• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 174
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 1:43 am

Revelation wrote:
ethernal wrote:
Sure. But are you willing to bet a $20B on a cleansheet NMA design that I'm wrong? That's the question Boeing has to ask. And I wouldn't make that bet.

From what we read from the rumblings at PAS, yes, Boeing is still on the road to a clean sheet NMA.

The opportunity is for NMA to be to A321XLR what 787 is to A330, bigger, mostly CFRP design, better fuel burn, lower maintenance, etc.

All this careful scrubbing of the business plan should tell us that if they do launch they are confident that they can make money building it.


Agreed. Boeing doesn’t want to pull an A350 where they deliver an airplanes 5 years late after having to scrap the initial concept, renegotiating initial orders and then dropping a variant. In my opinion It is better to get the business case and design right the first time rather than repeat the mistakes of the A350 MK1.
 
VS11
Posts: 1432
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2001 6:34 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:07 am

Revelation wrote:
From what we read from the rumblings at PAS, yes, Boeing is still on the road to a clean sheet NMA.

The opportunity is for NMA to be to A321XLR what 787 is to A330, bigger, mostly CFRP design, better fuel burn, lower maintenance, etc.

All this careful scrubbing of the business plan should tell us that if they do launch they are confident that they can make money building it.


A CFRP 757/767 sounds great but why hasn’t Boeing announced it yet? They have access to so much market intelligence, they should be able to have incredibly sophisticated macroeconomic modeling capabilities. They should be able to identify every possible route where their NMA can provide a competitive advantage. At this point, they should know everything there is know to make a decision. All of this waiting is hurting them because the XLR is a compelling aircraft.
 
LH707330
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:39 am

Amiga500 wrote:
LH707330 wrote:
From what I've seen, Boeing is aiming at the 763ER payload/range segment, and needs to figure out if such a right-sized plane will sell enough units at the price point airlines are willing to pay in order to warrant the investment.


I agree that many make that argument. My problem with that is:

767-300ER could carry ~ 260 passengers up to ~6000 nm (OK, prob couldn't do both at same time but you get the idea)
787-9 can carry ~290 passengers ~7600 nm.

Are we really at a point where there is an economic case for replacing the 787 with an aircraft that has its range reduced by around 1500 nm to improve economics on shorter missions?

Lest we forget, the 787-3 was a dismal failure - and it had been rejigged (albeit, not exactly optimised) for a mission range of much less than 6000 nm.



If someone strongly made the case for a 300-350 seat aircraft operating over a range of no more than 2000nm being so significantly cheaper than narrowbodies as to justify (i) the investment from airframer, (ii) airlines accepting the trip cost risk & (iii) the airlines accepting loss of flexibility - then I'd listen. But I cannot see a 787-lite ending up any different from 787-3. Or worse - significantly cannibalising sales of the 787.

I'm not making a case for replacing a 787 with a smaller plane, I'm making a case for a smaller plane to be sent places where the 787 is too much capacity and trip cost risk. The reason we still see so many 767-300ERs plodding around is that they have ok trip costs, even if their CASM is garbage relative to an A330 or 787. A new CFRP plane in that segment with 10-11 hour range and 45-50k engines would be more flexible than a 321XLR (see 233t A333), and have trip costs way lower than a 788 because it'd be optimized for those shorter routes. CASM might be marginally worse, but as long as RASM stays better, you're good to go.

The 787-3 failed because it was a clipped-wing 787-8 with the heavier engines and structure, so there was no real trip cost savings there.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 372
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:45 am

I think that the only thing that Boeing can do is to keep selling MAXes and bridge the gap to the NSA.
The NSA can be a 3-aircraft family of 180, 210, 240 seats, centered around the 210-seater.
So what if Airbus wins a year worth of production for the XLR for the next 10 years.

Plus, the XLR isn't exactly a hot seller yet.
Orders will be mostly conversions from existing orders for A321, A321LR and it won't be priced cheap.

Up to now, there is only a significant lessor order. We'll have to see if anything comes up later in the show.

I wonder why Airbus wasted resources on the A321LR when there was capacity to do the A321XLR straight away.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:45 am

ethernal wrote:
The NMA would be wonderful for passengers, but the reality is that the market just isn't there. The long-range narrowbody is here- and it is here to stay. Lower capacity point-to-point routes will be handled with narrowbodies. Higher capacity point-to-point and long haul routes (>10 hours) will be handled by widebodies.

The cost to carry around an extra aisle will negate any CASM benefit the NMA would have had over a narrowbody due to the extra 30-40 seats of capacity. It will still be more fuel efficient and have a lower CASM, but that fuel efficiency come via expensive composites and clean sheet design.

There is a huge market for the NMA. Unfortunately that huge market will be satisfied with "good enough" - the A321neoXLR at the bottom-end and small widebodies at the other.



Well I beg to differ and mainly because Boeing does and I will agree with them. There is a Market otherwise they would not be spinner there wheels for so long. Now it might be a close case and or not quite be a made case.But Boeing clearly has made the it clear that they believe there iand many airlines have said there is a want=market.
 
User avatar
SQ32
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 2:18 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:53 am

By the time NMA shows up, A321XLR would have taken all the market share.

The existence of XLR further weaken the case for NMA.

Nowadays Boeing is run by a bunch of MBAs, lording over good engineers. Since the Dreamliner, there is no improvement on the platform. Rather Boeing bank on GEs or Safran for NPI.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:59 am

Revelation wrote:
ethernal wrote:
The short answer is "not better enough".

The A321XLR will already get pretty good "gas mileage" so to speak. Sure, a NMA made with the latest composites and cleansheet aero would get better fuel economy (especially given the higher capacity). But not that much given the significantly wider cross-section required to go double-aisle. A total swag but I'd guess no more than 10-15% more fuel efficient at best. And again, that comes at the cost of a more expensive airframe.

You'll get slight other benefits from more seat capacity, but most are relatively small. You'd still need extra FAs for the NMA (assume all XLR configs will be <200 seats). You'd need the same number of pilots. What you get from more seats you'll trade off in higher landing fees and gate fees.

It's just not that compelling, especially if it means losing fleet commonality. If I already operate the A320 family, ah XLR is a no-brainer. And since the NMA would be clean-sheet under a new certification, it's a whole new type. And if it is a widebody, it is somewhat unlikely that it would share a certification with whatever Boeing creates as their new narrowbody (unless they pull a 757/767 which is unlikely).

Thing is, NMA will be designed for the market of 2025-2045 and in that light you can see a future where today's metal narrow body darling of 1988 A321 will look like a 767 does today. XLR is showing there is buzz in that market segment and NMA will be the next step in meeting the market demand.



Bravo right on point imop. And this is the way I'd imagine in part Boeing/Airbus would be looking at things.
 
speedbird52
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:04 am

acjbbj wrote:
We need a third manufacturer (Lockheed Martin or a new McDonnell-Douglas) to jump in and make an NMA. We'd have a much better aviation industry with three players instead of just two.

It is really sad what Boeing did to Bombardier. We could have had a three player industry
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:06 am

wnflyguy wrote:
Boeing should have at least did 757NG years ago vs the Everything on the 737 path.
Even today it could have added New MAX engine technology to the 757 giving it lower fuel cost and more range.
Hopefully the 797 is the true replacement.

Flyguy

The true replacement for the 757 exists and is flying as is called the A321LR. The A321XLR is above and beyond
Waterbomber2 wrote:
I think that the only thing that Boeing can do is to keep selling MAXes and bridge the gap to the NSA.
The NSA can be a 3-aircraft family of 180, 210, 240 seats, centered around the 210-seater.
So what if Airbus wins a year worth of production for the XLR for the next 10 years.

Plus, the XLR isn't exactly a hot seller yet.
Orders will be mostly conversions from existing orders for A321, A321LR and it won't be priced cheap.

Up to now, there is only a significant lessor order. We'll have to see if anything comes up later in the show.

I wonder why Airbus wasted resources on the A321LR when there was capacity to do the A321XLR straight away.

You’re making the same argument that was said about the 737-10 vs -9 yet it was more realistic of an argument for the 737 than this.

The difference is that anyone still using a 757 is doing so because they couldn’t find something that could replace everything it could do. On the high performance front there’s planes like the A319 that can take that over, on the short but high capacity the regular A321 is just fine, but nothing could do the longer flights until the LR or XLR (the XLR is better and better is a always what everyone wants) so airlines like UA, DL, and AA that don’t have any on order should be interested in it with the latter two already having ordered and allocated space in their fleet for regular A321s not being sure what they’d fill the 757 gap with so getting XLRs would have to be extra.
Last edited by 767333ER on Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
grbauc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:08 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Aceskywalker wrote:
To be quite honest, I don't see a business case for Boeing to spend billions on developing the NMA - not when they have multiple fires to put out with the MAX crisis, 777X delay, and eroding trust in the 787 family.

Boeing must clean house and admit defeat to Airbus for the next decade or a little less, and go clean sheet design for a new narrowbody.


This is the most absurd thing I have ever read on this wesbite.



What one was is the most absurd?

1- Boeing to spend billions on developing the NMA not when they have multiple fires to put out with the MAX crisis, 777X delay"

Sir >Delays Happen in almost all new builds-max issues will end, Should Boeing just stop being in the aviation business. All these are hurdles that have been around since the birth of the market. Spending money on new builds, Developments delayed, sadly the ball being dropped... Should they just give up?

2-" eroding trust in the 787 family "

Yikes Pluto calling planet earth do you hear me?????? really :rotfl: :rotfl: Next to that do we put the A350 is ugly and a utter failure that is not selling.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:11 am

767333ER wrote:
wnflyguy wrote:
Boeing should have at least did 757NG years ago vs the Everything on the 737 path.
Even today it could have added New MAX engine technology to the 757 giving it lower fuel cost and more range.
Hopefully the 797 is the true replacement.

Flyguy

The true replacement for the 757 exists and is flying as is called the A321LR. The A321XLR is above and beyond



I'd argue its not a true replacement but rather has grown nicely into it.
 
masA380
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 12:54 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:12 am

Don’t worry. ANA, QF and DL will order hundreds of them.
 
Jefford717
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:36 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:14 am

Dropping the 787-3 was a massive mistake. I believe that slight improvement that is natural on every product maturity would increase its original range around 500nmi and would attract customers outside of Japan.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:15 am

SQ32 wrote:
By the time NMA shows up, A321XLR would have taken all the market share.

The existence of XLR further weaken the case for NMA.

Nowadays Boeing is run by a bunch of MBAs, lording over good engineers. Since the Dreamliner, there is no improvement on the platform. Rather Boeing bank on GEs or Safran for NPI.




Unfortunately that seems to be in part due to the duopoly.
 
rigo
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:52 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:16 am

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Agreed. Boeing doesn’t want to pull an A350 where they deliver an airplanes 5 years late after having to scrap the initial concept, renegotiating initial orders and then dropping a variant. In my opinion It is better to get the business case and design right the first time rather than repeat the mistakes of the A350 MK1.


Isn't the A350 MK1 basically the A330 NEO? And it seems to be finally getting some traction. But I see your point. That protracted period where airlines were screaming at Airbus "which part of Clean. Sheet. Design. don't you understand?" and Leahy' answer was "lalala I'm not listening" was very weird.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:17 am

grbauc wrote:
767333ER wrote:
wnflyguy wrote:
Boeing should have at least did 757NG years ago vs the Everything on the 737 path.
Even today it could have added New MAX engine technology to the 757 giving it lower fuel cost and more range.
Hopefully the 797 is the true replacement.

Flyguy

The true replacement for the 757 exists and is flying as is called the A321LR. The A321XLR is above and beyond



I'd argue its not a true replacement but rather has grown nicely into it.

What’s not true about it? It can fly as many people just as far. The XLR can do that but even farther. Proof is that the 797 is said to be a 767 replacement if it happens because there’s no point making a 757 replacement going straight up against the A321
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
DFWuser
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon May 20, 2019 5:52 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:18 am

Jefford717 wrote:
Dropping the 787-3 was a massive mistake. I believe that slight improvement that is natural on every product maturity would increase its original range around 500nmi and would attract customers outside of Japan.



The 787-3 did not have any confirmed orders. The program was, I believe, 3 years behind schedule. The business case was relatively weak especially if you could procure a 788 much sooner.
SF3 CR7 E75 M88 M90 L10 319 320 321 32B 332 333 343 388 712 722 732 733 73G 738 744 752 763 772 773 77W 788 789 78J
 
User avatar
SQ32
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 2:18 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:29 am

The Boeing has been letting the NMA air out since 2015, and till now, no decision has been made. All while there are clear demands as 757 abd 767 are reaching EOL. Meanwhile the MBA managers rake in millions shuffling papers for many years discussing business case.
 
acjbbj
Posts: 310
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:06 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:34 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Aceskywalker wrote:
To be quite honest, I don't see a business case for Boeing to spend billions on developing the NMA - not when they have multiple fires to put out with the MAX crisis, 777X delay, and eroding trust in the 787 family.

Boeing must clean house and admit defeat to Airbus for the next decade or a little less, and go clean sheet design for a new narrowbody.


This is the most absurd thing I have ever read on this wesbite.


How so?! Back in the days of the DC-10, people forgot about it really quickly. But now we have the world wide web and social media. No one's going to be forgetting about the 737 Max crashes. This is why people who actually put safety ahead of cost hope Boeing go bankrupt. And there's a good chance they will. Which is nothing bad but entirely a good thing. So we could have Boeing's font and the entire commercial division become a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin and the military side become the new McDonnell-Douglas. So the new MDC could work on an NMA.
Douglas Aircraft Company
Born: 22 July 1921 (Santa Monica, CA)
Died: 23 May 2006 (Long Beach, CA), age 84 years 10 months 1 day
You will be missed.
 
marcelh
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:40 am

With the introduction of the A321XLR Boeing knows exactly what the gap is they can fill with the NMA. More interesting is what they will do with the NSA in terms of capacity and range and how this will (or won’t) eat into NMA territory.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:45 am

Armadillo1 wrote:
mistake was made by choosing MAX instead of clean sheet.

but after that what they can do?

A clean sheet wouldnt likely address the A321XLR

As for all the arm chair CEOs with their fisher price MBAs. In 2011, oil was $100+ per barrel. Airlines were not going to wait 6-8 years for a 737 clean sheet replacement when they needed a more fuel efficient plane now that airbus could offer. Not to mention Boeing just spent everything they had on 787 program which was a difficult and complex program
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1243
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:48 am

acjbbj wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
Aceskywalker wrote:
To be quite honest, I don't see a business case for Boeing to spend billions on developing the NMA - not when they have multiple fires to put out with the MAX crisis, 777X delay, and eroding trust in the 787 family.

Boeing must clean house and admit defeat to Airbus for the next decade or a little less, and go clean sheet design for a new narrowbody.


This is the most absurd thing I have ever read on this wesbite.


How so?! Back in the days of the DC-10, people forgot about it really quickly. But now we have the world wide web and social media. No one's going to be forgetting about the 737 Max crashes. This is why people who actually put safety ahead of cost hope Boeing go bankrupt. And there's a good chance they will. Which is nothing bad but entirely a good thing. So we could have Boeing's font and the entire commercial division become a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin and the military side become the new McDonnell-Douglas. So the new MDC could work on an NMA.


Congratulations. Now this is the most absurd thing I've read on this website.

Boeing isn't going bankrupt. Most people have no idea what a 737 Max is. Those who do won't care when they see a ticket that is $1 cheaper.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:52 am

SQ32 wrote:
By the time NMA shows up, A321XLR would have taken all the market share.

The existence of XLR further weaken the case for NMA.

Nowadays Boeing is run by a bunch of MBAs, lording over good engineers. Since the Dreamliner, there is no improvement on the platform. Rather Boeing bank on GEs or Safran for NPI.

Which is exactly what the NEO would have done had Boeing done a clean sheet 737 replacement instead of the max
 
smartplane
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:02 am

Amiga500 wrote:
LH707330 wrote:
From what I've seen, Boeing is aiming at the 763ER payload/range segment, and needs to figure out if such a right-sized plane will sell enough units at the price point airlines are willing to pay in order to warrant the investment.


I agree that many make that argument. My problem with that is:

767-300ER could carry ~ 260 passengers up to ~6000 nm (OK, prob couldn't do both at same time but you get the idea)
787-9 can carry ~290 passengers ~7600 nm.

Are we really at a point where there is an economic case for replacing the 787 with an aircraft that has its range reduced by around 1500 nm to improve economics on shorter missions?

Lest we forget, the 787-3 was a dismal failure - and it had been rejigged (albeit, not exactly optimised) for a mission range of much less than 6000 nm.



If someone strongly made the case for a 300-350 seat aircraft operating over a range of no more than 2000nm being so significantly cheaper than narrowbodies as to justify (i) the investment from airframer, (ii) airlines accepting the trip cost risk & (iii) the airlines accepting loss of flexibility - then I'd listen. But I cannot see a 787-lite ending up any different from 787-3. Or worse - significantly cannibalising sales of the 787.

Given the 787 cost of production has benefited from assembly simplification and economies of scale, perhaps a 783 or lite is again on Boeing's radar.
 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:13 am

ethernal wrote:
There is nothing magical that makes a widebody more comfortable than a narrowbody.


I think that makes a lot of sense, but I have never been able to explain the abject failure of the B757-300. It was designed in 1996 when the A321 began chipping away at B757 sales. By stretching the B757-200 so that the fuel economy per seat was one of the best for any jet at the time, it also had the passenger capacity of the early B767s.

Yet only a token 55 B753s were ever sold, and after 9/11 Boeing stopped taking orders and closed the line in favor of the B737-900. Now the A321 went from being the inferior product technically (but less expensive) when compared to the B757 to being the superior product when compared to the B739.

B757 --- A321 deliveries
2 1982 ---
25 1983 ---
18 1984 ---
36 1985 ---
35 1986 ---
40 1987 ---
48 1988 ---
51 1989 ---
77 1990 ---
80 1991 ---
99 1992 ---
71 1993 ---
69 1994 16
43 1995 22
42 1996 16
46 1997 22
54 1998 35
67 1999 33
45 2000 28
45 2001 49
29 2002 35
14 2003 33
11 2004 35
2 2005 17
--- 2006 30

The inability to sell even a single B757-300 in Asia must be one of the sources of Boeing's rejection of making the B797 a single aisle jet.
 
Naincompetent
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:20 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:32 am

I think people are forgetting one thing about the NMA, and it is the answer of Airbus to it.

Airbus does not have any new aircraft development as of now (XLR and project sunrise are probably not using all of airbus engineering capabilities).
This means that Airbus probably has teams working on replying to Boeing. No doubt that Airbus wouldn't care if this new AC canibalizes the A330neo 10 years from now, that means that the NMA program will also have an impact on future B787 sales.

So, yes I think Boeing will go and launch the NMA but yes, Boeing is right to be prudent and to take its time. It's not as if all 767 replacements will go to Airbus, the XLR is still to small and the 787 is already there to compete with the A330
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 372
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:46 am

People talking about B757 and B767 replacement but if you look at the airlines, most already have a replacement plan in place, with B737-10, A321, B787, A330neo.

Reviving the B783 could be an option but the B787 production line is already running at full steam.

I think that Boeing should focus on the Max, B777X, then go for the NSA, perhaps even to overlap with the MAX, offering the MAX as a cheaper platform alo gside a bigger NSA, a bit like A220/A320 work in tandem.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10599
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:13 am

rigo wrote:
What I find interesting is that for years it has been an A.net wisdom that Boeing would never replace the 757 because there was supposedly no market for this class of aircraft any more. And suddenly the A321(X)LR comes around and boom! So what happened here? What did Airbus see that everyone else missed?


They didn't see anything the others missed. They just happened to have a frame of roughly the right size, that wasnt designed to lift a full cabin of small runways for a transcon flight, and hence doesn't weigh in at 1000 pounds per m2 cabin floor space with no weight advantage over wide bodies despite being single aisle..

If you start from a ~15% lighter frame, you get something very different. Even if same gen engines, it the 757 would still be heavy.... and hence expensive to fly.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
sciing
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:54 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:36 am

SEAxSANxBOS wrote:
I also hope that the XLR will have an option to board L2.

Boarding will be quite difficult without a door.
There is no Door 2 anymore for the ACF.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6861
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:51 am

rigo wrote:
What I find interesting is that for years it has been an A.net wisdom that Boeing would never replace the 757 because there was supposedly no market for this class of aircraft any more. And suddenly the A321(X)LR comes around and boom! So what happened here? What did Airbus see that everyone else missed?


Easy. Airbus saw that they could address a fair chunk of the MOM market by some relatively simple (especially compared to an all new platform) modifications to what will still fundamentally be an A321NEO (just with a fancier belly fuel tank).
It will come off the same production lines as 60+ other A32X family per month.
It will easily fit into any A32X fleet and be virtually interchangeable
It will be cheap and quick to produce.
But it will be an A321

That's what Boeing haven't seen, because they aren't able to do this with the 737.
They have to do an all new plane if they intend to address MOM.
It will be a stand-alone platform addressing just that particular need.
The 757 and 767 are the same - that's why they have gone.

As enthusiasts we might not be too keen on the A321XLR, but as a business move it is inspired.
Imagine small airlines that operate say 20-30 A32X, but have aspirations for something more.
Convert 3 to 4 of these to A321XLR and you're good to go

Revelation wrote:
ethernal wrote:
Sure. But are you willing to bet a $20B on a cleansheet NMA design that I'm wrong? That's the question Boeing has to ask. And I wouldn't make that bet.

From what we read from the rumblings at PAS, yes, Boeing is still on the road to a clean sheet NMA.

The opportunity is for NMA to be to A321XLR what 787 is to A330, bigger, mostly CFRP design, better fuel burn, lower maintenance, etc.

All this careful scrubbing of the business plan should tell us that if they do launch they are confident that they can make money building it.


NMA will not be to the A321XLR what the 787 is to the A330. There's a fundamental difference, and it is the one I describe above.
There will be a lot of cases where there are barriers to entry for NMA that the A321XLR just will not face because it is basically another A321.

What the careful scrubbing of the business case tells us is that Boeing were already aware of the level of demand out there, and yet have still struggled to close the business case in 4 years.
The A321XLR can only be reducing the space that NMA will sit in.
If Boeing don't launch soon then the XLR will have eaten up a fair chunk of that demand and damaged the business case.

Much has been made of the "productionisation" of NMA, and I don't get it.
The work must be really exciting - it's right up my street and what I do for a living.

Surely the right place to apply it is into a plane that you can make 60 - 70 per month of, and really put your competitor in a tight spot that they HAVE to respond to. And, if done properly can fill in most of the NMA space anyway.

Armchair CEO time - if I were Boeing I would ditch any pretence at NMA and switch those resources onto NSA.
The MAX? Yes it became the fastest selling Boeing and could have been an amazing programme.
Sadly, the MCAS experience and attendant crashes draw the focus onto the product's limitations rather than its strengths.
I don't think that MAX will ever fully recover, and is a "lifed" item.
In other words, I wouldn't let the MAX backlog stop me from doing NSA, and moving from the back foot to the front foot

VS11 wrote:
A CFRP 757/767 sounds great but why hasn’t Boeing announced it yet? They have access to so much market intelligence, they should be able to have incredibly sophisticated macroeconomic modeling capabilities. They should be able to identify every possible route where their NMA can provide a competitive advantage. At this point, they should know everything there is know to make a decision. All of this waiting is hurting them because the XLR is a compelling aircraft.


I think your answer is in your question. If they "know everything there is know to make a decision" and yet haven't launched, what should that be telling you?

Rgds
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1521
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:00 am

There is no risk to Boeing.

Everyone can see widebody aircraft are getting smaller. The point to point flights are growing exponentially driving sales of smaller long range widebodies. This will continue to even smaller widebodies like the 797 and long range narrowbodies like the A321XLR.

We can not look at the history of 757 sales as an indication of market size due to the old days of the hub and spoke model.

The A321XLR will sell very well and there is still huge room for the 797. I actually expect most A330 and 787-8's to be replaced by 797's and A321XLR's. That is 1000+ sales on top of the 757/767's that need to be replaced. This might mean a downgauge in size but the major routes are getting split between secondary cities.

History shows the 797 can exist above the A321XLR. The 767 sat above the 757 in both size and range and both aircraft sold well. The 777 sat above the A330 in the same way.

There will be routes between 5000-6000nm that only the 797 can be stretched to fly.

Larger aircraft are dieing as soon as smaller aircraft become capable. 777X sales will die as soon as the 787NEO comes out. 787NEO sales will halve as soon as the 797NEO comes out.

New engines make the aircraft fly further and eventully the 787-9NEO will become an overweight and over capable ultra long haul aircraft like the 777LR. The sales will then drop.

I expect the 797 to be the last fully fossil fueled airliner boeing will develop. The 797 with multiple engine upgrades will eventually be able to fly half way around the world. A short range hybrid electric aircraft will do the short routes and the 797 will do everything else.
Last edited by RJMAZ on Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:08 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:03 am

astuteman wrote:
I think your answer is in your question. If they "know everything there is know to make a decision" and yet haven't launched, what should that be telling you?

Rgds

Because the launch was originally planned to be 2020 and it isn't 2020 yet. That is something a lot of people have forgotten.
 
estorilm
Posts: 665
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:10 am

incitatus wrote:
There is great demand for an aircraft such as the -XLR. The most evident one is Transatlantic, where the 757 is still used and a replacement is overdue. But there is also Europe to the Middle East and Africa, intra-Asia, and North-South America. There are other thin and small markets out there and what they lack in size they make up for with rich fares. It is perfectly reasonable to expect that service on thinner routes that are 8-to-10 hour flights becomes a competitive requirement.

In my mind, Boeing is making its biggest strategic mistake in decades. Within 3-4 years, what appears at first to be a niche product may garner 1000 orders. The proposed NMA from Boeing is not a similar competitor. Wide-bodies by nature have heavier frames and more drag. A stubby wide-body to compete with the -XLR would have to make up for the increased operation cost with cargo, and in many thinner routes that is not going to be a factor. The 8-to-10-hour flights that can support a wide-body are well covered by 787s, as the economics are good and they create a good blend with longer routes to keep fleet and pilots used to the right limits. I see the NMA as a dead end - a cheaper, de-rated 787-8 would hit about the same market point. If Boeing tried that and got no bites, it is damning for the NMA business case.

I know there are other threads on the -XLR, but I am interested in the market potential and Boeing's response.

The "mistake" was made decades ago - most of us here saw this situation unfolding for years now, the issue is that they just don't have the right platform to produce a product for this market segment. Airbus has the PERFECT platform for such a market; with minimal modifications and maximum commonality, they're going to bring an aircraft to service in a short period of time. It's also a low-risk project requiring minimal investment, which will demand a PREMIUM price tag - profit margins on this thing should be amazing for Airbus.

I guess my point is that none of what I said above really applies to Boeing, they just don't have the platform available. Could they make a new aircraft? Sure - but would it ever break even on such a niche segment? Doubtful.. it's only doable for Airbus because they've got the thing right in front of them already.

This is the aggressive move I was curious about Airbus making.. they didn't really have to (look at their backlog for the 32X right now) but it seems they wanted to drive another nail in the coffin for Boeing's NMA.
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:12 am

astuteman wrote:
rigo wrote:
What I find interesting is that for years it has been an A.net wisdom that Boeing would never replace the 757 because there was supposedly no market for this class of aircraft any more. And suddenly the A321(X)LR comes around and boom! So what happened here? What did Airbus see that everyone else missed?


Easy. Airbus saw that they could address a fair chunk of the MOM market by some relatively simple (especially compared to an all new platform) modifications to what will still fundamentally be an A321NEO (just with a fancier belly fuel tank).
It will come off the same production lines as 60+ other A32X family per month.
It will easily fit into any A32X fleet and be virtually interchangeable
It will be cheap and quick to produce.
But it will be an A321

That's what Boeing haven't seen, because they aren't able to do this with the 737.
They have to do an all new plane if they intend to address MOM.
It will be a stand-alone platform addressing just that particular need.
The 757 and 767 are the same - that's why they have gone.

As enthusiasts we might not be too keen on the A321XLR, but as a business move it is inspired.
Imagine small airlines that operate say 20-30 A32X, but have aspirations for something more.
Convert 3 to 4 of these to A321XLR and you're good to go

Revelation wrote:
ethernal wrote:
Sure. But are you willing to bet a $20B on a cleansheet NMA design that I'm wrong? That's the question Boeing has to ask. And I wouldn't make that bet.

From what we read from the rumblings at PAS, yes, Boeing is still on the road to a clean sheet NMA.

The opportunity is for NMA to be to A321XLR what 787 is to A330, bigger, mostly CFRP design, better fuel burn, lower maintenance, etc.

All this careful scrubbing of the business plan should tell us that if they do launch they are confident that they can make money building it.


NMA will not be to the A321XLR what the 787 is to the A330. There's a fundamental difference, and it is the one I describe above.
There will be a lot of cases where there are barriers to entry for NMA that the A321XLR just will not face because it is basically another A321.

What the careful scrubbing of the business case tells us is that Boeing were already aware of the level of demand out there, and yet have still struggled to close the business case in 4 years.
The A321XLR can only be reducing the space that NMA will sit in.
If Boeing don't launch soon then the XLR will have eaten up a fair chunk of that demand and damaged the business case.

Much has been made of the "productionisation" of NMA, and I don't get it.
The work must be really exciting - it's right up my street and what I do for a living.

Surely the right place to apply it is into a plane that you can make 60 - 70 per month of, and really put your competitor in a tight spot that they HAVE to respond to. And, if done properly can fill in most of the NMA space anyway.

Armchair CEO time - if I were Boeing I would ditch any pretence at NMA and switch those resources onto NSA.
The MAX? Yes it became the fastest selling Boeing and could have been an amazing programme.
Sadly, the MCAS experience and attendant crashes draw the focus onto the product's limitations rather than its strengths.
I don't think that MAX will ever fully recover, and is a "lifed" item.
In other words, I wouldn't let the MAX backlog stop me from doing NSA, and moving from the back foot to the front foot

VS11 wrote:
A CFRP 757/767 sounds great but why hasn’t Boeing announced it yet? They have access to so much market intelligence, they should be able to have incredibly sophisticated macroeconomic modeling capabilities. They should be able to identify every possible route where their NMA can provide a competitive advantage. At this point, they should know everything there is know to make a decision. All of this waiting is hurting them because the XLR is a compelling aircraft.


I think your answer is in your question. If they "know everything there is know to make a decision" and yet haven't launched, what should that be telling you?

Rgds



Agreed, as discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1391009&p=20310963#p20310963. The MCAS problems have made this scenario even more likely.

Basically make it a double family. 1 The basic 737 replacement and 2 the A321XLR (and possibly A322) competitor. Start with the latter. Build up your production infrastructure and further develop it with the smaller production scale more capable family while the 737 can hold the fort on the bottom. Than slowly transition from 737 to the smaller family.

Critical points would be:

1 To have enough in common to be able to produce it economically within the same production environment, but not so much that you overly compromise both families.

2 Competing with a production system of 70+ from the get go.

3 To make this huge industrial transition.


Boeing's advantage: Airbus probably can't built enough A320 variants anyway (although increasing A220 production much further and launching an A220-500 could increase the pain).


That said, a lot of new technology and room for optimization would become available with this approach. In would be a major leap for Boeing narrowbody tech level and capability. Though still possibly within the close enough scope for Airbus to counter with heavily update A320 variants.
Last edited by Taxi645 on Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Innovation is seeing opportunity before obstacle.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17255
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:17 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
This is the most absurd thing I have ever read on this wesbite.


Did you not read that post about the FAA punishing other countries for grounding the MAX? That was pretty crazy!
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
upperdeckfan
Posts: 892
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:59 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:24 am

TWA772LR wrote:
I think its funny when people bring up 757 operations outside Europe and North America.

How many 757s were operated outside these regions? Going even further, how many of the TOTAL operators actually used the 757 to it's extent?

Comparatively, how many operators period use the A321 on longer routes than a US transcon? The 321XLR isnt going to magically open routes like Hanoi-Bangalore, or Antofagasta-Mexico City. TATL-length missions arent going to appear in Africa, Middle East, South East Asia etc...


Back in the days the 757 was introduced, asian legacies and NZ/QF were flying tons of 747's and D10's on short and mid-haul, these days they are flying mostly 787's and A350's. Time will tell what size of plane they'll be flying on mid-haul.

Hanoi-Bangalore might not open magically with the 321XLR, but the potential for aditional frequencies on routes such as HKG-PER or SVO/DME-VVO will be there.

PacoMartin wrote:
I think passenger resistance will be very high to flying 4000-4700 nm in a single aisle jet.


What percentage of people knows which airplane type are they flying before getting to the airport? From that percentage, how many will pass on booking a 10% cheaper fare just to fly a widebody?

Vast majority of flyers care about a reasonable seat pitch, on board service. I also assume J will have similar seats than any widebody (lie flat and aisle-access).

Just as a sample, none of my family and friends care to know about aircraft type except for me :)
748,744,742,741,772,773,762,763,
764, 789, 732,733,735,737,738,739,
752, 722, 717,74M,DC10,DC9,M82,
M83, M87, M88,310,319,320,321,332,
333, 343, 346,359,388,L1011,CR2,
CR7, CR9,CRK, E175,E190,ATR42,
DSH8, CS1,CS3
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12306
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:32 am

Jefford717 wrote:
Dropping the 787-3 was a massive mistake.

How's it a mistake to keep a program that nobody wanted, nobody firmed an order for; and which the only two customers remotely interested, found a more optimal platform for?

....that's more or less the cumulative definition of "weak business case."
Last edited by LAX772LR on Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1243
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:32 am

Taxi645 wrote:
astuteman wrote:
rigo wrote:
What I find interesting is that for years it has been an A.net wisdom that Boeing would never replace the 757 because there was supposedly no market for this class of aircraft any more. And suddenly the A321(X)LR comes around and boom! So what happened here? What did Airbus see that everyone else missed?


Easy. Airbus saw that they could address a fair chunk of the MOM market by some relatively simple (especially compared to an all new platform) modifications to what will still fundamentally be an A321NEO (just with a fancier belly fuel tank).
It will come off the same production lines as 60+ other A32X family per month.
It will easily fit into any A32X fleet and be virtually interchangeable
It will be cheap and quick to produce.
But it will be an A321

That's what Boeing haven't seen, because they aren't able to do this with the 737.
They have to do an all new plane if they intend to address MOM.
It will be a stand-alone platform addressing just that particular need.
The 757 and 767 are the same - that's why they have gone.

As enthusiasts we might not be too keen on the A321XLR, but as a business move it is inspired.
Imagine small airlines that operate say 20-30 A32X, but have aspirations for something more.
Convert 3 to 4 of these to A321XLR and you're good to go

Revelation wrote:
From what we read from the rumblings at PAS, yes, Boeing is still on the road to a clean sheet NMA.

The opportunity is for NMA to be to A321XLR what 787 is to A330, bigger, mostly CFRP design, better fuel burn, lower maintenance, etc.

All this careful scrubbing of the business plan should tell us that if they do launch they are confident that they can make money building it.


NMA will not be to the A321XLR what the 787 is to the A330. There's a fundamental difference, and it is the one I describe above.
There will be a lot of cases where there are barriers to entry for NMA that the A321XLR just will not face because it is basically another A321.

What the careful scrubbing of the business case tells us is that Boeing were already aware of the level of demand out there, and yet have still struggled to close the business case in 4 years.
The A321XLR can only be reducing the space that NMA will sit in.
If Boeing don't launch soon then the XLR will have eaten up a fair chunk of that demand and damaged the business case.

Much has been made of the "productionisation" of NMA, and I don't get it.
The work must be really exciting - it's right up my street and what I do for a living.

Surely the right place to apply it is into a plane that you can make 60 - 70 per month of, and really put your competitor in a tight spot that they HAVE to respond to. And, if done properly can fill in most of the NMA space anyway.

Armchair CEO time - if I were Boeing I would ditch any pretence at NMA and switch those resources onto NSA.
The MAX? Yes it became the fastest selling Boeing and could have been an amazing programme.
Sadly, the MCAS experience and attendant crashes draw the focus onto the product's limitations rather than its strengths.
I don't think that MAX will ever fully recover, and is a "lifed" item.
In other words, I wouldn't let the MAX backlog stop me from doing NSA, and moving from the back foot to the front foot

VS11 wrote:
A CFRP 757/767 sounds great but why hasn’t Boeing announced it yet? They have access to so much market intelligence, they should be able to have incredibly sophisticated macroeconomic modeling capabilities. They should be able to identify every possible route where their NMA can provide a competitive advantage. At this point, they should know everything there is know to make a decision. All of this waiting is hurting them because the XLR is a compelling aircraft.


I think your answer is in your question. If they "know everything there is know to make a decision" and yet haven't launched, what should that be telling you?

Rgds



Agreed, as discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1391009&p=20310963#p20310963. The MCAS problems have made this scenario even more likely.

Basically make it a double family. 1 The basic 737 replacement and 2 the A321XLR (and possibly A322) competitor. Start with the latter. Build up your production infrastructure and further develop it with the smaller production scale more capable family while the 737 can hold the fort on the bottom. Than slowly transition from 737 to the smaller family.

Critical points would be:

1 To have enough in common to be able to produce it economically within the same production environment, but not so much that you overly compromise both families.

2 Competing with a production system of 70+ from the get go.

3 To make this huge industrial transition.


Boeing's advantage: Airbus probably can't built enough A320 variants anyway (although increasing A220 production much further and launching an A220-500 could increase the pain).


That said, a lot of new technology and room for optimization would become available with this approach. In would be a major leap for Boeing narrowbody tech level and capability. Though still possibly within the close enough scope for Airbus to counter with heavily update A320 variants.


Boeing has already fixed the MCAS issue. They had been working on it since the Lion Air crash. It's up to the authorities to approve it. They will rename or just call it the 737-8,-9... But they're not throwing the program away. I can see a deal where they offer the 737 at a nice price with conversion rights to NMA. You all must think Boeing has the most incompetent sales and marketing team if you think they will watch all of their customers go to Airbus for "the next decade". People please.
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:43 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Boeing has already fixed the MCAS issue. They had been working on it since the Lion Air crash.


They might have fixed the technical aspect of it. There is more to the 737 situation than just the technical aspect of MCAS.... ;)

TTailedTiger wrote:
You all must think Boeing has the most incompetent sales and marketing team if you think they will watch all of their customers go to Airbus for "the next decade". People please.


Never said anything like that.
Innovation is seeing opportunity before obstacle.
 
YIMBY
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 4:32 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:44 am

Armadillo1 wrote:
mistake was made by choosing MAX instead of clean sheet.

but after that what they can do?


Yes, at hindsight.

They might also have been messed up the clean sheet similarly which would have cost even more.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2237
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:30 am

http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/ar ... cover.html

Boeing have been grappling with the "Middle of the Market" for nearly 20 years.
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:15 am

Just to explain further. If Boeing launches the NMA and thus commits it's resources to it, Airbus can immediately initiate a whole list of things to put the 737 in a lot more trouble still:

- Increase A320 production further
- Increase A220 production further
- Launch an A322 based on the XLR design changes
- Launch an A220-500
- Composite wingbox and state of the art new wing for the A320
- Engine PIP or more for the A320
- Engine PIP or more for the A220
- Additive manufacturing improvements on A220 and A320


All stuff Boeing will not likely be able to respond sufficiently to because resources would be committed to the NMA and because ROI won't be there on a plane nearing end of life.

Possibly the only reason Airbus would not completely erode the 737 market share in that situation might be that A they don't have the production capacity and B they rather would maintain the NB duopoly and not destabilize that market too extremely in light of long term interests.
Last edited by Taxi645 on Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:18 am, edited 2 times in total.
Innovation is seeing opportunity before obstacle.
 
TaromA380
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:25 am

estorilm wrote:
The "mistake" was made decades ago - most of us here saw this situation unfolding for years now, the issue is that they just don't have the right platform to produce a product for this market segment. Airbus has the PERFECT platform for such a market; with minimal modifications and maximum commonality, they're going to bring an aircraft to service in a short period of time. It's also a low-risk project requiring minimal investment, which will demand a PREMIUM price tag - profit margins on this thing should be amazing for Airbus.

I guess my point is that none of what I said above really applies to Boeing, they just don't have the platform available. Could they make a new aircraft? Sure - but would it ever break even on such a niche segment? Doubtful.. it's only doable for Airbus because they've got the thing right in front of them already.

This is the aggressive move I was curious about Airbus making.. they didn't really have to (look at their backlog for the 32X right now) but it seems they wanted to drive another nail in the coffin for Boeing's NMA.

Maybe this is just a comfortable tactical move (easy $$$, even more pressure on B), while holding on the real aggressive one – the A322 – as answer to Boeing’s future try to escape the trap.

How many of you remember one of Leahy’s last major brag before retirement? It was about the NMA. Like a farewell spell, he predicted exactly what’s developing under our eyes.
 
tomcat
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:59 am

Taxi645 wrote:
Just to explain further. If Boeing launches the NMA and thus commits it's resources to it, Airbus can immediately initiate a whole list of things to put the 737 in a lot more trouble still:

- Increase A320 production further
- Increase A220 production further
- Launch an A322 based on the XLR design changes
- Launch an A220-500
- Composite wingbox and state of the art new wing for the A320
- Engine PIP or more for the A320
- Engine PIP or more for the A220
- Additive manufacturing improvements on A220 and A320


All stuff Boeing will not likely be able to respond sufficiently to because resources would be committed to the NMA and because ROI won't be there on a plane nearing end of life.

Possibly the only reason Airbus would not completely erode the 737 market share in that situation might be that A they don't have the production capacity and B they rather would maintain the NB duopoly and not destabilize that market too extremely in light of long term interests.


What if Boeing changes its priorities and first launches its new single aisle family covering the 180-250 seats market? Let's not be too optimistic and let's consider that it would be available by 2026. Although not a significant development, the XLR will keep Airbus busy for some time but that would be a complete waste if Boeing brings the NSA in 2026. Overall, the NEO outlook would be significantly reduced, while Boeing could offer the MAX customers to transfer some of their orders to the NSA.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20899
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:02 pm

astuteman wrote:
NMA will not be to the A321XLR what the 787 is to the A330. There's a fundamental difference, and it is the one I describe above.
There will be a lot of cases where there are barriers to entry for NMA that the A321XLR just will not face because it is basically another A321.

Airbus at one point thought an A330 with bit of GLARE and some new engines would be good enough to compete with 787, but in the end found they had to go clean sheet. They think the A321 is good enough to fend off NMA but I think in the end we will find that NMA will build a strong market for itself in a market space one size bigger than A321 is, and Airbus will have to find a way to access that market.

astuteman wrote:
Armchair CEO time - if I were Boeing I would ditch any pretence at NMA and switch those resources onto NSA.
The MAX? Yes it became the fastest selling Boeing and could have been an amazing programme.
Sadly, the MCAS experience and attendant crashes draw the focus onto the product's limitations rather than its strengths.
I don't think that MAX will ever fully recover, and is a "lifed" item.
In other words, I wouldn't let the MAX backlog stop me from doing NSA, and moving from the back foot to the front foot

You're gonna shank the same people who you want to buy the NSA when you kill the MAX. Great plan! It's one thing to make mistakes on MAX, it's a totally different thing to intentionally shiv your customer base. It'd null out any money they've already put into the MAX, throw them onto Airbus's tender mercy to find them an A320neo in five or so years time and/or hope NSA goes off without a flaw whilst their competitors enjoy next generation engine performance, nullify all their investment in 737 training and spares common with NG, etc.

Back to CEO School for you!
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
 
cpd
Posts: 5952
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:09 pm

tomcat wrote:
One area where the NMA can make a difference is the cruise speed as the M.78 cruise speed of the XLR is not ideal for flight duration reaching 8 to 10 hours. A NMA cruising at M.85 or M.86 could save up to 50 minutes or so on a 4500nm flight compared to the XLR.


Nobody cares about speed, it’s all about economics.

And passengers don’t get a say in that. I think this kind of slower, but very flexible plane is the future.

If you need to go faster, you take a business jet. If you can’t afford that, then you don’t need to go any faster than the rest of us.

I was an advocate of faster planes, but the reality is clear, faster speeds are a dead end.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:12 pm

marcelh wrote:
With the introduction of the A321XLR Boeing knows exactly what the gap is they can fill with the NMA. More interesting is what they will do with the NSA in terms of capacity and range and how this will (or won’t) eat into NMA territory.


I agree.

Boeing has been too vocal for the last 4 years with the NMA.

They waited to see how far Airbus can go with its A321neoXLR. There is no doubt that NSA will follow the NMA closely.

It may be that this PAS'19 / A321neo XLR launching has been Pandora's Box
 
maverick4002
Posts: 97
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 2:14 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:24 pm

Waterbomber2 wrote:
I think that the only thing that Boeing can do is to keep selling MAXes and bridge the gap to the NSA.
The NSA can be a 3-aircraft family of 180, 210, 240 seats, centered around the 210-seater.
So what if Airbus wins a year worth of production for the XLR for the next 10 years.

Plus, the XLR isn't exactly a hot seller yet.
Orders will be mostly conversions from existing orders for A321, A321LR and it won't be priced cheap.

Up to now, there is only a significant lessor order. We'll have to see if anything comes up later in the show.

I wonder why Airbus wasted resources on the A321LR when there was capacity to do the A321XLR straight away.


Not saying it will or wont be a hot seller, but come one dude, its been 24 hours or so, how can you even attempt to make a conclusion from one day?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20899
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:35 pm

Meanwhile we read:

United Airlines continues to evaluate the newly launched Airbus A321XLR for its middle-of-the-market needs, but does not see the aircraft as a full solution to the gap in its fleet.

"The XLR doesn't solve the [Boeing] 767 replacement issue," Gerry Laderman, the US carrier's chief financial officer, told reporters at the Paris air show.

Clearly he also doesn't see A350/787/A330 as the solution either.

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ni-459024/
Last edited by Revelation on Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2237
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Business Risk for Boeing: The A321XLR

Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:41 pm

Revelation wrote:
Airbus at one point thought an A330 with bit of GLARE and some new engines would be good enough to compete with 787, but in the end found they had to go clean sheet.


Except of course now, the A330neo (sans GLARE) is competing with the 787.


Revelation wrote:
They think the A321 is good enough to fend off NMA but I think in the end we will find that NMA will build a strong market for itself in a market space one size bigger than A321 is, and Airbus will have to find a way to access that market.


So more than 240 seats (sardine class) and less than 360 seats (sardine class).




Revelation wrote:
You're gonna shank the same people who you want to buy the NSA when you kill the MAX. Great plan! It's one thing to make mistakes on MAX, it's a totally different thing to intentionally shiv your customer base. It'd null out any money they've already put into the MAX, throw them onto Airbus's tender mercy to find them an A320neo in five or so years time and/or hope NSA goes off without a flaw whilst their competitors enjoy next generation engine performance, nullify all their investment in 737 training and spares common with NG, etc.
Back to CEO School for you!


I didn't see the bit where he suggested stopping all MAX production before the NSA is ramped.

Boeing are going to have to transition sometime, better to get that underway from a position of some strength rather than when they are firefighting a serious performance deficit to, say, an A32x neo2 in the mid-2020s.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9

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