• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
User avatar
remcor
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:25 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Wed Apr 17, 2019 9:28 pm

Interesting aside from that FlightGlobal article from the original poster. It says
"with the 787, Boeing developed a global supply chain, shifted major systems production to suppliers and expanded aftermarket offerings. Such changes, however, shifted aircraft program value from Boeing to suppliers, which now scoop up 70% of profits (including aftermarket profits) generated throughout the chain. Some large suppliers post 15-20% profit margins, significantly greater than Boeing's or Airbus's"

Reminds me of the brilliant warning/analysis from Boeing engineer Dr. L. J. Hart-Smith about outsourcing. Aircraft companies screw themselves seeking higher "return on assets" - the market likes it! - by outsourcing value-added work. Then they become slave to the lowest quality supplier. Good suppliers keep the profits, bad suppliers have to be bailed out by Boeing. This was borne out when Boeing had to bail out Vought. https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/01/21/what-went-wrong-at-boeing/#290db1807b1b

Aside from that aside, I was fortunate when decades ago Dr. Hart-Smith gave a guest lecture to a class I was taking, lovely old crotchety engineer. He started serious:

"Unfortunately I'm in a bad mood today because a friend of mine had a terrible accident and suffered a serious brain injury.
The doctor told his wife he needed a brain transplant.
Doctor: I've got 4 choices of brain: a boxer's brain for $100 a pound, an engineer's brain for $1000 a pound, a scientist's brain for $2000 a pound, and a Harvard MBAs brain for $1,000,000 a pound.
Wife: I understand why the boxer's brain is so low, but why are the engineer and scientist brain so cheap?
Doctor: Well the engineers and scientists use their brains a lot so they're really worn out by the time we get them.
Wife: Ok, but why is the MBA's brain so expensive? A million dollars a pound is crazy.
Doctor: Lady, if you knew how many MBA's we needed to go through to get one pound of brain you'd understand."


I thought it was funny.
 
rayfound
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Wed Apr 17, 2019 9:48 pm

keesje wrote:
Narrow WB fuselage has been looked at for decades.
It didn't get usefull applucation for short/ medium haul.

Image


It seems to me that if you're doing 2 aisles, it makes more sense to be 3-2-2 - so essentially seats ABC are the same as all the other single single aisle. That said, 7-wide with 2 aisles seems fairly close to 787 fuselage widths. Wonder if a LCC would be able to run 4/4 single aisle on something like that for high density?
 
User avatar
XAM2175
Posts: 1156
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:25 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:37 pm

rayfound wrote:
Wonder if a LCC would be able to run 4/4 single aisle on something like that for high density?


Not if it needs to comply with US law:

14 CFR § 25.817 - Maximum number of seats abreast
On airplanes having only one passenger aisle, no more than three seats abreast may be placed on each side of the aisle in any one row.
 
rayfound
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:31 pm

XAM2175 wrote:
rayfound wrote:
Wonder if a LCC would be able to run 4/4 single aisle on something like that for high density?


Not if it needs to comply with US law:

14 CFR § 25.817 - Maximum number of seats abreast
On airplanes having only one passenger aisle, no more than three seats abreast may be placed on each side of the aisle in any one row.


Thanks for that... learn something new every day.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:38 am

keesje wrote:
I'm not convinced of 2-3-2. It just adds a lot of weight.

Prove it will weigh more or less is impossible, as long as there is no design. But writing is on the wall & even Boeing doesn't deny (NMA OEW 70t).

The original 767, A310 and 757 were developed in the same time frame, using the same materials, engines, systems. All having a seat capacity of ~265 seats, the 757-300 weighs 15t / 20% less. An OEW of ~65t versus ~80t. That doesn't tell the complete story, but too much to ignore / dismiss.

On short- medium flights, competing with A321s (10-15t lighter than 757..), going for a 2-3-2 widebody doesn't sound like a very logical choice if weight & fuel burn means anything in aviation..


The part of the story not to ignore or dismiss is that the 767 wing is 50% larger than the 757 and the airplane is designed to carry more than 50% additional payload. The ability to carry more payload is why the 767 weighs so much more than the 757, not fuselage width.
 
9Patch
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:27 am

Ziyulu wrote:
I've a feeling if this new aircraft is 7 abreast, it will be narrower than a 767, so we will still be squished in like a 3-3-3 787 or 3-4-3 777.


And the airlines will buy it like the 787 and 777, much to the consternation of Airbus fan boys..
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3937
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Apr 18, 2019 2:32 am

keesje wrote:
..
I'm under the impression, the NMA might be quietly shrinking on the drawingboards.

:arrow: Airlines are not stumbling over each other commiting to a 7 abreast 5000 Nm WB at NB cost levels
:arrow: After market income works better with a larger amount of new aircraft
:arrow: Airbus continues to dominate around 200 seats in every market and moves ahead with new variants

Image

Not offering a big, quiet, geared fan container carrying NB might not be the bold market proposition the Boeing sales teams are looking for, moving forward from 2025. :scratchchin:

The MAX backlog might prove rock solid during a next recession. Or not, unidentified customers, leasing companies and large legacy's prove flexible. They don't get "punished" by Airbus and Boeing when they change their plans. Investing when margin starts hurting, might be years too late, you are struggling for 5-7 years..

Aboulafia pegs Boeing's likelihood of launching the NMA at 60-65%, saying the company could alternatively redirect $8-10 billion in potential NMA funds to shareholders via stock buybacks or dividend payments.

But he believes Boeing unlikely to ignore the success Airbus has had selling A321neos, which that company now offers in a longer-range derivative marketed as a 757 replacement.

Airbus holds about 2,160 A321neo backorders, while Boeing holds just 450 orders for its competing 737 Max 10s, according to Flight Fleets Analyzer.

"If I were Boeing, I'd say, 'I've got to do something here,'" Aboulafia says.

If Boeing moves forward, Airbus may need to react, possibly with a re-engined, re-winged variant of the A321neo – an aircraft some have assigned the handle A322neo, Aboulafia notes.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-how-the-nma-might-prepare-boeing-for-a-737-455844/

Image

https://nl.3dexport.com/3dmodel-boeing-797-concept-mom-aircraft-175357.htm

The boys in Bordeaux probably prefer Boeing going for a real big, capable WB NMA, while they sit around the table with UA, JAL and KLM.

Unfortunately? That's not what Aviation week is saying. UA, AA, and DL are looking forward to the airplane in the dual aisle configuration because loading and unloading pax and freight would be faster and less labor intensive than a single aisle..
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3937
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Apr 18, 2019 2:45 am

If the B797 or NMA does nothing Else? It will replace the B767 series of airplane and allow Boeing to transition the 737-8 /-9 to the freighter market when the opportunity arises. Will the A321 be able to do that? I don't know that, I do know the A320 series would need new floor structures to become freighters so it might become cost prohibitive unless Airbus launches a freight derivative or conversion kit for the A320 ceo or neo series. (which they should do)..
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8727
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:03 am

9Patch wrote:
Ziyulu wrote:
I've a feeling if this new aircraft is 7 abreast, it will be narrower than a 767, so we will still be squished in like a 3-3-3 787 or 3-4-3 777.


And the airlines will buy it like the 787 and 777, much to the consternation of Airbus fan boys..


And why not? In economy class price matters most. And the 797 will be highly efficient.
 
CowAnon
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:02 pm

Boeing erred in not building the 7J7. McDonnell Douglas would have followed with UDF-powered MD-80 derivatives, and the reliability/maintenance bugs of the new engines would have been ironed out by the time fuel prices shot up in the 2000s. Airbus would have been forced to phase out the A320 and come up with a clean-sheet aircraft that could accommodate the more-efficient propfan engines.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:27 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
I'm not convinced of 2-3-2. It just adds a lot of weight.

Prove it will weigh more or less is impossible, as long as there is no design. But writing is on the wall & even Boeing doesn't deny (NMA OEW 70t).

The original 767, A310 and 757 were developed in the same time frame, using the same materials, engines, systems. All having a seat capacity of ~265 seats, the 757-300 weighs 15t / 20% less. An OEW of ~65t versus ~80t. That doesn't tell the complete story, but too much to ignore / dismiss.

On short- medium flights, competing with A321s (10-15t lighter than 757..), going for a 2-3-2 widebody doesn't sound like a very logical choice if weight & fuel burn means anything in aviation..


The part of the story not to ignore or dismiss is that the 767 wing is 50% larger than the 757 and the airplane is designed to carry more than 50% additional payload. The ability to carry more payload is why the 767 weighs so much more than the 757, not fuselage width.


The A321 and original 767 had less range than NMA's projected so far and a stretch version is part of the deal. If Boeing tries to realize that, it will be an excellent A310, 767 replacement and it would be outperformed in the large lower NMA segment because it weighs 15-20t more empty. That extra weight ripples down into to all costs. If that was a good idea, Boeing would probably have launched 2 years ago, after studying , discussing the business case for 4 years.

Image
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4185774-boeing-797-sales-potential-175-billion

I think this graph illustrates the huge gab between the largests 737MAX and A321's. A321NEO's versions backlog is officially 2000 but looking at recent conversions in reality 3000 are hidden in the 6000 aircraft backlog. Boeing being absent here when waiting after 2030 would have even more loyal BOEING NB deflect. United seems finally tired of waiting. If on the other end of the spectrum Southwest must be convinced to re-order the grounded 6t heavier 737-7 after all, it seems the time is right to put a Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
DenverTed
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:08 pm

Where's the inflection point between single aisle and twin aisle? Maybe there is no logic for 2-3-2 ever. But maybe there is no logic for 2-4-2 either. Just go from 40 rows of 3-3 at 240, to 27 rows of 3-3-3 at 243.

But I personally think there is a great case for twin aisle at anything above 180 pax, for comfort, cabin circulation, etc.
2-2-2, the final frontier. No more fear and loathing in the middle seat. 2-2-2 can exist with 3-3, just different markets, just like free bags exist with paying for checked bags. There is not one definitive right answer.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8727
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 3:23 pm

DenverTed wrote:
Where's the inflection point between single aisle and twin aisle? Maybe there is no logic for 2-3-2 ever. But maybe there is no logic for 2-4-2 either. Just go from 40 rows of 3-3 at 240, to 27 rows of 3-3-3 at 243.

But I personally think there is a great case for twin aisle at anything above 180 pax, for comfort, cabin circulation, etc.
2-2-2, the final frontier. No more fear and loathing in the middle seat. 2-2-2 can exist with 3-3, just different markets, just like free bags exist with paying for checked bags. There is not one definitive right answer.


In the end it is quite simple you want as may seats per aisle as possible, as aisle space does not produce revenue. The desired number of seats and the finesse ratio of the fuselage give you the best solution for the desired capacity. The other major factor is range, as range influences the typical cabin configuration.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 4:06 pm

Aisle seats produce revenue if people pay a direct premium for them. People may indirectly pay for 2-2-2, just like they pay for free bags, by choosing a consistent preferred product versus a competitor. Also, there are indirect saved costs from turnaround times, customer relaxation, crew relaxation, less air angst from better cabin circulation of twin aisles.
But I suppose ya, in the most basic form, the aisle is another seat, the cost split between six people. $100 for 3-3 or pay a premium of $117 to sit in 2-2-2?
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8727
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 5:05 pm

DenverTed wrote:
Aisle seats produce revenue if people pay a direct premium for them. People may indirectly pay for 2-2-2, just like they pay for free bags, by choosing a consistent preferred product versus a competitor. Also, there are indirect saved costs from turnaround times, customer relaxation, crew relaxation, less air angst from better cabin circulation of twin aisles.
But I suppose ya, in the most basic form, the aisle is another seat, the cost split between six people. $100 for 3-3 or pay a premium of $117 to sit in 2-2-2?


Considering the trends of the last 2 decades, I think it is very likely that the lower price option will win, especially as the 3-3 seating is well established.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 6:12 pm

keesje wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
I'm not convinced of 2-3-2. It just adds a lot of weight.

Prove it will weigh more or less is impossible, as long as there is no design. But writing is on the wall & even Boeing doesn't deny (NMA OEW 70t).

The original 767, A310 and 757 were developed in the same time frame, using the same materials, engines, systems. All having a seat capacity of ~265 seats, the 757-300 weighs 15t / 20% less. An OEW of ~65t versus ~80t. That doesn't tell the complete story, but too much to ignore / dismiss.

On short- medium flights, competing with A321s (10-15t lighter than 757..), going for a 2-3-2 widebody doesn't sound like a very logical choice if weight & fuel burn means anything in aviation..


The part of the story not to ignore or dismiss is that the 767 wing is 50% larger than the 757 and the airplane is designed to carry more than 50% additional payload. The ability to carry more payload is why the 767 weighs so much more than the 757, not fuselage width.


The A321 and original 767 had less range than NMA's projected so far and a stretch version is part of the deal. If Boeing tries to realize that, it will be an excellent A310, 767 replacement and it would be outperformed in the large lower NMA segment because it weighs 15-20t more empty. That extra weight ripples down into to all costs. If that was a good idea, Boeing would probably have launched 2 years ago, after studying , discussing the business case for 4 years.

Image
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4185774-boeing-797-sales-potential-175-billion

I think this graph illustrates the huge gab between the largests 737MAX and A321's. A321NEO's versions backlog is officially 2000 but looking at recent conversions in reality 3000 are hidden in the 6000 aircraft backlog. Boeing being absent here when waiting after 2030 would have even more loyal BOEING NB deflect. United seems finally tired of waiting. If on the other end of the spectrum Southwest must be convinced to re-order the grounded 6t heavier 737-7 after all, it seems the time is right to put a Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019.


I know it's not your graph - but there is no way the 763 has 20-30 seats more capacity than an 788, implying more floor area.

I think that is where a lot of confusion is coming from - what size are they really targeting? I think it's basically NMA- Small = A321 and NMA - L A321 plus 30ish seats.

In 2 class that is more like 180/190 to 210/220 vs about 250/260 for an 788 - Using AC's cattle class standards of Seat Configurations - 183 Seats on an A321, 211 an an 763 and 251 on an 788.

Or something like that.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 19, 2019 6:53 pm

I think the real bread and butter is at 225 and 250 seats at 3,000nm range. The graph shows the A321 at 205 and the 753 at 245 for comparison. Whether that is single aisle or twin aisle is up for debate, the size and range is where I would call the new sweet spot on that graph.
 
kayik
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 20, 2019 11:50 pm

I have plotted this cross checking figures from wikipedia and manufacturers' sites. 2 class seating figures are used. In a few cases with WB aircraft there was no clearity, there I used seating plans of reputable airlines from seat guru. For example Emirates has a 2 class A380 with 615 seats which did not fit into the chart. If you have other info, pls post with source to excel this. Old models of B777 and A330 are in pale colors. Russian and Chinese competion is included.

Image
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3141
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Apr 21, 2019 12:20 am

The killer MOM will be orthogonal to a seat/range line drawn through the above chart. Picture it as an oval going from 300 people/ 3750 range to 175 people/5250 range. It will not be in a circle in the middle of the gap. the 797 obviously cannot cover all of that, but will cover most of it.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21416
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Apr 21, 2019 2:22 am

kayik wrote:
I have plotted this cross checking figures from wikipedia and manufacturers' sites. 2 class seating figures are used. In a few cases with WB aircraft there was no clearity, there I used seating plans of reputable airlines from seat guru. For example Emirates has a 2 class A380 with 615 seats which did not fit into the chart. If you have other info, pls post with source to excel this. Old models of B777 and A330 are in pale colors. Russian and Chinese competion is included.

Image

Very interesting. If you're willing to share, I'd be interested in a copy of the data. DM the (x,y, label) text to me, post to a Google Doc, etc.
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
seabosdca
Posts: 6511
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:08 am

That is a fantastic effort. A few comments:

- Boeing underwent a dramatic revision of its range estimates in 2015, which didn't affect the 737 too much but saw the estimates for the widebodies drop by 400 to 500 nm. I believe you've got a mix of old and new—I think the currently available types with the exception of the 747-8 are using the new numbers, while the older types and the 747-8 are using the old numbers.
- I think there's general agreement that Airbus's range estimates are more conservative than the old Boeing numbers and less conservative than the new Boeing numbers. It may be worth digging into the ACAP to roll your own estimate based on the seating configurations you're using and whatever realistic OEW data you can find.
- The capacity estimate of the 777-9 seems a bit low compared with both the 777-8 and the classic 777s, while that of the 787-9 seems a bit low compared to everything else around it.
- The narrowbodies seem denser than the widebodies. Comparing international-style products, I'd expect fewer than 200 seats in an A321 with the numbers going downward from there.
 
kayik
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:29 am

Slight change in the bottom left corner. I will DM figures.

Image
 
kayik
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:17 am

seabosdca wrote:
That is a fantastic effort. A few comments:

- Boeing underwent a dramatic revision of its range estimates in 2015, which didn't affect the 737 too much but saw the estimates for the widebodies drop by 400 to 500 nm. I believe you've got a mix of old and new—I think the currently available types with the exception of the 747-8 are using the new numbers, while the older types and the 747-8 are using the old numbers.
- I think there's general agreement that Airbus's range estimates are more conservative than the old Boeing numbers and less conservative than the new Boeing numbers. It may be worth digging into the ACAP to roll your own estimate based on the seating configurations you're using and whatever realistic OEW data you can find.
- The capacity estimate of the 777-9 seems a bit low compared with both the 777-8 and the classic 777s, while that of the 787-9 seems a bit low compared to everything else around it.
- The narrowbodies seem denser than the widebodies. Comparing international-style products, I'd expect fewer than 200 seats in an A321 with the numbers going downward from there.


Thank you, I have just checked WB range from both Boeing website and wikipedia, numbers match. Boeing website also confirms the seats in dual class. Since 77X is not available yet, I am not able to check it against airline seating plans. When it comes to 787-8 the offical figure is 242 but Qatar has 252 in 2 class. 787-9 is 290 according to Boeing, Hainan airlines has the standard where as Vietnam Airlines has a 311 seat configuration. 787-10 is 330, Singapore Airlines has an 336 configuration.

NB configuration differ from airline to airline as well. The website figure I used is 206 for A321neo. Philippine Airlines has 199 seat in 2 class where Finnair has 201.

I will keep this up to date.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:00 pm

kayik wrote:
seabosdca wrote:
That is a fantastic effort. A few comments:

- Boeing underwent a dramatic revision of its range estimates in 2015, which didn't affect the 737 too much but saw the estimates for the widebodies drop by 400 to 500 nm. I believe you've got a mix of old and new—I think the currently available types with the exception of the 747-8 are using the new numbers, while the older types and the 747-8 are using the old numbers.
- I think there's general agreement that Airbus's range estimates are more conservative than the old Boeing numbers and less conservative than the new Boeing numbers. It may be worth digging into the ACAP to roll your own estimate based on the seating configurations you're using and whatever realistic OEW data you can find.
- The capacity estimate of the 777-9 seems a bit low compared with both the 777-8 and the classic 777s, while that of the 787-9 seems a bit low compared to everything else around it.
- The narrowbodies seem denser than the widebodies. Comparing international-style products, I'd expect fewer than 200 seats in an A321 with the numbers going downward from there.


Thank you, I have just checked WB range from both Boeing website and wikipedia, numbers match. Boeing website also confirms the seats in dual class. Since 77X is not available yet, I am not able to check it against airline seating plans. When it comes to 787-8 the offical figure is 242 but Qatar has 252 in 2 class. 787-9 is 290 according to Boeing, Hainan airlines has the standard where as Vietnam Airlines has a 311 seat configuration. 787-10 is 330, Singapore Airlines has an 336 configuration.

NB configuration differ from airline to airline as well. The website figure I used is 206 for A321neo. Philippine Airlines has 199 seat in 2 class where Finnair has 201.

I will keep this up to date.


Good initiative. 2 class works if identical seat specifications / class sizes ate used. Otherwise you end up comparing sleeper seats to economy with a bit extra pitch. If possible I would compare 1 class economy seat capacity & look at payload range to see what the range is with that payload (100kg/ seat). Not ideal, but more objective. Few WB's 2 class anyway..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 26, 2019 9:39 pm

Questions also arose during the recent earnings call about whether 737 Max issues have affected Boeing’s evaluation of, or commitment to, the concept aircraft known as the NMA.

Boeing has said that narrowbody aircraft, if developed, would have 200-270 seats and 4,000-5,000nm (7,400-9,300km) range. It has pitched the NMA as a 757 replacement and a clean-sheet competitor to the Airbus A321.

Boeing has said it would decide whether to offer the aircraft to customers in 2019, then decide in 2020 whether to formally launch the NMA. Boeing has pegged 2025 as the year the aircraft, if approved, would enter service.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-777x-and-nma-timelines-unaffected-by-737-max-457701/

WTF.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
CowAnon
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 26, 2019 10:34 pm

DenverTed wrote:
Where's the inflection point between single aisle and twin aisle? Maybe there is no logic for 2-3-2 ever. But maybe there is no logic for 2-4-2 either. Just go from 40 rows of 3-3 at 240, to 27 rows of 3-3-3 at 243.

But I personally think there is a great case for twin aisle at anything above 180 pax, for comfort, cabin circulation, etc.
2-2-2, the final frontier. No more fear and loathing in the middle seat. 2-2-2 can exist with 3-3, just different markets, just like free bags exist with paying for checked bags. There is not one definitive right answer.

Russia/Yakovlev/Irkut almost decided to use 2-2-2 on the MC-21. It would seem to make sense for airlines who do lots of short trips every day and need short turnarounds, regardless of the total capacity.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... as-315516/
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Apr 26, 2019 11:13 pm

CowAnon wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Where's the inflection point between single aisle and twin aisle? Maybe there is no logic for 2-3-2 ever. But maybe there is no logic for 2-4-2 either. Just go from 40 rows of 3-3 at 240, to 27 rows of 3-3-3 at 243.

But I personally think there is a great case for twin aisle at anything above 180 pax, for comfort, cabin circulation, etc.
2-2-2, the final frontier. No more fear and loathing in the middle seat. 2-2-2 can exist with 3-3, just different markets, just like free bags exist with paying for checked bags. There is not one definitive right answer.

Russia/Yakovlev/Irkut almost decided to use 2-2-2 on the MC-21. It would seem to make sense for airlines who do lots of short trips every day and need short turnarounds, regardless of the total capacity.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... as-315516/


I made some sketches on such 2-2-2 configurations 10-15 yrs ago in a few MoM like threads. There an A321Plus-Plus concept there too (A325)

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=761529#p10993159
https://images.app.goo.gl/AhR2N7HLXwTFQjRb7
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
c933103
Posts: 3824
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:46 am

CowAnon wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Where's the inflection point between single aisle and twin aisle? Maybe there is no logic for 2-3-2 ever. But maybe there is no logic for 2-4-2 either. Just go from 40 rows of 3-3 at 240, to 27 rows of 3-3-3 at 243.

But I personally think there is a great case for twin aisle at anything above 180 pax, for comfort, cabin circulation, etc.
2-2-2, the final frontier. No more fear and loathing in the middle seat. 2-2-2 can exist with 3-3, just different markets, just like free bags exist with paying for checked bags. There is not one definitive right answer.

Russia/Yakovlev/Irkut almost decided to use 2-2-2 on the MC-21. It would seem to make sense for airlines who do lots of short trips every day and need short turnarounds, regardless of the total capacity.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... as-315516/

As the aircraft have only shrinked 20mm width compares to the original design, I would say it is still possible for airlines, especially short-haul-focused ones, to use 2-2-2 layout, by reducing the seat width by an inch or so.
When no other countries around the world is going to militarily stop China and its subordinate fom abusing its citizens within its national boundary, it is unreasonable to expect those abuse can be countered with purely peaceful means.
 
c933103
Posts: 3824
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:46 am

keesje wrote:
Questions also arose during the recent earnings call about whether 737 Max issues have affected Boeing’s evaluation of, or commitment to, the concept aircraft known as the NMA.

Boeing has said that narrowbody aircraft, if developed, would have 200-270 seats and 4,000-5,000nm (7,400-9,300km) range. It has pitched the NMA as a 757 replacement and a clean-sheet competitor to the Airbus A321.

Boeing has said it would decide whether to offer the aircraft to customers in 2019, then decide in 2020 whether to formally launch the NMA. Boeing has pegged 2025 as the year the aircraft, if approved, would enter service.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-777x-and-nma-timelines-unaffected-by-737-max-457701/

WTF.

Probably just flightglobal....?
When no other countries around the world is going to militarily stop China and its subordinate fom abusing its citizens within its national boundary, it is unreasonable to expect those abuse can be countered with purely peaceful means.
 
c933103
Posts: 3824
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:52 am

kayik wrote:
Slight change in the bottom left corner. I will DM figures.

Image

Problem is what is the operational cost difference between a 787-10 and an A321XLR when flying a 6 hours long mission?
When no other countries around the world is going to militarily stop China and its subordinate fom abusing its citizens within its national boundary, it is unreasonable to expect those abuse can be countered with purely peaceful means.
 
c933103
Posts: 3824
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:04 am

kayik wrote:
I have plotted this cross checking figures from wikipedia and manufacturers' sites. 2 class seating figures are used. In a few cases with WB aircraft there was no clearity, there I used seating plans of reputable airlines from seat guru. For example Emirates has a 2 class A380 with 615 seats which did not fit into the chart. If you have other info, pls post with source to excel this. Old models of B777 and A330 are in pale colors. Russian and Chinese competion is included.

Image

actually, would it be more meaningful to use OEW as one of the axis? It will show more clearly the difference imo
When no other countries around the world is going to militarily stop China and its subordinate fom abusing its citizens within its national boundary, it is unreasonable to expect those abuse can be countered with purely peaceful means.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:29 am

AC would be a good airline to use as they fly almost everything except 350/380
 
CowAnon
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 6:50 am

keesje wrote:
CowAnon wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Where's the inflection point between single aisle and twin aisle? Maybe there is no logic for 2-3-2 ever. But maybe there is no logic for 2-4-2 either. Just go from 40 rows of 3-3 at 240, to 27 rows of 3-3-3 at 243.

But I personally think there is a great case for twin aisle at anything above 180 pax, for comfort, cabin circulation, etc.
2-2-2, the final frontier. No more fear and loathing in the middle seat. 2-2-2 can exist with 3-3, just different markets, just like free bags exist with paying for checked bags. There is not one definitive right answer.

Russia/Yakovlev/Irkut almost decided to use 2-2-2 on the MC-21. It would seem to make sense for airlines who do lots of short trips every day and need short turnarounds, regardless of the total capacity.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... as-315516/


I made some sketches on such 2-2-2 configurations 10-15 yrs ago in a few MoM like threads. There an A321Plus-Plus concept there too (A325)

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=761529#p10993159
https://images.app.goo.gl/AhR2N7HLXwTFQjRb7

Thanks, I hadn't seen that thread. Someone mentioned that A and B learned that one 30-inch aisle disembarked passengers faster than two 20-inch aisles, but that sort of contradicts Boeing's 7J7 tests in the 1980s, which found that a plane with a couple of 18-inch aisles emptied quicker than one with a 26-inch aisle.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct- ... story.html

c933103 wrote:
As the aircraft have only shrinked 20mm width compares to the original design, I would say it is still possible for airlines, especially short-haul-focused ones, to use 2-2-2 layout, by reducing the seat width by an inch or so.

The MS-21 cabin is 150 inches wide, which is only enough to fit something similar to Airbus's new 9-abreast A330 configuration -- 17-inch seats and aisles, probably with 1.5" armrests. Irkut should make that an option, anyway. I think passengers would find it tolerable since everyone except the window-seat passengers are directly next to an aisle. If it got a good reception, other OEMs would be encouraged to try a light twin-aisle.
 
c933103
Posts: 3824
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 7:03 am

CowAnon wrote:
keesje wrote:
CowAnon wrote:
Russia/Yakovlev/Irkut almost decided to use 2-2-2 on the MC-21. It would seem to make sense for airlines who do lots of short trips every day and need short turnarounds, regardless of the total capacity.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... as-315516/


I made some sketches on such 2-2-2 configurations 10-15 yrs ago in a few MoM like threads. There an A321Plus-Plus concept there too (A325)

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=761529#p10993159
https://images.app.goo.gl/AhR2N7HLXwTFQjRb7

Thanks, I hadn't seen that thread. Someone mentioned that A and B learned that one 30-inch aisle disembarked passengers faster than two 20-inch aisles, but that sort of contradicts Boeing's 7J7 tests in the 1980s, which found that a plane with a couple of 18-inch aisles emptied quicker than one with a 26-inch aisle.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct- ... story.html

c933103 wrote:
As the aircraft have only shrinked 20mm width compares to the original design, I would say it is still possible for airlines, especially short-haul-focused ones, to use 2-2-2 layout, by reducing the seat width by an inch or so.

The MS-21 cabin is 150 inches wide, which is only enough to fit something similar to Airbus's new 9-abreast A330 configuration -- 17-inch seats and aisles, probably with 1.5" armrests. Irkut should make that an option, anyway. I think passengers would find it tolerable since everyone except the window-seat passengers are directly next to an aisle. If it got a good reception, other OEMs would be encouraged to try a light twin-aisle.

It is probably more honorable and more marketable to make a new narrowbody aircraft with extra wide seats and extra wide corridor than a mini wide body with very narrow seats and very narrow aisles. Afterall, if they make an aircraft focused on short haul then it won't be attractive to most other airlines who also fly some relatively longer routes.
When no other countries around the world is going to militarily stop China and its subordinate fom abusing its citizens within its national boundary, it is unreasonable to expect those abuse can be countered with purely peaceful means.
 
Andy33
Posts: 2473
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 10:17 am

CowAnon wrote:
Russia/Yakovlev/Irkut almost decided to use 2-2-2 on the MC-21. It would seem to make sense for airlines who do lots of short trips every day and need short turnarounds, regardless of the total capacity.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... as-315516/


Yet Ryanair manage to operate hundreds of short trips every day with 189 seat 737-800s, and 25 minute turnrounds. Just how much time would having 2 aisles save over what FR can do?
 
morrisond
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 10:45 am

Although there would be a turnaround benefit and more options while in flight to get around carts the Big benefit in my eyes of a tight 2x3x2 cross section for NMA/NSA is what you can do in the front. A nice 2x2x2 Domestic Business class or 1x1x1 sleepers.

You would also be able to introduce a new Container size that is basically an XL version of the LD3-45 - Maybe 6" Higher and 30" wider with over 50% more Capacity - which means fewer Containers to carry typical Bags in the belly and more space for freight.

When you start looking at cross sections and assume some type of Oval you get a Cross section that is about the same Penalty the 320 takes over the 737 per Y passenger but a big benefit for your premium classes.
 
pune
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:18 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 11:24 am

kayik wrote:
I have plotted this cross checking figures from wikipedia and manufacturers' sites. 2 class seating figures are used. In a few cases with WB aircraft there was no clearity, there I used seating plans of reputable airlines from seat guru. For example Emirates has a 2 class A380 with 615 seats which did not fit into the chart. If you have other info, pls post with source to excel this. Old models of B777 and A330 are in pale colors. Russian and Chinese competion is included.

Image


nice image, thank you.
 
kayik
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:34 pm

c933103 wrote:
actually, would it be more meaningful to use OEW as one of the axis? It will show more clearly the difference imo


I actually tried various parameters. However, OEW and Payload information is not available for 737MAX except 8MAX. This is a ghost plane. I would appreciate if somebody could provide this info.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Mon Jun 10, 2019 2:26 pm

kayik wrote:
c933103 wrote:
actually, would it be more meaningful to use OEW as one of the axis? It will show more clearly the difference imo


I actually tried various parameters. However, OEW and Payload information is not available for 737MAX except 8MAX. This is a ghost plane. I would appreciate if somebody could provide this info.


The 737-7 and 737-9 should be relative easy to estimate by interpolation. They are versions of the same aircaft. For the -10 there is the heavier landing gear and maybe other modifications.

This thread was started before the Ethiopian crash. I wonder if Boeing is already considering leaner, lighter, easier to produce, more competitive NMA specification than the oval twin aisle to secure a reasonable market share in the 200-270 seat 1500-4000 NM segment, in the next two decades. Hoping everybody forgets about the MAX drama in no time, might prove naive.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Elementalism
Posts: 466
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:38 pm

DenverTed wrote:
Aisle seats produce revenue if people pay a direct premium for them. People may indirectly pay for 2-2-2, just like they pay for free bags, by choosing a consistent preferred product versus a competitor. Also, there are indirect saved costs from turnaround times, customer relaxation, crew relaxation, less air angst from better cabin circulation of twin aisles.
But I suppose ya, in the most basic form, the aisle is another seat, the cost split between six people. $100 for 3-3 or pay a premium of $117 to sit in 2-2-2?


Seat aisles do produce extra revenue. But is it equal to a partial seat? I doubt it. 2-2-2 seems really inefficient use of floor space. I think the 767 2-3-2 is the minimum we will ever see in a dual aisle config in economy. Not sure the airlines will really want to go back to it neither. How stubby would the 797 be if it had a 2-4-2 config at 225 pax? 29 rows? Scale it from there? I don't know.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8521
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Mon Jun 10, 2019 4:42 pm

Elementalism wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Aisle seats produce revenue if people pay a direct premium for them. People may indirectly pay for 2-2-2, just like they pay for free bags, by choosing a consistent preferred product versus a competitor. Also, there are indirect saved costs from turnaround times, customer relaxation, crew relaxation, less air angst from better cabin circulation of twin aisles.
But I suppose ya, in the most basic form, the aisle is another seat, the cost split between six people. $100 for 3-3 or pay a premium of $117 to sit in 2-2-2?


Seat aisles do produce extra revenue. But is it equal to a partial seat? I doubt it. 2-2-2 seems really inefficient use of floor space. I think the 767 2-3-2 is the minimum we will ever see in a dual aisle config in economy. Not sure the airlines will really want to go back to it neither. How stubby would the 797 be if it had a 2-4-2 config at 225 pax? 29 rows? Scale it from there? I don't know.


A 2-4-2 version for 225 pax would be very similar to a A310, as stubby as that.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:02 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Aisle seats produce revenue if people pay a direct premium for them. People may indirectly pay for 2-2-2, just like they pay for free bags, by choosing a consistent preferred product versus a competitor. Also, there are indirect saved costs from turnaround times, customer relaxation, crew relaxation, less air angst from better cabin circulation of twin aisles.
But I suppose ya, in the most basic form, the aisle is another seat, the cost split between six people. $100 for 3-3 or pay a premium of $117 to sit in 2-2-2?


Seat aisles do produce extra revenue. But is it equal to a partial seat? I doubt it. 2-2-2 seems really inefficient use of floor space. I think the 767 2-3-2 is the minimum we will ever see in a dual aisle config in economy. Not sure the airlines will really want to go back to it neither. How stubby would the 797 be if it had a 2-4-2 config at 225 pax? 29 rows? Scale it from there? I don't know.


A 2-4-2 version for 225 pax would be very similar to a A310, as stubby as that.


Apart from how stubby it would look, I have seen no convincing theories it would weigh less than a similar capacity single aisle. Maybe that is why nobody pursued this configuration for shorter flights in recent times.

According to various media channels, the chances of Boeing putting a 737 replacement on the table this summer, even fast tracking it, has grown.

At one point, Boeing was expected to announce the launch of the NMA at #PAS2019 but this is off the table. In fact, many are speculating Boeing is now fast-tracking a clean sheet 737 MAX replacement, with future campaigns looking bleak.

https://airwaysmag.com/paris-air-show/pas19/analysis-what-to-expect/
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:21 am

DenverTed wrote:
Where's the inflection point between single aisle and twin aisle? Maybe there is no logic for 2-3-2 ever. But maybe there is no logic for 2-4-2 either. Just go from 40 rows of 3-3 at 240, to 27 rows of 3-3-3 at 243.

But I personally think there is a great case for twin aisle at anything above 180 pax, for comfort, cabin circulation, etc.
2-2-2, the final frontier. No more fear and loathing in the middle seat. 2-2-2 can exist with 3-3, just different markets, just like free bags exist with paying for checked bags. There is not one definitive right answer.


They can still do 3-3. Just use the 18.5/19/18.5 config that the A220 uses and increase the aisle width to 24. Keeps it light, and the wider aisle improves the boarding process. Also needs an L2/R2 door. Boarding the A321 and 737-9 is suck. The 737-10 will be a crap show. It should be a 757-200/300 bird, maybe slightly longer, but not by much. Gate space is a premium, especially with ramp depth in tight facilities. They can use the same tube, but a different wing that falls between the 737-7 and 737-8, plus another between the 737-8 and 737-9. 3500nm range in the smaller version and 5500nm in the larger. Maybe even folded wingtips and a 787 type wing for both so they could have a 757 type span that fits in an ADG-III gate and a full ADG-IV wingspan that fits in a 757 gate. This would cover everything until the jump to a widebody. Leave the E-Jets for the smaller segment. With the 777X I think they’ve figured this out. Gate footprint with a more efficient wing will be a challenge and folded tips may be the answer.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
DenverTed
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:52 am

DL717 wrote:
and a full ADG-IV wingspan that fits in a 757 gate.

What's a 757 gate? Are there many out there? In terms of future aircraft and airport design, it seems like a gate size between 36m and 52m would make sense. Halfway between is 44m, or something near that size wingspan.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:38 am

Pressure is building on Boeing to come with a credible NB strategy for the next 10-15 yrs, according to Bloomberg.

The 737MAX will do just fine until 2030- and -the 5000 MAX backlog is solid- are disputed assumptions at this stage.

The cat-and-mouse game over jets to be rolled out during the next decade is one of the top issues for Boeing Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg as he meets customers and faces the public at the industry’s biggest gathering, which kicks off June 17 on an airfield north of Paris.

His choices: spend big on a so-called mid-market airplane, or NMA, to stanch customer defections to the A321. Or plow that $15 billion or so into the 737’s successor -- a scenario that has gained considerable urgency now that the Max grounding is in its fourth month and some customers are considering dropping their orders outright.

If Boeing doesn’t strike just the right balance, “Airbus has a clear path to 60 per cent market share for the next 10 to 15 years,” said Henri Courpron, chairman and founder of Plane View Partners and a former executive in the aircraft-leasing business. “Airbus is sitting pretty and waiting to see Boeing show its hand.”


Image

None of Boeing’s options is easy. The planemaker has spent years searching for digital production advances that could bring its planned twin-aisle design closer to a single-aisle jet’s costs. While abandoning that effort for a 737 replacement might seem like the right thing to do given the Max backlash, moving too soon could be financially ruinous, turning a trickle of canceled Max orders into a flood.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/airbus-cornered-boeing-into-the-max-now-another-dilemma-looms
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
VS11
Posts: 1455
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2001 6:34 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:19 am

keesje wrote:
Pressure is building on Boeing to come with a credible NB strategy for the next 10-15 yrs, according to Bloomberg.

The 737MAX will do just fine until 2030- and -the 5000 MAX backlog is solid- are disputed assumptions at this stage.

The cat-and-mouse game over jets to be rolled out during the next decade is one of the top issues for Boeing Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg as he meets customers and faces the public at the industry’s biggest gathering, which kicks off June 17 on an airfield north of Paris.

His choices: spend big on a so-called mid-market airplane, or NMA, to stanch customer defections to the A321. Or plow that $15 billion or so into the 737’s successor -- a scenario that has gained considerable urgency now that the Max grounding is in its fourth month and some customers are considering dropping their orders outright.

If Boeing doesn’t strike just the right balance, “Airbus has a clear path to 60 per cent market share for the next 10 to 15 years,” said Henri Courpron, chairman and founder of Plane View Partners and a former executive in the aircraft-leasing business. “Airbus is sitting pretty and waiting to see Boeing show its hand.”


Image

None of Boeing’s options is easy. The planemaker has spent years searching for digital production advances that could bring its planned twin-aisle design closer to a single-aisle jet’s costs. While abandoning that effort for a 737 replacement might seem like the right thing to do given the Max backlash, moving too soon could be financially ruinous, turning a trickle of canceled Max orders into a flood.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/airbus-cornered-boeing-into-the-max-now-another-dilemma-looms


Nothing new really. We have known about Boeing’s dilemma for over a decade now. We are still waiting for Boeing’s move.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21416
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:01 pm

VS11 wrote:
keesje wrote:
None of Boeing’s options is easy. The planemaker has spent years searching for digital production advances that could bring its planned twin-aisle design closer to a single-aisle jet’s costs. While abandoning that effort for a 737 replacement might seem like the right thing to do given the Max backlash, moving too soon could be financially ruinous, turning a trickle of canceled Max orders into a flood.


Nothing new really. We have known about Boeing’s dilemma for over a decade now. We are still waiting for Boeing’s move.

I think a pivot of NMA to NSA right now would be like an investor selling on bad news, which is a bad strategy.

I think the way Boeing can recover financially and reputationally is to reboot MAX and then monetize its backlog.

Given the duopoly status and the difficulty of breaking contracts I don't see how they won't be able to do that, barring another tragedy.

As above, pivoting to NSA now would indeed cause a terrible customer backlash and be financially ruinous.

Also they will not have sufficiently advanced technological content or manufacturing processes, so a pivot to NSA could end up be a terrible failure.

But all of this does make for good click bait.
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
 
VS11
Posts: 1455
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2001 6:34 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:18 pm

Revelation wrote:
VS11 wrote:
keesje wrote:


Nothing new really. We have known about Boeing’s dilemma for over a decade now. We are still waiting for Boeing’s move.

I think a pivot of NMA to NSA right now would be like an investor selling on bad news, which is a bad strategy.

I think the way Boeing can recover financially and reputationally is to reboot MAX and then monetize its backlog.

Given the duopoly status and the difficulty of breaking contracts I don't see how they won't be able to do that, barring another tragedy.

As above, pivoting to NSA now would indeed cause a terrible customer backlash and be financially ruinous.

Also they will not have sufficiently advanced technological content or manufacturing processes, so a pivot to NSA could end up be a terrible failure.

But all of this does make for good click bait.


Boeing can be creative for sure. They could actually use the E2 as a new NSA platform, not unlike how the A220 could replace the 319/320. Then, a NMA family could offer various range/capacity options to compete with the A321/LR/XLR and address the fabled gap to the 787.

But I agree that the MAX is not going anywhere, and there is no need to be retired anyway. MCAS is a nifty engineering solution, which needed a better implementation. But they will get there, even if they have to compensate Southwest for increased pilot training.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:44 pm

DenverTed wrote:
DL717 wrote:
and a full ADG-IV wingspan that fits in a 757 gate.

What's a 757 gate? Are there many out there? In terms of future aircraft and airport design, it seems like a gate size between 36m and 52m would make sense. Halfway between is 44m, or something near that size wingspan.


Yes, hundreds of 75 specific gates out there. Set for a 140’ span that can’t support full ADG-IV, so they will be wasted space when the 75s are gone. Airports that didn’t have the real estate built gates around the 75 specifically. Ramp depth can be an issue if Boeing builds it a bit too long. Most were built for the 752, but there are a good number of them that can support the 753, typically those on the corners of a concourse.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:57 pm

VS11 wrote:

Nothing new really. We have known about Boeing’s dilemma for over a decade now. We are still waiting for Boeing’s move.


Everything changed.

- 737 lost marketshare since MAX launch
- 737-7 & 737-9 had to be upgraded to keep customers
- Airbus bought A220 & started selling, working toward 14/month in a few years
- Boeing invested in Embraer
- "w'll stay with you whatever happens" customers are a dying breed
- A321 remains a runaway success with little competition
- airlines refused to put money on the table for an oval WB at NB costs
- https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/1/4/5546411.jpg?v=v41c6a913980
- Big MAX customer are scratching their heads. https://www.npr.org/2019/06/10/731385440/poll-shows-travelers-still-fear-737-max-as-boeing-tries-to-get-it-back-in-the-ai?t=1560514234055
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

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