Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
benbeny
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Sat Nov 02, 2019 1:04 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
benbeny wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
Is it faster to load/unload with two aisles or a wider aisle? If an aisle is blocked you cannot just use the other one.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Twin aisle gives you redundancy, but in the end, the limiting factor is often the door size and how fast people walk down the bridge. How often it is when you have to wait for last one pax?

In 7w you only have redundancy for the middle seat and that only counts if you haven’t yet entered the aisle. A wider single aisle might mean that you can squeeze by a stopped person or it might mean that people just take up more room when they swing their bags.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now 2 people can probably stand simultaneously to open up the baggage compartment. Now, will we have more head bumped by heavy bags, or will the boarding become faster and better? I guess it will be just a mild annoyance for everyone on board, but still, it's an annoyance.
 
P1aneMad
Posts: 467
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:05 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:48 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
keesje wrote:

Image


What does this look like in two-class configuration?

Other than the US majors who else is going to put dedicated business class seats on the future Boeing single isle aircraft?
Not the 90 per cent plus of single isle aircraft operators around the world they won't.
Those that sell business class tickets will continue to block the middle seat in the front rows as keesje's graph already shows.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14099
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Sun Nov 03, 2019 5:03 pm

P1aneMad wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
keesje wrote:

Image


What does this look like in two-class configuration?

Other than the US majors who else is going to put dedicated business class seats on the future Boeing single isle aircraft?
Not the 90 per cent plus of single isle aircraft operators around the world they won't.
Those that sell business class tickets will continue to block the middle seat in the front rows as keesje's graph already shows.


Indeed. The 1-2-1 option would be for longer flights, the NMA variant.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=ht ... h%2Fx%2Fim
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 906
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Sun Nov 03, 2019 6:19 pm

Image

Really am looking forward to seeing the STRETCHED version of this thing!

(;
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14099
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Sun Nov 03, 2019 10:37 pm

KlimaBXsst wrote:
Image

Really am looking forward to seeing the STRETCHED version of this thing!

(;


It would be significant shorter and have a significant bigger cross section than the 757-300..

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Dave05
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Mon Nov 04, 2019 2:43 am

A double aisles aircraft of course would make passengers onloading and offloading much faster, but a dual aisle aircraft fuselage will be much heavier. Actually, a 767 replacement is in Boeing product range already, it is not even the 787-3 but 787-8. What's American, Delta and United seating configuration for the 787-8? 250 pax in 3 class configuration. Wouldn't that be a good seating capacity for Lax to Tlv? So actually they can put off temporarily a 767 replacement and concentrate on a 757 replacement and the 737 Max replacement would be based on the 757 replacement....
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 736
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Mon Nov 04, 2019 6:43 am

Dave05 wrote:
A double aisles aircraft of course would make passengers onloading and offloading much faster, but a dual aisle aircraft fuselage will be much heavier. Actually, a 767 replacement is in Boeing product range already, it is not even the 787-3 but 787-8. What's American, Delta and United seating configuration for the 787-8? 250 pax in 3 class configuration. Wouldn't that be a good seating capacity for Lax to Tlv? So actually they can put off temporarily a 767 replacement and concentrate on a 757 replacement and the 737 Max replacement would be based on the 757 replacement....


From my experience, double aisles only really speeds up exiting when you also use two jetbridges. I flew many many TATL flights with almost every model possible and when ever only one jet bridge was used there was a long line especially when you were on the "far" aisle. If two jet bridges where used and the far aisle got routed through business/first to the front jet bridge exiting was really fast. Same goes for boarding it is really long with one jet bridge, especially when you have to pass first and business.

Best TATL I ever had was on a 757 on Delta from CDG to RDU. It is just nice as there are so few people on the flight, so at all stages it does not feel crowded. So I am actually looking forward to do a TATL on the A321LR/XLRs.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19279
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:01 pm

Richard Aboulafia (who he? :wink2: ) says that there's a case for shelving NMA and going ahead with FSA.

https://aviationweek.com/new-civil-airc ... 1be732f83c
After years of marketing and studies, Boeing’s new midmarket airplane (NMA) might stay on the shelf.
...
There are many advantages to replacing the NMA with the FSA. First, an upgauged single-aisle design would be the safest way to respond to Airbus’ very strong A321neo. The 737 MAX 9/10 has attracted less than 30% of the A321neo’s 2,794 order book. As I wrote here 2.5 years ago (AW&ST April 3-16, 2017, p. 12), using a twin-aisle like the NMA to compete with a single-aisle is highly problematic, due to the seemingly unbridgeable gap between single-aisle and twin-aisle operating economics and production costs.

Second, upgauging Boeing’s next single-aisle would create space in the company’s product lineup to leverage Boeing’s $5.7 billion investment in Embraer.


So it seems FSA (Future Small Airplane) is a single-aisle after all. :o

Who'd have thought? :lol:
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.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3350
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:26 pm

So its Aboulafia's opinion, ok, I thought he had inside info or something but again, its his "opinion".
 
morrisond
Posts: 2858
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:51 pm

william wrote:
So its Aboulafia's opinion, ok, I thought he had inside info or something but again, its his "opinion".


Exactly.

A tight light 7W might be more difficult to produce than an 6W SA - however for the same passenger capacity there should actually be fewer parts in the Fuselage of a 7W as it would be shorter. Less Floor beams, fewer ribs, etc.. That might be a bigger determinant on production cost and time to produce than a thinner cross section.

They have been working on an 7W for at least 10 years.

That does mean however that they could do a smaller winged/shorted Range version of an 7W NSA/NMA first though. With the Bigger Winged/Longer ranged NMA coming later.

All possible.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8487
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:59 pm

william wrote:
So its Aboulafia's opinion, ok, I thought he had inside info or something but again, its his "opinion".


Yes, analysts have opinions. They are often informed opinions. Aboulafia's been doing this for a long time. Do you have his industry qualifications and contacts? Care to point to the last aviation pieces you had published in Aviation Week or Forbes?
Last edited by MIflyer12 on Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19279
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:00 pm

william wrote:
So its Aboulafia's opinion, ok, I thought he had inside info or something but again, its his "opinion".


The opinion part is shelving NMA for FSA, not the fact that FSA will be a single-aisle.
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.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24789
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:08 pm

scbriml wrote:
Richard Aboulafia (who he? :wink2: ) says that there's a case for shelving NMA and going ahead with FSA.

https://aviationweek.com/new-civil-airc ... 1be732f83c
After years of marketing and studies, Boeing’s new midmarket airplane (NMA) might stay on the shelf.
...
There are many advantages to replacing the NMA with the FSA. First, an upgauged single-aisle design would be the safest way to respond to Airbus’ very strong A321neo. The 737 MAX 9/10 has attracted less than 30% of the A321neo’s 2,794 order book. As I wrote here 2.5 years ago (AW&ST April 3-16, 2017, p. 12), using a twin-aisle like the NMA to compete with a single-aisle is highly problematic, due to the seemingly unbridgeable gap between single-aisle and twin-aisle operating economics and production costs.

Second, upgauging Boeing’s next single-aisle would create space in the company’s product lineup to leverage Boeing’s $5.7 billion investment in Embraer.


So it seems FSA (Future Small Airplane) is a single-aisle after all. :o

Who'd have thought? :lol:

What is safe about going after an entrenched competitor by spending $billions of dollars to produce a product with similar capabilities, and outsourcing some/all of the work to a new division with no track record of producing work on the same size and scale as BCA?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14099
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:12 pm

morrisond wrote:
william wrote:
So its Aboulafia's opinion, ok, I thought he had inside info or something but again, its his "opinion".


Exactly.

A tight light 7W might be more difficult to produce than an 6W SA - however for the same passenger capacity there should actually be fewer parts in the Fuselage of a 7W as it would be shorter. Less Floor beams, fewer ribs, etc.. That might be a bigger determinant on production cost and time to produce than a thinner cross section.

They have been working on an 7W for at least 10 years.

That does mean however that they could do a smaller winged/shorted Range version of an 7W NSA/NMA first though. With the Bigger Winged/Longer ranged NMA coming later.

All possible.


Few would doubt on which side of the Ocean Richards preferences lay. https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... hires.html But he's knowledgeable, changes his mind & can be bluntly honest on anyone, including Boeing & himself. I've been advocating a brand new 7 abreast could not be competitive 180-260 seats, because the effiency really is in the engines, weight, cross section drag and wings. And a competitive advantage is hard to find there. It probably took 3000 A321NEO's to convince Boeing..

Image

Probably United called it a day. Told them they ordered 100 A321NEO's and will have another 300 if Boeing doesn't have something slightly more efficient by 2026.
Last edited by keesje on Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2578
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:34 pm

I've been advocating "FSA" over "MoM" as well. And my views have only strengthened after the MAX disaster.

Boeing has been studying a new single aisle for years. Some of that R&D that was made before the MAX launch is probably still valuable. That might cut back the development time some. The biggest issue with a new single aisle is the engine technology. If the new FSA will use the same engine tech as the current latest gen, the advantage of the FSA in fuel burn and economy might be single digits. Especially when you know there's nothing stopping Airbus from expanding their A321neo even further. We already know Airbus has studied versions with new wings and other improvements. The reason those plans were shelved was that they weren't necessary at the time.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:36 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
Do you have his industry qualifications and contacts?


What qualifications?!?

MIflyer12 wrote:
Care to point to the last aviation pieces you had published in Aviation Week or Forbes?


I've never met a bit of paper yet that refused ink.


The broken clock got the A380 right.


http://richardaboulafia.com/shownote.asp?id=325

The 737 has a fuel burn advantage over the A320, and the 737-800 enjoys a slightly higher rating as a financial asset. The A320 is a superb aircraft that competes on comfort, performance and other factors. It’s fine to offer a premium product when you’re in a two-way race, but if the CSeries and any other new market entrants start offering reduced fuel burn, you look like a high-cost laggard. Fortunately for Airbus, the larger ground clearance of its A320 family lets it take full advantage of the new, larger engines. An A320NEO should offer cost savings well above 4%.

Boeing, by contrast, can coast for a few years, selling 737NGs at a discount, tweaking the product to offer minor savings when possible. In 4-7 years they can create a 737 replacement.


The A350XWB, which, based on recent Airbus and Rolls-Royce program performance will likely be a poorly executed and disastrously delayed composite mid-market twinjet
Last edited by Amiga500 on Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24789
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:41 pm

keesje wrote:
It probably took 3000 A321NEO's to convince Boeing.. Probably United called it a day. Told them they ordered 100 A321NEO's and will have another 300 if Boeing doesn't have something slightly more efficient by 2026.

Probably madness to spend $10-$20B and 6+ years to end up competing head on with a competitor with an installed base of 3000 A321NEOs they can make faster and cheaper with a minimal delta in performance just because UA wants to buy 300 copies.
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
JetBuddy
Posts: 2578
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:49 pm

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
It probably took 3000 A321NEO's to convince Boeing.. Probably United called it a day. Told them they ordered 100 A321NEO's and will have another 300 if Boeing doesn't have something slightly more efficient by 2026.

Probably madness to spend $10-$20B and 6+ years to end up competing head on with a competitor with an installed base of 3000 A321NEOs they can make faster and cheaper with a minimal delta in performance just because UA wants to buy 300 copies.


I agree. But I believe this FSA will be the replacement for 737-8, 737-9 and 737-10.

And therefore a competitor not only to A321neo, but the A320neo as well.

Below that I think they'll come up with a solution with Embraer for the 115-160 seat market.
 
nycbjr
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:54 pm

Maybe this just means they will focus on the 737 replacement but not really launch it for a few years for a 2030 entry into service? Doesn't mean it will get launched right away. They need to do something and launching NMA then FSA is a costly proposition!

Of course it means that Airbus will win the "middle of the market" with the A321/A330 until then so thats not really a good place to be either.

Tough call for Boeing....
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14099
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:57 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
william wrote:
So its Aboulafia's opinion, ok, I thought he had inside info or something but again, its his "opinion".


Yes, analysts have opinions. They are often informed opinions. Aboulafia's been doing this for a long time. Do you have his industry qualifications and contacts? Care to point to the last aviation pieces you had published in Aviation Week or Forbes?


Amiga500 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Do you have his industry qualifications and contacts?


What qualifications?!?

MIflyer12 wrote:
Care to point to the last aviation pieces you had published in Aviation Week or Forbes?


I've never met a bit of paper yet that refused ink.


Yes, all those unqualified people saying what I don't want to hear. :frown: William, Amiga500, Revelation, please, I need solid confirmed info, proof. I feel this place has been declining since I joined. .. wait ..

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
It probably took 3000 A321NEO's to convince Boeing.. Probably United called it a day. Told them they ordered 100 A321NEO's and will have another 300 if Boeing doesn't have something slightly more efficient by 2026.

Probably madness to spend $10-$20B and 6+ years to end up competing head on with a competitor with an installed base of 3000 A321NEOs they can make faster and cheaper with a minimal delta in performance just because UA wants to buy 300 copies.


I think not all orders are for the best aircraft performance. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fran ... SKCN1TJ0RW
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
morrisond
Posts: 2858
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:06 pm

keesje wrote:

I feel this place has been going down, since I joined really.



The correlation is pretty strong isn't it? Is it Causality? Sorry i couldn't resist. I'm just kidding.

You are an asset to the forums and your contributions would be missed if you ever left. It's good to have opposing viewpoints or there is nothing to discuss/debate.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:06 pm

keesje wrote:

Yes, all those unqualified people saying what I don't want to hear. :frown:

William, Amiga500, Revelation, please, I need solid confirmed info, proof.

I feel this place has been going down, since I joined really.


Proof of what?

Aboulafia being an idiot?

That is all I am saying. I don't care what the subject is - do not use Richard Aboulafia as a reference for backing up any idea being right or wrong as you may as well go down to the local pond and ask the ducks when your feeding them.


With regards the 6AB vs. 7AB - I have long been on the record in this forum as saying the 7AB concept is a stupid idea which would fill a very small niche and be extremely vulnerable to further improvements in A32x performance and upgrades (i.e. A322). I was of that opinion long before Richard Aboulafia chimed in - so I don't need someone with a degree in "War Studies" to tell me what makes a good aircraft design.
Last edited by Amiga500 on Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 506
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:09 pm

Middle could be mid-range or it could be mid-capacity. I think the shift will be from the 5K NMA to the 500nm to 3K market range NMA.
Instead of a 45m wing and 50K engines, a 36m wing and 35K engines. Since it will be in the same capability range as the A321 with the same engines, Boeing has to differentiate in some way. A few more rows, a wider aisle, and CFRP wings. A 160" outside diameter fuselage. Or study a 2-2-2 configuration with a 172" outside diameter fuselage. People like aisle seats, and people don't like middle seats.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2858
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:19 pm

DenverTed wrote:
Middle could be mid-range or it could be mid-capacity. I think the shift will be from the 5K NMA to the 500nm to 3K market range NMA.
Instead of a 45m wing and 50K engines, a 36m wing and 35K engines. Since it will be in the same capability range as the A321 with the same engines, Boeing has to differentiate in some way. A few more rows, a wider aisle, and CFRP wings. A 160" outside diameter fuselage. Or study a 2-2-2 configuration with a 172" outside diameter fuselage. People like aisle seats, and people don't like middle seats.


Or an 7W 165ish" H x 184-188ish"W Oval - in the same ballpark as 172" cross section with 1 more Y seat and up to 2 more in front in Domestic Business in 2x2x2
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3350
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:19 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
william wrote:
So its Aboulafia's opinion, ok, I thought he had inside info or something but again, its his "opinion".


Yes, analysts have opinions. They are often informed opinions. Aboulafia's been doing this for a long time. Do you have his industry qualifications and contacts? Care to point to the last aviation pieces you had published in Aviation Week or Forbes?


You can't be on Anet for 20 years and not know who is, or posted a quote from him. My point stands,I thought he was reporting with new inside info on the project. It was just his opinion, an highly educated one yes, but his opinion.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 506
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:34 pm

morrisond wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Middle could be mid-range or it could be mid-capacity. I think the shift will be from the 5K NMA to the 500nm to 3K market range NMA.
Instead of a 45m wing and 50K engines, a 36m wing and 35K engines. Since it will be in the same capability range as the A321 with the same engines, Boeing has to differentiate in some way. A few more rows, a wider aisle, and CFRP wings. A 160" outside diameter fuselage. Or study a 2-2-2 configuration with a 172" outside diameter fuselage. People like aisle seats, and people don't like middle seats.


Or an 7W 165ish" H x 184-188ish"W Oval - in the same ballpark as 172" cross section with 1 more Y seat and up to 2 more in front in Domestic Business in 2x2x2

I hope that is a design option as well. Is this a CFRP fuselage? I think the design challenge is how much can you squeeze out of this with the wing and engine constraints, and possibly a 100t MTOW constraint. I wonder economically, is the step change to double axle main gears is a deal breaker or not? If not then 110t or 115t MTOW may be possible with the wing and engine, and the extra MTOW would outpace the A321, short of the Airbus doing an expensive rewing and regear.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7184
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:51 pm

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
It probably took 3000 A321NEO's to convince Boeing.. Probably United called it a day. Told them they ordered 100 A321NEO's and will have another 300 if Boeing doesn't have something slightly more efficient by 2026.

Probably madness to spend $10-$20B and 6+ years to end up competing head on with a competitor with an installed base of 3000 A321NEOs they can make faster and cheaper with a minimal delta in performance just because UA wants to buy 300 copies.


I would expect Boeing to be smart enough to make the competition not quite head on - e.g make it a fraction larger and taller than the A32X and more able to accept higher bypass engines (do to the NEO what the NEO has done to the 737).

I've never been a fan on the concept of NMA - from my seat, the market for most aircraft gets challenged from underneath, and the challenge from the vast plethora of narrowbodys , in my eyes, is so great that it makes NMA space untenable, except for a variant of that same plethora of narrowbodys.

So I'll go on record as believing that spending $10 - $20Bn and 6 years on a product that puts the narrobody monkey back on Airbus's shoulders, AND paves the way for a more effective "NMA" space derivative than the A321 can ever become, is WAY less mad than spending the same amount on an NMA aircraft family that in reality will never have enough of a market to justify the business case, and will be forever vulnerable to the commoditised narrowbodys underneath it.

I think it's the right call, as is moving it up slightly in size relative to the 737, to allow the Embraer products underneath room to grow, and facilitate an "NMA" variant

Rgds
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3350
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 5:06 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
Top executives at global airlines and lessors, including many who were thought to be likely large launch carriers for the NMA (which would eventually become the 797), have soured on the idea of Boeing’s 220 to 270-seat twin-aisle concept and are privately pushing for a successor to the 737 Max and the aging fleet of 757s


Behind the scenes, Boeing has been recently briefing a small handful of U.S., European and leasing customers on an all-new aircraft — dubbed the Future Small Airplane (FSA) — whose first models would notionally be 180 to 210-seats. That’s larger than the 737 Max 8, which seats 162 passengers in a two-class configuration.


There is a paywall.

I find it very interesting airlines are pushing for FSA over the NMA.

https://theaircurrent.com/aircraft-deve ... placement/


Isn't this the same as the NMA, but engineered for domestic routes instead of overbuilt for long range? Which should yield a lighter aircraft.

Beneath this,737 replacement will be similar to the A220. An aircraft that spans the E2 to 737-8. Similar to the A220-500 that keeps being pitched here on Anet to replace the A320.. The 150 pax version will be the most economical stretch of the platform.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 5:27 pm

'Tis interesting looking down the track.

Do Boeing and Embraer go do a 5AB for the 130-170 seat market? Then 6AB for the 180-280 seat market?

If Airbus did a CS500m then that would put their 5AB at around 160 seats, I don't know if they could do a double stretch to 180 seats. Then the A30X running from 170-270 seats.

That would be direct competition in both payload and range across two families. They don't like directly competing really. Usually there is a bit of a slide in terms of payload/range between the OEMs.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3350
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 5:54 pm

The NB market is really the only segment where Airbus and Boeing compete directly spec wise. So,yes, I can see the meat of the market being fought with 5AB aircraft up to the A320/737-8 range from both manufacturers. Above that is where differing philosophies will yield different aircraft in the same segment but with different strengths depending on flight profile.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2858
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:12 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
'Tis interesting looking down the track.

Do Boeing and Embraer go do a 5AB for the 130-170 seat market? Then 6AB for the 180-280 seat market?

If Airbus did a CS500m then that would put their 5AB at around 160 seats, I don't know if they could do a double stretch to 180 seats. Then the A30X running from 170-270 seats.

That would be direct competition in both payload and range across two families. They don't like directly competing really. Usually there is a bit of a slide in terms of payload/range between the OEMs.


This is the conundrum - 5W can very effectively take over the A320-738 6W space with an Carbon Tube which is stiffer and can be built efficiently light at longer lengths, but from an Passenger Experience standpoint (Boarding/Unboarding - moving around the cabin) it's kind of hard to take 6W much past 220-230 seats. So 6W in Carbon sits in this really tight seat range 180-230.

The advantages of using Carbon is that it could be a lot easier to do a 7W with very little weight penalty. There is excess strength in a Carbon Barrel as the thickness it needs to be to deal with Impact damage is thicker than it needs to be for the given size. That excess strength margin can be used to make it wider and almost getting that one extra seat in width for free.

It will also be quite easy to take 7W up to 300 seats(Single Class).

If you are building from Scratch Boeing Brazil can do an 5W from up to about 180 Seats and then Boeing US does an 7W from 200-300 (Single Class), with differing Short Range and Long Range Gear/Wing/Engines/Tail.

Almost anyway you look at it Boeing needs to do 2 new cross sections to cover the whole market below 787.

They really should have bought the C-Series - that was a big mistake.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24789
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:26 pm

keesje wrote:
I think not all orders are for the best aircraft performance. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fran ... SKCN1TJ0RW

Yes, some times they are for low acquisition cost, quick delivery, fleet diversity, and the best performance on a given route network too.

Not sure how this relates to UA being the king maker for a hypothetical FSA.
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
 
747megatop
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:31 pm

musman9853 wrote:
yeah before the max issue i thought nma was a surety. now, after spending tens of billions on the max, spending 15B on the nma makes less and less sense.

It's about time Airlines pushed Boeing to draw the curtains on a 50 year old design. I think the 737 has been MAXed out to the limit by Boeing. Yes, it is a risk...but the only way forward is for Boeing to design a all new clean sheet narrow body replacement for the 737; hopefully with better technology that has been developed and learnt as part of the 787 design & development.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:36 pm

morrisond wrote:
This is the conundrum - 5W can very effectively take over the A320-738 6W space with an Carbon Tube which is stiffer and can be built efficiently light at longer lengths, but from an Passenger Experience standpoint (Boarding/Unboarding - moving around the cabin) it's kind of hard to take 6W much past 220-230 seats. So 6W in Carbon sits in this really tight seat range 180-230.


Disagree on the 7AB - a simple structure is still carrying too big a weight & wetted area handicap to make it work. A complex structure (that reduces wetted area) is now carrying even more weight which is far too much to make it work.

It fundamentally starts off the entire design with bad top level requirements (TLR). You can have the best engineers in the world work their proverbials off - but it won't matter a damn because the TLRs were bad to begin with. A case in point is the JSF. Lockheed were screwed from the moment it was decided the F-35 must fit on the Wasp LHD elevators. Their finesse ratio went to crap and from that they were always struggling with trading off weight vs.wing area vs. L/D vs. zero-lift transonic drag. Sure, its got some great electronics and nice transient performance - but the sustained kinematic performance of the aircraft is poor - at best.


There are two simple solutions to the 6AB boarding/deboarding issue that I can think of (and there may be more):
(i) Embarking/Debarking from both front and rear doors
(ii) Embarking/Debarking from L2 door.

A wider aisle also helps with moving around the cabin, and if the main door was at L2, you could locate lavs adjacent* to that splitting up the distance travelled by a substantial margin.

*I appreciate that most now are going "spaceflex" to cram pax in like sardines - but if a product were designed from the start for L2 boarding, then surrendering a metre of cabin length (which is just over 1 seat row) for a quasi-twin aisle without the weight issue is a trade off I consider worth making.
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1351
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:48 pm

Boeing's problem is that they should have thrown the baby out with the bath water. The baby is an old and tired 737 that Boeing keeps tweaking to keep the 737 in production and also make Southwest Airlines happy. You cannot keep living in the past. The 737 is the perfect example of the past. :old:
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2288
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:31 pm

I keep seeing that frontal area of the 7W compared to 6W cannot be overcome. But how then does the 777 have good CASM at 20'-4 circular hull width, it does not appear to utilized a double bubble arrangement to reduce area. The A350 has a 19.7' width. The frontal area of the hull is 7% more than the A350 but its CASM is basically the same. The 787 is 18'-11" wide, this is 8% smaller than the A350, yet somehow the A350 can overcome that added drag.

going 7W allows for a shorter airplane compared to 6W of the same capacity, so wetted area is a bit lower. There are a lot of trade offs that must be considered.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2858
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:02 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
I keep seeing that frontal area of the 7W compared to 6W cannot be overcome. But how then does the 777 have good CASM at 20'-4 circular hull width, it does not appear to utilized a double bubble arrangement to reduce area. The A350 has a 19.7' width. The frontal area of the hull is 7% more than the A350 but its CASM is basically the same. The 787 is 18'-11" wide, this is 8% smaller than the A350, yet somehow the A350 can overcome that added drag.

going 7W allows for a shorter airplane compared to 6W of the same capacity, so wetted area is a bit lower. There are a lot of trade offs that must be considered.


Theoretically you could have an less stiff longitudinal structure with 7W as well saving weight.

A 7W NMA/NSA (165"H x 185"W) would have about 20.7% more cross section that an A320 (163"H x 156"W) (24,103 sq" vs 19,971sq"), for 16.7% more Y seats, 50% more Domestic Business in the front and a Cargo Container that could take about 50% more volume as it would be 30" wider in the biggest part of the container.

The A320 has about 8.7% more cross section than 737 and it seems to do okay with that (19,971 vs 18,365 approx.).

An Ovalish 7W is not that big of an increase in cross section and a lot smaller than people are thinking if it's used as an 737 and 757 replacement.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2858
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:43 pm

Assuming Keesje's Extra Wide Aisle 6W concept is about 12" wider than A320 and is round for Maximum efficiency - that puts it as about an 168" Diameter circle or 22,167 sq" - about 11% more than an A320 and within 9% of the tight wide 7W.

That's an easy cross section deficiency to overcome with the extra Y seat and 2 more in Domestic Business.
 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 901
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:55 am

ikolkyo wrote:
the Future Small Airplane (FSA) — whose first models would notionally be 180 to 210-seats. That’s larger than the 737 Max 8, which seats 162 passengers in a two-class configuration.


Seats is a fairly vague notion in describing the capacity of a jet, but it sounds like the FSA is going to be the same specifications as the A321neo. Presumably it would have the same range as the XLR as well (4700 nm in calm weather with no jetstream). In some ways you are at the practical upper limit of a single-aisle jet because if it flies over 14 hours you need two pilots

Sample A321neo seating configurations
16+168=184 seats Aer Lingus
8+180=188 seats Asiana Airlines
16+44+129=189 seats Hawaiian Airlines
12+182=194 seats Air China
8+186=194 seats ANA
12+183=195 seats Avianca
20+47+129=196 seats American Airlines
214 =214 seat Air New Zealand
219=219 seats Arkia

--------------------------
If I am wrong and the FSA is intended to be larger than the A321neo, then there seems to be the lesson of the B753.

The first B753 was delivered 16.56 years after the first B767. (10. Mar. 1999 vs 19. Aug. 1982). As I understand it was perceived as a low cost way to deliver a little less performance as the original B767s at a lot less operational cost. The B753 and B767-200 had similar seat capacity. The B767-200 (128 orders) had a range of 7,200 km with 63,217 L of fuel. The B753 had a range of 6,295 km with a maximum capacity of 43,400 L of fuel.

The lesson of the B753 is that airlines don't seem to want long jets. Sales were horrific, and only 2 sold to Arkia counted towards Asian sales. In total there were 55 sales of the model.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2288
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 15, 2019 5:05 am

morrisond wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
I keep seeing that frontal area of the 7W compared to 6W cannot be overcome. But how then does the 777 have good CASM at 20'-4 circular hull width, it does not appear to utilized a double bubble arrangement to reduce area. The A350 has a 19.7' width. The frontal area of the hull is 7% more than the A350 but its CASM is basically the same. The 787 is 18'-11" wide, this is 8% smaller than the A350, yet somehow the A350 can overcome that added drag.

going 7W allows for a shorter airplane compared to 6W of the same capacity, so wetted area is a bit lower. There are a lot of trade offs that must be considered.


Theoretically you could have an less stiff longitudinal structure with 7W as well saving weight.

A 7W NMA/NSA (165"H x 185"W) would have about 20.7% more cross section that an A320 (163"H x 156"W) (24,103 sq" vs 19,971sq"), for 16.7% more Y seats, 50% more Domestic Business in the front and a Cargo Container that could take about 50% more volume as it would be 30" wider in the biggest part of the container.

The A320 has about 8.7% more cross section than 737 and it seems to do okay with that (19,971 vs 18,365 approx.).

An Ovalish 7W is not that big of an increase in cross section and a lot smaller than people are thinking if it's used as an 737 and 757 replacement.


We are both noting that increased frontal area is important, but just one of many factors. I personally feel that a snug 7W is a very good size, in particular how it adds to the premium cabin. One item that affects the design - the range. Reducing the range by 2,000 nm saves about 6%, Yes the NMA needs more range than the A321, but not a lot more. A future engine upgrade will increase the range by 15% or more.

I still feel a NMA is essential in the strategy to introducing the NSA. This is mostly that it would take 5-6 years from introduction to pass rate 20, the production system to produce 50+ a month doesn't happen overnight. A direct 737 replacement would likely pound the existing backlog.
 
B764er
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:19 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 3:08 pm

Boeing has to implement tried and true 787 technology on It's future 737 and 757 replacements and not depend on software for plane control (no MCA'S) in order to regain a share of the market. The 737 is done and must be replaced. So is the 757.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 506
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 4:07 pm

B764er wrote:
Boeing has to implement tried and true 787 technology on It's future 737 and 757 replacements and not depend on software for plane control (no MCA'S) in order to regain a share of the market. The 737 is done and must be replaced. So is the 757.

The 737-10 was never going to hold the market against the A321. As that market (100t MTOW) grows, it is more of an issue.
As for the 737-8, if it returns to service successfully, it may stick around until 2035.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2858
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 4:23 pm

Here is where I got the idea of half circle on top, 1/3 on the bottom. It wasn't me making it up.

https://jonostrower.com/2018/04/toddler ... -fuselage/
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6472
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 4:39 pm

B764er wrote:
Boeing has to implement tried and true 787 technology on It's future 737 and 757 replacements and not depend on software for plane control (no MCA'S) in order to regain a share of the market. The 737 is done and must be replaced. So is the 757.


I’ll bet the next plane by Boeing will be FBW, so, yes, they’ll rely on software for control.
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:44 pm

DenverTed wrote:
The 737-10 was never going to hold the market against the A321. As that market (100t MTOW) grows, it is more of an issue.


I'm starring to wonder if Boeing actually will go ahead with the 737-10, or if they will focus on delivering 737-8, while designing the 737 replacement at the same time.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19279
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:25 pm

reidar76 wrote:
I'm starring to wonder if Boeing actually will go ahead with the 737-10, or if they will focus on delivering 737-8, while designing the 737 replacement at the same time.


Well, the first one rolled out of the factory today.
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.
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:57 pm

scbriml wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
I'm starring to wonder if Boeing actually will go ahead with the 737-10, or if they will focus on delivering 737-8, while designing the 737 replacement at the same time.


Well, the first one rolled out of the factory today.


That must have been a very low profile roll out. I can't see any of the regular sources reporting this. I actually didn't know Boeing had even started building a 737-10.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19279
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:15 pm

reidar76 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
I'm starring to wonder if Boeing actually will go ahead with the 737-10, or if they will focus on delivering 737-8, while designing the 737 replacement at the same time.


Well, the first one rolled out of the factory today.


That must have been a very low profile roll out. I can't see any of the regular sources reporting this. I actually didn't know Boeing had even started building a 737-10.


Didn't need to look too far! :wink2:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1435485
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.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1285
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:21 am

I don't understand the obsessions with 2-2-2 configurations on narrow-body. You know it would never fly. There are 2 main concerns for this design.

First is the overhead bin. If you divided the aisle in two. You would be forced to create smaller overhead bin so it doesn't protrude into the 2 aisles. You might be able to do 3 small one, but you'll ended up with 2 small overhead bin on the side and a tiny one on the middle which could only be opened from one of the aisle.

Second is the economics of the 2 aisles. The more seats you got between the two aisle. The more efficient the design become. 9-10 abreast are the best example for this.
Also, it would be WAY more beneficial if they have 1 big aisle rather than 2 small aisles. Which mean that 2 people can board at the same time.

2 small aisle at 17" means that they required 34" of aisle space. A single aisle at 26" - 28" width would required less space while providing a more space for the flight attendants to work on, faster boarding and deboarding, and it would allowed for the biggest overhead bin because of all of the space.

There would just be another 3-3 narrowbody aircraft with either narrow seats and single aisle or wide seats and single aisle. That's it.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Boeing NMA in doubt as customers push for all new 737MAX and 757 replacement

Sun Nov 24, 2019 7:14 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
william wrote:
Aboulafia's been doing this for a long time. Do you have his industry qualifications and contacts? Care to point to the last aviation pieces you had published in Aviation Week or Forbes?


william wrote:
(..) an highly educated one yes, but his opinion.


Richard has a master in War Studies and worked at Jane's analysing the jet engine market. That's it. He never worked in the industry, merely looked at it from the outside with a background of studying wars. About as relevant as a highly educated doctor of medicine offering his opinions on construction of nuclear power plants.

He's famous for being an opinionated arse, that's about it. He's been proven wrong far, far more often then right and offering nothing but opinionated guesswork.

As for being published, a lot of idiots have been published. That doesn't tell you anything about their qualifications, merely their abilities to convince someone to publish their musings and make some money off it. I've been published a few times, on topics I knew almost nothing about but was ready to offer an uneducated, and highly controversial, opinion on. Just to prove that controversy is much more relevant to publishers than fact, because there's more clicks and thus money to be had by publishing controversy and educated facts.
Signature. You just read one.

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