• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 25
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1483
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:19 pm

JerseyFlyer wrote:
I wonder if RR will have a new engine offering in time for whatever Boeing decides to do. Their decision a year or so ago to pull out of the NMA competition looks good with hindsight.

RR will have the ultrafan 2.0 certified and 100% Reliable by the time Boeing makes up their mind.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:45 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
JerseyFlyer wrote:
I wonder if RR will have a new engine offering in time for whatever Boeing decides to do. Their decision a year or so ago to pull out of the NMA competition looks good with hindsight.

RR will have the ultrafan 2.0 certified and 100% Reliable by the time Boeing makes up their mind.


back to the future! Horray! :-)))))
Murphy is an optimist
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:46 pm

WIederling wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
JerseyFlyer wrote:
I wonder if RR will have a new engine offering in time for whatever Boeing decides to do. Their decision a year or so ago to pull out of the NMA competition looks good with hindsight.

RR will have the ultrafan 2.0 certified and 100% Reliable by the time Boeing makes up their mind.


back to the future! Horray! :-)))))


:lol:
NL: Bij de landing is full reverse het leukst!

EN: Full reverse is the best at touchdown!
 
incitatus
Posts: 3337
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:12 pm

DanniS wrote:
I know I'm turning into a broken record already, but I think that's a tad unfair. Widebodies have ostensibly been the favored plane for TATL and other long haul flight types. Widebodies have the cargo space both for cargo and for amenities and food. And, while it's obvious Boeing's putting a LOT of great work into their new wing design, I don't know if you could apply it to a widebody, and then mounting the engines on those "flimsy" things... Or would you prefer the big engines on-body as a passenger? :P

There's still a lot of work to do in aerospace engineering. Putting a lot of new tech together at once is very, very risky.


But there hasn't been a narrow body that can offer significant coverage of the transatlantic market. The 757 had a very limited envelope. United wanted to use it in routes for which its range was not adequate, such as TXL-EWR.

Most passenger airlines (not all, I agree) see cargo as a mere add-on. Their business is to fly passengers and their presence in the cargo market is just a byproduct of empty cargo holds. As for amenities of a wide-body, I do not understand what is meant. What matters is personal space. Those that can afford upgrade from an A380 to a Gulfstream. There is nothing extra intrinsic of the wider cabin of a commercial aircraft layout that makes passengers demand it.
I do not consume Murdoch products including the Wall Street Journal
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:13 pm

scbriml wrote:
DanniS wrote:
All-composite construction, the Truss-Braced Wing (supposedly up to 60% more efficient than current designs), new engines, and filling out the full wingspan of the C-Class aircraft slot.


Where does this "supposedly" 60% figure come from? I haven't seen Boeing or NASA claim that.

It seems I conflated the wing vs. total plane design gains. Apologies.

Chicago-based Boeing said it tweaked the plane's designs with an optimised truss and a modified wing sweep that allow it to fly at speeds of Mach .8, or about 965 km per hour, slightly faster than previous designs but on par with current passenger jetliners.

Boeing said the jet ideally would reduce fuel burn by 60 per cent compared to an aircraft in 2005, but said it did not have final data to compare the fuel savings to present-day aircraft.

https://www.traveller.com.au/boeing-unv ... ngs-h19wn0
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:18 pm

incitatus wrote:
DanniS wrote:
I know I'm turning into a broken record already, but I think that's a tad unfair. Widebodies have ostensibly been the favored plane for TATL and other long haul flight types. Widebodies have the cargo space both for cargo and for amenities and food. And, while it's obvious Boeing's putting a LOT of great work into their new wing design, I don't know if you could apply it to a widebody, and then mounting the engines on those "flimsy" things... Or would you prefer the big engines on-body as a passenger? :P

There's still a lot of work to do in aerospace engineering. Putting a lot of new tech together at once is very, very risky.


But there hasn't been a narrow body that can offer significant coverage of the transatlantic market. The 757 had a very limited envelope. United wanted to use it in routes for which its range was not adequate, such as TXL-EWR.

Most passenger airlines (not all, I agree) see cargo as a mere add-on. Their business is to fly passengers and their presence in the cargo market is just a byproduct of empty cargo holds. As for amenities of a wide-body, I do not understand what is meant. What matters is personal space. Those that can afford upgrade from an A380 to a Gulfstream. There is nothing extra intrinsic of the wider cabin of a commercial aircraft layout that makes passengers demand it.

Boeing offered to make an extended range model that could have flown New York-Berlin easily (probably all the way to Moscow for most parts of the year). Practically no one wanted it.

Again, with a potential 60% fuel burn reduction inbound, a narrowbody that could fly Vancouver to London or New York to Moscow may be inbound by 2035, but I certainly wouldn't want to be on it.
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:20 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
TObound wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
One could poke the bear and say the 737 is NOT a modern airliner :duck:


It isn't. It's 60's vintage airplane with 90s avionics. And the only reason it's gotten away with not having features that modern airliners have, is grandfathering. I wish regulators would simply mandate fully redundant FBW, glass cockpits, electronic checklists, centralized crew alerting, etc. It sucks that airlines can get away with buying under-equipped airliners and then thundering them in with pax in the back.

Not sure such mandates are good for innovation; what if something much better and safer than FBW (for example) was invented? Regulation would halt its implementation and that'd be bad news for safety and innovation.

Innovation is usually driven by customer demands and competition; unfortunately, it would appear Boeing listened too much to a few customers for the 737 (apparently both NG and MAX) and just decided to slap another coat of make-up on that pig.

Well EVENTUALLY global connectivity will be good enough we can just have AI fly planes without human pilots. People will foam at the mouth when Boeing or Airbus first announces it, but it IS inevitable.
 
IADCA
Posts: 2069
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:22 pm

Matt6461 wrote:
FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
Matt6461 wrote:
So NMA was basically a billion-dollar* A.net thread. Hope they had fun in Seattle while it lasted.

*Will we get to see a write-down amount eventually? Boeing made it sound as if they were well into detailed design.

So what is Boeing going to do then? Build the NSA? Does the NMA still exist? What about the NMA cockpit? Is the NMA cockpit the same as the usual Boeing cockpits? Or does it have an A220-like design?

Did Calhoun basically say they have dropped the NMA?

Was Calhoun talking about the NMA and NSA when he was talking about redesigning the flight control laws?


I've been on record doubting the NSA business case for years. IMO we may be at a point where the next short-hauler is as much a commodity as the family sedan. I.e. there's no long-term business case for a US/European company to sink billions into a product that China can match or nearly match on fuel efficiency. Even if you have a small fuel edge, China will probably beat you on acquisition cost. Even if you win after acquisition cost you probably don't pay down the development cost.

What next? I really don't know. There's a good argument that under corporate law what Boeing should do is just wring shareholder profits out of the existing product line before closing BCA in a couple decades or so, focusing on corporate welfare from the military state therafter.


I don't think that's realistic. The national security implications of handing over the bread-and-butter hardware of a vital transportation network to Chinese state-owned companies are really severe, and the US government would likely write a series of very large checks to prevent that happening. People are finally waking up to the problem they let happen with computers and a large segment of automotive. Look at it this way: if a Chinese company tried to buy the BCA division, it would get blocked so fast by CFIUS that time might flow backwards. That's a good sign of what's really going on.

And that's without considering that Boeing's military programs are propped up by several high-margin products that are high-margin specifically because the commercial side did most of the R&D work. There are substantial diseconomies involved in closing or selling BCA, let alone that doing so would turn Boeing into a small fish in a pond full of sharks, all of which get exceedingly ravenous at even the smallest cut in defense spending.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:22 pm

DanniS wrote:
quoted:
Boeing said the jet ideally would reduce fuel burn by 60 per cent compared to an aircraft in 2005, but said it did not have final data to compare the fuel savings to present-day aircraft.

from
https://www.traveller.com.au/boeing-unv ... ngs-h19wn0


60% against which reference frame?
787 was to be 20++++++++++% better than "current generation planes" ( i.e. competitive in 2004?)
that later contracted to some well aged 767 type ( which, no idea 767-200? :-))

how much engine improvement versus 2005 is munged into that statement?

I am always a bit skeptical when "fly and joy" sites offer in depth technical articles.
Usually just a handed out fluff piece from the manufacturer regurgitated.
Last edited by WIederling on Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Murphy is an optimist
 
morrisond
Posts: 2367
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:23 pm

DanniS wrote:
morrisond wrote:
TObound wrote:

If folding wingtips have done well on the 777X then a 7ab 250-seater widebody that fits into Code C gates could well be possible. That would be huge.


Yes it would be - and with even more efficient engines available later this decade - that means less fuel to go the same distance which means less weight which means less wingspan making Code C gates entirely possible.

It's basically not possible. Boeing's own engineers have previously stated the mechanism is so necessarily heavy that it's not viable on smaller craft. Otherwise, I'm sure the 767 MAX would already have been announced by now. More improvements by CFM/PW and better aerodynamics from a new composite wing.


Where have you seen this? I'm sure you couldn't retrofit it to an existing wing - but a wing from scratch shouldn't be an issue. The Weight of the mechanism would scale to the size/weight of the Aircraft it is being used on.
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:36 pm

morrisond wrote:
DanniS wrote:
morrisond wrote:

Yes it would be - and with even more efficient engines available later this decade - that means less fuel to go the same distance which means less weight which means less wingspan making Code C gates entirely possible.

It's basically not possible. Boeing's own engineers have previously stated the mechanism is so necessarily heavy that it's not viable on smaller craft. Otherwise, I'm sure the 767 MAX would already have been announced by now. More improvements by CFM/PW and better aerodynamics from a new composite wing.


Where have you seen this? I'm sure you couldn't retrofit it to an existing wing - but a wing from scratch shouldn't be an issue. The Weight of the mechanism would scale to the size/weight of the Aircraft it is being used on.

Not really. The motors for them sit in the wingbox area as part of regulations. Most of the weight from the 777X implementation will also exist in a 737-sized implementation. The only reason it survives in military operations is the need to pack as many on the deck of a carrier as possible. Storage needs outweigh flight efficiency needs.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2367
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 3:08 pm

DanniS wrote:
morrisond wrote:
DanniS wrote:
It's basically not possible. Boeing's own engineers have previously stated the mechanism is so necessarily heavy that it's not viable on smaller craft. Otherwise, I'm sure the 767 MAX would already have been announced by now. More improvements by CFM/PW and better aerodynamics from a new composite wing.


Where have you seen this? I'm sure you couldn't retrofit it to an existing wing - but a wing from scratch shouldn't be an issue. The Weight of the mechanism would scale to the size/weight of the Aircraft it is being used on.

Not really. The motors for them sit in the wingbox area as part of regulations. Most of the weight from the 777X implementation will also exist in a 737-sized implementation. The only reason it survives in military operations is the need to pack as many on the deck of a carrier as possible. Storage needs outweigh flight efficiency needs.


So you would need motors that are the same size to fold a wingtip that is half the size or weight?

What type of mechanism do they use? Is it electric or Hydraulic?

Do you have an article where Boeing engineers say they won't work on smaller wings? Or is this first hand knowledge?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 22687
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:03 pm

889091 wrote:
Last sentence - is he implying that they'll be bringing the majority back in-house again or will BCA continue to subcontract it out to the lowest bidder, etc, etc....

It's always a tricky decision, isn't it? But as the CEO wrote, they are going to apply lessons learned. IMO it's a bad thing to have to go to Cedar Rapids to host the review of your own flight control computer. That stuff should be in house, IMO. And guess what? Boeing has set up it's own avionics division.
Ref: https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/08/1 ... echnology/

“We don't need to be vertical everywhere, but there are a few areas where when we look through a customer value lens, it's clear that we can add value,” said Muilenburg, adding that avionics is “another area” where Boeing feels it can provide value on the airplanes they’re manufacturing.

While Boeing still has not confirmed a launch date for its new mid-market aircraft (NMA), Muilenburg said they’re projecting a 2025 entry into service for the new aircraft type if and when they decide to launch it.

Would that mean then that Boeing plans on developing the flight controls, navigation and information systems completely independently for the NMA? That is unclear, but CFO Greg Smith did discuss the company bringing more production in-house in the wake of displeasure surrounding the 787.

Maybe the NMA "shelving" allows time for them to "go vertical" with regard to avionics. Note the division is tucked underneath Boeing Services, and a big part of NMA was changing the traditional business model. It seems to me the cockpit would be a key to such a strategy.

ual763 wrote:
Apparently, you didn’t read my entire post. I said systems logic “in terms of flight control systems” shouldn’t change from what is on the 757/767 for example. Innovate all you want, make systems better and more reliable, But, in the end the pilot should absolutely have the ultimate authority to override said flight control system if he/she feels it is in the best interest to do so. The computer shouldn’t decide for you, rather it should advise you.

I appreciate your point of view, but I'm thinking it's coming from a 20th century / boomer perspective. Airbus has full envelope protection since the 80s now and it's safety record is stellar. You advocate for the pilot being the last line of defense but clearly we have plenty of pilots already in the worldwide fleet who suck at being the last line of defense and many I presume who would really prefer to not have such a burden. Also we have airlines focused on cost who don't want to train pilots to the level of holding all those checklists in their heads when computers can hold them just fine, and don't want the liability when they show they can't remember memory items nor can't execute them flawlessly with three seconds notice.

DanniS wrote:
More improvements by CFM/PW and better aerodynamics from a new composite wing.

Not sure if CFM, PW or RR are in any shape to be investing in more improvements for the current generation. NMA clearly was going to get a LEAP variant but that was before GE Aviation stopped getting revenue from MAX via CFM and is still spending heavily on GE9x. I think the engine industry is happy to get a bit of a breather, a few years to take in revenues and build up some reserves.

strfyr51 wrote:
The Chinese would have to procure system integration tech that the Russians aren't going to sell them. and then procure Engine Technology that nobody will sell them. They are at best 2035 before they are able to build a suitable and reliable airliner. More than likely with Indian help.

Uhm, the Comac C919 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COMAC_C919 ) already has CFM LEAP engines and lots of Western partnerships developing the systems:

While the airframe is entirely made by Chinese Avic, most systems are made by Western-Chinese joint-ventures: with UTAS for the electric power, fire protection and lighting; with Rockwell Collins for the cabin systems and avionics, with Thales for the IFE, with Honeywell for the flight controls, APU, wheels and brakes; with Moog for the high lift system; with Parker for the hydraulics, actuators and fuel systems, with Liebherr for the landing gear and air management; and the CFM engine and Nexcelle nacelle are entirely foreign.
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
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 658
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:17 pm

I think one should recall the long thin route range of the A318 never caught the airlines attention.

Boeing’s common design has to be exceedingly efficient to compete successfully against the aircraft it is going against.

This may mean 2 different fuselage widths, and multiple different wing types AT A MINIMUM. Pairing down from optimal 4 wing sizes to 3 wings sizes is the key. One fuselage width and one wing for the 737, 757, and 767 replacement just WON’T work.
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9227
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:18 pm

But the intention of the avionics division was not to make a better product but to make more money, by also taking the profit of the supplier directly to Boeing.
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 658
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:19 pm

The A318 wasn’t efficient enough, therefore a dud. Whatever Boeing produces MUST not be a competitive dud.
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 22687
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:36 pm

seahawk wrote:
But the intention of the avionics division was not to make a better product but to make more money, by also taking the profit of the supplier directly to Boeing.

There are ways to both make a better product and make more money at the same time. Also the industry is not going to want to change the business model so the only way to do so is to bring the development in house. SpaceX and Tesla show plenty of examples of how a more vertical integration that existing suppliers weren't willing to contemplate results in a better and cheaper product.
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
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:40 pm

Revelation wrote:
DanniS wrote:
More improvements by CFM/PW and better aerodynamics from a new composite wing.

Not sure if CFM, PW or RR are in any shape to be investing in more improvements for the current generation. NMA clearly was going to get a LEAP variant but that was before GE Aviation stopped getting revenue from MAX via CFM and is still spending heavily on GE9x. I think the engine industry is happy to get a bit of a breather, a few years to take in revenues and build up some reserves.

CFM is in plenty good shape. GE's flush with cash and so is Safran. The LEAP program brings in money from 3 separate planes, so improvements to the platform are very likely. Where CFM already integrates carbon fan cases, the best combustor in the industry, and carbon fan blades; PW has their geared fan tech maturing (and can get a carbon fan easily enough to step up from Aluminum); GE has the rotating CMC parts, carbon fan blades, carbon case, and the hottest hot section in the industry; and Rolls Royce has their three-shaft design matured and ready to begin integration of CMC parts, carbon blades, and a geared fan, as the Advance3 project is doing bit by bit.

GE is probably too busy on its own between its 3 in-production engines plus the LEAP, but Safran is not with only 1 in active production and 1 in maintenance. PW, once they get the core issues of the GTF sorted, really only have the one platform in active production.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9227
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:49 pm

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
But the intention of the avionics division was not to make a better product but to make more money, by also taking the profit of the supplier directly to Boeing.

There are ways to both make a better product and make more money at the same time. Also the industry is not going to want to change the business model so the only way to do so is to bring the development in house. SpaceX and Tesla show plenty of examples of how a more vertical integration that existing suppliers weren't willing to contemplate results in a better and cheaper product.


Tesla and Space X went down that route because they did not find suppliers that could match their needs, Boeing has indicated in the past that they want to go down that route to make more money, especially in after sales. At the moment I do not believe that the driving motivation behind Boeing´s action has changed one bit, only the words have changed. From we must do more inhouse to earn a bigger slice of the pie, to we must do more inhouse to avoid problems (and still earn a bigger slice of the pie).
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 851
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:54 pm

As upset as I am about this (Boeing shareholder here) for many of the reasons already discussed in the thread, in a strange way, this might be a positive thing. One of the common ideas in many of these anti-Boeing, 737-MAX debacle threads is that Boeing is no longer an engineering company but rather more of a penny pinching profit monster intent upon a quick buck. By going back completely to a clean sheet design, this might signal a greater engineering emphasis, at least in this one instance. It could indicate a desire by Boeing to truly engineer a world beater for the long haul timewise, instead of simply pumping out a quick product and turning a fast profit.

Anyway, while this delay means ceding the market space to Airbus in the short term it might - just might - also be indicative of something more positive. Let's hope that the cultural change at Boeing that many of us have desired and written about is actually happening. I just hope there's a market left for the 797 when it finally does fly.
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:03 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
As upset as I am about this (Boeing shareholder here) for many of the reasons already discussed in the thread, in a strange way, this might be a positive thing. One of the common ideas in many of these anti-Boeing, 737-MAX debacle threads is that Boeing is no longer an engineering company but rather more of a penny pinching profit monster intent upon a quick buck. By going back completely to a clean sheet design, this might signal a greater engineering emphasis, at least in this one instance. It could indicate a desire by Boeing to truly engineer a world beater for the long haul timewise, instead of simply pumping out a quick product and turning a fast profit.

Anyway, while this delay means ceding the market space to Airbus in the short term it might - just might - also be indicative of something more positive. Let's hope that the cultural change at Boeing that many of us have desired and written about is actually happening. I just hope there's a market left for the 797 when it finally does fly.

I totally agree. The NMA might be Boeing’s turning point. Is it likely that Boeing will build a NSA size out of the NMA?
NL: Bij de landing is full reverse het leukst!

EN: Full reverse is the best at touchdown!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 22687
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:08 pm

DanniS wrote:
PW, once they get the core issues of the GTF sorted, really only have the one platform in active production.

True, but PW also has all of the F-35 new business and lots of legacy stuff too. The F-35 is finally ramping up enough to be generating good revenue, but it also is consuming lots of resources.

seahawk wrote:
Tesla and Space X went down that route because they did not find suppliers that could match their needs, Boeing has indicated in the past that they want to go down that route to make more money, especially in after sales. At the moment I do not believe that the driving motivation behind Boeing´s action has changed one bit, only the words have changed. From we must do more inhouse to earn a bigger slice of the pie, to we must do more inhouse to avoid problems (and still earn a bigger slice of the pie).

That's not my take on things. I think these things go in cycles. Outsourcing was the last cycle, in-sourcing is the current cycle. SpaceX and Tesla found vendors were simply unwilling to do high integration because it destroys their business models. I think Boeing must have found the same thing. And yes it does allow them to change the entire industry's business model. I would not be surprised to find Boeing using things like software licenses / "cockpit by the hour" to capture revenue. They can't do much if any of that if someone else owns the software. It's a vital technology that they must own to be successful in the future, IMO.
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
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3550
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:14 pm

Electronic flight control will be a core competency of the next generation of planes. A new Tesla has upwards of two dozen sensors as part of its auto-pilot. Those sensors, integration of the data, and presentation to the driver (or brakes, accelerator, and steering) present huge demands on computer power. Planes likely will require more. And the airframe maker needs to be in near total control.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:31 pm

FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
Aptivaboy wrote:
As upset as I am about this (Boeing shareholder here) for many of the reasons already discussed in the thread, in a strange way, this might be a positive thing. One of the common ideas in many of these anti-Boeing, 737-MAX debacle threads is that Boeing is no longer an engineering company but rather more of a penny pinching profit monster intent upon a quick buck. By going back completely to a clean sheet design, this might signal a greater engineering emphasis, at least in this one instance. It could indicate a desire by Boeing to truly engineer a world beater for the long haul timewise, instead of simply pumping out a quick product and turning a fast profit.

Anyway, while this delay means ceding the market space to Airbus in the short term it might - just might - also be indicative of something more positive. Let's hope that the cultural change at Boeing that many of us have desired and written about is actually happening. I just hope there's a market left for the 797 when it finally does fly.

I totally agree. The NMA might be Boeing’s turning point. Is it likely that Boeing will build a NSA size out of the NMA?

Somewhat like the 737 and 757, a common fuselage platform for 2 different craft might be the go-to strategy. If they build the fuselage from composites, the NSA can potentially have Aluminum wings to save on unit costs while the NMA would have composite wings to maximize performance to give carriers great options without letting development costs blow out on either program. Given Boeing now makes their 777X wings in-house, and given the 787 CEO will be ramping down in 4 years at the current numbers, they could move resources toward manufacturing the new wings and fuselages while the 787NG gets underway if GE doesn't release their CMC PIP for the GEnx soon.
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:45 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Electronic flight control will be a core competency of the next generation of planes. A new Tesla has upwards of two dozen sensors as part of its auto-pilot. Those sensors, integration of the data, and presentation to the driver (or brakes, accelerator, and steering) present huge demands on computer power. Planes likely will require more. And the airframe maker needs to be in near total control.

They're not really huge demands on computer power. What consumes so much compute in Teslas today is the AIs are learning and redistributing their learning across the fleet over time. Once the AIs mature to the point they can have Level 5 autonomy, the big, expensive compute platforms will be removed from future models, as the AI can be written directly into the hardware rather than as a runnable program in software needing to be stored in flash and memory. ASICs are shockingly power-efficient vs. their general-purpose compute cousins. Planes may not actually need more compute power. Cars tend to get very close to each other in large numbers on the highway (or even in a town) and have to obey all kinds of road signs and variations on them (there are 4 different kinds of stop signs just in Western Europe). Planes don't. At most you've only got to keep track of 4-6 other nearby planes in the real world and the data being gathered is uniform in terms of its form, so you don't necessarily need a huge budget of compute power if you don't have a bunch of noise and data form variations.

Between computer vision (entirely shape, rather than color-driven in this case), radar, weather data, and air traffic control vector data, you're only talking a few tens of Megabytes per second of data to crunch. One ARM A72 core can do that practically while asleep. Decisions in the flight deck do not need to be made on the order of microseconds, more like ~1 second, as evidence by pilots taking many seconds to make decisions even under crisis.
 
Exeiowa
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:49 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:51 pm

It funny how the pendulum of industry swings, from integration to out sourcing and back again. One aspect of outsourcing always missed, is that once the internal competition is eliminated there is less incentive for an external supplier to hold prices down. And no company really has an army of idle employees waiting to go to work, but instead hires from the same pool as anyone else would do to fulfill the task, be it local cleaners or internationally mobile skilled workers. Often transferring the employees to or between contractors.

Once upon a time conglomerates with many different business where the norm and then they became streamlined focused companies in a single sector now maybe we go back to diverse companies to spread risk of exposure to a single market.

I wonder if GE previously ruthless employee structure led it to short term thinking that has led to its current structural problems. (Their longterm care insurance business did great initially, until people got old....)
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9227
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 6:15 pm

Revelation wrote:
DanniS wrote:
PW, once they get the core issues of the GTF sorted, really only have the one platform in active production.

True, but PW also has all of the F-35 new business and lots of legacy stuff too. The F-35 is finally ramping up enough to be generating good revenue, but it also is consuming lots of resources.

seahawk wrote:
Tesla and Space X went down that route because they did not find suppliers that could match their needs, Boeing has indicated in the past that they want to go down that route to make more money, especially in after sales. At the moment I do not believe that the driving motivation behind Boeing´s action has changed one bit, only the words have changed. From we must do more inhouse to earn a bigger slice of the pie, to we must do more inhouse to avoid problems (and still earn a bigger slice of the pie).

That's not my take on things. I think these things go in cycles. Outsourcing was the last cycle, in-sourcing is the current cycle. SpaceX and Tesla found vendors were simply unwilling to do high integration because it destroys their business models. I think Boeing must have found the same thing. And yes it does allow them to change the entire industry's business model. I would not be surprised to find Boeing using things like software licenses / "cockpit by the hour" to capture revenue. They can't do much if any of that if someone else owns the software. It's a vital technology that they must own to be successful in the future, IMO.


Yes, things go in cycles but what still matters is the motivation behind each move. Tesla or Space X went down the route because they wanted to do something new or different and did not find a partner willing to go the same route with them. Boeing on the other hand just wants to take revenue from their existing partners.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1818
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:35 pm

Boeing has two excellent test cases going that are developing the new digital design / production / support program - the MQ-25 tanker drone and the T-7 Redhawk. The MQ-25 will be remote piloted / autonomous including landing on a carrier deck. Besides for the regular autonomous challenges, add the runway is bouncing up and down, has pitch and roll and lots of crazy eddy currents - not fun. Then also the tanking function is unique. It has begun its flight test program.

The T-7 is moving along in its EMD phase. Flight testing has resumed as the wetted surface of the prototype is confirmed to not be changing, Saab just announced it is cutting metal on the first 7 sets. This is 16 months after award to the clean sheet design with program start in Dec 13, first flight in Dec 16, the RFP period Mar 17 to Sept 18. It came together incredibly fast - appears at this time to be running ahead of schedule and smooth.

Boeing won a $9.2 billion contract in September 2018 to supply the USAF with 351 T-7A aircraft, 46 simulators and associated ground equipment

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing ... 69.article

So this rethink of the NMA based on the lessons learned with the MAX debacle, but also what is being learned on the T-7A. Smart vertical integration makes sense as one keeps control as well as not loosing the tech to the competition when it is the suppliers tech.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 22687
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 7:48 pm

DanniS wrote:
They're not really huge demands on computer power. What consumes so much compute in Teslas today is the AIs are learning and redistributing their learning across the fleet over time. Once the AIs mature to the point they can have Level 5 autonomy, the big, expensive compute platforms will be removed from future models, as the AI can be written directly into the hardware rather than as a runnable program in software needing to be stored in flash and memory. ASICs are shockingly power-efficient vs. their general-purpose compute cousins.

If you want to see how Tesla is really approaching the problem, make the time to take in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZK1fARxYsE -- they are using a shockingly effective approach but clearly full custom silicon as opposed to FPGA. Peter Bannon was the lead architect on the ARM CPUs that Apple designed for their iPhones and is clearly still at the top of his form working for Tesla.

DanniS wrote:
Planes may not actually need more compute power. Cars tend to get very close to each other in large numbers on the highway (or even in a town) and have to obey all kinds of road signs and variations on them (there are 4 different kinds of stop signs just in Western Europe). Planes don't. At most you've only got to keep track of 4-6 other nearby planes in the real world and the data being gathered is uniform in terms of its form, so you don't necessarily need a huge budget of compute power if you don't have a bunch of noise and data form variations.

Between computer vision (entirely shape, rather than color-driven in this case), radar, weather data, and air traffic control vector data, you're only talking a few tens of Megabytes per second of data to crunch. One ARM A72 core can do that practically while asleep. Decisions in the flight deck do not need to be made on the order of microseconds, more like ~1 second, as evidence by pilots taking many seconds to make decisions even under crisis.

Agreed, self flying cars are an order of magnitude simpler than self driving automobiles.

seahawk wrote:
Tesla or Space X went down the route because they wanted to do something new or different and did not find a partner willing to go the same route with them. Boeing on the other hand just wants to take revenue from their existing partners.

Tesla, SpaceX and Boeing all want to minimize cost and maximize profit. Boeing has an existing supplier network. Tesla and SpaceX had the traditional auto and aerospace suppliers willing to provide products and services. These traditional suppliers are all going to try to maximize their profits. A lot of these technologies are now relatively mature and technological advances allows for higher levels of integration, but the suppliers don't want to do high integration because it undermines their business models. Therefore we see the pendulum swing back to towards the OEMs doing more integration themselves.
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
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:03 pm

Revelation wrote:
DanniS wrote:
They're not really huge demands on computer power. What consumes so much compute in Teslas today is the AIs are learning and redistributing their learning across the fleet over time. Once the AIs mature to the point they can have Level 5 autonomy, the big, expensive compute platforms will be removed from future models, as the AI can be written directly into the hardware rather than as a runnable program in software needing to be stored in flash and memory. ASICs are shockingly power-efficient vs. their general-purpose compute cousins.

If you want to see how Tesla is really approaching the problem, make the time to take in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZK1fARxYsE -- they are using a shockingly effective approach but clearly full custom silicon as opposed to FPGA. Peter Bannon was the lead architect on the ARM CPUs that Apple designed for their iPhones and is clearly still at the top of his form working for Tesla.

DanniS wrote:
Planes may not actually need more compute power. Cars tend to get very close to each other in large numbers on the highway (or even in a town) and have to obey all kinds of road signs and variations on them (there are 4 different kinds of stop signs just in Western Europe). Planes don't. At most you've only got to keep track of 4-6 other nearby planes in the real world and the data being gathered is uniform in terms of its form, so you don't necessarily need a huge budget of compute power if you don't have a bunch of noise and data form variations.

Between computer vision (entirely shape, rather than color-driven in this case), radar, weather data, and air traffic control vector data, you're only talking a few tens of Megabytes per second of data to crunch. One ARM A72 core can do that practically while asleep. Decisions in the flight deck do not need to be made on the order of microseconds, more like ~1 second, as evidence by pilots taking many seconds to make decisions even under crisis.

Agreed, self flying cars are an order of magnitude simpler than self driving automobiles.
It's not fully custom Silicon. They bought Tensorflow (IE Deep Learning) acceleration IP from Google and did integrate it with some amount of flexible FPGA-like logic. A college mate of mine was on the design team for it. The macro architecture is custom, but it's a lot of essentially off-the-shelf microarchitectural parts.

And what is learned by one Tesla is then sent to a big iron cluster for de-duplication and collation as needed before updates are sent to the fleet over 4G or in the shop. Eventually when it's recognized that further learning requirements are minimal or unnecessary, a fully custom chip will be developed if Tesla has the market share needed. Otherwise, off-the-shelf CPU, GPU, and Tensorflow IP and a program.

And yes, "flying cars" in the context of airplanes are actually a much simpler problem to solve. You don't have an indeterminate number of chiefs and few Indians (everyone likes to own the road, but in the sky it's only local ATC), the number of nearby "vehicles" is deterministically always few at large distances (side-by-side landings being a 1-off issue and still not a very hard one), and the road and lanes already agreed upon by everyone (flight path and vector data published well in advance).
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 22687
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:10 pm

DanniS wrote:
It's not fully custom Silicon. They bought Tensorflow (IE Deep Learning) acceleration IP from Google and did integrate it with some amount of flexible FPGA-like logic. A college mate of mine was on the design team for it. The macro architecture is custom, but it's a lot of essentially off-the-shelf microarchitectural parts.

And what is learned by one Tesla is then sent to a big iron cluster for de-duplication and collation as needed before updates are sent to the fleet over 4G or in the shop. Eventually when it's recognized that further learning requirements are minimal or unnecessary, a fully custom chip will be developed if Tesla has the market share needed. Otherwise, off-the-shelf CPU, GPU, and Tensorflow IP and a program.

It's fair to describe it as fpga-like if you look at it as an application specific solution, but a lot of the elements are far more dense than you could hope to implement in fpga, and the large srams and fat busses aren't going to be on any commercial fpga I've seen.

The talk says this device is already in production Teslas so I don't think there's much of an issue about needing more market share to justify this approach. It is interesting that they are using licensed IP.

DanniS wrote:
And yes, "flying cars" in the context of airplanes are actually a much simpler problem to solve. You don't have an indeterminate number of chiefs and few Indians (everyone likes to own the road, but in the sky it's only local ATC), the number of nearby "vehicles" is deterministically always few at large distances (side-by-side landings being a 1-off issue and still not a very hard one), and the road and lanes already agreed upon by everyone (flight path and vector data published well in advance).

Indeed, not to mention active elements on the ground such as ILS guiding you into the runway. It's far easier than having to interpret electro-optical inputs to try to figure out whether something really is a stop sign or not.
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
 
DanniS
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:35 pm

Revelation wrote:
DanniS wrote:
It's not fully custom Silicon. They bought Tensorflow (IE Deep Learning) acceleration IP from Google and did integrate it with some amount of flexible FPGA-like logic. A college mate of mine was on the design team for it. The macro architecture is custom, but it's a lot of essentially off-the-shelf microarchitectural parts.

And what is learned by one Tesla is then sent to a big iron cluster for de-duplication and collation as needed before updates are sent to the fleet over 4G or in the shop. Eventually when it's recognized that further learning requirements are minimal or unnecessary, a fully custom chip will be developed if Tesla has the market share needed. Otherwise, off-the-shelf CPU, GPU, and Tensorflow IP and a program.

It's fair to describe it as fpga-like if you look at it as an application specific solution, but a lot of the elements are far more dense than you could hope to implement in fpga, and the large srams and fat busses aren't going to be on any commercial fpga I've seen.

The talk says this device is already in production Teslas so I don't think there's much of an issue about needing more market share to justify this approach. It is interesting that they are using licensed IP.

DanniS wrote:
And yes, "flying cars" in the context of airplanes are actually a much simpler problem to solve. You don't have an indeterminate number of chiefs and few Indians (everyone likes to own the road, but in the sky it's only local ATC), the number of nearby "vehicles" is deterministically always few at large distances (side-by-side landings being a 1-off issue and still not a very hard one), and the road and lanes already agreed upon by everyone (flight path and vector data published well in advance).

Indeed, not to mention active elements on the ground such as ILS guiding you into the runway. It's far easier than having to interpret electro-optical inputs to try to figure out whether something really is a stop sign or not.

Have you seen the flagships from Altera and Xilinx? The cache (SRAM) is more than double what's on Tesla's processor and the bus is interchangeable for various memory types. Mind you the flagship FPGAs get deployed in a high speed derivatives trading operation on up to 5Terabit per second fiber connections on specialized PCIe cards to the tune of 60,000 USD or more.

Licensing circuit IP is not really interesting. Tesla hired the guy who knew how to get it done (without patent disputes). Musk is a man who lives off credibility of doing it right to the nines every time, but he doesn't have the capital to go inventing custom silicon of this degree.

I may have mistaken your previous post on flying cars as sarcasm. If that was just a straightforward agreement, oops.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 1:14 am

Where was this sensible notion by Boeing 5 years ago?
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9227
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 6:36 am

Revelation wrote:
Tesla, SpaceX and Boeing all want to minimize cost and maximize profit. Boeing has an existing supplier network. Tesla and SpaceX had the traditional auto and aerospace suppliers willing to provide products and services. These traditional suppliers are all going to try to maximize their profits. A lot of these technologies are now relatively mature and technological advances allows for higher levels of integration, but the suppliers don't want to do high integration because it undermines their business models. Therefore we see the pendulum swing back to towards the OEMs doing more integration themselves.


Tesla and SpaceX had revolutionary ideas and wanted OEMs to enter into risk sharing contracts for the high integration work. But in the end they are result driven and go the route they need to go to reach their goals and make their vision reality.
Boeing is in a different boat. The product is well established, until very recently they pushed for making OEMs easily replaceable and the main push was to take revenue from the OEMs. The 787 saw higher integration and risk sharing by OEMs which did not turn out to hot for either side, then Boeing went down the "make the OEM replaceable route" which also did not turn out to o good and now the move is "we do it inhouse", given the current cooperate culture at Boeing I am not sure this will be an improvement for the product.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:13 am

Common sense finally kicking in?

It took decade (of groupthink, trust & brandloyalty) to admit a flattened 2-3-2 is a relatively inefficient cross section for almost all applications.

Hopefully materials and production technology research and development has been progressing and can be used for a more rational, attractive NB design.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:42 am

Revelation wrote:
Seattle Times ( https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... estore-it/ ) reports:

Calhoun announced that the development work Boeing has been doing for several years on the NMA is starting over.

Boeing had hoped to have that jet in service by 2025 but the concept—an aircraft intermediate in size and range between the narrowbody and widebody jet segments—has been overtaken by Airbus’s huge sales success in selling its contender in that jet category, the A321neo.

The delay in launching the NMA means Boeing must now think even further ahead, taking account of developing Chinese competition.

“Things have changed a bit. The competitive playing field is a bit different. We have to plan for China,” Calhoun said. “We’re going to start with a clean sheet of paper again.”

So NMA is facing a reboot at best: the foot dragging went on too long, and now the Chinese competition is viewed as a concern.

And he indicated that the lessons learned from the MAX accidents, especially the change in thinking about how flight crews handle emergencies, could have a profound impact on that next new airplane design.

We might have to start with the flight control philosophy before we actually get to the airplane,” he said. “We’ve always favored airplanes that required more pilot flying than maybe our competitor did. We are all going to have to get our heads around exactly what we want” in future.

This mirrors what I wrote in the MAX grounding thread, it's not realistic to expect new pilots who have had smartphones as youngsters to be able to deal with a cockpit with low levels of automation. The cost to train such new entrants would end up being too high. Now is a good time to take the lessons learned from MAX and project what you can expect new entrants to be able to do by the time NMA is ready for market.

Boeing dragged their feet for...at minimum 5 years on the NMA without securing an ATO/launch order (and possibly even a business case)?

Wake me up in 2028 when the first ink is dry.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 9:00 am

It looks like Boeing doesn’t know what they want to make. Has Boeing any plans to ever be innovative again?
NL: Bij de landing is full reverse het leukst!

EN: Full reverse is the best at touchdown!
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13585
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 9:37 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
Boeing has two excellent test cases going that are developing the new digital design / production / support program - the MQ-25 tanker drone and the T-7 Redhawk. The MQ-25 will be remote piloted / autonomous including landing on a carrier deck. Besides for the regular autonomous challenges, add the runway is bouncing up and down, has pitch and roll and lots of crazy eddy currents - not fun. Then also the tanking function is unique. It has begun its flight test program.

The T-7 is moving along in its EMD phase. Flight testing has resumed as the wetted surface of the prototype is confirmed to not be changing, Saab just announced it is cutting metal on the first 7 sets. This is 16 months after award to the clean sheet design with program start in Dec 13, first flight in Dec 16, the RFP period Mar 17 to Sept 18. It came together incredibly fast - appears at this time to be running ahead of schedule and smooth.

Boeing won a $9.2 billion contract in September 2018 to supply the USAF with 351 T-7A aircraft, 46 simulators and associated ground equipment

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing ... 69.article

So this rethink of the NMA based on the lessons learned with the MAX debacle, but also what is being learned on the T-7A. Smart vertical integration makes sense as one keeps control as well as not loosing the tech to the competition when it is the suppliers tech.


Lessons learned from T7A applied; ask Embraer to come up with a plan & prototyping and ask US government to finance everything.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4297
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 10:04 am

Matt6461 wrote:
So NMA was basically a billion-dollar* A.net thread. Hope they had fun in Seattle while it lasted.

*Will we get to see a write-down amount eventually? Boeing made it sound as if they were well into detailed design.

Boeing has been into the NMA for quite a while now but now they have new parameters to deal with,, my hope is that they quit the "one off" model theory and develop an entire line o. what I hope is that they al availablelable cockpits with the ltwef aircraft in the digital realm. and make them all advanced with composite wings, composite fuselages or Both. GE, Rolls and Pratt will build FADEC engines for any and every model and they will all have digital flight controls. with advanced cabins built for reliability with the SATCOM built in rather than added on. Boeing is past the point where they can build an airplane for ONE carrier who wants to stay as close to the past as possible. They need to put in the work to build the BEST plane available and if an airline doesn't like it? Then buy Airbus, Comac, or any other airplane, But quit designing airplanes for one particular customer. They either buy it? Or they DON'T...
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 12:42 pm

FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
It looks like Boeing doesn’t know what they want to make. Has Boeing any plans to ever be innovative again?

If they aren't innovative, they wouldn't had decided on restarting the whole study. They know they need a lot more innovation this time round, probably more so than the already very innovative 787, and they are willing to go through the entire process again. So, you'd expect them to keep using the 737 design? And nobody says anything when Airbus reuses the same frame.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 12:46 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
Boeing has been into the NMA for quite a while now but now they have new parameters to deal with,, ..


is the offer technically feasible but lackluster and there are no takers
or
is the offer OK, would get the nod
but Boeing sees no way to produce that offer and make a dime ( like NSA )?

customers have been burned twice! .. and in different ways.
Murphy is an optimist
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 1:07 pm

I would expect them to look into a scenario where two frames with different fuselage widths (one for NSA and one for NMA) could be built on the same line, which will improve the profitability of an NMA sized plane. If they could do this, it could change aviation manufacturing forever. I expect more trips to Toyota for this.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 1:31 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
I would expect them to look into a scenario where two frames with different fuselage widths (one for NSA and one for NMA) could be built on the same line, which will improve the profitability of an NMA sized plane. If they could do this, it could change aviation manufacturing forever. I expect more trips to Toyota for this.


Anyone beyond the US native automobile manufacturers.
They all are rather flexible in intermeshed or switched change of type.

The "tool-less" "clean floor" Boeing setup should be adaptable. ( but apparently not?)
if all tooling is fully mobile?
Murphy is an optimist
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3550
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 2:42 pm

And oddly it was Toyota not signing off on the California mileage agreement that supported the feds into thinking it could be challenged. Along with their conviction that hydrogen will be the fuel of the future. Toyota is good, and our mainstay for the last 20 years, but for me, time to move on. Their autodrive safety features are good, but a kludge (MAX, anyone?)
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 22687
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 3:03 pm

DanniS wrote:
Have you seen the flagships from Altera and Xilinx? The cache (SRAM) is more than double what's on Tesla's processor and the bus is interchangeable for various memory types. Mind you the flagship FPGAs get deployed in a high speed derivatives trading operation on up to 5Terabit per second fiber connections on specialized PCIe cards to the tune of 60,000 USD or more.

My last place was a Xilinx shop but definitely not in flagship territory. Thanks for the update.

DanniS wrote:
I may have mistaken your previous post on flying cars as sarcasm. If that was just a straightforward agreement, oops.

Actually it was more of a "don't post before you finish your coffee" kind of thing. I think we are in agreement that self flying commercial aviation is a much easier problem to solve than self driving autos. It seems the public perception is opposite of this so it will take a lot of time to gain acceptance.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 22687
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 3:20 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
If they aren't innovative, they wouldn't had decided on restarting the whole study. They know they need a lot more innovation this time round, probably more so than the already very innovative 787, and they are willing to go through the entire process again. So, you'd expect them to keep using the 737 design? And nobody says anything when Airbus reuses the same frame.

I think people are not factoring in the big regime change at Boeing.

Of course each regime is going to want to have their say on the product lineup. They are key decision makers, they need to comfortable with the direction the company is taking.

NMA was a product of the Muilenberg / McAllister regime. The mandate they came up with was to not make advances in the technology but to make advances in manufacturing and business model.

Now we have the Calhoun / Deal regime. The concern is more about future competition and IMO that will take innovation. It will also take innovation to make a clean break with the MAX debacle.

I don't know if this new criteria means they will target a different market segment than NMA or not, time will tell. It was easier to make a business case in the MOM space two and a half years ago, yet they could not. Given how late this rethink will come to the party, any remnants of the 757/767 replacement market will be gone. It'd have to be able to make a case for itself solely on its own merits rather than getting any pull from loyalty, and that's a big ask.

I still wonder what the potential customers who were briefed on NMA (like DL, QF, UA, Neeleman, others) must be thinking right now.
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
 
dare100em
Posts: 278
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 3:28 pm

WIederling wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
I would expect them to look into a scenario where two frames with different fuselage widths (one for NSA and one for NMA) could be built on the same line, which will improve the profitability of an NMA sized plane. If they could do this, it could change aviation manufacturing forever. I expect more trips to Toyota for this.


Anyone beyond the US native automobile manufacturers.
They all are rather flexible in intermeshed or switched change of type.

The "tool-less" "clean floor" Boeing setup should be adaptable. ( but apparently not?)
if all tooling is fully mobile?


The idea that Toyota is especially up-front in agile production is a myth. The asian company’s generally allow for a lot less configurations and typically have only a limited range of a few configurations (at the end “base” / “middle” / “high” - of course with much more complex fancy names). The Mazda CX-3 of my mother-in-law has about 100 overall possible configurations including colour. A BMW, Audi or Mercedes Benz has up to billions of possible configurations, with many only build once or never at all.

However Toyota is very good at “lean” production, meaning perfection regarding supply-chain, in-plant logistics and quality control measures as well as a constant “flow” in anything around the assembling process. But all that is based on a large-scale production of a few 100.000 cars per plant.

From our experience regarding agile platforms in car-manufacturing (MQB) and lot of discussions with airbus that is simply not very helpful for airplanes.

The numbers are much lower which doesn’t allow for learning-based approaches, whatever using KI or simple learning by humans. The database is to small. But the biggest troubles come from very different materials and characteristics in civil aviation for joining of parts.

Boeing even skipped auto riveters at the 777X. In my opinion the robots they used are simply not stiff enough (Kuka robots are build for automatisation for e. g. cars and have a lot of mechanical limits like no direct drives and measuring systems in their joints).

To build to different fuses on one “automated” line is an automation nightmare without much benefit because of low numbers. At max they make a few planes at one line per month.

A stroke in car-manufacturing is seconds whereas in civil airplanes it’s hours.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 5:08 pm

WIederling wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
I would expect them to look into a scenario where two frames with different fuselage widths (one for NSA and one for NMA) could be built on the same line, which will improve the profitability of an NMA sized plane. If they could do this, it could change aviation manufacturing forever. I expect more trips to Toyota for this.


Anyone beyond the US native automobile manufacturers.
They all are rather flexible in intermeshed or switched change of type.

The "tool-less" "clean floor" Boeing setup should be adaptable. ( but apparently not?)
if all tooling is fully mobile?

Don't worry about that, Boeing has visited Toyota at least since the mid 1990s, if not earlier.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 5:17 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
And oddly it was Toyota not signing off on the California mileage agreement that supported the feds into thinking it could be challenged. Along with their conviction that hydrogen will be the fuel of the future. Toyota is good, and our mainstay for the last 20 years, but for me, time to move on. Their autodrive safety features are good, but a kludge (MAX, anyone?)

I didn't make myself clear on the part regarding Toyota, it has nothing to do with the product itself, but the production line, supply chain and the management related to these aspects. Examples include the Kaizen and kanban philosophies that Boeing has adapted from Toyota.
 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 831
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: Boeing CEO: NMA will "start with a clean sheet of paper again"

Sat Jan 25, 2020 6:03 pm

DanniS wrote:
Again, with a potential 60% fuel burn reduction inbound, a narrowbody that could fly Vancouver to London or New York to Moscow may be inbound by 2035, but I certainly wouldn't want to be on it.


Aren't those potential routes for the A321XLR in 2023?
YVR LHR 4,104 nm
JFK DME 4,085 nm
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 25

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