Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
zuckie13
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:16 pm

Is he just mostly upset that he thinks Boeing could be selling a higher priced aircraft that he can make more money leasing to airlines?
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1825
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:41 pm

SEPilot wrote:
Here are some economic realities. The fact that the 737 continues to sell in large numbers means that it fulfills the needs of many customers, and Boeing is making money building them. The fact that the basic design is over 50 years old is completely irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is newer and is selling better is only slightly relevant. Boeing still has loyal and not-so-loyal customers who still buy the 737. The A320 is doing better, but Boeing still manages about a 40% market share.


Imagine possible investor day PowerPoint:

"We're happy with 40%."
"We're no longer the clear market leader."
"Our narrow body product is losing market share"
"All the best of 1968"
"We're not an airplane manufacturer, we're a tech company. 1960s tech."
"New tech is over rated, it doesn't pay its way onto the airplane."
 
Cdydatzigs
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 3:31 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:52 pm

MileHFL400 wrote:
Sorry but a 737 replacement isn’t coming until there’s a massive step change in engine technology. As it stands now they would be investing billions for diminishing returns.


The 737 MAX is the final variant of the family though, so there will be a replacement coming eventually. And I think it's safe to say that Boeing is already in the preliminary stages of looking at what that will be.
 
744SPX
Posts: 777
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:20 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:09 pm

SteelChair wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Here are some economic realities. The fact that the 737 continues to sell in large numbers means that it fulfills the needs of many customers, and Boeing is making money building them. The fact that the basic design is over 50 years old is completely irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is newer and is selling better is only slightly relevant. Boeing still has loyal and not-so-loyal customers who still buy the 737. The A320 is doing better, but Boeing still manages about a 40% market share.


Imagine possible investor day PowerPoint:

"We're happy with 40%."
"We're no longer the clear market leader."
"Our narrow body product is losing market share"
"All the best of 1968"
"We're not an airplane manufacturer, we're a tech company. 1960s tech."
"New tech is over rated, it doesn't pay its way onto the airplane."


The problem isn't so much the 1960's tech, as it is trying to shoehorn in 2010's tech, leaving you with the worst of both technologies. (and an ugly airplane to boot)
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9833
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:12 pm

SEPilot wrote:
Here are some economic realities. The fact that the 737 continues to sell in large numbers means that it fulfills the needs of many customers, and Boeing is making money building them. The fact that the basic design is over 50 years old is completely irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is newer and is selling better is only slightly relevant. Boeing still has loyal and not-so-loyal customers who still buy the 737. The A320 is doing better, but Boeing still manages about a 40% market share.


Yes the age of the design is irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is selling better is actually the point. Does Boeing want to be competitive or not. If Boeing is satisfied with a shrinking share of the market, than the 737 will do. If Boeing wants to be the leader, they need something new.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 3175
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:02 pm

texl1649 wrote:
It is so tiresome the same cheerleaders constantly bashing Boeing for not replacing the 737, when it was their beloved Airbus who jumped into the A320NEO precisely to cut off the timeline for the 737 replacement which was pending launch. As bad as the 737Max has been the past two years, it has a huge backlog, SWA just ordered a bunch more, and UA is about to.

Are you really blaming Airbus for the 737 MAX??? That's what competition is, and you cannot blame one company for forcing their competitor into cutting corners and releasing a subpar product...
 
kiowa
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 10:12 pm

744SPX wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Here are some economic realities. The fact that the 737 continues to sell in large numbers means that it fulfills the needs of many customers, and Boeing is making money building them. The fact that the basic design is over 50 years old is completely irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is newer and is selling better is only slightly relevant. Boeing still has loyal and not-so-loyal customers who still buy the 737. The A320 is doing better, but Boeing still manages about a 40% market share.


Imagine possible investor day PowerPoint:

"We're happy with 40%."
"We're no longer the clear market leader."
"Our narrow body product is losing market share"
"All the best of 1968"
"We're not an airplane manufacturer, we're a tech company. 1960s tech."
"New tech is over rated, it doesn't pay its way onto the airplane."


The problem isn't so much the 1960's tech, as it is trying to shoehorn in 2010's tech, leaving you with the worst of both technologies. (and an ugly airplane to boot)


I agree with your points but the 737 is still 1960s tech. It needs to be replaced if Boeing wants to stay competitive.
 
DaCubbyBearBar
Posts: 543
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 10:24 pm

keesje wrote:
Leeham news:

“Boeing has to look at the future. What kind of airplanes that airlines will need with all the environmental challenges, regulatory challenges? What is the airplane type airlines will need 5, 10, 15, 20 years from now?” Hazy said.

“Boeing needs to invest. The 737 is a wonderful airplane, but it’s been in operation since 1967. We have an airplane that its basic design has been around for 54 years. It’s time for a new technology airplane that will give airlines and the public greater efficiency, better economics, better environmental footprint so the airlines can make money with it and yet meet the challenges that we’re facing on the environmental front.”

https://leehamnews.com/2021/06/14/ponti ... more-36736

I think increasingly people feel the 737 isn't good enough for even later this decade & becoming a poor investment for airlines, lessors.

He is not wrong…. And with this latest version, the Max, that is appropriate, because it is at the maximum it can give. This is the final version of the 737. The next plane is new.. it must be, IMHO…
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 905
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 11:51 pm

zuckie13 wrote:
Is he just mostly upset that he thinks Boeing could be selling a higher priced aircraft that he can make more money leasing to airlines?


ding! ding! ding! Winner Winner Chicken Dinner. Steven 'Captain Obvious' Udvar-Hazy just doesn't like the lease values of everything he's holding now having dropped so....

but queue the A320.5 and A322 powerpoints in 3, 2, 1....

I mean, Steve's right... but it's hardly a headline....

What will be interesting for all of us to learn is if the 10MAX will be able to hold a bit of interest and bring in more cash. The 900ER did breathe a bit of life into the 900 (though well short by a near order of magnitude of the A321...conceded!!!) Maybe the 10 is a maginal investiment that will help gain some sales that the 9 could not. It's a stopgap... Of course we want new... My hope is the 10 helps to bring in a little money to fund the new (NBA, NSA, RSA... whatever form 737 replacment is taking today)...
Last edited by FiscAutTecGarte on Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Mon Jun 14, 2021 11:58 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Here are some economic realities. The fact that the 737 continues to sell in large numbers means that it fulfills the needs of many customers, and Boeing is making money building them. The fact that the basic design is over 50 years old is completely irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is newer and is selling better is only slightly relevant. Boeing still has loyal and not-so-loyal customers who still buy the 737. The A320 is doing better, but Boeing still manages about a 40% market share.


Yes the age of the design is irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is selling better is actually the point. Does Boeing want to be competitive or not. If Boeing is satisfied with a shrinking share of the market, than the 737 will do. If Boeing wants to be the leader, they need something new.


The A320 isn’t actually selling better this year. It has a bigger backlog, but if we look at 2021 (which I assume you meant since you said “is selling” and not “has sold”) there are 316 737 orders vs 68 A320NEO orders this year.
 
jeffrey1970
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2001 1:41 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:25 am

MDC862 wrote:
Ha, what is rhe current backlog for Boeing, 4,000 plus? Idealists want flash, new, and shiney. The 320 program is 35 years old, still selling and also has a hefty backlog. So much for customers ignoring this segment of the market.


I think he is onto something. Even if Boeing has a backlog of 737 orders I am sure many will get cancelled. Because of the pandemic the airlines financial situation has changed dramatically. Boeing is at it's best when they listen to the needs of their customers.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 1150
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:54 am

jeffrey1970 wrote:
Even if Boeing has a backlog of 737 orders I am sure many will get cancelled. Because of the pandemic the airlines financial situation has changed dramatically. Boeing is at it's best when they listen to the needs of their customers.


Such as Southwest needing a new generation of 737?
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:59 am

I think both B and A are continuing to elongate the life of these older platforms (albeit B’s platform is much older). As others have correctly pointed out, until there are some worthwhile technological breakthroughs (fuselage design or manufacturing or power plant revolutions), the time may not be right for the investment. Strategically, what might be worse than stringing along the 737 platform a little longer, is prematurely investing 10b in a new plane based on current technology limitations. I guess that will change in the next 3-5 years, and we’ll see both B and A start working on new platforms
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:05 am

I think both B and A are continuing to elongate the life of these older platforms (albeit B’s platform is much older). As others have correctly pointed out, until there are some worthwhile technological breakthroughs (fuselage design or manufacturing or power plant revolutions), the time may not be right for the investment. Strategically, what might be worse than stringing along the 737 platform a little longer, is prematurely investing 10b in a new plane based on current technology limitations. I guess that will change in the next 3-5 years, and we’ll see both B and A start working on new platforms
 
TexStones
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:09 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:14 am

At the risk of being shouted down by The Vocal Few, this infrequent poster/frequent reader will offer an opinion on the 737 situation. In no particular order, here are a few bullet points.

1) Steven Udvar-Hazy is absolutely right, Boeing needs to get to work on a 737 replacement. As a matter of fact, they probably already are well down that road. What else are their thousands of engineers doing right now? (Yeah, I know, other markets and projects, but work is already well underway.)

2) It is foolish to think that Boeing will have any difficulty accessing the capital markets to raise funds for the development of a new airliner. They are the #1 US export company, by far. Banks will line up to throw cash at them, and they will see a return on their investment.

3) Airbus needs to get to work on a new narrowbody family, but they have the comfort of a slightly longer timeline.

4) Depending on the EIS for the new frame, much of the MAX backlog can be converted to the replacement. There are certainly reams of spreadsheets describing multiple backlog conversion strategies.

5) WN is the Alpha Customer for the new NB aircraft. Boeing will follow their lead. Watch them closely for clues.

6) No player, not Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, or any Russian or Soviet contender, or any airline, has the luxury of waiting for a leap in engine technology. They should all be anticipating such developments, but work should be underway now to meet NB demand for 2030 and beyond. These people are smart enough to plan for future powerplant options.

7) The new NB aircraft will be built in Everett. The Renton facility will be transitioned to a WB product that will share much of the engineering from the 737 replacement.

I'll go back to lurking now.
Last edited by TexStones on Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3775
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:18 am

TexStones wrote:
At the risk of being shouted down by The Vocal Few, this infrequent poster/frequent reader will offer an opinion on the 737 situation. In no particular order, here are a few bullet points.

7) The new NB aircraft will be built in Everett. The Renton facility will be transitioned to a WB product that will share much of the engineering from the 737 replacement.

I


I'd flip that. With the 747 going out of production there will be plenty of space at Everett in the short term and I personally think the next aircraft Boeing builds will be a MOM type aircraft and that would be free space. 737 Replacement isn't happening for quite some time.
 
Canuck600
Posts: 405
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:40 am

SEPilot is the only one here thinking with a business persons mind. If you have something that sells well, you milk it for all it's worth until it stops selling and making money

Fans keep forgetting that the only thing that matters is are airlines making money using the aircraft & is Boeing making money selling it. Boeing has dropped the ball by not working on a 737 replacement in the background or working on the replacement faster.

With all the technology available why is the development process taking so long? Was the 747 done in something like 2 years & they were still using slide rules to a certain extent then
 
UA748i
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 11:53 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:52 am

davidjohnson6 wrote:
Boeing is unlikely to spend over $10bn on a new aircraft without giving stockholders the chance to vote on it first. The vote may be a formality... but the board will want to gain sone sort of formal consent for such a program


Ironically, the MAX has cost Boeing more than that at this point.
 
RR757
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:16 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 3:07 am

texl1649 wrote:
It is so tiresome the same cheerleaders constantly bashing Boeing for not replacing the 737, when it was their beloved Airbus who jumped into the A320NEO precisely to cut off the timeline for the 737 replacement which was pending launch. As bad as the 737Max has been the past two years, it has a huge backlog, SWA just ordered a bunch more, and UA is about to.

Meanwhile, just a little context for SUH and ALC, he had a huge order for Max, cancelled/converted some to 787's during covid insanity 2020 (still has over a hundred on order), and is clearly in a negotiating process for how many to re-instate/pricing/delivery/shuffling their order book as short haul flying is returning a lot faster than long haul for lease customers. Throwing cold water publicly on residual/value in this process is a bit STC of him, but not real surprising. All car salesmen want an exciting new model customers get excited about, it doesn't mean they know how/when/why the mfg really does an all new chassis/model.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... clearances


It’s not bashing Boeing, it’s Boeing failing to innovate and investing in new designs for what is effectively their bread and butter.
 
Insertnamehere
Posts: 387
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 3:44 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:04 am

Would Boeing even be right to be the first mover in replacing their flagship single-aisle aircraft? While first-mover advantage is undoubtedly advantageous, the second-mover advantage can be just as powerful. If Boeing lets Airbus move first, they can see how the market adopts such an expensive program and thus act in kind, possibly beating Airbus.

Do we know how far along, if at all, Boeing was on their 737 replacement when they had to move forward with their MAX when the NEO was announced? At least according to Wikipedia Boeing was beginning to look at 737 replacements back in 2006 then shelved it in 2011.

How much of that development could Boeing use to let Airbus move first then respond in-kind with something better? If its substantial, it might mean Boeing can announce later and be in market before Airbus.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7631
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:29 am

TexStones wrote:
At the risk of being shouted down by The Vocal Few, this infrequent poster/frequent reader will offer an opinion on the 737 situation. In no particular order, here are a few bullet points.

5) WN is the Alpha Customer for the new NB aircraft. Boeing will follow their lead. Watch them closely for clues..


I did.
And they've just ordered a shedload of MAXes.
They do seem to be the Alpha customer for the "new" narrowbody - the MAX, that is ...

Rgds
 
Max Q
Posts: 9246
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:40 am

Boeing HAS to make the Max a winning program, it’s not just about restoring their good name but they need to buy time while new technologies mature, particularly engines


This is going to be a few years, it would be senseless to start developing a clean sheet 737 replacement now without a step change in engine efficiency


Furthermore they seriously need to make some money, they’re massively in debt right now, making the Max as profitable as possible and paying down as much of that debt as possible should be their priority


Development of the 737 replacement can continue in the background while engine development continues


A higher priority is a 757 replacement to go up against the A321XLR
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14915
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:54 am

sxf24 wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
ILNFlyer wrote:
Everyone knows the 737 needs replacement - even Boeing. The basic problem remains - with what? The primary driver of efficiency is the engines. It already has the best available under the wings. So they could upgrade the the flight system to FBW. Again, to what advantage? Is this going to result in a substantive enough efficiency gain to offset the investment and increased cost? Why should Boeing invest $10B+ on an aircraft which will not see a substantive gain in efficiency great enough to leap-frog the 320NEO.


Doesn't the GTF have a fuel burn advantage on the LEAP? Thus, the best engine won't actually wont even fit under the wing, because the wing box/landing gear interface are too small. Thus, advantage A321.

I suppose one could argue that CFM is generally more reliable than PW, this obviating the fuel burn advantage. Taking this argument (which is yet to be proved on these particular engines) might make the LEAP the "best."


PW makes GTF with different diameters and there's no technical reason why Boeing couldn't have offered with the 737.


Aside of the only GTF variants small enough to hang of a 737 wing having about 1/3 less thrust than the 737 engines...

best regards
Thomas
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8385
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 6:30 am

The Boeing board must shudder every time someone mentions a new build or new enhancement. Their 787, 77X and Max projects have cost them a fortune in recent years.
 
User avatar
Leovinus
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2021 5:57 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 6:32 am

Max Q wrote:
Boeing HAS to make the Max a winning program, it’s not just about restoring their good name but they need to buy time while new technologies mature, particularly engines


This is going to be a few years, it would be senseless to start developing a clean sheet 737 replacement now without a step change in engine efficiency


Furthermore they seriously need to make some money, they’re massively in debt right now, making the Max as profitable as possible and paying down as much of that debt as possible should be their priority


Development of the 737 replacement can continue in the background while engine development continues


A higher priority is a 757 replacement to go up against the A321XLR


For some time now I've been somewhat convinced that Boeing will need to design two aircraft, one as a future MAX replacement, and one that can plug the gap between MAX 10 and 787-8 for longer and slimmer point to point routes. With Airbus hinting at a resigned and lengthened "A322" it's becoming obvious that Boeing needs to do something. Airbus simply has the more flexible airframe. The MAX is straining what the design can accommodate. Airbus simply has more life in the A320 still.

The cheapest would probably be for them to review a 787-3 design from the point of view of commonality and accounting realities. Helping to spread the cost of the 787 program and use the savings in airframes to offset the slightly less optimised product for its segment. I don't think people understand how much is saved by reusing mostly the same jigs, tooling, competent workforce, work-flows, inventory, etc vs. setting up a separate line for a new aircraft. Which is precisely why re-winging and re-engining is so preferable in the aircraft manufacturers sector. Or any manufacturing sector. So in my mind: launch a derivative where it is possible, and then design a 737 replacement from scratch.

The 737 is at the end of the line. It has nothing more to give. Engines can't be made bigger, the airframe can't get much lighter. I suppose a carbon fibre gull-wing could be designed for it? It would be exceptionally cool. But at some point it's just better to face facts, take the expense, and make a new platform all-together. One that customers have been begging for over a decade. Car manufacturers have to do it all the time to stay within regulations and competitiveness. Prices go up. We accept it because we have to. If the international community put their money where their mouth is something similar would be true for aviation.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 6:38 am

Max Q wrote:
Boeing HAS to make the Max a winning program, it’s not just about restoring their good name but they need to buy time while new technologies mature, particularly engines


This is going to be a few years, it would be senseless to start developing a clean sheet 737 replacement now without a step change in engine efficiency


Furthermore they seriously need to make some money, they’re massively in debt right now, making the Max as profitable as possible and paying down as much of that debt as possible should be their priority


Development of the 737 replacement can continue in the background while engine development continues


A higher priority is a 757 replacement to go up against the A321XLR


Both rolled the dice with the NEO and the MAX and while it seems like the MAX will be second to the NEO, it is still strong enough to capture 40% of the market share. Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose, but it still is enough to make a healthy profit for Boeing. Airbus and Boeing would only bankrupt each other if both would constantly aim to be the leader in each market segment.

The 757 replacement market has sailed, the A321NEO won. They can not really make a direct competitor without replacing the MAX and they can not make a twin aisle without hurting the 787.
 
Rekoff
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue May 18, 2021 7:15 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:13 am

Revelation wrote:
sagechan wrote:
The marginal improvement is the key restriction since Boeing went ahead with the MAX. Without new engine tech or some sort of materials or aerodynamic design breakthrough its hard to make a case for a new clean sheet. The duopoly also reduces the desire for big new programs. With all that said, high backlogs of the current products isn't that important to the discussion since there aren't other options and fleets need replaced and in normal trends growth needs to happen, so there will always be sales of what's available.

As above it is starting to feel the new engine tech for at least shorter range flights will be a UDF with SAF or H2 as fuel because the biggest engine maker is putting money into developing just that. Their time frame is ~2035 which is about when most people thought we'd see a true need for new clean sheets. It'll be interesting to see how A and B incorporate that into their planning.


This will be a smaller short range plane so I'm seeing this as an engine for the A220 successor, not the A320. This engine development isnt any proof (part of the) 737MAX wont see early replacement by a 757 successor.
 
Noshow
Posts: 3538
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:18 am

Looking back it feels like Boeing can improve some things doing their next programs:
-Don't cut aircraft capabilities and growth options because of neighboring programs. Like 737-787-777-747.
-Don't custom tailor too much for specific airlines, optimize for anticipated general market needs.
-Don't wait for too long with program launches until you finally just have to act.
-Keep the knowledge in the company hot without pausing development for years losing experienced staff. Don't retire your specialist folks early.
-Provide proper funding from the beginning. Don't burn through your budget by getting things right only afterwards.
 
ben7x
Posts: 216
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2021 8:58 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:24 am

Hello, this is my first post, and I‘d like to add something.

Isn’t it possible that Boeing just like “skips” the MoM and combines it with 737 successor?
I could imagine three possible variants:
B797-8: 170-200 seats
B797-9 : 200-240 seats
B797-10: 240 to 270 seats
I know that Boeing wouldn’t have a smaller regional sized plane like the A220, but wouldn’t that just be a rather simple and cheap way to cover the most of the NB market?
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 4216
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:24 am

seahawk wrote:
Both rolled the dice with the NEO and the MAX and while it seems like the MAX will be second to the NEO, it is still strong enough to capture 40% of the market share. Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose, but it still is enough to make a healthy profit for Boeing. Airbus and Boeing would only bankrupt each other if both would constantly aim to be the leader in each market segment.

The 757 replacement market has sailed, the A321NEO won. They can not really make a direct competitor without replacing the MAX and they can not make a twin aisle without hurting the 787.


Well said. And that´s the reason why the enthusiasm to launch anything new (except for derivates) is limited at both OEMs currently. It´s a situation both can be happy with for some years to come. And finally earn some money. And wait for the coming updates of legal frame works to settle down and decide afterwards what the appropriate way(s) for future are.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:30 am

I'm afraid the rest of the world is not overly impressed by Southwest airlines ordering a bunch of MAX -7's. Are they the sole -7 customer?
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5782
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:39 am

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Here are some economic realities. The fact that the 737 continues to sell in large numbers means that it fulfills the needs of many customers, and Boeing is making money building them. The fact that the basic design is over 50 years old is completely irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is newer and is selling better is only slightly relevant. Boeing still has loyal and not-so-loyal customers who still buy the 737. The A320 is doing better, but Boeing still manages about a 40% market share.


Yes the age of the design is irrelevant. The fact that the A320 is selling better is actually the point. Does Boeing want to be competitive or not. If Boeing is satisfied with a shrinking share of the market, than the 737 will do. If Boeing wants to be the leader, they need something new.


The A320 isn’t actually selling better this year. It has a bigger backlog, but if we look at 2021 (which I assume you meant since you said “is selling” and not “has sold”) there are 316 737 orders vs 68 A320NEO orders this year.

You have a point, but this year to me is an outlier. Because of the MAX grounding the 737 was much easier to cancel during COVID. Hence many more 737s were canceled than A320s. Now that the light is visible at the end of the COVID tunnel and the MAX is flying again it is only natural that it should get a surge of orders. But I expect the 60/40 market share split to reestablish itself soon.

And as to that split, of course Boeing would like it to be 50/50. The problem is how much they would have to spend to get there, and how long it would take to recover that investment. Boeing has a bigger share of the wide body market; at this point it is probably necessary to concede that Airbus dominates the narrowbody field. A 40% share is nothing to sneeze at, and they are still going to make plenty of money with it. And once they have the technology to build something sufficiently better to be worthwhile they will. Meanwhile their goal should be to get into the best financial shape that they can so that when that time comes they can seize the opportunity. If they jump too soon they run the risk of having Airbus upstage them again by coming in second with a better plane. That has happened several times in Boeing’s history.
 
DartHerald
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:08 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:41 am

Both rolled the dice with the NEO and the MAX and while it seems like the MAX will be second to the NEO, it is still strong enough to capture 40% of the market share. Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose, but it still is enough to make a healthy profit for Boeing. Airbus and Boeing would only bankrupt each other if both would constantly aim to be the leader in each market segment. .


This is only true to a degree. It could be argued that the Max has retained market share because of limitations on A320 production, and that if Airbus was able to produce more it would capture more of the market and I think we may see that happening as time goes by if Airbus are able to expand their production. Against that, there will of course always be some Boeing diehard companies like WN and FR but what proportion of the market do they represent?
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5782
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:08 am

kiowa wrote:
744SPX wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

Imagine possible investor day PowerPoint:

"We're happy with 40%."
"We're no longer the clear market leader."
"Our narrow body product is losing market share"
"All the best of 1968"
"We're not an airplane manufacturer, we're a tech company. 1960s tech."
"New tech is over rated, it doesn't pay its way onto the airplane."


The problem isn't so much the 1960's tech, as it is trying to shoehorn in 2010's tech, leaving you with the worst of both technologies. (and an ugly airplane to boot)


I agree with your points but the 737 is still 1960s tech. It needs to be replaced if Boeing wants to stay competitive.

The wheel is 3000 BC tech but we still use it. The age of any technology is not the issue. The issue is can you improve on it, and at what cost? If the cost outweighs the gain it is not worth doing. To be specific, let’s just say that Boeing sells a 737MAX8 for $80 million (just a WAG). They design and build the 797-8 that their accountants say must be sold for $100 million in order to make a profit. It only offers about 5% improvement in CASM. Meanwhile the A320NEO can be had for $81 million, and is within 4% CASM. How many airlines are going to pay that price premium? My guess is not many. Should Boeing build it anyway and sell it at a loss? Meanwhile Airbus bides their time, waits for new technology to mature and 5 years later comes out with the A360 that offers a 15% improvement in CASM that they can sell for $90 million. Where does that leave Boeing? Much worse off than they are now.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:39 am

I think 40% marketshare might be optimistic this decade. On top of that price/ margin is essential.
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 4216
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:46 am

SEPilot wrote:
kiowa wrote:
744SPX wrote:

The problem isn't so much the 1960's tech, as it is trying to shoehorn in 2010's tech, leaving you with the worst of both technologies. (and an ugly airplane to boot)


I agree with your points but the 737 is still 1960s tech. It needs to be replaced if Boeing wants to stay competitive.

The wheel is 3000 BC tech but we still use it. The age of any technology is not the issue. The issue is can you improve on it, and at what cost? If the cost outweighs the gain it is not worth doing. To be specific, let’s just say that Boeing sells a 737MAX8 for $80 million (just a WAG). They design and build the 797-8 that their accountants say must be sold for $100 million in order to make a profit. It only offers about 5% improvement in CASM. Meanwhile the A320NEO can be had for $81 million, and is within 4% CASM. How many airlines are going to pay that price premium? My guess is not many. Should Boeing build it anyway and sell it at a loss? Meanwhile Airbus bides their time, waits for new technology to mature and 5 years later comes out with the A360 that offers a 15% improvement in CASM that they can sell for $90 million. Where does that leave Boeing? Much worse off than they are now.


Many true words in it. And even worse: can the airlines make the 20 million USD gap between your 737MAX8 and 797-8 actually work? Assuming CASM of 5,000 USD / block hour for your 737MAX8 and CASM of 4,500 USD / block hour for your 797-8 - 10% reduction - you´ll need a whooping 40,000 block hours just to amortize the gap. Even assuming 14 block hours / day that´s nearly 8 years worth of flying. I think it shows the dilemma: if you want to be in a position to charge a premium over the current product you´ll need to present a drastic reduction in costs. As long as this isn´t possible you won´t really have anyone bite on a new project.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7631
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 10:28 am

Max Q wrote:
Boeing HAS to make the Max a winning program, it’s not just about restoring their good name but they need to buy time while new technologies mature, particularly engines


This is going to be a few years, it would be senseless to start developing a clean sheet 737 replacement now without a step change in engine efficiency


Furthermore they seriously need to make some money, they’re massively in debt right now, making the Max as profitable as possible and paying down as much of that debt as possible should be their priority


Development of the 737 replacement can continue in the background while engine development continues


A higher priority is a 757 replacement to go up against the A321XLR


I sort of agree, insofar as Boeing have now nailed their colours firmly to the MAX.
It is demonstrating a good recovery that could be, and was, predicted.
It was always pretty clear that the likes of WN and FR were going to re-inject momentum.
They are also injecting that momentum across the range, including the 737-7 (WN) and 737-10 (FR)

I think Boeing will work really hard to get the MAX fully recovered.
So I think NSA is on the back-burner for now.

As far as the 757 goes, I have to pinch myself sometimes.
How many 757's were actually doing the "specialist" sectors (like long-range TATL, or hot and high)?
I suspect the vast majority of former 757 sectors are already being covered off by bog standard A321/A321NEO's, 737-900Er's, 737-9's and soon 737-10

The A321XLR seems to solicit extreme responses, from "it's a niche product" to "its the new wunderkind".
I get the impression there is an emotional response to the "new 757 being an Airbus" sort of thing from both sides.
Reality is that it doesn't matter.

The A321XLR is a fabulous product from the viewpoint of a "bang-for-buck" leverage of the base A321into a different market niche
But in terms of the OVERALL market, I think it's a marginal gain in terms of overall sales and revenue.

Once the 737-10 is up and running, Boeing will need to decide whether it is worth bothering with a new frame to cover off a marginal market, or just keep their powder dry and milk the 737-10
I'll put my cards on the table - I don't see an all-new programme from either manufacturer this decade.
And I don't think it will matter, except to us as enthusiasts.
I think the 737-10 will do well.

Rgds
 
Noshow
Posts: 3538
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 10:32 am

The recent MAX orders might very well indicate rebated take overs of other customer's cancellations. Parts and services will still make this profitable.
It looks like a race to get rates up fast on both sides. Airbus wants to built as many A321neos as possible before Boeing can react, harvesting their practical monopoly for the moment.
 
planecane
Posts: 1927
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 10:50 am

seahawk wrote:
As the competition is not more climate friendly or efficient, the 737 is just fine. And yes, a 737 won´t cut it in 2045, but neither would an A320.

^This. While the A321NEO may perform better for certain missions from a payload range standpoint, the A320NEO series is not much, if any better from the environmental perspective which is mentioned in the OP.

If he 737 needs to be replaced to meet future environmental specs than so does the A320.
 
texl1649
Posts: 2243
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 10:56 am

LAX772LR wrote:
texl1649 wrote:
the 737 replacement which was pending launch.

There was no launch of anything "pending."


davidjohnson6 wrote:
Boeing is unlikely to spend over $10bn on a new aircraft without giving stockholders the chance to vote on it first. The vote may be a formality...

Of course it is, seeing as they'd be about 2 degrees removed from an actual executive decision.


ILNFlyer wrote:
So they could upgrade the the flight system to FBW.

Not if they want to call the resultant product a 737.
No way the FAA in its current state would certify such a change, especially on the model that's already been a stake for their reputation's head.


In 2011 they absolutely planned to launch, but then the loss of prime customers AA and UA suddenly to the new A320NEO is what made them launch the Max, as they couldn’t wait to get a product to market until 2020. Here we are.

https://simpleflying.com/boeing-set-to-replace-737-max/

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna41517601
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1825
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 11:01 am

keesje wrote:
I think 40% marketshare might be optimistic this decade. On top of that price/ margin is essential.


I agree and that's really the point. Boeing was losing market share even before the pandemic and the MAX debacle. I get all the arguments about the economics of a new airplane being prohibitive, but how long can Boeing languish? Eventually, there will be spillover into the wide body segment due to pilot efficiencies, Airbus will gain an advantage with airline customers due to their narrow body dominance.

Southwest is doing what is best for Southwest, not Boeing. They're successful and a good customer, but they're only one customer.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 11:09 am

SteelChair wrote:
keesje wrote:
I think 40% marketshare might be optimistic this decade. On top of that price/ margin is essential.


I agree and that's really the point. Boeing was losing market share even before the pandemic and the MAX debacle. I get all the arguments about the economics of a new airplane being prohibitive, but how long can Boeing languish? Eventually, there will be spillover into the wide body segment due to pilot efficiencies, Airbus will gain an advantage with airline customers due to their narrow body dominance.

Southwest is doing what is best for Southwest, not Boeing. They're successful and a good customer, but they're only one customer.


Boeing had a dominance in the single aisle market for decades, still Airbus not only managed to sell A320s, they also managed to sell their widebodies.
 
brindabella
Posts: 757
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:42 pm

astuteman wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Boeing HAS to make the Max a winning program, it’s not just about restoring their good name but they need to buy time while new technologies mature, particularly engines


This is going to be a few years, it would be senseless to start developing a clean sheet 737 replacement now without a step change in engine efficiency


Furthermore they seriously need to make some money, they’re massively in debt right now, making the Max as profitable as possible and paying down as much of that debt as possible should be their priority


Development of the 737 replacement can continue in the background while engine development continues


A higher priority is a 757 replacement to go up against the A321XLR


I sort of agree, insofar as Boeing have now nailed their colours firmly to the MAX.
It is demonstrating a good recovery that could be, and was, predicted.
It was always pretty clear that the likes of WN and FR were going to re-inject momentum.
They are also injecting that momentum across the range, including the 737-7 (WN) and 737-10 (FR)

I think Boeing will work really hard to get the MAX fully recovered.
So I think NSA is on the back-burner for now.

As far as the 757 goes, I have to pinch myself sometimes.
How many 757's were actually doing the "specialist" sectors (like long-range TATL, or hot and high)?
I suspect the vast majority of former 757 sectors are already being covered off by bog standard A321/A321NEO's, 737-900Er's, 737-9's and soon 737-10

The A321XLR seems to solicit extreme responses, from "it's a niche product" to "its the new wunderkind".
I get the impression there is an emotional response to the "new 757 being an Airbus" sort of thing from both sides.
Reality is that it doesn't matter.

The A321XLR is a fabulous product from the viewpoint of a "bang-for-buck" leverage of the base A321into a different market niche
But in terms of the OVERALL market, I think it's a marginal gain in terms of overall sales and revenue.

Once the 737-10 is up and running, Boeing will need to decide whether it is worth bothering with a new frame to cover off a marginal market, or just keep their powder dry and milk the 737-10
I'll put my cards on the table - I don't see an all-new programme from either manufacturer this decade.
And I don't think it will matter, except to us as enthusiasts.
I think the 737-10 will do well.

Rgds


:checkmark:

All good; however the growing MAX sales successes will need to spread outside the core and Mega 737 stalwart airlines.
Which may happen - but isn't the reality just yet.

Maybe worth recalling a common judgement pre the crashes that the two strongest sellers in the 6-ab NB space would continue to be the MAX8 and the 321NEO - albeit that the large Lessors were screaming for BA to accelerate the MAX10.

To your last prediction - do I hear echoes of the long-running debate about the NMA being the (necessary) vehicle to learn how to do the NSA?
(If so I am still weighing your insights on that - and waiting to see how the T7 turns out once volume production begins. Will be fascinating)....

:D


cheers
 
brindabella
Posts: 757
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 12:47 pm

seahawk wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
keesje wrote:
I think 40% marketshare might be optimistic this decade. On top of that price/ margin is essential.


I agree and that's really the point. Boeing was losing market share even before the pandemic and the MAX debacle. I get all the arguments about the economics of a new airplane being prohibitive, but how long can Boeing languish? Eventually, there will be spillover into the wide body segment due to pilot efficiencies, Airbus will gain an advantage with airline customers due to their narrow body dominance.

Southwest is doing what is best for Southwest, not Boeing. They're successful and a good customer, but they're only one customer.


Boeing had a dominance in the single aisle market for decades, still Airbus not only managed to sell A320s, they also managed to sell their widebodies.


Sadly, the massive fine against AB for corruption may point to a reason for some of that success.

:ashamed:
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 13645
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:19 pm

Having a solid narrow body helps when packaging together a joint narrowbody/widebody deal. But if a wide body from another vendor is far and above a better choice airlines will buy it. Just look at the 777 vs A340. Crew commonality helps, but:

A) Many (most?) airlines are keep their narrowbody and widebody crew separate.

B) You have to keep in mind those training day figures you see OEM’s tout is the bare legal minimum. Many airlines, especially major airlines, may require additional training than the basic package, as might local certifying authorities. This is especially true if the airline has multiple narrow body types in their fleet (eg any combination of 737, A320, A220) that pilots may be training from-they want to ensure their new A330 pilot, for example, is as equally trained and familiar coming from a A220 vs coming from a A320. Which may mean some technically redundant training for the A320 pilot extending training time past what Airbus promotes.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:00 pm

brindabella wrote:
seahawk wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

I agree and that's really the point. Boeing was losing market share even before the pandemic and the MAX debacle. I get all the arguments about the economics of a new airplane being prohibitive, but how long can Boeing languish? Eventually, there will be spillover into the wide body segment due to pilot efficiencies, Airbus will gain an advantage with airline customers due to their narrow body dominance.

Southwest is doing what is best for Southwest, not Boeing. They're successful and a good customer, but they're only one customer.


Boeing had a dominance in the single aisle market for decades, still Airbus not only managed to sell A320s, they also managed to sell their widebodies.


Sadly, the massive fine against AB for corruption may point to a reason for some of that success.

:ashamed:


Brindabella, do you have any sources to support your aquisation? It looks rather opportunistic & cheap. Thanks
 
N408BN
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2016 1:30 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:01 pm

MDC862 wrote:
Ha, what is rhe current backlog for Boeing, 4,000 plus? Idealists want flash, new, and shiney. The 320 program is 35 years old, still selling and also has a hefty backlog. So much for customers ignoring this segment of the market.



The B-52 is pushing 70 years old, but she still gets the job done!!!
 
astuteman
Posts: 7631
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:03 pm

brindabella wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Boeing HAS to make the Max a winning program, it’s not just about restoring their good name but they need to buy time while new technologies mature, particularly engines


This is going to be a few years, it would be senseless to start developing a clean sheet 737 replacement now without a step change in engine efficiency


Furthermore they seriously need to make some money, they’re massively in debt right now, making the Max as profitable as possible and paying down as much of that debt as possible should be their priority


Development of the 737 replacement can continue in the background while engine development continues


A higher priority is a 757 replacement to go up against the A321XLR


I sort of agree, insofar as Boeing have now nailed their colours firmly to the MAX.
It is demonstrating a good recovery that could be, and was, predicted.
It was always pretty clear that the likes of WN and FR were going to re-inject momentum.
They are also injecting that momentum across the range, including the 737-7 (WN) and 737-10 (FR)

I think Boeing will work really hard to get the MAX fully recovered.
So I think NSA is on the back-burner for now.

As far as the 757 goes, I have to pinch myself sometimes.
How many 757's were actually doing the "specialist" sectors (like long-range TATL, or hot and high)?
I suspect the vast majority of former 757 sectors are already being covered off by bog standard A321/A321NEO's, 737-900Er's, 737-9's and soon 737-10

The A321XLR seems to solicit extreme responses, from "it's a niche product" to "its the new wunderkind".
I get the impression there is an emotional response to the "new 757 being an Airbus" sort of thing from both sides.
Reality is that it doesn't matter.

The A321XLR is a fabulous product from the viewpoint of a "bang-for-buck" leverage of the base A321into a different market niche
But in terms of the OVERALL market, I think it's a marginal gain in terms of overall sales and revenue.

Once the 737-10 is up and running, Boeing will need to decide whether it is worth bothering with a new frame to cover off a marginal market, or just keep their powder dry and milk the 737-10
I'll put my cards on the table - I don't see an all-new programme from either manufacturer this decade.
And I don't think it will matter, except to us as enthusiasts.
I think the 737-10 will do well.

Rgds


:checkmark:

To your last prediction - do I hear echoes of the long-running debate about the NMA being the (necessary) vehicle to learn how to do the NSA?
(If so I am still weighing your insights on that - and waiting to see how the T7 turns out once volume production begins. Will be fascinating)....

:D


cheers


As someone who has spent 40 years being engaged in operating, facilitating, and at time now setting out the manufacturing execution architecture for very complex products, I don't really buy the argument about NMA being necessary to learn how to do NSA.
I get even more intrigued when the people who champion this also champion MBSE, whose whole point is to minimise/eliminate that very need... :scratchchin:

On programmes this size, just like the one I'm on now, there are very many ways of synthesising, process modelling, physically prototyping, and 1st Article production and verifications in the modern world to mitigate that dependency.

There were methods 40 years ago too - just not digital. But they were just as effective for all that......
I watched the schedule and cost of the most complex product ever created by the mind and hand of humankind get absolutely nailed out of the box in the '80's.
(full scale mocks ups or engineered plastic models anyone?)

I struggle to buy it, to be honest.

Rgds
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 13645
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:07 pm

keesje wrote:
brindabella wrote:
seahawk wrote:

Boeing had a dominance in the single aisle market for decades, still Airbus not only managed to sell A320s, they also managed to sell their widebodies.


Sadly, the massive fine against AB for corruption may point to a reason for some of that success.

:ashamed:


Brindabella, do you have any sources to support your aquisation? It looks rather opportunistic & cheap. Thanks

I mean it is a reason for some of that success, it’s just not the sole reason. Unless you think Airbus is so inept that that they kept up a bribery operation (which Airbus admitted to and paid fines for) that was resulting in no extra business for them.
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 1150
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: Steven Udvar-Hazy: 737 needs replacement

Tue Jun 15, 2021 2:21 pm

astuteman wrote:
I watched the schedule and cost of the most complex product ever created by the mind and hand of humankind get absolutely nailed out of the box in the '80's.
Rgds

Which project was this? I can think of a few possibilities. We live in extraordinary times.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], battlegroup62, crytexx, cx777fan, David_itl, davidjohnson6, FlyingHonu001, Google [Bot], Harry1301, JoseSalazar, kriskim, LWIEV, propchaser, Speedbird2010, woodcutting, xwb777, YoungDon and 113 guests

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