/wing.

The 797, if it happens, will not ever compete in a tender vs. an A32x variant.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5414
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:50 am

The 797, if successful (I.e. matching the economics of the A321LR) will put Airbus in an uncomfortable position. The A321NEO will still have a niche, but a small one, that is, for 200+ seat short range missions. The MAX8 will be competitive with the A320NEO, and if Airbus tries to match the 797 they will be encroaching on the A330NEO. Meanwhile Airbus is left with the A330NEO and A350 to compete against the 787 and 777X, and Boeing seems to have had the better of that matchup. If Boeing cannot make the 797 work then they are pretty much forced into the NSA, and presumably they would start with the largest version and aim it to be longer range (presumably with a bigger wing, and maybe folding wingtips) than the A322, if that appears. Then later they can make the smaller, shorter range versions with a smaller wing. But the first scenario would clearly be better for them.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 5:57 am

Revelation wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
Airbus has some financial constraints currently, I believe that JL was pricing deals a bit too competitive along with the production bottlenecks currently, the A320 is not printing cash like it should be. Coupled with the A380, the 350 getting the production curve improvements yet (they will, it will be much more profitable once 6-700 have been made), and the slow start for the A330neo, their overall margins are running about half of Boeing's. It is a good time for Boeing to strike with the 797 once they get all their ducks in a row.

I agree with most of what you wrote (especially how Boeing hopes Airbus responds to NMA with A32x family tech), but this being a.net, there will be differences of opinion. Here's my opinion.

The A380 debacle caused Airbus to shelve their original plan, which was to do a A330neo (the much discussed "A350 Mk1") first, use that to undermine/overlap the 787 whilst filling some of the middle-of-the-market, and then go all out with a clean sheet that would overlap 777. IMHO this would have put them in a better spot than they are today, where the A350 had to attempt to cover the A358 market (which failed) and had to get wing and engine tweaks to try to be competitive in the 77W's market space. As bigjku points out, the A350 is not on the growth trajectory Airbus had hoped for, and the A330neo has left room for NMA that an earlier/better "A350 Mk1" would have probably filled a long time ago.

Overall, I agree with bigjku that Airbus probably is disappointed with where it finds itself in the wide body market.


The derth of orders for a model is painful to watch, Boeing was kicked back a bit with the end of the 757 and it had a good run. Those that build the A380 are probably feeling trauma. I think it has affected the whole widebody program, now a new review on their line up without the 380. Yes,
Airbus probably is disappointed with where it finds itself in the wide body market.
A decade ago, their lineup looked excellent and they hoped to become the market leader in wide bodies. In the battle over 5% difference in margin between a successful airline and one struggling, sales trends take time to observe in aircraft purchases.

It is 'interesting' that the 797 is aiming for a market position that Airbus started in and left - the A300-600 with its 4,000 nm range.
 
rj777
Posts: 1780
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 1:47 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 5:58 am

I just thought of something..... once Boeing finally does launch the 797..... then a lot of people on here will be posting threads like...... "What comes next? 808, 7107, etc"
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 6:07 am

rj777 wrote:
I just thought of something..... once Boeing finally does launch the 797..... then a lot of people on here will be posting threads like...... "What comes next? 808, 7107, etc"


I sometimes wonder if it will come out as the 787-5 and -6, saving the 797 for the NSA
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:14 am

Jon Ostrower just posted an interesting article, the 7J7 cabin width is 10" narrower than the 767 in an old video from yesteryear.

https://theaircurrent.com/historical-co ... t-the-797/
 
Lewton
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:46 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:02 am

Boeing needs to design a completely new line with 4 models going from 150 to 250 passengers at a typical US airline setup.
They don't need to update any of their current 737. They are all selling pretty OK at the moment considering how little their redesign cost.
They should aim to launch them by 2025 so that they can finally kill the A320 and capture a big part of the midsize market.

Anything else will allow Airbus' cash cow (the A320, potentially stretched further with an A322) to keep dominating its segment and this supporting Airbus efforts to come up with better models for the larger segments.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2747
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 10:41 am

jagraham wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
“Wide body at narrow body costs”
Begs the question of which narrow body? And what is meant by costs?



The presumption would be an A321LR with 200 seat cost. The wide body comparison has to be made with the A321LR seats in the widebody, especially up front. Under those conditions, wide body at narrowbody CASM is possible, especially for the larger plane.. The plane has to use uprated narrowbody engines because the widebody engines are too heavy. And no way does it get half way around the world. Even Europe to USA west coast doesn't happen without severe restrictions. Then the plane can get within 15% of an A321LR MTOW weight per pax.


Yes indeed, that's how its is supposed to read to the lay person and if you dig beneath the numbers for the 787 marketing the aircraft they used for the their comparisons was the A33......oh no hang on! They used the 767 because that's how marketing works. I'd be almost sure that this would be in comparison to the NG.

Fred
Image
 
brindabella
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 12:12 pm

Dupli wrote:
monomojo wrote:
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


In my opinion, you are looking too much at the a321-mom market segment. What is the effect of a rewinged and updated a320 on 737 sales?


Well, an even more visible effect would be the first intro of the NSA, in whatever sequence: (**)


cheers

(**) the glorious segment of the 320neo-family order book is the 321neo.

Expect BA to attack that directly!
(I am in a majority of one here - every other a-netter believes implicitly that BA will do the NMA ONLY and leave all else alone.

I think not! (Certainly NOT when Muilenberg is running the show, IMO.)

:smile:
Billy
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 12:20 pm

brindabella wrote:
Dupli wrote:
monomojo wrote:
2. Of course they will. I don't think Boeing or anyone else expects that Airbus won't sell plenty of aircraft at the bottom of the MoM segment. But as long as it's based on the A321, the bottom of the segment is always where it's going to be, and without a clean sheet redesign at best it will merely be competitive at the bottom, whereas right now they're the only option.
3. Of course they will. Airbus will have lots of scope to aggressively compete on price with the A321XLR.


In my opinion, you are looking too much at the a321-mom market segment. What is the effect of a rewinged and updated a320 on 737 sales?


Well, an even more visible effect would be the first intro of the NSA, in whatever sequence: (**)


cheers

(**) the glorious segment of the 320neo-family order book is the 321neo.

Expect BA to attack that directly!
(I am in a majority of one here - every other a-netter believes implicitly that BA will do the NMA ONLY and leave all else alone.

I think not! (Certainly NOT when Muilenberg is running the show, IMO.)

:smile:


I don’t think they will leave the 737 alone. I think NMA will move further down the chain than people think and then they will come in with a very light plane to combat the A320neo directly.

Agree that the current CEO isn’t going to back down from competing. Boeing is going to come for the throat.
 
brindabella
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 12:32 pm

seabosdca wrote:
bigjku wrote:
The A350 sold a lot, entered service and has struggled since sales wise. We can ascribe whatever reason we want for it but the longer sales stay low the less reasons like backlog and replacement cycles hold up.

The 77W replacement cycle thing I think is oversold around here. The biggest 77W operator is on the books for 150 77X. The next biggest split it’s repalcment plan and has 21 77X on order. The next biggest has 60 77X on order. I am not sure if Air France has ordered those replacements yet. Turkish is down for the 787 and A350 and possibly hasn’t replaced its 77W’s yet so there is another one. Singapore is replacing 27 77W with 20 77X. ANA has 28 77W with 20 77X on order.

I think the 777 repalcment race is already well underway. Of other big operators I expect to see a Korean order this year which I expect to go 787 and 77X. You then have your late arrivals to the 77W party in American and United who took some. Add to that whatever the Chinese do. What operators are we waiting on at this point that will really move the needle? Name an operator who is looking for a program starting number of orders on a plane larger than an A359 that isn’t already bought into the 77X.


That airline that already has 150 77X on order. No, seriously. And in general I don't think that an existing 77X order is a death blow for Airbus's prospects with an airline, especially where that airline is also ordering A350s.

With the A380 cancellation they still don't have enough capacity on order, even with the replacement Airbus orders. Assuming they absorb EY's and possibly some of QR's 777X slots in the near term, speeding delivery of their 77X order, they will need more lift right around the timeframe that people are bandying about for the A350neo. Would not be shocked to see them be a launch customer of the A350-1000neo (or the stretch variant!) with 50 orders.

Other airlines that I think could order significant numbers of A350neo are BA, AF, CX, TK, BR, JL, and the Chinese. Also SU might be interested in a European 777 replacement for political reasons if there is an electoral backlash to the current Kremlin-cozy US president.

To sort of get back toward the topic. I see this as a much more likely and much more profitable venture for Airbus than an all-new widebody A330neo replacement. Airbus's way to compete with the 797 is from below. One new A320 series wing, not two, is enough.



Very reasonable.

But ever more, the AB product-line seems to steadily contract into an A320 family/A350 strategy.

Meanwhile, against all logic and evidence, many a-netters STILL talk about BA reducing to 3 product-lines. :hissyfit:

Despite all the visible (and obvious) evidence that the BA sales superiority is increasingly based-upon a multitude of product-lines!


cheers
Billy

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