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

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:07 pm

Lewton wrote:
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.

IMO we have to stop using such language.

I can't picture anything Boeing could do to kill the A320 in the 2025 time frame, just like I can't picture anything Airbus could do to kill the 737 in the same time frame.

This of course rules out anything stupid like intentionally taking massive losses to gain market share.

Both products have a lot of inertia and the industry as a whole gains a lot of benefits from a stable duopoly.

If the A320 was killed tomorrow Boeing could not make up the production shortfall, and vice versa.

A superior product (777 vs A340, A330 vs 767) can kill off a weaker product but it takes many years to happen.

In the aftermath the vendors make adjustments (A350, 787) and we all carry on.
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
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1359
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:20 pm

The notion of Boeing killing the A320 or conversely Airbus killing the 737 is ludicrous, and off topic. Airbus will end the A320 and Boeing the 737 with their follow ons. It is absurd to contemplate one OEM owning any more than maybe 60% of the single aisle family market. They just couldn't build them, as we can see right freaking now.

Please note I said FAMILY deliberately to stop the "But the A321 is selling 50 times the 737-10" retort. I did say please. And it's off topic. :tongue2:
 
planecane
Posts: 846
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:24 pm

Revelation wrote:
Lewton wrote:
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.

IMO we have to stop using such language.

I can't picture anything Boeing could do to kill the A320 in the 2025 time frame, just like I can't picture anything Airbus could do to kill the 737 in the same time frame.

This of course rules out anything stupid like intentionally taking massive losses to gain market share.

Both products have a lot of inertia and the industry as a whole gains a lot of benefits from a stable duopoly.

If the A320 was killed tomorrow Boeing could not make up the production shortfall, and vice versa.

A superior product (777 vs A340, A330 vs 767) can kill off a weaker product but it takes many years to happen.

In the aftermath the vendors make adjustments (A350, 787) and we all carry on.


Also, neither Boeing nor Airbus has the production capacity to kill the other's narrowbody line. If a new NB is enough "better" the producer would gain some market share and force the other company to lower prices so that ownership costs are at least in the same ballpark. This would lower margins and at a point it makes more sense to respond with a new program.

If Boeing decided to sell the 737MAX10 for half the price of the A321NEO, they'd win a lot more orders and the market share would be closer. However, that would kill the profitability of the 737 line so it makes no sense to do. Hence, it makes more sense to compete with a clean sheet NMA/797. The question will be if it makes enough sense to launch.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8528
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:56 pm

planecane wrote:
If Boeing decided to sell the 737MAX10 for half the price of the A321NEO, they'd win a lot more orders and the market share would be closer. However, that would kill the profitability of the 737 line so it makes no sense to do. Hence, it makes more sense to compete with a clean sheet NMA/797. The question will be if it makes enough sense to launch.

So let's think about this some more, spend 10 billion on a new frame for which they do not have RLI, or lower the profitability of the 737-900ER / MAX-10 / MAX200 to regain some market share?
If it was that simple Boeing would be nuts to not implement a loss leader to increase sales of its slower selling product, as we are always told, after market support is huge.
The MAX8 is selling and generating all the bulk of the profits, cutting profitability on the poor selling models will not send the 737 program into a tail spin.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2867
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:24 pm

par13del wrote:
So let's think about this some more, spend 10 billion on a new frame for which they do not have RLI, or lower the profitability of the 737-900ER / MAX-10 / MAX200 to regain some market share?


I'm not sure if that is the current consensus now at Boeing as it have been stated that Boeing will not sell plane for a loss just to gain market share. This was back when Airbus had the title of number one airplane manufacturer. Even now, I believe Boeing is O.K. with the A320 outselling the A737 if by a small margin as long as they maintain dominance in the wide body market (where the profit is). This is not going to change with the addition of the 797 and the emergence of COMAC narrow body.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:41 pm

par13del wrote:
planecane wrote:
If Boeing decided to sell the 737MAX10 for half the price of the A321NEO, they'd win a lot more orders and the market share would be closer. However, that would kill the profitability of the 737 line so it makes no sense to do. Hence, it makes more sense to compete with a clean sheet NMA/797. The question will be if it makes enough sense to launch.

So let's think about this some more, spend 10 billion on a new frame for which they do not have RLI, or lower the profitability of the 737-900ER / MAX-10 / MAX200 to regain some market share?
If it was that simple Boeing would be nuts to not implement a loss leader to increase sales of its slower selling product, as we are always told, after market support is huge.
The MAX8 is selling and generating all the bulk of the profits, cutting profitability on the poor selling models will not send the 737 program into a tail spin.


The more practical problems I would say are as follows.

1. The 737 is expensive to produce and Boeing wants to eventually replace it with planes designed for modern, automatedmass production. You have to start somewhere and NMA will be where they start.

2. Simply selling more 737 (or A320neo) at this point really doesn’t do anything for you. The lines are full up. The engine builders hve out the stops on further capacity increases for the time being. Maybe they will go to 70 for Airbus and mid 60’s for Boeing but not until 2021 at the earliest. And frankly I don’t see them going further. Whatever you invest in increasing rate as a vendor you better make back by 2028-30 or so. There is lot much reason to sell lower margin products on a production limited line if you can make good margin on the 737-8 and keep it full.

3. Look at the life of the 737 and A320. What both companies are engaged in now will have ramifications over the next 30 years and possibly more. Getting NMA and then NSA in the right spots are what matter. Generating cash for those investments for the next 10 years or so is what matters. Market share of the 737-10 doesn’t matter. The ideal way to do this would be to shut off 737 production one day and have NSA ready to run at rate 60 the next. But that’s not practical. So Boeing is going to debug with NMA without really impacting what the 737 is currently doing to generate cash and then if NSA has a lot in common with it can start from a production base already making 10-12 of these a month rather than from zero because the new narrows for each airframer will have to be spun up production rate wise faster than any other modern jetliner ever has been.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3066
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:04 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
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/


I am glad some else remembers this concept. A double aisle domestic aircraft is not a new concept. At the time I thought it was a 767 body with a T tail. Interesting it was 10 inches narrower.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:19 pm

bikerthai wrote:
par13del wrote:
So let's think about this some more, spend 10 billion on a new frame for which they do not have RLI, or lower the profitability of the 737-900ER / MAX-10 / MAX200 to regain some market share?


I'm not sure if that is the current consensus now at Boeing as it have been stated that Boeing will not sell plane for a loss just to gain market share. This was back when Airbus had the title of number one airplane manufacturer. Even now, I believe Boeing is O.K. with the A320 outselling the A737 if by a small margin as long as they maintain dominance in the wide body market (where the profit is). This is not going to change with the addition of the 797 and the emergence of COMAC narrow body.

bt


The narrow body frames, both at Boeing and Airbus are the cash cows, the main provider of profits.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1125
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:28 pm

william wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
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/


I am glad some else remembers this concept. A double aisle domestic aircraft is not a new concept. At the time I thought it was a 767 body with a T tail. Interesting it was 10 inches narrower.



That's about where you get too if you take the width of an 737 Fuselage and add 20.5" for a seat and two Arm rests and an extra Aisle. NMA could be about 190" in width and if they are shooting for small containers about 170-175" in Height (A320 plus 7-12").

A nice tight and light 7W Fuselage at about 25% more surface area than an A320.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8528
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:50 pm

bigjku wrote:
1. The 737 is expensive to produce and Boeing wants to eventually replace it with planes designed for modern, automatedmass production. You have to start somewhere and NMA will be where they start.

Does make you wonder why they did not stick to their guns and do the NSA when they wanted to, they had to know then how expensive it was to produce and whether they could simply lower the cost by just squeezing the vendors, can't blame everything on the NEO catching them off guard.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:29 pm

par13del wrote:
bigjku wrote:
1. The 737 is expensive to produce and Boeing wants to eventually replace it with planes designed for modern, automatedmass production. You have to start somewhere and NMA will be where they start.

Does make you wonder why they did not stick to their guns and do the NSA when they wanted to, they had to know then how expensive it was to produce and whether they could simply lower the cost by just squeezing the vendors, can't blame everything on the NEO catching them off guard.


There is only so much you can do at once and the 787 blew a gaping hole in the side of the ship. They didn’t know if building planes that way would work. Since then I think they have decided what parts of the 787 process to keep, what to bring internal (wings clearly on that list) and how they want to apply it.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6424
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 6:22 pm

brindabella wrote:
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!


I'm not sure it's good for either OEM to have lots and lots of different types around. Every all-new type program in the last two decades has been massively over budget and at least a bit behind schedule. It's becoming harder and harder to engineer them. There is a lot of value in reusing existing work where possible--which is what a lot of the most obvious possible "next moves" for both OEMs do. Think about all these possibilities that could realistically be evaluated over the next decade or so:

- A320 rewing with a heavier wing, leaving the existing wing or a variant in place for lighter variants
- A350 stretch + maybe wing extension to neutralize 777X capacity advantage and leverage A350 weight advantage
- 787 heavier center wing box + new main gear + wing extension to take the 787 into 777X replacement territory
- A220 stretch + heavier main gear

All of these would cover markets that the OEMs are currently missing or will be missing in the near future, for far less money than all-new frames. Boeing's key strategic issue that it's working through is that it cannot address the A321 in this sort of way.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8528
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 6:59 pm

The A321 issue is not new, Boeing for years have stated that the market in their line up for a 757 replacement was not there, and this was with the full knowledge that the reason why the 757 ceased selling was due to the A321 being a more efficient product for those who did not need the full capabilities of the 757.
The 737-9XX in any variant was to address the shortfall, the larger NG etc included,now things are changing, the need for the A321 size a/c is going from a trickle to a surge. If and I say if the 797 is finally launched I hope we will get more details on why it took so long to launch.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:01 pm

seabosdca wrote:
brindabella wrote:
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!


I'm not sure it's good for either OEM to have lots and lots of different types around. Every all-new type program in the last two decades has been massively over budget and at least a bit behind schedule. It's becoming harder and harder to engineer them. There is a lot of value in reusing existing work where possible--which is what a lot of the most obvious possible "next moves" for both OEMs do. Think about all these possibilities that could realistically be evaluated over the next decade or so:

- A320 rewing with a heavier wing, leaving the existing wing or a variant in place for lighter variants
- A350 stretch + maybe wing extension to neutralize 777X capacity advantage and leverage A350 weight advantage
- 787 heavier center wing box + new main gear + wing extension to take the 787 into 777X replacement territory
- A220 stretch + heavier main gear

All of these would cover markets that the OEMs are currently missing or will be missing in the near future, for far less money than all-new frames. Boeing's key strategic issue that it's working through is that it cannot address the A321 in this sort of way.


I will say right here that the day Airbus stretches the A220 and looks to be pushing the A320neo out of that market for it to position it as an A321/22 I sell my shares in Airbus and possibly even short the stock. I may be wrong but splitting the baby seems like an awful idea to me that far too many here readily endorse without really thinking it thru.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5414
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:30 pm

par13del wrote:
bigjku wrote:
1. The 737 is expensive to produce and Boeing wants to eventually replace it with planes designed for modern, automatedmass production. You have to start somewhere and NMA will be where they start.

Does make you wonder why they did not stick to their guns and do the NSA when they wanted to, they had to know then how expensive it was to produce and whether they could simply lower the cost by just squeezing the vendors, can't blame everything on the NEO catching them off guard.

The customers forced their hand. They said that they would not wait for the NSA; they would rather have the MAX (which they were willing to wait for) now.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 27, 2019 1:00 am

mjoelnir wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
par13del wrote:
So let's think about this some more, spend 10 billion on a new frame for which they do not have RLI, or lower the profitability of the 737-900ER / MAX-10 / MAX200 to regain some market share?


I'm not sure if that is the current consensus now at Boeing as it have been stated that Boeing will not sell plane for a loss just to gain market share. This was back when Airbus had the title of number one airplane manufacturer. Even now, I believe Boeing is O.K. with the A320 outselling the A737 if by a small margin as long as they maintain dominance in the wide body market (where the profit is). This is not going to change with the addition of the 797 and the emergence of COMAC narrow body.

bt


The narrow body frames, both at Boeing and Airbus are the cash cows, the main provider of profits.

They are cash cows, but only because of volume. You'll get higher margins on widebody sales.
 
mzlin
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:32 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:08 am

Rolls Royce has dropped out of the engine competition for the NMA/797. I believe Stitch predicted it.

"Rolls-Royce also said it would withdraw from a competition to power a new plane Boeing may build. The timelines to complete development of its engine and Boeing’s plans to introduce the so-called New Midsize Airplane around 2025 don’t match up, Rolls-Royce Chief Executive Warren East said Thursday, calling the move “a very difficult decision.”"

Reported by WSJ in their article about today's order by BA for 18x 777-9s:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-lan ... counts-wsj
 
pabloeing
Posts: 576
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:35 am

Fantastic for GE ¡¡¡¡
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20576
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:47 pm

Jon O / The Air Current ( https://theaircurrent.com/engine-develo ... gine-pick/ ) suggests the RR drop out may mean that the NMA engine winner annoncement may be fast approaching.

His twitter ( https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/ ... 9782355969 ) says:

Rolls-Royce’s own internal target since at least late 2018 had assumed its engine offering for Boeing’s 797 wouldn’t have been ready until 2027.

which to me at least suggests Boeing wasn't OK with a delayed (post-2025) time line.
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
Revelation
Posts: 20576
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:44 pm

bigjku wrote:
They didn’t know if building planes that way would work. Since then I think they have decided what parts of the 787 process to keep, what to bring internal (wings clearly on that list) and how they want to apply it.

It's funny when you step back and take in the big picture after reading various partisan posts.

They suggest there is a genuine fear that Boeing will pull off what the aviation media is suggesting they probably will do, create an all-new light wide body for the middle of the market that has great operational economics and attractive purchase price, largely based on technology flowing down from 787 and 777x, with a low technology risk engine with high reliability and efficiency, and able to open new city pairs due to its payload, range and economics. In the process, Boeing will be putting in to place new design and manufacturing methodologies and changing its relationship with its supply chain, establishing for itself a new level of profitability and positioning itself to make an all new narrow body as a follow up.

I guess this can generate a lot of fear in some people's minds.

The fear might also come from fact that they keep proposing all different permutations of new wings and new wing boxes and stretches yet they are hearing next to nothing in the aviation media from Airbus, other than hints of the turmoil in the decision making process as the guard changes from Enders to Faury while a corruption investigation continues in the background.

It's nice to be able to just sit back and watch events unfold instead of having to continuously generate pot stirring theories and photoshopped photos of overstretched aircraft.
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
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3638
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:09 pm

Revelation wrote:
bigjku wrote:
They didn’t know if building planes that way would work. Since then I think they have decided what parts of the 787 process to keep, what to bring internal (wings clearly on that list) and how they want to apply it.

It's funny when you step back and take in the big picture after reading various partisan posts.

They suggest there is a genuine fear that Boeing will pull off what the aviation media is suggesting they probably will do, create an all-new light wide body for the middle of the market that has great operational economics and attractive purchase price, largely based on technology flowing down from 787 and 777x, with a low technology risk engine with high reliability and efficiency, and able to open new city pairs due to its payload, range and economics. In the process, Boeing will be putting in to place new design and manufacturing methodologies and changing its relationship with its supply chain, establishing for itself a new level of profitability and positioning itself to make an all new narrow body as a follow up.

I guess this can generate a lot of fear in some people's minds.

The fear might also come from fact that they keep proposing all different permutations of new wings and new wing boxes and stretches yet they are hearing next to nothing in the aviation media from Airbus, other than hints of the turmoil in the decision making process as the guard changes from Enders to Faury while a corruption investigation continues in the background.

It's nice to be able to just sit back and watch events unfold instead of having to continuously generate pot stirring theories and photoshopped photos of overstretched aircraft.


Airbus is going to have to market against the NMA. They may have the fear you are referring to. The sales strategies are appearing

  • The NMA can’t fly cargo, so buy the A330neo
  • Single aisle airplanes are better, so buy the A321
  • The technology doesn’t exist for the NMA to be a good plane
  • The A321 is will be around a long time and has potential to grow, so don’t swap
  • Everyone flies the A321, so jump on the bandwagon
  • The A321 payload can keep going up. Ignore the consequences from the wingloading, engine thrust increases and weigh and balance
  • No one can build a plane on time, so assume Boeing will fail and be late
  • The PW engine will be fixed by the time the NMA is around. Geared fans are better

All the airlines expressing interest in the NMA probably does create some fear that the NMA will be a success
Last edited by Newbiepilot on Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20576
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:20 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Airbus is going to have to market against the NMA. They may have the fear you are referring to. The sales strategies are appearing

  • The NMA can’t fly cargo, so buy the A330neo
  • Single aisle airplanes are better, so buy the A321
  • The technology doesn’t exist for the NMA to be a good plane
  • The A321 is will be around a long time and has potential to grow, so don’t swap
  • Everyone flies the A321, so jump on the bandwagon
  • No one can build a plane on time, so assume Boeing will fail and be late
  • The PW engine will be fixed by the time the NMA is around

All the airlines expressing interest in the NMA probably does create some fear that the NMA will be a success

You forgot:

  • No gear = No good

But maybe don't say it too loud till you're sure PW doesn't find its way on to the NMA.

Newbiepilot wrote:
All the airlines expressing interest in the NMA probably does create some fear that the NMA will be a success

It's hard to avoid reaching this conclusion, seeing how much denial their is around what the airlines are saying they want.

Some are so fearful of reality that they are referring to A321 as a new medium airplane when it is a 1980s old medium airplane.
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
Kindanew
Posts: 149
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:07 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:35 pm

Leeham News continues to be highly sceptical that a launch will come any time soon.
https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/04/ponti ... ma-launch/
 
musman9853
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:46 pm

Kindanew wrote:
Leeham News continues to be highly sceptical that a launch will come any time soon.
https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/04/ponti ... ma-launch/


i think with ATO coming soon, the initial demand from airlines will make or break the program. if they can get a few hundred orders before launch they'll go ahead i think.
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17496
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:59 pm

musman9853 wrote:
Kindanew wrote:
Leeham News continues to be highly sceptical that a launch will come any time soon.
https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/04/ponti ... ma-launch/


i think with ATO coming soon, the initial demand from airlines will make or break the program. if they can get a few hundred orders before launch they'll go ahead i think.

I see the demand. Airlines are discussing. There is an obvious Gap in the market. The only question is the business case as this plane will compete in a new area for widebodies.

Leeham is always skeptical on Boeing and was overly enthusiastic on the A346, A388, and A338/9. Meh... The site has good information, I just draw different conclusions.

The engine will be key:

Pratt: 3.5:1 gearbox, better low turbine. Probably first GTF with 4 low turbine stages (greater bypass ratio).
Probably add in the fan nozzle (missions are long enough).

CFM:. CMC inlet vanes on the turbine. Already shown an ability to put in an insane number of low turbine stages. Unlikely to be GTF ready. But still a contender. They will bid a lower cost than Pratt.

At this time I cannot pick an engine as I do not have access to the bid details.

The chance for Pratt goes up if RR partners...

We find out if ATO goes forward within the next 90 days.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 2918
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:07 pm

Depending upon how much of the R and D (including new manufacturing systems) of the 797 are directly transferrable to the NSA the price of the NMA may be a few tens of millions cheaper that customary accounting might have it. One learning I suspect Boeing is demanding from the 797 is rapid build up of production. The 797 will be fast, the NSA will sprint to ten a month - (by the end of the first year?)
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:14 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Depending upon how much of the R and D (including new manufacturing systems) of the 797 are directly transferrable to the NSA the price of the NMA may be a few tens of millions cheaper that customary accounting might have it. One learning I suspect Boeing is demanding from the 797 is rapid build up of production. The 797 will be fast, the NSA will sprint to ten a month - (by the end of the first year?)


Yeah, everyone wants to ignore the impact you hve on NSA by doing some of the systems here. Even if they are derivatives it’s a lot easier to get to rate quickly with things you already make or are similar to things you make.

The NSA rate spin up will be (for both builders) the biggest industrial and development challenge ever managed. IMHO the second one is announced orders for he previous model dry up and people are screaming to convert. Ideally you need to go from announces to in service in 4 years. You need to be in high rate production in 6. That is a huge challenge.
 
Eyad89
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:27 pm

lightsaber wrote:


Leeham is always skeptical on Boeing and was overly enthusiastic on the A346, A388, and A338/9. Meh... The site has good information, I just draw different conclusions.

Lightsaber


To be fair, he simply referred to the doubts raised by people from the industry, that wasn’t simply his opinion. Some analysts can be biased for sure though.

But if it is true that even engine manufacturers don’t see a business case unless they become they the sole suppliers, then this might raise some eyebrows to say the least.
 
User avatar
Kindanew
Posts: 149
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:07 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:42 pm

lightsaber wrote:
musman9853 wrote:
Kindanew wrote:
Leeham News continues to be highly sceptical that a launch will come any time soon.
https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/04/ponti ... ma-launch/


i think with ATO coming soon, the initial demand from airlines will make or break the program. if they can get a few hundred orders before launch they'll go ahead i think.

I see the demand. Airlines are discussing. There is an obvious Gap in the market. The only question is the business case as this plane will compete in a new area for widebodies.

Leeham is always skeptical on Boeing and was overly enthusiastic on the A346, A388, and A338/9. Meh... The site has good information, I just draw different conclusions.

The engine will be key:

Pratt: 3.5:1 gearbox, better low turbine. Probably first GTF with 4 low turbine stages (greater bypass ratio).
Probably add in the fan nozzle (missions are long enough).

CFM:. CMC inlet vanes on the turbine. Already shown an ability to put in an insane number of low turbine stages. Unlikely to be GTF ready. But still a contender. They will bid a lower cost than Pratt.

At this time I cannot pick an engine as I do not have access to the bid details.

The chance for Pratt goes up if RR partners...

We find out if ATO goes forward within the next 90 days.

Lightsaber


There was obviously a gap in the market for the A380 but in hindsight the gap wasn't large enough to justify it's development.

I just find it strange how so many people on here are convinced the NMA will definitely the greatest success when people who's job it is to work these things out aren't convinced. The Leeham article claims that Boeing can't make the NMA as cheaply as airlines want and that the engine makers don't see a huge market for it. Plus they have been talking about this for 7 years.Airbus launched the A350 twice during that time.

Personally I think Boeing will launch the NMA but it will be of niche interest. It might sell 300-400 in the first year or two then the orders will trail off.
 
User avatar
Carlos01
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:52 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:52 pm

Kindanew wrote:

There was obviously a gap in the market for the A380 but in hindsight the gap wasn't large enough to justify it's development.



Well to be fair, the A380 was created in a "niche" that had never been tried before. Nobody really knew how many routes would be viable for a 600-seat plane.

Whereas, a modern plane sized 250 seats will hit certain spots, as such routes exist today already. Not to mention, similarly sized 757 and 767 are still flying, so there must be something there if it works even with "outdated" technology.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8349
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:04 pm

If it is a niche product, then economies of scale mean that it can not hit the desired price point. It is either go big (serious volume) or go home.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:10 pm

bigjku wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
Depending upon how much of the R and D (including new manufacturing systems) of the 797 are directly transferrable to the NSA the price of the NMA may be a few tens of millions cheaper that customary accounting might have it. One learning I suspect Boeing is demanding from the 797 is rapid build up of production. The 797 will be fast, the NSA will sprint to ten a month - (by the end of the first year?)


Yeah, everyone wants to ignore the impact you hve on NSA by doing some of the systems here. Even if they are derivatives it’s a lot easier to get to rate quickly with things you already make or are similar to things you make.

The NSA rate spin up will be (for both builders) the biggest industrial and development challenge ever managed. IMHO the second one is announced orders for he previous model dry up and people are screaming to convert. Ideally you need to go from announces to in service in 4 years. You need to be in high rate production in 6. That is a huge challenge.


By offering new models above the 737 current capabilities is the best way to transition, in particular if the NMA is sold sufficiently to sell at rate 20.

Yes the size of the components are different between the NMA and NSA. But actuators can have different force and stroke, but the NMA version is basically a stretch of the NSA version. All the controls stay the same in both. Repeat 1,000 times. The air packs could be the same, 4 on the NMA and 3 on the NSA. Use the same software and architecture throughout. But the NMA would give a good dress rehearsal, a chance to change items a bit for the new size to improve them onto the NSA.

Digital design, 3D printing, barrels with the ribs installed, every part designed for full on automation. Designed with elegant simplicity and redundancy. The 787 has now provided thru 800 copies to get CFRP experience and learning curve improvements.

It is time for ATO, I see Airbus constrained by the 380 demise and the changing of the guard. Airbus's initial response would likely be an A322 or similar with a new wing, but that locks them longer in the existing architecture of the A320, sort of a dead end. Similar to Boeing with the MAX introduction, it locked an added decade of 737 production, but it was the only available option as it would be 5 extra years to go NSA then, besides the lessons learned on the 787 were not fully there yet.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:19 pm

Eyad89 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:


Leeham is always skeptical on Boeing and was overly enthusiastic on the A346, A388, and A338/9. Meh... The site has good information, I just draw different conclusions.

Lightsaber


To be fair, he simply referred to the doubts raised by people from the industry, that wasn’t simply his opinion. Some analysts can be biased for sure though.

But if it is true that even engine manufacturers don’t see a business case unless they become they the sole suppliers, then this might raise some eyebrows to say the least.


It could be the case of suppliers finding them outside of the business case. For example, for RR is it better for them if the NMA launches without them or never comes to pass. Honeywell and Collins may be on the outside looking in too, is it better for them then that the NMA not proceed?
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5414
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:38 pm

Well, the NMA is essentially the 767 with better economics. The 767 sold quite well until the A330 came along and ate its lunch. So the question is can a 7-abreast airliner still compete with an 8-abreast from above (A330neo) or 6-abreast from below (A321neo, A322) and win? It is a difficult proposition, as the 7-abreast is a fundamentally inefficient layout, and there are no tweaks that can change that. Whatever magic Boeing can find to make it work can also be applied to a competitor, either from above or below.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
monomojo
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:39 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 7:04 pm

SEPilot wrote:
Well, the NMA is essentially the 767 with better economics. The 767 sold quite well until the A330 came along and ate its lunch. So the question is can a 7-abreast airliner still compete with an 8-abreast from above (A330neo) or 6-abreast from below (A321neo, A322) and win? It is a difficult proposition, as the 7-abreast is a fundamentally inefficient layout, and there are no tweaks that can change that. Whatever magic Boeing can find to make it work can also be applied to a competitor, either from above or below.


Which is why it won't be a 7ab, but a "7.5". It will fly 8ab on short high-density routes, and do it at a massive efficiency advantage over either the A330NEO or A320NEO, and offer wide 7ab for premium fares and long-haul configurations, with much better pax comfort and payloads/ranges single aisles can't match.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2867
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:04 pm

SEPilot wrote:
Whatever magic Boeing can find to make it work can also be applied to a competitor, either from above or below.


The magic is reducing the cost of fabrication through proprietary manufacturing process. Because it is proprietary, it can not be duplicated from above or below without getting into legal troubles.

The more I hear about the implementation of this process within Boeing, the more confident I am that they can get this right an drive down the cost of the 797. Enough to make it competitive with the current narrow body? Shrug . . . they say they may be close . . . time will tell.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17496
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:13 pm

bikerthai wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Whatever magic Boeing can find to make it work can also be applied to a competitor, either from above or below.


The magic is reducing the cost of fabrication through proprietary manufacturing process. Because it is proprietary, it can not be duplicated from above or below without getting into legal troubles.

The more I hear about the implementation of this process within Boeing, the more confident I am that they can get this right an drive down the cost of the 797. Enough to make it competitive with the current narrow body? Shrug . . . they say they may be close . . . time will tell.

bt

I'm curious as to the manufacturing process. I'm aware with what is happening with engines and certain vendors. Boeing definitely is stretching to get under a certain cost while still arriving at a business case.

It is an efficient cross section for a limited, cargo light market. It is a more efficient than the 767 cross section. Enough to fend off a very efficient 8-across? Well, side by side LD3 packages best with 9-across, so I now see a gap, cargo or no cargo 7 to 9 across in Y.

Cheap enough? Let us see.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:24 pm

lightsaber wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Whatever magic Boeing can find to make it work can also be applied to a competitor, either from above or below.


The magic is reducing the cost of fabrication through proprietary manufacturing process. Because it is proprietary, it can not be duplicated from above or below without getting into legal troubles.

The more I hear about the implementation of this process within Boeing, the more confident I am that they can get this right an drive down the cost of the 797. Enough to make it competitive with the current narrow body? Shrug . . . they say they may be close . . . time will tell.

bt

I'm curious as to the manufacturing process. I'm aware with what is happening with engines and certain vendors. Boeing definitely is stretching to get under a certain cost while still arriving at a business case.

It is an efficient cross section for a limited, cargo light market. It is a more efficient than the 767 cross section. Enough to fend off a very efficient 8-across? Well, side by side LD3 packages best with 9-across, so I now see a gap, cargo or no cargo 7 to 9 across in Y.

Cheap enough? Let us see.

Lightsaber


You clearly attack the 8 across with the 9 from above and the 7 from below. The A330 in its prime dealt with 9/10 across 777 that wasn’t great at 9 wide and a 7 across 767. The existence of the 787 makes life tough for an 8 across airplane I would think.

Ideally I would want a lineup (presuming I can’t find a way to do 4x4 in Y) that is 6 across, 7 with a very tight 8 across, 8/9 across and a 10/11 across. As an airline I would like to be able to segment my product with Y and Y+. The best way to do that in my view is the 787 approach. My Y tight but defensible for legacy carriers and Y+ you lose one seat without giving away the farm as far as space. It matters less the wider you get as that one seat only buys you so much extra space.

Anyway, long story short the gap between NMA would be very tight cross section wise to the 787 I would think. You could build a pure 8 across but it’s going to be bracketed.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5414
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:46 pm

bikerthai wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Whatever magic Boeing can find to make it work can also be applied to a competitor, either from above or below.


The magic is reducing the cost of fabrication through proprietary manufacturing process. Because it is proprietary, it can not be duplicated from above or below without getting into legal troubles.

The more I hear about the implementation of this process within Boeing, the more confident I am that they can get this right an drive down the cost of the 797. Enough to make it competitive with the current narrow body? Shrug . . . they say they may be close . . . time will tell.

bt

Purchase price only gets you so far. The operating economics have to be competitive as well. And while the oval 7-abreast is better than the 767 cross section, it is still worse than 6-abreast, and will be heavier as well, even with CFRP construction, as some structure will be needed to keep the oval shape that is not needed with a round or double-bubble cross section.
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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:49 pm

Bathrooms right now just fit behind 3 seats, so do not fit well on the sides of a narrow double aisle. However doing an arrangement where it is single aisle premium economy ahead of the exit doors allows for side bathrooms slightly larger than currently. Makes the seats 2" wider along with a wider aisle ahead. Does it gain enough revenue by people upgrading at check in "Enjoy Premium for this leg - $50", a $ 100 extra per round trip to offset the costs.

It could be 7ab in the rear with the same seat width of the 737, that is only 16" wider than the 737 for the aisle.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1125
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 9:04 pm

SEPilot wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Whatever magic Boeing can find to make it work can also be applied to a competitor, either from above or below.


The magic is reducing the cost of fabrication through proprietary manufacturing process. Because it is proprietary, it can not be duplicated from above or below without getting into legal troubles.

The more I hear about the implementation of this process within Boeing, the more confident I am that they can get this right an drive down the cost of the 797. Enough to make it competitive with the current narrow body? Shrug . . . they say they may be close . . . time will tell.

bt

Purchase price only gets you so far. The operating economics have to be competitive as well. And while the oval 7-abreast is better than the 767 cross section, it is still worse than 6-abreast, and will be heavier as well, even with CFRP construction, as some structure will be needed to keep the oval shape that is not needed with a round or double-bubble cross section.


Don't assume the economics are worse. If the oval is only 170"H by 188"W - that is a cross section only 25% more than an A320 (which is 163"H x 156"W) - for 16.7% more Y seats and up to 50% more premium seats and a container that could hold 50% more as well. The A320 has 10% more cross section area than 737 and it doesn't see to hurt it that much. BTW a 767 has a cross section 65.8% more than A320 at 213"H x 198"W, it's a lot bigger than what a tight Oval 7W could be.

An NMA at A321 length will have a lot more seats (20-30) or for the same seating the NMA could be substantially shorter. The weights could potentially not be that different on a per seat basis.

The operating economics may not be that bad if they go with a tight light oval. You can't make a broad generalization that 6W is better - it may be it may not be.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2867
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:28 pm

SEPilot wrote:
The operating economics have to be competitive as well.


Exactly. While there are no numbers that we can get our hands on of yet, one of the benefit of a double aisle aircraft is to allow faster boarding and de-boarding thus increasing the utilization of the aircrafts. How many more flights can you squeeze in? Shrug . . .

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5414
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:56 pm

bikerthai wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
The operating economics have to be competitive as well.


Exactly. While there are no numbers that we can get our hands on of yet, one of the benefit of a double aisle aircraft is to allow faster boarding and de-boarding thus increasing the utilization of the aircrafts. How many more flights can you squeeze in? Shrug . . .

bt

That is certainly one factor, as 7- abreast haa the fewest seats per aisle, and hence will have the fastest turnaround times of any common configuration. But that is important only on very short routes, where the plane makes multiple stops per day. And that is not the market that NMA is targeting.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6424
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:01 am

SEPilot wrote:
That is certainly one factor, as 7- abreast haa the fewest seats per aisle, and hence will have the fastest turnaround times of any common configuration. But that is important only on very short routes, where the plane makes multiple stops per day. And that is not the market that NMA is targeting.


We'll see. If NMA comes in two variants as has been widely speculated, I could imagine quite a few copies of the larger one spending their lives flying 2-hour missions in Europe and the Far East. It's about time for a new Kontschaufel -- the A300 got too expensive to fly compared with the A321/739, but nothing quite does what it did for airlines like LH, TG, and even AA.
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 929
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:43 am

I am not sure if having twin aisles actually speeds up the exit process. The bottleneck is the number of doors used for the process - if a twin aisle aircraft use only one door, the throughput will be the same as a single aisle aircraft.
 
mzlin
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:32 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:56 am

flee wrote:
I am not sure if having twin aisles actually speeds up the exit process. The bottleneck is the number of doors used for the process - if a twin aisle aircraft use only one door, the throughput will be the same as a single aisle aircraft.


You apparently have never ridden in the back of a narrowbody before. The bottleneck is all 6 people each row getting their luggage from the overhead compartments. That's 6 sequential motions of getting up out of seat, picking up stuff around them, moving to aisle, reaching up, sideways, forward and back for suitcase, needing help with suitcase, putting it on ground, extending handle, placing other items on suitcase, moving down aisle, hopefully not dropping things or getting stuck halfway. Now repeat for each of 33 rows.

In a widebody say 9abreast, it's 4.5 passengers per aisle and when one is blocked the other can keep moving. In many widebody disembarkations, I cross over at some point to bypass someone blocking the aisle retrieving their items. And the door is so wide and efficient that by the time you get there it's often a full jog and the flight attendants are barely a blur in your eye as you zip by.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8349
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:49 am

The turnaround time won´t be much different. More seats mean more seats to clean, more food to restock, more trash to take out.

Sure a FR or U2 like operation could probably squeeze a few minutes out of the process, but I doubt they are seen as operators for the plane. And once you get premium class seats and catering in the plane, restocking and cleaning those alone will eat up any advantage.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:48 am

Kindanew wrote:
Leeham News continues to be highly sceptical that a launch will come any time soon.
https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/04/ponti ... ma-launch/
very interesting article actually. I would agree.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12913
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:49 am

SEPilot wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
The operating economics have to be competitive as well.


Exactly. While there are no numbers that we can get our hands on of yet, one of the benefit of a double aisle aircraft is to allow faster boarding and de-boarding thus increasing the utilization of the aircrafts. How many more flights can you squeeze in? Shrug . . .

bt

That is certainly one factor, as 7- abreast haa the fewest seats per aisle, and hence will have the fastest turnaround times of any common configuration. But that is important only on very short routes, where the plane makes multiple stops per day. And that is not the market that NMA is targeting.


I wonder about that. If you have a narrow aisle & someone is doing his luggage, everybody waits. Also on a twin aisles. Is everybody would be able to pass each other comfortably, all the time, that could make a huge difference. Also for people getting in and out of seats. The ~10 inch wider fuselage would allow direct aisle access 1-2-1 or 1-1-1 in front and offer better stiffness for fuselages up to 270 seats. And carry more AKH containers than a same seat capacity 2-3-2 fuselage.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Carlos01
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:52 am

Re: Boeing 797 Thread - 2019

Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:32 pm

seahawk wrote:
The turnaround time won´t be much different. More seats mean more seats to clean, more food to restock, more trash to take out.

Sure a FR or U2 like operation could probably squeeze a few minutes out of the process, but I doubt they are seen as operators for the plane. And once you get premium class seats and catering in the plane, restocking and cleaning those alone will eat up any advantage.


From the point a narrowbody plane connects to the airbridge, it takes normally 20-30 minutes for the boarding to start for the next flight. This includes unloading anything below deck, refueling, recycling, cleaning, catering, potentially a crew change. If the plane has 20-30% more seats but 2 aisles, I don't see anything there why it would take longer, also nothing why it would be considerably quicker. At least the twin-aisle will not make it more difficult, and if they have to add a handful of people for the cleaning crew for 10 minutes, I doubt it costs a lot.

But seriously, from the point when boarding starts, in a full 320/737, it takes 30-60 minutes until all passengers have found their seats. And that again is due to the fact, that each one of those 200 people will have to queue in the airbridge and wait for their turn to enter the plane, to lift their luggage in the overhead bin, or ask someone to lift it for them, take off their jacket, quadruple-check the seat number, then ask someone to change their seat with someone because they want to seat somewhere else, get in their seat, fasten their seatbelt, unfasten the seatbelt, get off the seat and let someone else go to the window, re-seat, re-fasten, re-member that something was forgotten in the luggage, unfasten, get up, lift down luggage, fix the issue, lift the luggage back up, cram the luggage because it longer fits, test that the overhead bin lid closes - it doesn't - ask the FA to help - it really doesn't fit - here you can put your bag here in the back, excuse me sir, coming through, sorry, pardon, myfaultmyfault, lift the bag in the empty bin (which now limits the other people to fit their's), make their way back to their seat, wait for passengers coming on, navigate, finally sit down, and then remember that they also wanted to use the bathroom before takeoff.

This is the time that can be cut in half with 2 aisles. In other words down to 15-30mins. And that does make a huge difference, no matter how much the Airbus fanboys try to argue against it.

That of course does not have an impact on the fact that there is always some schmuck who is late for boarding, or connecting passengers, or delays with the luggage, or delays given by air traffic control. But even then, the biggest single factor impacting the turnaround time on average, is the boarding procedure.

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