Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Misterven1
Topic Author
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun May 20, 2018 7:30 pm

Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:54 pm

Why is Boeing no longer making small regional jets, with 70 to 130 passengers, to compete with Embraer, Sukhoi, Mitsubishi and Airbus? That in itself is a fact that no more small jets were made by Boeing, in fact Boeing even had 2 variants of the small Boeing 737, the Boeing 737-100 and Boeing 737-200 Advanced in the 1970s. Now that Boeing's partnership with Embraer has failed, they will re-enter the regional market in the future with lighter, narrower aircraft such as Airbus A220s with 2-3 seats in a row. I think Boeing should continue to develop Boeing 717 into a very modern 2-engine, short-range aircraft. I really think that is a missed opportunity for Boeing to be a part of the regional market.

Perhaps it is better for Boeing to look at new aircraft models that are best suited for the regional market, especially focusing on electric flying. The 737 is too heavy and too big for a regional market. An electric flying aircraft can travel at least 1,000 to 3,000 km, especially on regional European or American lines. Such as electric aircraft is also very interesting for regional airlines such as KLM Cityhopper. It should be similar to that of E-190-E2 through E-195-E2.

I think that in the future it will be financially attractive and efficient for the airlines to have a fleet from one aircraft manufacturer and also save a lot of maintenance costs. This method also saves a lot for pilot training in a particular aircraft type. If you look at how many companies work with different aircraft manufacturers in fleet composition, it costs a lot more than you think, especially maintenance, kerosene consumption ,. pilot training, cabin crew training and much more. In itself, this is not useful for every company that has contracts with different aircraft manufacturers for deliveries of certain aircraft types.

Look, Martinair had in the past only a McDonnel Douglas fleet, both this was cheaper in maintenance and the personnel who have to work with the plane. Martinair also had 1 Fokker 28 in its fleet, but that was short-lived. So we have to go this way again, is only better for the environment and the economy. We are changing far too quickly from different aircraft manufacturers to others because they may be cheaper than other builders.
Last edited by SQ22 on Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Typo fixed
 
B6JFKH81
Posts: 2249
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:35 am

Re: Littele aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:01 pm

Well, Boeing was going to get in bed with Embraer, but COVID-19 happened along with a long 737MAX grounding and 777X delays they pulled out.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing% ... nt_venture
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
 
ILNFlyer
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: Littele aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:03 pm

The company focus is 130+ seats. Plus they have a lot on their plate right now with 777X and NMA, which will be bigger money makers for them.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 993
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:54 pm

Upgrading the 717 in ways that McD could only have dreamed of having the finances to accomplish would have kept Boeing in that smallish jet market. Or, a new clean sheet jet in that class could have replaced the old Mad Dog iron completely. But, there were so many things going in, Boeing doesn't have unlimited deep pockets, never has, never will and there were other projects that seemed more compelling at the time. Personally, I'd love to see them revisit the 717-class of jets. The Embraer deal would have allowed them to do just that. Too bad it all crashed and burned. Stupid Boeing...
 
Noshow
Posts: 2421
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 8:13 pm

Embraer would have been the right partner. Is there any chance they try it a second time?
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 461
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 8:37 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
Upgrading the 717 in ways that McD could only have dreamed of having the finances to accomplish would have kept Boeing in that smallish jet market. Or, a new clean sheet jet in that class could have replaced the old Mad Dog iron completely. But, there were so many things going in, Boeing doesn't have unlimited deep pockets, never has, never will and there were other projects that seemed more compelling at the time. Personally, I'd love to see them revisit the 717-class of jets. The Embraer deal would have allowed them to do just that. Too bad it all crashed and burned. Stupid Boeing...

They also could have had the C Series program for a song. Could have then developed a common platform (same subsystems, possibly same type rating) 6 abreast plane as a 737 replacement.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9310
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 8:55 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
Upgrading the 717 in ways that McD could only have dreamed of having the finances to accomplish would have kept Boeing in that smallish jet market. Or, a new clean sheet jet in that class could have replaced the old Mad Dog iron completely. But, there were so many things going in, Boeing doesn't have unlimited deep pockets, never has, never will and there were other projects that seemed more compelling at the time. Personally, I'd love to see them revisit the 717-class of jets. The Embraer deal would have allowed them to do just that. Too bad it all crashed and burned. Stupid Boeing...


Boeing doesn’t build a 100-150 seat jet because it *generally* isn’t economical for airlines to operate at this capacity point. The 100-seat market segment is historically a weak-selling niche for all OEMs. It’s a local dis-optimum where it’s more economical to fly smaller RJs or bigger mainline jets. Some of that is scope clause related, some of it is economies of scale, but nobody has ever got a strong seller to work. The CS100 (now A220-100) is yet another slow selling example.

Going back in time to the early-2000s, ending the 717 was absolutely the right decision by Boeing. The 717 was aggressively marketed in several major campaigns - none of which materialized into orders. It was not for lack of trying that Boeing didn’t book more orders. The biggest opportunity for the 717 was the -300 variant requested by AirTran who wanted U.S. transcontinental range with 130 seats. Well, Boeing already sold that airplane in the form of the 737-700. So what would be the point? AirTran bought the 73G and saved Boeing from developing a bespoke orphan variant.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 838
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 10:14 pm

There was a time 10 years ago that Boeing was interested in partnering with Mitsubishi on the MRJ Spacejet

https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2011-06-22 ... d-Services

"We are pleased to announce we have concluded an agreement with Boeing for MRJ customer support as the Mitsubishi Regional Jet sets the new standard for next- generation regional jets truly suited for the 21st century," said Hideo Egawa, president, Mitsubishi Aircraft. "With this agreement, Mitsubishi Aircraft will be able to deliver profit-enhancing support and a competitive boost to our customers. We are confident that this agreement will further strengthen the relationship between our two companies."
 
alan3
Posts: 454
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 11:05 pm

Speaking of Baby Boeings, I recently rediscovered what the 737-100 looked like and I don't think anyone will make a cuter plane than that.

Ahem...Anyway, on a more serious note, I know the Embraer deal went through but I would surprised to see them just stand by and watch the A220 monopolize that market. The desire to compete will be too great, like how they let the 757 age 30 years and now are finally planning the NMA after the A321XLR emerged.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7621
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 11:14 pm

alan3 wrote:
Speaking of Baby Boeings, I recently rediscovered what the 737-100 looked like and I don't think anyone will make a cuter plane than that.

Ahem...Anyway, on a more serious note, I know the Embraer deal went through but I would surprised to see them just stand by and watch the A220 monopolize that market. The desire to compete will be too great, like how they let the 757 age 30 years and now are finally planning the NMA after the A321XLR emerged.

I mean, they could just MAX the 100 and call it a day. Imagine the 737-100 with LEAP engines and scimitar winglets!
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 2:58 am

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
There was a time 10 years ago that Boeing was interested in partnering with Mitsubishi on the MRJ Spacejet

https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2011-06-22 ... d-Services

"We are pleased to announce we have concluded an agreement with Boeing for MRJ customer support as the Mitsubishi Regional Jet sets the new standard for next- generation regional jets truly suited for the 21st century," said Hideo Egawa, president, Mitsubishi Aircraft. "With this agreement, Mitsubishi Aircraft will be able to deliver profit-enhancing support and a competitive boost to our customers. We are confident that this agreement will further strengthen the relationship between our two companies."


Good thing Boeing did not go with the MRJ Spacejet program. It has failed miserably in having many delays to EIS.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2223
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:17 am

Misterven1 wrote:
I think Boeing should continue to develop Boeing 717 into a very modern 2-engine, short-range aircraft. I really think that is a missed opportunity for Boeing to be a part of the regional market.

The 717 (f.k.a. MD-95) was last build in May 2006, almost 15 years ago, and the factory has now being demolished/repurposed. So, "continuing" development of the 717 and restarting production is at the same level as restarting the 757 line: ain't gonna happen, time to move on.
 
jreeves96
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2020 10:05 am

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:34 am

alan3 wrote:
Speaking of Baby Boeings, I recently rediscovered what the 737-100 looked like and I don't think anyone will make a cuter plane than that.


If I had endless money I would have a 737-100BBJ. Just love the look of the 100 and 200.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 1006
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:45 am

Boeing thrives where the cost of entry is absurdly high for any new entrants. Military, space, and widebodies. The 737 had an amazing run, partially because so much of the development costs were already paid, making it hard for new entrants to really compete. This also makes it hard for any new Boeing to compete. This is the fundamental thesis behind most of the MOM/NSA threads; how do you compete with the existing aircraft while paying the development cost of entry?

Everyone with a dream of building big aircraft start with the small jet, which means it will always be a market with more money than economic sense.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4805
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 2:21 pm

Two modern engines and a single aisle seem to require the bones of a plane at least big enough to carry 150 passengers. Alaska manages with turboprops, but Delta coming in with pure jets seemed to do a little harm, at least so I hear from the few road warriors I know.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 993
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 3:44 pm

Going back in time to the early-2000s, ending the 717 was absolutely the right decision by Boeing. The 717 was aggressively marketed in several major campaigns - none of which materialized into orders. It was not for lack of trying that Boeing didn’t book more orders. The biggest opportunity for the 717 was the -300 variant requested by AirTran who wanted U.S. transcontinental range with 130 seats. Well, Boeing already sold that airplane in the form of the 737-700. So what would be the point? AirTran bought the 73G and saved Boeing from developing a bespoke orphan variant.


You may have misread my point. I wasn't saying that ending 717 was the wrong decision at the time. However, seriously upgrading the plane or using it as the starting point for a clean sheet design would have helped Boeing to compete in this market space. There were a great many MD-80 family operators who would have likely welcomed a more fuel efficient, modern plane in the same class. After all, the sun setting on the MD-80 family was something everyone could see approaching. Or, as another poster said, snapping up the C-Series instead of fighting it would have been the better option. As a Boeing shareholder, I'm still seriously upset about that major screw up - another totally wasted, squandered opportunity.
 
Noshow
Posts: 2421
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 3:56 pm

AFAIK Boeing went out of all regional sized airplanes because they are low margin at full program cost. But they missed to harvest the bigger ones like E2 and CSeries to renew their lower sized offerings fast and dirty as Airbus did with the A220.
 
N292UX
Posts: 676
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 7:08 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:53 pm

The last two <130 seaters Boeing made was the 717 and 737-600. Neither sold well at all. Especially the 736. I think Boeing realizes their main focus should be on the 150+ seat market rather than smaller jets. The 737 MAX 7 will be Boeing's smallest product going forward, and even that isn't selling well. Only customers for that at the moment are WN and WS. I wouldn't be surprised if those two both eventually have a pretty large 7M7 fleet, but I don't really see it selling well outside of those two.
 
bob75013
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:01 pm

Noshow wrote:
AFAIK Boeing went out of all regional sized airplanes because they are low margin at full program cost. But they missed to harvest the bigger ones like E2 and CSeries to renew their lower sized offerings fast and dirty as Airbus did with the A220.


Since the A220 continues to lose money maybe Boeing didn't miss any harvest.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1496
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 11:21 pm

DfwRevolution wrote:
The biggest opportunity for the 717 was the -300 variant requested by AirTran who wanted U.S. transcontinental range with 130 seats. Well, Boeing already sold that airplane in the form of the 737-700. So what would be the point? AirTran bought the 73G and saved Boeing from developing a bespoke orphan variant.


It's really too bad how prolific 3x3 seating is. Oh well.
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1496
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 11:23 pm

N292UX wrote:
I think Boeing realizes their main focus should be on the 150+ seat market


If this century has been focus, I'd hate to see what "afterthought" looks like.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2223
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Little aircraft Boeing?

Thu Mar 04, 2021 2:32 am

bob75013 wrote:
Noshow wrote:
AFAIK Boeing went out of all regional sized airplanes because they are low margin at full program cost. But they missed to harvest the bigger ones like E2 and CSeries to renew their lower sized offerings fast and dirty as Airbus did with the A220.


Since the A220 continues to lose money maybe Boeing didn't miss any harvest.

With that mindset, the 787 would have been cancelled right away.

The A220 (ex-CSeries) suffers from a bad program management and cost overrun from Bombardier; it's currently too expensive to manufacture.
However, with the "heavy machine" that is Airbus, they can (and will) reduce cost, allowing for cheaper sales price, which in turn will lead to higher sales, hence cheaper production; and so on, and so forth.
Airbus is convinced the A220 will be cashflow positive at some point, same belief ran within Boeing for the 787; both were allowed to proceed.

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