Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15738
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:06 pm

steman wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Boeing declared at its time, that the 737-800/900 was the successor to the 757.


No, at the time, the 737-800 was considered a direct 727-200 replacement.


I would say the 737-800 was a direct replacement for 737-400.


The seating capacity of the 737-400 was far below that of the -800. The 737-800 was a direct 727-200 replacement, especially when you look at the airlines whose 738 fleets did, in fact, replace the 727-200, particularly in the U.S.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:07 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:

But you also have to consider that the first iteration (-200) is still in production after 31 years.

A 30 year old CEO is practically identical to an end of line build in the factory right now, and has 95% commonality with a NEO.

This is why so many carriers are ESG-ing their older fleet members.


Thank you, well stated, thats the essence of what I was saying.

Look, Boeing has tried 3 times to compete with an essentially unchanged A320: the 300/400/500, the NG, and the MAX. 2 of the 3 have been failures (if the 300/400/500 wasn't a failure, then why the NG?), while Airbus just keeps pumping out A320 and 321 aircraft. And Boeing STILL doesn't really have an answer for the 321neo. It was outselling the MAX before the accidents.


You think selling 1,988 frames is a failure?


Within context, yes. Had they done the 300/400/500 right, there would have been no need for the NG
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14490
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:45 pm

EA CO AS wrote:
steman wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:

No, at the time, the 737-800 was considered a direct 727-200 replacement.


I would say the 737-800 was a direct replacement for 737-400.


The seating capacity of the 737-400 was far below that of the -800. The 737-800 was a direct 727-200 replacement, especially when you look at the airlines whose 738 fleets did, in fact, replace the 727-200, particularly in the U.S.


Correct, but the -400 is a significant part of the story. In the 80s/90s, you had 319 and 320 versus 733/4/5. It was a small airplane “battle;” look how relatively few -400s Boeing sold.

As technological improvements have improved runway performance and range, the volume “battle” is now 738/739 versus 320/321. The 738 very much holds its own against the 320, but the 321 is superior to the 739 in virtually every respect. As average gauge increases, therefore, Airbus’ relatively better performance should surprise no one.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2543
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:45 pm

SteelChair wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

Thank you, well stated, thats the essence of what I was saying.

Look, Boeing has tried 3 times to compete with an essentially unchanged A320: the 300/400/500, the NG, and the MAX. 2 of the 3 have been failures (if the 300/400/500 wasn't a failure, then why the NG?), while Airbus just keeps pumping out A320 and 321 aircraft. And Boeing STILL doesn't really have an answer for the 321neo. It was outselling the MAX before the accidents.


You think selling 1,988 frames is a failure?


Within context, yes. Had they done the 300/400/500 right, there would have been no need for the NG


You seem to be completely ignoring the improvements in engine options between the Classic and NG.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:55 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

You think selling 1,988 frames is a failure?


Within context, yes. Had they done the 300/400/500 right, there would have been no need for the NG


You seem to be completely ignoring the improvements in engine options between the Classic and NG.


Not at all, the CFM56 was a huge step forward. But Boeing messed up the wing.....it wasn't big enough.

And as I recall, engine options were limited. You could get a CFM56, or a CFM56. And then there was the CFM56 option. I guess the good part is that those engines were out-freaking-standing.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1771
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:06 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

You think selling 1,988 frames is a failure?


Within context, yes. Had they done the 300/400/500 right, there would have been no need for the NG


You seem to be completely ignoring the improvements in engine options between the Classic and NG.

The 737 never had any "engine option"; it was always:
- P&W JT8D on 737-100/-200;
- CFM International CFM56-3 on 737-300/-400/-500;
- CFM International CFM56-7B on 737-600/-700/-800/-900;
- CFM International Leap1B on 737MAX7/MAX8/MAX9/MAX10.
The is a much bigger gap between the JT8D and the CFM56-3 than between the CFM56-3 and the CFM56-7B.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11128
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:02 am

Just a reminder to all to keep your posts on topic and relevant to the discussion. Keep the name calling and flamebait out of the discussion. Do not provoke other users or incite trouble and your posts must contribute constructively to the discussion. If the forum rules can not be followed the thread will be locked.
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20086
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:04 am

scbriml wrote:
It’s an achievement worthy of note and something that many here thought unimaginable a few years ago.

But what I feel is truly remarkable about both the A320 and 737 is the scale of their industrialisation. These things are being pumped out at a combined rate of 100+ per month which is unprecedented for a non-wartime plane. In a small number of years, both will exceed total DC-3 sales and production. That’s simply astonishing and a testament to both.

This.

Excluding, as noted, war time production, these economic of scale are unprecedented. Airbus has do e major improvements. The NEO is a best seller.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:16 am

Nice mark for the A320, but let's see if deliveries ever match.

Also, it can't be denied that business objectives have an effect on sales totals. Doesn't mean the A320 doesn't deserve its credit, but it doesn't mean total sales it's pure apples to apples either.

SteelChair wrote:
Not at all, the CFM56 was a huge step forward. But Boeing messed up the wing.....it wasn't big enough.

And as I recall, engine options were limited. You could get a CFM56, or a CFM56. And then there was the CFM56 option. I guess the good part is that those engines were out-freaking-standing.


A classic with an NG wing is still a classic. It would have been an incremental change, not the large step forward the NG was, and it would not have matched the early A320. Technology, particularly with engines, was still advancing rapidly in the '80s and '90s, and the NG is the product of that. It's not as if Boeing was a full 15 years late in making the NG. The tech wasn't there yet.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15738
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:31 am

Cubsrule wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
steman wrote:

I would say the 737-800 was a direct replacement for 737-400.


The seating capacity of the 737-400 was far below that of the -800. The 737-800 was a direct 727-200 replacement, especially when you look at the airlines whose 738 fleets did, in fact, replace the 727-200, particularly in the U.S.


Correct, but the -400 is a significant part of the story. In the 80s/90s, you had 319 and 320 versus 733/4/5. It was a small airplane “battle;” look how relatively few -400s Boeing sold.

As technological improvements have improved runway performance and range, the volume “battle” is now 738/739 versus 320/321. The 738 very much holds its own against the 320, but the 321 is superior to the 739 in virtually every respect. As average gauge increases, therefore, Airbus’ relatively better performance should surprise no one.


All I’m saying is that the 738 was the 722 replacement. Because it was. That’s all.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
User avatar
FLALEFTY
Posts: 780
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:45 am

Cubsrule wrote:
EA CO AS wrote:
steman wrote:

I would say the 737-800 was a direct replacement for 737-400.


The seating capacity of the 737-400 was far below that of the -800. The 737-800 was a direct 727-200 replacement, especially when you look at the airlines whose 738 fleets did, in fact, replace the 727-200, particularly in the U.S.


Correct, but the -400 is a significant part of the story. In the 80s/90s, you had 319 and 320 versus 733/4/5. It was a small airplane “battle;” look how relatively few -400s Boeing sold.

As technological improvements have improved runway performance and range, the volume “battle” is now 738/739 versus 320/321. The 738 very much holds its own against the 320, but the 321 is superior to the 739 in virtually every respect. As average gauge increases, therefore, Airbus’ relatively better performance should surprise no one.


As I recall, Boeing offered United the 734 as a potential replacement for the 722. However, the payload was less than the 722 with the 734 and the hot & high performance of the 734 was lacking (not ideal for UA's Denver hub). This gave Airbus an opening for the A320, as well as the A319 and United took the political risk of not "buying American" and ordered these instead.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:09 am

MSPNWA wrote:
Nice mark for the A320, but let's see if deliveries ever match.

Also, it can't be denied that business objectives have an effect on sales totals. Doesn't mean the A320 doesn't deserve its credit, but it doesn't mean total sales it's pure apples to apples either.

SteelChair wrote:
Not at all, the CFM56 was a huge step forward. But Boeing messed up the wing.....it wasn't big enough.

And as I recall, engine options were limited. You could get a CFM56, or a CFM56. And then there was the CFM56 option. I guess the good part is that those engines were out-freaking-standing.


A classic with an NG wing is still a classic. It would have been an incremental change, not the large step forward the NG was, and it would not have matched the early A320. Technology, particularly with engines, was still advancing rapidly in the '80s and '90s, and the NG is the product of that. It's not as if Boeing was a full 15 years late in making the NG. The tech wasn't there yet.


So you're attributing the performance/payload range increase from the 300/400/500 to the NG to the engine, ie., going from a CFM56-3 to a -7, and not to the larger wing? Not sure I buy that. Imho Boeing underwinged the 300.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:15 am

SteelChair wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Nice mark for the A320, but let's see if deliveries ever match.

Also, it can't be denied that business objectives have an effect on sales totals. Doesn't mean the A320 doesn't deserve its credit, but it doesn't mean total sales it's pure apples to apples either.

SteelChair wrote:
Not at all, the CFM56 was a huge step forward. But Boeing messed up the wing.....it wasn't big enough.

And as I recall, engine options were limited. You could get a CFM56, or a CFM56. And then there was the CFM56 option. I guess the good part is that those engines were out-freaking-standing.


A classic with an NG wing is still a classic. It would have been an incremental change, not the large step forward the NG was, and it would not have matched the early A320. Technology, particularly with engines, was still advancing rapidly in the '80s and '90s, and the NG is the product of that. It's not as if Boeing was a full 15 years late in making the NG. The tech wasn't there yet.


So you're attributing the performance/payload range increase from the 300/400/500 to the NG to the engine, ie., going from a CFM56-3 to a -7, and not to the larger wing? Not sure I buy that. Imho Boeing underwinged the 300.


I'd have to agree with you Steelchair.

Aside from the engines, wings, and avionics, what else was really changed for the NG?

Also, weren't the CFM56-5B's from '95 a closer match to the -7B's? How did the -3's from '84 compare to the -5A's only from '87 (three years versus 27 to finally get the NEO engines)?

EDIT: forgot that FADEC was invented in '87 with the -5A :boxedin:
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:50 am

1989worstyear wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Nice mark for the A320, but let's see if deliveries ever match.

Also, it can't be denied that business objectives have an effect on sales totals. Doesn't mean the A320 doesn't deserve its credit, but it doesn't mean total sales it's pure apples to apples either.



A classic with an NG wing is still a classic. It would have been an incremental change, not the large step forward the NG was, and it would not have matched the early A320. Technology, particularly with engines, was still advancing rapidly in the '80s and '90s, and the NG is the product of that. It's not as if Boeing was a full 15 years late in making the NG. The tech wasn't there yet.


So you're attributing the performance/payload range increase from the 300/400/500 to the NG to the engine, ie., going from a CFM56-3 to a -7, and not to the larger wing? Not sure I buy that. Imho Boeing underwinged the 300.


I'd have to agree with you Steelchair.

Aside from the engines, wings, and avionics, what else was really changed for the NG?

Also, weren't the CFM56-5B's from '95 a closer match to the -7B's? How did the -3's from '84 compare to the -5A's only from '87 (three years versus 27 to finally get the NEO engines)?

EDIT: forgot that FADEC was invented in '87 with the -5A :boxedin:


Imho the CFM56 changes were marginal, small percentage increases in efficiency. Yet the wing on the A320 is essentially unchanged from what, 1981-82? (Not sure when design freeze was.) Little wonder the 320 series has been so successful. Bravo Airbus! And for many years I was not a believer. I'll go so far as to say that the A320 series is one of the best commercial airplane designs of all time, right up there with the DC3 imho.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2543
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:59 am

1989worstyear wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Nice mark for the A320, but let's see if deliveries ever match.

Also, it can't be denied that business objectives have an effect on sales totals. Doesn't mean the A320 doesn't deserve its credit, but it doesn't mean total sales it's pure apples to apples either.



A classic with an NG wing is still a classic. It would have been an incremental change, not the large step forward the NG was, and it would not have matched the early A320. Technology, particularly with engines, was still advancing rapidly in the '80s and '90s, and the NG is the product of that. It's not as if Boeing was a full 15 years late in making the NG. The tech wasn't there yet.


So you're attributing the performance/payload range increase from the 300/400/500 to the NG to the engine, ie., going from a CFM56-3 to a -7, and not to the larger wing? Not sure I buy that. Imho Boeing underwinged the 300.


I'd have to agree with you Steelchair.

Aside from the engines, wings, and avionics, what else was really changed for the NG?

Also, weren't the CFM56-5B's from '95 a closer match to the -7B's? How did the -3's from '84 compare to the -5A's only from '87 (three years versus 27 to finally get the NEO engines)?

EDIT: forgot that FADEC was invented in '87 with the -5A :boxedin:


Yeah, a new wing and avionics are not big changes at all... You either seem to be trying to minimize Boeing's enhancements or don't realize just how much time and money goes into such changes. But seriously, even upgrading the DC-8 to CFM engines was no small task. No one seems to recognize that the original 737 was quite a good design to be able handle such large upgrades over the years. The same is being done with the A320. No one back then could have imagined it expanding into the A321XLR and possibly stretched even further in the future. Why is one ok but not the other?
 
westgate
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 6:17 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:10 am

VSMUT wrote:
ericm2031 wrote:
westgate wrote:

Slightly off topic, but what exactly was the reason why Air Canada switched to 737's from 320's? Did they get a great deal from Boeing or did they believe the aircraft to be that much more efficient? This always struck me as odd as usually airlines switch in the other direction from 737's to 320's. If what you say is true about the complaints from technical support, then I guess their decision has already come back to bite them in the backside ;-)


Probably came down to price/offer Boeing made (I believe they are taking the E190s). Performance probably isn't a huge difference, and if it is, the manufacturers can make up for it in other ways


It was widely reported at the time that Boeing made a massive discount that included the 787 delay compensations, while GE threw in a similar deal for the engines as part of the E-190 debacle. Plus Boeing taking the 20 E-190s in return. I think something like a 70% discount was floating around these forums at the time.


Oh wow, well that certainly would explain it !!! I had assumed that it would have to have been some amazing deal for them to switch their narrowbody fleet from 320's to 737's.
 
Asiaflyer
Posts: 916
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:50 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:45 am

Congrats to Airbus! A truly great achievement.

As long as Boeing doesn’t launch a 737 successor, the A320 family will continue to outsell the 737.
 
planecane
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:02 am

AlaskaA321NEO wrote:
Congrats Airbus! Although I must say I am not surprised with all the innovations Airbus has implemented in the A320 family. Not to bash Boeing but I think airbus thinks about the long term a little more, building a plane where they have options to change the engines for example without too much headache.

Anthony.

When the 737 was introduced, it was a regional jet designed for antiquated airports with little ground handling equipment. There was no way to predict that a version of it would be desired for Transatlantic flights and no way to meet its design requirements and the fantasy future variants.

I don't think Airbus innovations led to the ease of putting larger engines on it and don't think the engineers in the 1980s were future proofing it on purpose. I think it was a case of "excellence by accident" where other design considerations lead to the ground clearance that was useful 25 years later.
 
Canuck600
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:31 am

I wouldn't call the airports of that time period antiquated, the 737 was just designed for smaller loads/airports & ease of service.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5631
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 5:27 am

There has always been a penalty for being first in airliners, because the second one can do it better. And Boeing has been the victim of this more than once. First, they came out with the first modern all-metal airliner, the 247, only to be completely outclassed by the DC-2. Then the Stratoliner was upstaged by the DC-4. The Stratocruiser was never upstaged, it was just too expensive and unreliable. But Boeing only just escaped being upstaged when the DC-8 came out at 6 abreast when the 707 was going to be 5 abreast. The decision to redo the 707 was one of the gutsiest in industrial history, as up to that point Boeing had never had a successful civilian plane, and they were already producing the KC-135 with the narrower fuselage and a production run that was only supposed to be for 29 planes-the rest were to be Lockheeds. So it was an enormous gamble for them to make the 707 different.

The 737 was designed to be as low to the ground as possible for speedy loading and unloading, as jetways did not exist at that time. It did serve its purpose well, but was competing against the DC-9 as well as others that have disappeared. In the 80s the Classic came out, which was a huge improvement. But it was still hampered by the low landing gear. Then the A320 appeared about 5 years later, and was clearly superior. Boeing was doing the 744 at the time, and preparing to do the 777. They probably did not take the A320 seriously at the time, and did not until they started losing domestic orders to it. Had they jumped sooner they could have come out with a new plane, but at this point felt that updating the 737 again was their best choice. And they did a superb job; according to all I have read and according to the sales results, the 737NG and the A320 were extremely close in performance.

But then Airbus came out with the NEO, and the short landing gear of the 737 made it impossible for Boeing to pull another rabbit out of the 737 hat. And the customers were not willing to wait for a new aircraft. They came out with the MAX, which even without the MCAS problems was not the equal of the NEO the way the NG was to the original A320. So Boeing is now between a rock and a hard place; the problem all along is that they have not had technology to improve the economics of the new plane enough to justify the expense of a new plane. But the MAX debacle may force them to do it. They missed their best chance which was when the A320 first came out. But they thought at that time their main competition was the MD-80.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
art
Posts: 3471
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:51 pm

SteelChair wrote:

And for many years I was not a believer. I'll go so far as to say that the A320 series is one of the best commercial airplane designs of all time, right up there with the DC3 imho.


DC3 was an unmatchable icon, wasn't it?

Concorde also was iconic and never matched (easier since only Tupolev actually built another SST).

Somehow I don;t see the A320 as iconic as those 2. Fantastic achievement, though, and changed the world NB market from an American near monopoly into a duopoly.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:53 pm

art wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

And for many years I was not a believer. I'll go so far as to say that the A320 series is one of the best commercial airplane designs of all time, right up there with the DC3 imho.


DC3 was an unmatchable icon, wasn't it?

Concorde also was iconic and never matched (easier since only Tupolev actually built another SST).

Somehow I don;t see the A320 as iconic as those 2. Fantastic achievement, though, and changed the world NB market from an American near monopoly into a duopoly.


Concorde was a technical program imho. Not successful in any other level. Mho.

If I were ranking jet commetcial transports by their success, it would be hard for me to put anything ahead of the A320. I guess a lot of people around the world would say the 747, maybe. Maybe the 777. The DC9, 8, and 707 were all great, but none has the longevity or market success of the 320. And the 737 hasn't really been an airplane, its more of a marketing designation for 4 different airplanes with some common structure. Again, mho.
 
caljn
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:37 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:12 pm

A320FlyGuy wrote:
[quote="TTailedTiger"
.

Once the A320 hit the market, everything else was relegated to the status of “also ran”. The A320 is just about the perfect single aisle aircraft and the A321 is the ultimate evolution of the family. The A320 family is wider, quieter, preferred by passengers and crews and has set the bar pretty damn high for what a single aisle aircraft should be. I’d also go as far as saying that the A320 and it’s variants are superior in build quality when compared to the 737....I know many guys in Air Canada’s technical support division are rather disgusted with the new 737s and their dismal build quality and systems architecture compared to the A320s. Even with some airframes approaching 30 years old, these older A320s are still superior to the newer 737s.



Now you're dreaming...and extrapolating recent anecdotes of lightweight materials to reduce weight used in 787 (and 350) with alleged "superior quality in systems and architecture". One could easily find any number of tech support teams who prefer the utterly reliable 737 to "Fifi" the temperamental 320.
That said, yes Boeing does need to introduce a new product in this category.
 
Chrisba320
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:05 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:40 pm

I am a massive fan of the A320, now that is out of the way. I live in Cape Town and work in Johannesburg, I commute between the two cities weekly. Except for SAA all our domestic airlines operate the 737-800 which is what I fly most of the time. I have plenty of respect for the aircraft, it is a real workhorse and it has carried me safely on more flights than I can count. But it is such a treat to fly on the A320 sometimes, one of my most memorable flights was on the second revenue flight on a brand new A320-200 SAA took delivery of. The wider aisle, the wider, more comfortable seats, the decent space in the overhead lockers, the modern look and feel of the galleys and bathrooms, it makes a difference. We had an all female flight crew and there was just something about the way they did everything. I love how quiet it is during take off and cruise, the sound of the IAE engines and the landing in Johannesburg was one of the gentlest I’ve ever experienced. Baby Bus makes the commute a pleasure, that’s for sure. Seeing how Airbus keeps finding ways to make the best better I’m looking forward to seeing what is next for this spectacularly successful aircraft family.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14490
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:09 pm

Chrisba320 wrote:
I am a massive fan of the A320, now that is out of the way. I live in Cape Town and work in Johannesburg, I commute between the two cities weekly. Except for SAA all our domestic airlines operate the 737-800 which is what I fly most of the time. I have plenty of respect for the aircraft, it is a real workhorse and it has carried me safely on more flights than I can count. But it is such a treat to fly on the A320 sometimes, one of my most memorable flights was on the second revenue flight on a brand new A320-200 SAA took delivery of. The wider aisle, the wider, more comfortable seats, the decent space in the overhead lockers, the modern look and feel of the galleys and bathrooms, it makes a difference. We had an all female flight crew and there was just something about the way they did everything. I love how quiet it is during take off and cruise, the sound of the IAE engines and the landing in Johannesburg was one of the gentlest I’ve ever experienced. Baby Bus makes the commute a pleasure, that’s for sure. Seeing how Airbus keeps finding ways to make the best better I’m looking forward to seeing what is next for this spectacularly successful aircraft family.


Is the difference you cite one of type or one of aircraft age? On both Airbus and Boeing, the new overhead bins/lockers are brilliant and the 1990s version aren’t.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
TheOldDude
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:07 pm

SEPilot wrote:
There has always been a penalty for being first in airliners, because the second one can do it better. And Boeing has been the victim of this more than once. First, they came out with the first modern all-metal airliner, the 247, only to be completely outclassed by the DC-2. Then the Stratoliner was upstaged by the DC-4. The Stratocruiser was never upstaged, it was just too expensive and unreliable. But Boeing only just escaped being upstaged when the DC-8 came out at 6 abreast when the 707 was going to be 5 abreast. The decision to redo the 707 was one of the gutsiest in industrial history, as up to that point Boeing had never had a successful civilian plane, and they were already producing the KC-135 with the narrower fuselage and a production run that was only supposed to be for 29 planes-the rest were to be Lockheeds. So it was an enormous gamble for them to make the 707 different.

The 737 was designed to be as low to the ground as possible for speedy loading and unloading, as jetways did not exist at that time. It did serve its purpose well, but was competing against the DC-9 as well as others that have disappeared. In the 80s the Classic came out, which was a huge improvement. But it was still hampered by the low landing gear. Then the A320 appeared about 5 years later, and was clearly superior. Boeing was doing the 744 at the time, and preparing to do the 777. They probably did not take the A320 seriously at the time, and did not until they started losing domestic orders to it. Had they jumped sooner they could have come out with a new plane, but at this point felt that updating the 737 again was their best choice. And they did a superb job; according to all I have read and according to the sales results, the 737NG and the A320 were extremely close in performance.

But then Airbus came out with the NEO, and the short landing gear of the 737 made it impossible for Boeing to pull another rabbit out of the 737 hat. And the customers were not willing to wait for a new aircraft. They came out with the MAX, which even without the MCAS problems was not the equal of the NEO the way the NG was to the original A320. So Boeing is now between a rock and a hard place; the problem all along is that they have not had technology to improve the economics of the new plane enough to justify the expense of a new plane. But the MAX debacle may force them to do it. They missed their best chance which was when the A320 first came out. But they thought at that time their main competition was the MD-80.


I like the history. I too suspect that Boing has reached the end of the line in terms of economics with the 737. Their next move should be a clean sheet. If Airbus is smart (and I think they are) they will eat their young and introduce a clean sheet as well.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:43 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
Chrisba320 wrote:
I am a massive fan of the A320, now that is out of the way. I live in Cape Town and work in Johannesburg, I commute between the two cities weekly. Except for SAA all our domestic airlines operate the 737-800 which is what I fly most of the time. I have plenty of respect for the aircraft, it is a real workhorse and it has carried me safely on more flights than I can count. But it is such a treat to fly on the A320 sometimes, one of my most memorable flights was on the second revenue flight on a brand new A320-200 SAA took delivery of. The wider aisle, the wider, more comfortable seats, the decent space in the overhead lockers, the modern look and feel of the galleys and bathrooms, it makes a difference. We had an all female flight crew and there was just something about the way they did everything. I love how quiet it is during take off and cruise, the sound of the IAE engines and the landing in Johannesburg was one of the gentlest I’ve ever experienced. Baby Bus makes the commute a pleasure, that’s for sure. Seeing how Airbus keeps finding ways to make the best better I’m looking forward to seeing what is next for this spectacularly successful aircraft family.


Is the difference you cite one of type or one of aircraft age? On both Airbus and Boeing, the new overhead bins/lockers are brilliant and the 1990s version aren’t.


As much as I like the A320, I think a lot of people seem to forget it's a 31 year old design for some reason.

In fact, the doors and entryways near the galleys have remained the same since '87, even with the enhanced interior. It's a pretty stark contrast between the pax cabin (which looks quite nice IMHO) versus obvious 1987 hair metal era styling.
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5631
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 7:07 pm

TheOldDude wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
There has always been a penalty for being first in airliners, because the second one can do it better. And Boeing has been the victim of this more than once. First, they came out with the first modern all-metal airliner, the 247, only to be completely outclassed by the DC-2. Then the Stratoliner was upstaged by the DC-4. The Stratocruiser was never upstaged, it was just too expensive and unreliable. But Boeing only just escaped being upstaged when the DC-8 came out at 6 abreast when the 707 was going to be 5 abreast. The decision to redo the 707 was one of the gutsiest in industrial history, as up to that point Boeing had never had a successful civilian plane, and they were already producing the KC-135 with the narrower fuselage and a production run that was only supposed to be for 29 planes-the rest were to be Lockheeds. So it was an enormous gamble for them to make the 707 different.

The 737 was designed to be as low to the ground as possible for speedy loading and unloading, as jetways did not exist at that time. It did serve its purpose well, but was competing against the DC-9 as well as others that have disappeared. In the 80s the Classic came out, which was a huge improvement. But it was still hampered by the low landing gear. Then the A320 appeared about 5 years later, and was clearly superior. Boeing was doing the 744 at the time, and preparing to do the 777. They probably did not take the A320 seriously at the time, and did not until they started losing domestic orders to it. Had they jumped sooner they could have come out with a new plane, but at this point felt that updating the 737 again was their best choice. And they did a superb job; according to all I have read and according to the sales results, the 737NG and the A320 were extremely close in performance.

But then Airbus came out with the NEO, and the short landing gear of the 737 made it impossible for Boeing to pull another rabbit out of the 737 hat. And the customers were not willing to wait for a new aircraft. They came out with the MAX, which even without the MCAS problems was not the equal of the NEO the way the NG was to the original A320. So Boeing is now between a rock and a hard place; the problem all along is that they have not had technology to improve the economics of the new plane enough to justify the expense of a new plane. But the MAX debacle may force them to do it. They missed their best chance which was when the A320 first came out. But they thought at that time their main competition was the MD-80.


I like the history. I too suspect that Boing has reached the end of the line in terms of economics with the 737. Their next move should be a clean sheet. If Airbus is smart (and I think they are) they will eat their young and introduce a clean sheet as well.

The business case for Airbus to do a clean sheet replacement of the A320 is much less compelling. What can they do to improve? CFRP technology does not give the benefits on a narrowbody that it does on a wide body, at least at this point. Boeing will probably use it on the NSA, and we will see what they come up with. However, if Boeing succeeds with it, and is able to bring manufacturing costs down so that they can have a price advantage, that will give Airbus a reason. It is not certain, though, that it will. It may lower maintenance costs, but whether or not that will be enough to tip the balance is uncertain. But right now Boeing needs to do it just to stay in the game. Airbus doesn’t yet.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
SanDiegoLover
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:24 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:56 pm

I was working for NWA in MSP when the first A320s started showing up. I flew on it non-rev soon after and was amazed how quiet it was compared to the 727-200s. NWA bought the A320s to replace their 727-200s. I remember a number of the mechanics whining about them that they’d never be a Boeing. Not to mention people complaining that the A320s didn’t have ashtrays throughout. Airbus along with Mr. Leahy deserve a ton of credit. Airbus was extremely aggressive and customer centric. If I remember correctly NWA got the first 10 A320s with a full money back guarantee if they didn’t work. NWA loved the first 10 and went on to order 100 in that one go.

The big order that shocked Boeing was Wolf’s order of 130 Airbus with options for 300 more at USAirways. I believe this was 1997/98. This was unprecedented.

The next major coup for Airbus in the US was JetBlue’s original order of 75 A320s in 1999. This order was Boeing’s to lose, but Boeing went out of their way to lose this order. JetBlue has now taken delivery of almost 200 Airbus A320 family.

Airbus with John Leahy and the A320 changed the industry in how narrow body aircraft are sold. Say what you will about John, he was a fantastic sales guy. I met him twice, and he remembered my name without prompting, and I was a nobody back then. The man appeared to love his job as much as he loved the product he sold.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20086
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sat Nov 16, 2019 10:58 pm

SEPilot wrote:
TheOldDude wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
There has always been a penalty for being first in airliners, because the second one can do it better. And Boeing has been the victim of this more than once. First, they came out with the first modern all-metal airliner, the 247, only to be completely outclassed by the DC-2. Then the Stratoliner was upstaged by the DC-4. The Stratocruiser was never upstaged, it was just too expensive and unreliable. But Boeing only just escaped being upstaged when the DC-8 came out at 6 abreast when the 707 was going to be 5 abreast. The decision to redo the 707 was one of the gutsiest in industrial history, as up to that point Boeing had never had a successful civilian plane, and they were already producing the KC-135 with the narrower fuselage and a production run that was only supposed to be for 29 planes-the rest were to be Lockheeds. So it was an enormous gamble for them to make the 707 different.

The 737 was designed to be as low to the ground as possible for speedy loading and unloading, as jetways did not exist at that time. It did serve its purpose well, but was competing against the DC-9 as well as others that have disappeared. In the 80s the Classic came out, which was a huge improvement. But it was still hampered by the low landing gear. Then the A320 appeared about 5 years later, and was clearly superior. Boeing was doing the 744 at the time, and preparing to do the 777. They probably did not take the A320 seriously at the time, and did not until they started losing domestic orders to it. Had they jumped sooner they could have come out with a new plane, but at this point felt that updating the 737 again was their best choice. And they did a superb job; according to all I have read and according to the sales results, the 737NG and the A320 were extremely close in performance.

But then Airbus came out with the NEO, and the short landing gear of the 737 made it impossible for Boeing to pull another rabbit out of the 737 hat. And the customers were not willing to wait for a new aircraft. They came out with the MAX, which even without the MCAS problems was not the equal of the NEO the way the NG was to the original A320. So Boeing is now between a rock and a hard place; the problem all along is that they have not had technology to improve the economics of the new plane enough to justify the expense of a new plane. But the MAX debacle may force them to do it. They missed their best chance which was when the A320 first came out. But they thought at that time their main competition was the MD-80.


I like the history. I too suspect that Boing has reached the end of the line in terms of economics with the 737. Their next move should be a clean sheet. If Airbus is smart (and I think they are) they will eat their young and introduce a clean sheet as well.

The business case for Airbus to do a clean sheet replacement of the A320 is much less compelling. What can they do to improve? CFRP technology does not give the benefits on a narrowbody that it does on a wide body, at least at this point. Boeing will probably use it on the NSA, and we will see what they come up with. However, if Boeing succeeds with it, and is able to bring manufacturing costs down so that they can have a price advantage, that will give Airbus a reason. It is not certain, though, that it will. It may lower maintenance costs, but whether or not that will be enough to tip the balance is uncertain. But right now Boeing needs to do it just to stay in the game. Airbus doesn’t yet.

The A320 sold well as it brought technologies that improved, but do not assume their aren't technologies out there that cannot be retrofitted:
1. Electrical subsystems. About a 3% fuel burn savings despite a ton increase in weight.
2. CFRP wing. Reduces weight, alliws easier underside laminar flow, and practically immune to wear and tear if the impact sacrificial layers are done right. There is a reason the 787 is certified for more cycles than the A220 and more hours than any other commercial aircraft. About a 3% drop in fuel burn at a $2 billion cost.
3. Folding wingtips to add even more underside laminar flow. Another 3%.

Then the way the nacelle anti ice isn't as durable as all electric subsystems. While at it, the new gearbox would drop fuel burn 3.5%, but needs taller gear.

The A321 has the wrong winv. Seriously, a wing optimized for 75 minute missions flying TATL?!? I can do it, but a proper wingspan would not only reduce the above 3%, but another 4% just by getting up in thinner air (less drag).

However, Airbus should focus on automating A320 production and reducing cost. At this time Airbus controls the more technologically advanced competition that needs production help, PiPs, part support, and needed direly more orders pre-Airbus.

So the A320 is safe for now. Don't pretend better isn't available. But is there a business case, with how well the A320 sells, to invest $9 billion in a new aircraft and $5 billion in new factory automation or automate A320 production?

For myself, the answer is easy, automate A320.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5631
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 12:13 am

lightsaber wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
TheOldDude wrote:

I like the history. I too suspect that Boing has reached the end of the line in terms of economics with the 737. Their next move should be a clean sheet. If Airbus is smart (and I think they are) they will eat their young and introduce a clean sheet as well.

The business case for Airbus to do a clean sheet replacement of the A320 is much less compelling. What can they do to improve? CFRP technology does not give the benefits on a narrowbody that it does on a wide body, at least at this point. Boeing will probably use it on the NSA, and we will see what they come up with. However, if Boeing succeeds with it, and is able to bring manufacturing costs down so that they can have a price advantage, that will give Airbus a reason. It is not certain, though, that it will. It may lower maintenance costs, but whether or not that will be enough to tip the balance is uncertain. But right now Boeing needs to do it just to stay in the game. Airbus doesn’t yet.

The A320 sold well as it brought technologies that improved, but do not assume their aren't technologies out there that cannot be retrofitted:
1. Electrical subsystems. About a 3% fuel burn savings despite a ton increase in weight.
2. CFRP wing. Reduces weight, alliws easier underside laminar flow, and practically immune to wear and tear if the impact sacrificial layers are done right. There is a reason the 787 is certified for more cycles than the A220 and more hours than any other commercial aircraft. About a 3% drop in fuel burn at a $2 billion cost.
3. Folding wingtips to add even more underside laminar flow. Another 3%.

Then the way the nacelle anti ice isn't as durable as all electric subsystems. While at it, the new gearbox would drop fuel burn 3.5%, but needs taller gear.

The A321 has the wrong winv. Seriously, a wing optimized for 75 minute missions flying TATL?!? I can do it, but a proper wingspan would not only reduce the above 3%, but another 4% just by getting up in thinner air (less drag).

However, Airbus should focus on automating A320 production and reducing cost. At this time Airbus controls the more technologically advanced competition that needs production help, PiPs, part support, and needed direly more orders pre-Airbus.

So the A320 is safe for now. Don't pretend better isn't available. But is there a business case, with how well the A320 sells, to invest $9 billion in a new aircraft and $5 billion in new factory automation or automate A320 production?

For myself, the answer is easy, automate A320.

Lightsaber

Yes, I agree. There is a lot Airbus can do with the existing A320 that can be done without starting over. The 737, not so much.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
mjoelnir
Topic Author
Posts: 9387
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 12:25 am

lightsaber wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
TheOldDude wrote:

I like the history. I too suspect that Boing has reached the end of the line in terms of economics with the 737. Their next move should be a clean sheet. If Airbus is smart (and I think they are) they will eat their young and introduce a clean sheet as well.

The business case for Airbus to do a clean sheet replacement of the A320 is much less compelling. What can they do to improve? CFRP technology does not give the benefits on a narrowbody that it does on a wide body, at least at this point. Boeing will probably use it on the NSA, and we will see what they come up with. However, if Boeing succeeds with it, and is able to bring manufacturing costs down so that they can have a price advantage, that will give Airbus a reason. It is not certain, though, that it will. It may lower maintenance costs, but whether or not that will be enough to tip the balance is uncertain. But right now Boeing needs to do it just to stay in the game. Airbus doesn’t yet.

The A320 sold well as it brought technologies that improved, but do not assume their aren't technologies out there that cannot be retrofitted:
1. Electrical subsystems. About a 3% fuel burn savings despite a ton increase in weight.
2. CFRP wing. Reduces weight, alliws easier underside laminar flow, and practically immune to wear and tear if the impact sacrificial layers are done right. There is a reason the 787 is certified for more cycles than the A220 and more hours than any other commercial aircraft. About a 3% drop in fuel burn at a $2 billion cost.
3. Folding wingtips to add even more underside laminar flow. Another 3%.

Then the way the nacelle anti ice isn't as durable as all electric subsystems. While at it, the new gearbox would drop fuel burn 3.5%, but needs taller gear.

The A321 has the wrong winv. Seriously, a wing optimized for 75 minute missions flying TATL?!? I can do it, but a proper wingspan would not only reduce the above 3%, but another 4% just by getting up in thinner air (less drag).

However, Airbus should focus on automating A320 production and reducing cost. At this time Airbus controls the more technologically advanced competition that needs production help, PiPs, part support, and needed direly more orders pre-Airbus.

So the A320 is safe for now. Don't pretend better isn't available. But is there a business case, with how well the A320 sells, to invest $9 billion in a new aircraft and $5 billion in new factory automation or automate A320 production?

For myself, the answer is easy, automate A320.

Lightsaber


First I want to disagree with one statement, it is completely unproven that electrical subsystems bring a 3 % savings on fuel. The view at Airbus regarding bleed against electrical driven air compressors was in regards to the A350, that it added complexity with an improvement well inside 1 % if any.
That does not mean, that it does not pay to exchange for example hydraulics for electrics in certain applications.
The main aim at Airbus for going electric is saving weight.

I think it is underrated how much work Airbus is doing on the A320 family in regards to continually improvement.
One of the big points is the increased use of 3 D printing, mainly to safe weight, in regards titanium it can also reduce cost.
Upgrades to the avionics. Functions being moved down the line from the A380 and A350.

Airbus i in the process of moving systems from hydraulic to electric, but it is mostly not a question of efficiency, but of weight. Airbus has been test flying a wing on the A320 test frame where the actuators were elektrohydraulic instead of hydraulic. The resulting replacement of hydraulic piping with electric cables lead to a considerable weight reduction.
There are quite a few technologies ready to be moved to the A320, but I think, that yes as it is, all power goes into streamlining and modernizing the production process and upping the production rates. But once that is done we will see quite a few changes done to the A320 family frames.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20086
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 12:38 am

mjoelnir wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
The business case for Airbus to do a clean sheet replacement of the A320 is much less compelling. What can they do to improve? CFRP technology does not give the benefits on a narrowbody that it does on a wide body, at least at this point. Boeing will probably use it on the NSA, and we will see what they come up with. However, if Boeing succeeds with it, and is able to bring manufacturing costs down so that they can have a price advantage, that will give Airbus a reason. It is not certain, though, that it will. It may lower maintenance costs, but whether or not that will be enough to tip the balance is uncertain. But right now Boeing needs to do it just to stay in the game. Airbus doesn’t yet.

The A320 sold well as it brought technologies that improved, but do not assume their aren't technologies out there that cannot be retrofitted:
1. Electrical subsystems. About a 3% fuel burn savings despite a ton increase in weight.
2. CFRP wing. Reduces weight, alliws easier underside laminar flow, and practically immune to wear and tear if the impact sacrificial layers are done right. There is a reason the 787 is certified for more cycles than the A220 and more hours than any other commercial aircraft. About a 3% drop in fuel burn at a $2 billion cost.
3. Folding wingtips to add even more underside laminar flow. Another 3%.

Then the way the nacelle anti ice isn't as durable as all electric subsystems. While at it, the new gearbox would drop fuel burn 3.5%, but needs taller gear.

The A321 has the wrong winv. Seriously, a wing optimized for 75 minute missions flying TATL?!? I can do it, but a proper wingspan would not only reduce the above 3%, but another 4% just by getting up in thinner air (less drag).

However, Airbus should focus on automating A320 production and reducing cost. At this time Airbus controls the more technologically advanced competition that needs production help, PiPs, part support, and needed direly more orders pre-Airbus.

So the A320 is safe for now. Don't pretend better isn't available. But is there a business case, with how well the A320 sells, to invest $9 billion in a new aircraft and $5 billion in new factory automation or automate A320 production?

For myself, the answer is easy, automate A320.

Lightsaber


First I want to disagree with one statement, it is completely unproven that electrical subsystems bring a 3 % savings on fuel. The view at Airbus regarding bleed against electrical driven air compressors was in regards to the A350, that it added complexity with an improvement well inside 1 % if any.
That does not mean, that it does not pay to exchange for example hydraulics for electrics in certain applications.
The main aim at Airbus for going electric is saving weight.

I think it is underrated how much work Airbus is doing on the A320 family in regards to continually improvement.
One of the big points is the increased use of 3 D printing, mainly to safe weight, in regards titanium it can also reduce cost.
Upgrades to the avionics. Functions being moved down the line from the A380 and A350.

Airbus i in the process of moving systems from hydraulic to electric, but it is mostly not a question of efficiency, but of weight. Airbus has been test flying a wing on the A320 test frame where the actuators were elektrohydraulic instead of hydraulic. The resulting replacement of hydraulic piping with electric cables lead to a considerable weight reduction.
There are quite a few technologies ready to be moved to the A320, but I think, that yes as it is, all power goes into streamlining and modernizing the production process and upping the production rates. But once that is done we will see quite a few changes done to the A320 family frames.

We will have to disagree on electrical subsystems. My experience is they are so much better for maintenance and save fuel when done right for cabin pressurization/HVAC, anti-ice, some actuators (but not others).

I believe the A320 has no competition, so wait for more technology. I am a fan of the PW1100G, so I am well aware of continuous improvement. I work for an airframer who has determined that CFRP is advantageous even down to small 20m wingspan drones for weight, but we have so very advanced CFRP prototypes flying.

So from a business case, I see Airbus continuing to improve the A320. Until Boeing (let us be honest, there is no other viable competition) develops the NSA. I've seen studies on the good and the bad of 787 maintenance. My opinion is the corner has been turned.

Order of cost to develop and certify:
1. Pneumatic (cheapest)
2. Hydraulic
3. Electric

Order of maintenance cost, once debugged:
1. Electric
2. Hydraulic
3. Pneumatic

It is all about the scale (paying off development costs) and timeline (reaping maintenance savings).

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 12:58 am

mjoelnir wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
The business case for Airbus to do a clean sheet replacement of the A320 is much less compelling. What can they do to improve? CFRP technology does not give the benefits on a narrowbody that it does on a wide body, at least at this point. Boeing will probably use it on the NSA, and we will see what they come up with. However, if Boeing succeeds with it, and is able to bring manufacturing costs down so that they can have a price advantage, that will give Airbus a reason. It is not certain, though, that it will. It may lower maintenance costs, but whether or not that will be enough to tip the balance is uncertain. But right now Boeing needs to do it just to stay in the game. Airbus doesn’t yet.

The A320 sold well as it brought technologies that improved, but do not assume their aren't technologies out there that cannot be retrofitted:
1. Electrical subsystems. About a 3% fuel burn savings despite a ton increase in weight.
2. CFRP wing. Reduces weight, alliws easier underside laminar flow, and practically immune to wear and tear if the impact sacrificial layers are done right. There is a reason the 787 is certified for more cycles than the A220 and more hours than any other commercial aircraft. About a 3% drop in fuel burn at a $2 billion cost.
3. Folding wingtips to add even more underside laminar flow. Another 3%.

Then the way the nacelle anti ice isn't as durable as all electric subsystems. While at it, the new gearbox would drop fuel burn 3.5%, but needs taller gear.

The A321 has the wrong winv. Seriously, a wing optimized for 75 minute missions flying TATL?!? I can do it, but a proper wingspan would not only reduce the above 3%, but another 4% just by getting up in thinner air (less drag).

However, Airbus should focus on automating A320 production and reducing cost. At this time Airbus controls the more technologically advanced competition that needs production help, PiPs, part support, and needed direly more orders pre-Airbus.

So the A320 is safe for now. Don't pretend better isn't available. But is there a business case, with how well the A320 sells, to invest $9 billion in a new aircraft and $5 billion in new factory automation or automate A320 production?

For myself, the answer is easy, automate A320.

Lightsaber


First I want to disagree with one statement, it is completely unproven that electrical subsystems bring a 3 % savings on fuel. The view at Airbus regarding bleed against electrical driven air compressors was in regards to the A350, that it added complexity with an improvement well inside 1 % if any.
That does not mean, that it does not pay to exchange for example hydraulics for electrics in certain applications.
The main aim at Airbus for going electric is saving weight.

I think it is underrated how much work Airbus is doing on the A320 family in regards to continually improvement.
One of the big points is the increased use of 3 D printing, mainly to safe weight, in regards titanium it can also reduce cost.
Upgrades to the avionics. Functions being moved down the line from the A380 and A350.

Airbus i in the process of moving systems from hydraulic to electric, but it is mostly not a question of efficiency, but of weight. Airbus has been test flying a wing on the A320 test frame where the actuators were elektrohydraulic instead of hydraulic. The resulting replacement of hydraulic piping with electric cables lead to a considerable weight reduction.
There are quite a few technologies ready to be moved to the A320, but I think, that yes as it is, all power goes into streamlining and modernizing the production process and upping the production rates. But once that is done we will see quite a few changes done to the A320 family frames.


"Continual improvement" is not unique to the A320. The 763 has been continually improved since 1986, but orders disappeared 20 years ago.

I think the root cause is - Gen X and Y managers and engineers simply want to stick with the status quo. Nobody has been willing to try anything new in the NB field after 1988, and therefore, the 31 year old A320-200 remains the NB king.

This industry is going to be in a world of hurt in 15 years now that certain European countries are getting serious with carbon taxes. A 1988 (or 60s-2000's hybrid) airframe will not help this.
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
SanDiegoLover
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:24 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:13 am

lightsaber wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
The A320 sold well as it brought technologies that improved, but do not assume their aren't technologies out there that cannot be retrofitted:
1. Electrical subsystems. About a 3% fuel burn savings despite a ton increase in weight.
2. CFRP wing. Reduces weight, alliws easier underside laminar flow, and practically immune to wear and tear if the impact sacrificial layers are done right. There is a reason the 787 is certified for more cycles than the A220 and more hours than any other commercial aircraft. About a 3% drop in fuel burn at a $2 billion cost.
3. Folding wingtips to add even more underside laminar flow. Another 3%.

Then the way the nacelle anti ice isn't as durable as all electric subsystems. While at it, the new gearbox would drop fuel burn 3.5%, but needs taller gear.

The A321 has the wrong winv. Seriously, a wing optimized for 75 minute missions flying TATL?!? I can do it, but a proper wingspan would not only reduce the above 3%, but another 4% just by getting up in thinner air (less drag).

However, Airbus should focus on automating A320 production and reducing cost. At this time Airbus controls the more technologically advanced competition that needs production help, PiPs, part support, and needed direly more orders pre-Airbus.

So the A320 is safe for now. Don't pretend better isn't available. But is there a business case, with how well the A320 sells, to invest $9 billion in a new aircraft and $5 billion in new factory automation or automate A320 production?

For myself, the answer is easy, automate A320.

Lightsaber


First I want to disagree with one statement, it is completely unproven that electrical subsystems bring a 3 % savings on fuel. The view at Airbus regarding bleed against electrical driven air compressors was in regards to the A350, that it added complexity with an improvement well inside 1 % if any.
That does not mean, that it does not pay to exchange for example hydraulics for electrics in certain applications.
The main aim at Airbus for going electric is saving weight.

I think it is underrated how much work Airbus is doing on the A320 family in regards to continually improvement.
One of the big points is the increased use of 3 D printing, mainly to safe weight, in regards titanium it can also reduce cost.
Upgrades to the avionics. Functions being moved down the line from the A380 and A350.

Airbus i in the process of moving systems from hydraulic to electric, but it is mostly not a question of efficiency, but of weight. Airbus has been test flying a wing on the A320 test frame where the actuators were elektrohydraulic instead of hydraulic. The resulting replacement of hydraulic piping with electric cables lead to a considerable weight reduction.
There are quite a few technologies ready to be moved to the A320, but I think, that yes as it is, all power goes into streamlining and modernizing the production process and upping the production rates. But once that is done we will see quite a few changes done to the A320 family frames.

We will have to disagree on electrical subsystems. My experience is they are so much better for maintenance and save fuel when done right for cabin pressurization/HVAC, anti-ice, some actuators (but not others).

I believe the A320 has no competition, so wait for more technology. I am a fan of the PW1100G, so I am well aware of continuous improvement. I work for an airframer who has determined that CFRP is advantageous even down to small 20m wingspan drones for weight, but we have so very advanced CFRP prototypes flying.

So from a business case, I see Airbus continuing to improve the A320. Until Boeing (let us be honest, there is no other viable competition) develops the NSA. I've seen studies on the good and the bad of 787 maintenance. My opinion is the corner has been turned.

Order of cost to develop and certify:
1. Pneumatic (cheapest)
2. Hydraulic
3. Electric

Order of maintenance cost, once debugged:
1. Electric
2. Hydraulic
3. Pneumatic

It is all about the scale (paying off development costs) and timeline (reaping maintenance savings).

Lightsaber


I’m assuming whenever the “ultra fan” is ready, probably 2028ish, Airbus should rewing the A320 family, with the standard model being based on the A321, the A320 the shrink, and add a simple stretch for an A322 seating 24 to 30 more passengers than the current A321.

As far as folding wingtips, CFRP, laminar flow wings, etc...will all depend on what the price of oil is. If oil is steady at around an inflation adjusted $60 as today is one thing. $120 per barrel is another matter. And if it’s $180 per barrel plus carbon taxes, is entirely a different thing. Building airliners is a tricky balancing act of efficiency vs dependability vs cost. Add to that you have to predict 10 and 15 years into the future.
 
Aviation737
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2018 1:53 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:11 am

It's been a sad year as a Boeing fan...
But nonetheless congratz to Airbus!!!
 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 901
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:17 am

mjoelnir wrote:
Total orders for the A320 family stand now at 15,193 frames against 15,136 frames for the 737.

That last order by Indigo for 300 neos pushed them past the B737

80 A318
1,486 A319ceo
36 A319neo
4,770 A320ceo
3,880 A320neo
1,799 A321ceo
3,142 A321neo
15,193

36 A319neo
3,880 A320neo
3,142 A321neo
7,058

The original B737, that used the B727 engines delivered 1125 jets from 28. Dec. 1967 until 8. Aug. 1988 and essentially predated the A320 family. The "classic" series of B737 started deliveries on 28. Nov. 1984. The A320 program launched in March 1984 was built to compete with the "classic" B737. It would be more appropriate to not count the original 1125 jets in making a comparison.

A fairer comparison would be
8135 A320ceo family orders (which contained some substantial improvements although none identified as a next generation)
8901 B737 classic and next generation model orders

4931 Max orders
7058 Neo orders
 
spacecookie
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:05 am

I don’t think that the a320 is a superior plane so does not some of the most important operators in Europe like ryr, and as a passenger I think the 737 ages better. But we have to give Airbus the credit to intruduce an all new plane and capture a lot of market to overtake Boeing on the single aisle 737/320 market ! What should hurt Boeing a lot is that companies like aa is full airbus (in the 737/320) segment

For us passengers, I the end we benefit from competition.
The sales number is not only the quality of the product it is also sales strategy and here airbus did a better job.
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 527
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 2:33 pm

I think it is more correct to compare A320ceo family deliveries to 737NG family deliveries. Year of first delivery in parenthesis.

A318 (2003) - 80
A319 (1996) - 1479
A320-200 (1989) - 4725*
A321-200 (1997) - 1698*
= 7982 deliveries

* excluding "first generation", A320-100 and A321-100

737-600 (1998) - 69
737-700 (1997) - 1258**
737-800 (1998) - 5126**
737-900/ER (2001) - 564**
= 7017 deliveries

** including military variants, business jets and freighter aircraft

Even in the NG/ceo-generation it is the A321 that makes the difference. With the MAX/neo-generation the strength of the A321, compared to the MAX 9/10, is even more obvious.

Boeing should launch a new narrowbody family as soon as possible, not necessarily to replace the MAX, but to extent the company's product offerings. Airbus has two mainline narrowbody families. Boeing should too, and should do so before the A220 family becomes strong competitor.
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 6:09 pm

Go Airbus!
R.I.P. Douglas Aircraft Company
Born 22 July 1921 | Died 23 May 2006
You will be missed, but your management will not.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1433
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:00 pm

Does anyone know how many MAX 9 deliveries there have been? I can't find MAX deliveries broken down by subtype (7, 8, 9, 10)
According to the wiki page there are only 474 9s and 521 10s on order, about 1/3 of
3,124 321NEO orders.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1771
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:34 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Does anyone know how many MAX 9 deliveries there have been? I can't find MAX deliveries broken down by subtype (7, 8, 9, 10)
According to the wiki page there are only 474 9s and 521 10s on order, about 1/3 of
3,124 321NEO orders.

MAX7 has yet to enter service.
MAX8 has been delivered;
MAX200 has yet to enter service;
MAX9 has been delivered;
MAX10 has yet to enter service.
It is indeed surprising that even Boeing doesn't split its MAX Delivery Sheet into MAX8 & MAX9 as they've done for the other variants.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2543
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:11 pm

spacecookie wrote:
I don’t think that the a320 is a superior plane so does not some of the most important operators in Europe like ryr, and as a passenger I think the 737 ages better. But we have to give Airbus the credit to intruduce an all new plane and capture a lot of market to overtake Boeing on the single aisle 737/320 market ! What should hurt Boeing a lot is that companies like aa is full airbus (in the 737/320) segment

For us passengers, I the end we benefit from competition.
The sales number is not only the quality of the product it is also sales strategy and here airbus did a better job.


Agreed. The sky interior on the 737 is very nice. And United has 18 inch seats on their 737-Max9 aircraft.
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 283
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:20 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
spacecookie wrote:
I don’t think that the a320 is a superior plane so does not some of the most important operators in Europe like ryr, and as a passenger I think the 737 ages better. But we have to give Airbus the credit to intruduce an all new plane and capture a lot of market to overtake Boeing on the single aisle 737/320 market ! What should hurt Boeing a lot is that companies like aa is full airbus (in the 737/320) segment

For us passengers, I the end we benefit from competition.
The sales number is not only the quality of the product it is also sales strategy and here airbus did a better job.


Agreed. The sky interior on the 737 is very nice. And United has 18 inch seats on their 737-Max9 aircraft.


I’m curious as to how you can say the aircraft with the narrower fuselage and narrower seats is a better aircraft?
My other car is an A320-200
 
Canuck600
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Tue Nov 19, 2019 3:46 am

Only when both programs have shut down will you able to determine who one in sales. Right now all it would take is for another big Boeing sale for them to be back in the lead.
 
AvFanNJ
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 9:47 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Tue Nov 19, 2019 4:06 am

Caluma350 wrote: "As an airline it is far more attractive to have a fleet of A320 as the aircraft overall has been far more efficient in terms of reliability." Not to take away from the A320 family's spectacular achievement but if you're going to post a claim like this as gospel, you really need to validate it with a link to a corroborating link. Here's hoping you can supply those statistics.

twaconnie wrote: "Boeing is slowly falling behind they need something new and better." This is indisputable. The MAX needs to be the last 737 iteration. Boeing needs to innovate to replace the MAX as soon as is practical. They need to field an all-new design with dramatically lower fuel costs to win customers back. May I humbly suggest their recent transonic truss braced wing concept with hybrid turbine electric propulsion as a promising contender?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13305
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Tue Nov 19, 2019 6:23 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
And United has 18 inch seats on their 737-Max9 aircraft.


Do they? Their website disagrees with SeatGuru on that (which is utterly unreliable for both width and pitch).
https://www.united.com/ual/de/de/fly/tr ... html#max-9

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2543
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Tue Nov 19, 2019 6:32 am

tommy1808 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
And United has 18 inch seats on their 737-Max9 aircraft.


Do they? Their website disagrees with SeatGuru on that (which is utterly unreliable for both width and pitch).
https://www.united.com/ual/de/de/fly/tr ... html#max-9

best regards
Thomas


Forbes also says that UA's 737 Max 9 has 18 in seat width.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgol ... bbb2fb267c
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1863
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Tue Nov 19, 2019 6:33 am

As I see it, the 737 will definitely not be the most successful NB of this generation. It was only a question of time, until the A320 would overtake it despite being available two decades less. The next chance for Boeing to break the absolute jet airliners sales record will be NSA.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13305
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: A320 family overtakes 737 family in total orders

Tue Nov 19, 2019 6:36 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
And United has 18 inch seats on their 737-Max9 aircraft.


Do they? Their website disagrees with SeatGuru on that (which is utterly unreliable for both width and pitch).
https://www.united.com/ual/de/de/fly/tr ... html#max-9

best regards
Thomas


Forbes also says that UA's 737 Max 9 has 18 in seat width.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgol ... bbb2fb267c


I would think the airline knows better. Can´t be a copy and paste error either, since it is different from the other 737. United doesn´t even have 18" seats on the A320, and that is wide enough to install them.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6

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