Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
dare100em
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 10:36 am

Quoting planemaker (Reply 148):
“The Stone Age did not end for lack of stone, [...]

Actually most - if not all - "Ages" [civilicatory supercycles] ended with a widespread collapse [for whatever reason], which comes with desintegration, complexity-reduction, "localisation", population decline, vanishing of knowledge, vansihing of "international" trade, almost always massive decline of cultural centers [= big cities], vanishing of the elites etc. etc.

Eventually - after some time - new "societies/civilisations" emerged which indeed where typically based on fundamental new knowledge, culture and technologies like bronze, writings, iron, coal + steam engine, ...

That's not to say that every substitude comes with a society collapse - e.g. oil substituting coal [while the use of coal still rising anyway] - but that it's not a "given" things will play out that way. Typical any "substidude" in one civilisation cycle comes with a higher complexity level - all systems getting more-and-more complex and interlinked and come with a tendancy towards "monopolization" - until these systems get more-and-more fragil and finally falling apart [triggerd by external factors like war/civil war, environmental change or brakeup of long-range trade] in cascading failures.

Odds are very high our cycle will "end" with large-scale-blackouts because if someone "pulles the plug" it's over within a week or two.
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 10:48 am

Quoting dare100em (Reply 150):
Odds are very high our cycle will "end" with large-scale-blackouts because if someone "pulles the plug" it's over within a week or two.

Good grief! Here am I thinking about Boeing's next big bet, now I need to think where our candles are kept and whether we need more deep freezers to hold essential foods and a gen set to drive them! But I digress from the question put forward by the OP.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1961
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 10:49 am

Quoting Egerton (Reply 127):
In hindsight, they might have found a better solution by not doing a kow-tow to American Airlines when AA said get your act together, or we will buy only A320neo series. If Boeing had taken deep breath and gone forward with the NSA then, and accepted that the still current old engine option would have to hold the fort until relieved. Mind, that would have carried desperate risks, just as the current mess does.

This may just have been a very good option, the A330 sold on availability as the 787 couldn't provide all the aircraft for all operators, the same for the 737 and A320. Boeing could have gone for modest improvements and still sold heaps because the A320 is sold out and cannot provide enough on its own, even when looking at more than 60 units per month. Sorta like Airbus, would have made a nice return had they stuck with the original A350 as the answer to the 787. They would then have had the opportunity to do the XWB aimed squarely at the 777. If only...right?

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 135):
Its funny that the OEM that delivers more aircraft, a higher proportion of widebodies, and has $15 Billion more in airplane revenue is the one that is hurting? Funny logic.

How much profit would Boeing have made had they not been doing program accounting again? Whilst the company is far away from being in financial trouble...lets not pretend they are running record profits because all is well with all of their programs.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 10:55 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 125):
Its hard to see how an A30X would be fundamentally different than the A330neo if you are proposing that fuse. If it is widebody I think it will have to be more narrow than a 767 not larger like the A300 fuse.

Sorry - I didn't think to explain the terminology.

A30X is the A320 replacement. It has been doing the rounds in Airbus R&T division for years now.... hasn't become a program yet but is a number of templates for research projects.

So its a 3+3 narrowbody, not 8 across.

[Edited 2015-11-17 03:04:02]
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 11:15 am

One thing Boeing has is time, considering the vast 737MAX backlog (and no sign of it stopping).

Also (on the whole) Boeing are very good at taking their time and getting their market positioning work correct.(Unlike Airbus)
By 2025 we will be seeing the maturity of a whole new generation of engines.Whether it be acoustically balanced OR's or Variable pitch geared Fans.Both would be carbon bladed and both would be powered by 70:1 plus compression ratio 'hot' ceramic cores.
Perhaps 'cold cure' carbon will have been perfected by then.

Certainly the work done on the 787 and 777X carbon wings will lead to very high aspect ratio 'laminar'- and therefore V efficient (folding) wings.

Whether the fuse will be partially 'lifting' who knows.As for twin versus single aisle again who knows.If the former allows some redeeming 'lift' from the body they may well go for the 'narrow' twin (IMHO).By then the smallest size will clearly be 200 PAX and the largest 250 PAX? (with one size in the middle?)

The MIT image above is perhaps a good example of where it may end up frankly.

One thing (I believe) is that Boeing won't mind (much) missing out on part of the A321 NEO LR market in the short term as long as they can get it all back in the long term.If they take their time it won't be a 'moonshot' as the necessary technologies will have matured and be understood - just as 'all electric' is now far better understood.

Whilst client economics will (of course) be a driver.There will be a far bigger bear on the scene.Global Warming.Right now it's still called 'Climate Change' but not for much longer (IMHO). It won't be about $40 a barrel it will all be about CO2 output and the new (huge) taxes that go with it.

If Boeing are looking at 2025 and an aircraft to last the following 30 years (as they will be IMHO).Then you have to imagine that World then - not as it is today.

Wind,Wave and primarily Solar (particularly at home) will be dominant energy producing systems with the critical 'base load' power coming from Fission reactors (using various power sources including Thorium).
Cars will primarily be electric with some still hybrid perhaps.Cities will be 'clean'.

There is only one place where nuclear is too dangerous and 'energy density' critical.That is aircraft - so here fossil fuels will remain the primary power source.So minimizing CO2 output from aircraft will be the primary driver. Today's 'new' planes (787/350) are not actually new - they are the last of the old!
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 1:18 pm

Quoting parapente (Reply 154):
Wind,Wave and primarily Solar (particularly at home) will be dominant energy producing systems with the critical 'base load' power coming from Fission reactors (using various power sources including Thorium).
Cars will primarily be electric with some still hybrid perhaps.Cities will be 'clean'.

If wind, wave and solar are to comprise the majority of the power network; then new planes won't matter as the global economy will be in deep recession.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 1:23 pm

Quoting Egerton (Reply 151):
Good grief! Here am I thinking about Boeing's next big bet, now I need to think where our candles are kept and whether we need more deep freezers to hold essential foods and a gen set to drive them! But I digress from the question put forward by the OP.

I don't think we have to worry... I am fairly sure that any apocalyptic end-of-world scenarios are far beyond the time frame of "Boeing's next big bet".  
'

Quoting parapente (Reply 154):
One thing (I believe) is that Boeing won't mind (much) missing out on part of the A321 NEO LR market in the short term as long as they can get it all back in the long term.If they take their time it won't be a 'moonshot' as the necessary technologies will have matured and be understood - just as 'all electric' is now far better understood.

Whilst client economics will (of course) be a driver.There will be a far bigger bear on the scene.Global Warming.Right now it's still called 'Climate Change' but not for much longer (IMHO). It won't be about $40 a barrel it will all be about CO2 output and the new (huge) taxes that go with it.

If Boeing are looking at 2025 and an aircraft to last the following 30 years (as they will be IMHO).Then you have to imagine that World then - not as it is today.

I like how Rocky Mountain Institute uses "Global Weirding" instead of "Global Warming" because the climatic results are not just a warmer planet.

Boeing (as is Airbus) is exploring two longer term solutions for aviation: biofuels and hybrid aircraft.

http://img.gizmag.com/boeing-sugar-volt.jpg?ch=Width&fit=crop&h=394&q=60&w=700&s=9e13fead2f6664cd1aa46357b5b94017

Quoting parapente (Reply 154):
Wind,Wave and primarily Solar (particularly at home) will be dominant energy producing systems with the critical 'base load' power coming from Fission reactors (using various power sources including Thorium).
Cars will primarily be electric with some still hybrid perhaps.Cities will be 'clean'.

   However, before Thorium we might be using up the waste nuclear fuel that is sitting around and which would last maybe over a century: Advanced Nuclear Energy and the Battle Against Climate Change

Quoting parapente (Reply 154):
There is only one place where nuclear is too dangerous and 'energy density' critical.That is aircraft - so here fossil fuels will remain the primary power source.So minimizing CO2 output from aircraft will be the primary driver. Today's 'new' planes (787/350) are not actually new - they are the last of the old!

As mentioned above, hybrid aircraft will probably be the longer term solutions. In the mid-term we may see biofuel blends, regulation of flight frequencies and a shift to even larger average aircraft size.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4883
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 4:21 pm

There is an interesting analogy to the difficulty of upsizing narrow body planes in the automobile industry. For a variety of easons almost all 4-5 passenger cars look the same. A Mercedes is a Kia is a Toyota is a Ford is a Honda.

If you want a 6-7 passenger car you need to jump up to an SUV/Minivan vehicle. Again the various brands tend to look alike. Even the SUV versus Minivans are often similar, and I suspect built on the same general frames.

Eight passenger and up are almost always full size vans.

Then there are specific limitations for both cars and planes - lane widths and how far from an aisle a passenger can be seated. If you consider humans traveling as generally weighing 100-250 pounds, 16 inches wide, and six feet long with two hinges the above sizing is demanded. I suspect the missing link in aircraft sizes is likewise determined by the size of humans.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 4:25 pm

I hope I am not being over interpreted here!
I am simply trying to see what things might be like in 2025 and how buyers and users ( and taxing governments) will be looking to take things forward over the 30 year future lifecycle.
Again ( over)?simply trying to see what genuine technologies might be at Boeings disposal to produce a highly efficient and low CO2 emitting aircraft.I am assuming that engines would be something like the art advance ultra or whatever they were called.
I suppose what I am saying is that it will need to be a real step change and not a MOM rehash of what we already have or for sure Airbus will eat their breakfast.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 4:39 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 145):
If they are separate and MoM uses engines one generation older while NSA grows as expected, the life expectancy of the MoM would be very limited.

Yes, good point. The new version on the single aisle airplane will certainly run into the MoM space if they aren't careful. I think it will be more about infringing on their capability than the fuel burn though. Boeing could theoretically make the NSA less capable and therefore lighter and better fore shorter missions as they could have the MoM as the backstop for those customers that need more range. It really could be more fragmented.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 145):
Because of this I can not see Boeing or Airbus committing to any new single aisle plane before the future noise regulations are out, which means not before the end of the decade.

5 years to get the regulation figured out? Terrible.

Quoting dare100em (Reply 146):
But Boeing was talking about a quite different plane 20-25% bigger and more range as the 757 for the start. And that is a 767(-300) substitude and nothing less

When I did the match originally it sounded like a 753 with 5,000nm range. Even a 762. I personally saw two models, one the size of a 753 and one the size of a 763 but a lot less capable. Leaving plenty of room for a 788 which is another stretch further in terms of capacity and heaps more capable.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 147):
They ought to have more than enough motivation by now then, no?   

If you think 1,000+ orders is a lot, then you have seen nothing yet. I bet that market is 5,000+ units. Long ways to go.

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 153):
A30X is the A320 replacement

Ah, I see where you are headed now. Makes more sense. Certainly don't want to put something out there that could get beat so quickly. As Airbus has done with Widebodies they could position the A30X to compete with two families from Boeing (NSA and NMA/MOM) in the middle. I really think we could see a less capable NSA if a MOM is launched.

tortugamon
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 5:13 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 134):
Its also at the begining of its evolution not the end, just rolling back 789 parts into the 788 will make it even better.

I've always thought that as well. A bit more tweaking of the 788 and it becomes the perfect middle of the market aircraft.
The plane is at the very beginning of it's life, surely there are opportunities to get another 5% in fuel burn savings out of it.
learning never stops.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 5:15 pm

Quoting parapente (Reply 158):
I suppose what I am saying is that it will need to be a real step change and not a MOM rehash of what we already have or for sure Airbus will eat their breakfast.

The other problem Boeing have is that the 737 frame really is at the limit now.

We could well get to 2025 and find out that ducted turbofans are still the thing to do (as opposed to propfans or distributed propulsion). So Airbus decide to scrap A30X Plan B, then conclude Plan A is not a large enough improvement on A320....


So they further update the A320neo to an A320neo2 with, say, Ultrafan for another ohhh, ~10% sfc improvement. They could even stick on a CF wing, keep the existing systems and still get it out the door in 2-3 years.

Boeing meanwhile would be shafted for a quick response as they really couldn't fit a bigger fan under the wing of the 737 and would struggle to have something in service in under 6 years.



So they need to make a move on updating the 737 frame, even if its in the guise of a 757 they could more easily port down.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 6:05 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 128):
The GEnX 2B would make it much heavier, thus eroding the advantage on shorter routes. If the 330neo only pays for itself fuel-wise on >2k nm sectors and the T700>T7000 swap is less weight gain than a CF6-80C2>GEnX, then I'd wager that the breakeven for a 767MAX is >2500 nm. Probably not worth it.

The -2B is only 1500lb heavier than the RB211's used on the 767. The real weight difference is OEW, which is 70-80,000lbs with the 332, 0ver 90k with the 333, compared with the 762/3.

All of those tens of thousands of pounds cost a lot of fuel to haul around and lots of money to buy.

Quoting WIederling (Reply 149):

the 767 is a non FBW design and its wing design already was behind the A310.
( First Boeing fully supercritical wing was on the 777 afaik.)

That's an A.net wives tale. The 767 has a supercritical wing. The 767 and the 310 were designed at almost the same time, so it's highly unlikely that one used aerodynamic techniques of which the other was unaware.


http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/airfoils/q0054b.shtml

Also, FBW has more to do with envelope protection and weight than cruise efficiency. If fly by wire made a significant difference in flight performance, the 738 never would have made it off of the drawing board, much less sell by the thousands.

There are reasons why the 767 won't be upgraded but weight and FBW aren't two of them.
What the...?
 
WIederling
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 8:29 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 162):
Also, FBW has more to do with envelope protection and weight than cruise efficiency

IMU supercritical profile families were developed on different path. There was a patent spat over these between Airbus and Boeing that found the Euro solution to not collide with the US solution. Beyond other reasons due to the devel work going much further back.

FBW ( here the aspect of holistic adjustments to the aircraft ) has quite a lot to do with extension of the performance envelope. Significant parts of the MTOW increases on the A330 are due to fiddling with load alleviation and lift distribution. Mostly for getting a heavy plane of the ground. But I think you know that better. than me.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 9:46 pm

I'm starting to think single aisle narrowbody with a wider aisle for quicker boarding. I just don't know how you optimize a twin aisle down to something between a 737-7 and 737-8:

16/120 or 150 all Y
20/168 or 200 all Y
24/216 or 250 all Y (38" pitch F/32" Y) - or- Long Haul 16/204 (60" pitch F/34" Y)

This creates a larger variant that sits between the 752 and 753 and offers a step up from the 737-7 and 737-8. Maybe two wings for the two larger variants. Group III (118') for all of them to use domestically out to 3,500nm with a larger wing option (maybe up to 140/150') for the one or maybe two larger variants to go maybe 4500nm. Room for another stretch later. Enough to do NYC to LON easily, and maybe something like Denver or Salt Lake to Hawaii going the other way.

Hopefully they take from Bombardier and go with 18.5" seats and a 19" middle. 20" aisle. One can dream.

Quoting sv11 (Reply 111):

I doubt Boeing will launch this aircraft. The few 757s today using the 4000 mile range can be handled by the A321LR. NSA is probably 15 years away.

So how do you grow the market in the mean time because you can't. For all the pax the 737-9 and A321 can carry, they cant do that 5% and they can't grow your market incrementally without adding more flights.

[Edited 2015-11-17 13:56:52]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
LH707330
Posts: 2460
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Tue Nov 17, 2015 10:23 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 140):
But if I read that chart is says a 2025 new clean sheet could be ~16% better than an A320neo and I think that is the time period we are looking at. Don't even need 3/4s of that to be succesful I would think. Can't wait to hear about Pratt's geared fan.

That's for an open rotor design. Most of that gain comes from propulsion.

Quoting dare100em (Reply 142):
As others have stated a single-aisle has many advantages, but given the range and size it should be wider than the typical A320 fuese about the size of the NSA-6-200 size (reply 67). Still this has disadvantages too like very limited further growth potential, high fitness ratio which come with high bending loads so "thick walls", suboptimal business package (a 7-abreast MOM could go for a 1-2-1 layout in business, a 6-abreast SA can't).

Anything wider than a 320 doesn't make sense, it's extra weight.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 145):
Another elephant in the room is the open rotor engine. If the noise regulations move into a direction that makes the open-rotor valid, you might need to do a MoM and a NSA as 2 very different planes.

The OR is a good thing to consider. If this happens, there could well be a market split with distinct 2000 nm designs emerging. Given cheap oil, I see this being less likely though.

Quoting WIederling (Reply 149):
then:
the 767 is a non FBW design and its wing design already was behind the A310.
( First Boeing fully supercritical wing was on the 777 afaik.)

The wings were both supercritical and both about the same on burn. There was a good thread where Longhauler explained that they did things differently, but fuel burn was about the same.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 159):
Yes, good point. The new version on the single aisle airplane will certainly run into the MoM space if they aren't careful. I think it will be more about infringing on their capability than the fuel burn though. Boeing could theoretically make the NSA less capable and therefore lighter and better fore shorter missions as they could have the MoM as the backstop for those customers that need more range. It really could be more fragmented.

Any time we've seen a less-capable frame with better costs against a heavier one, the lighter one often tends to end up winning in the long run, e.g 333 vs. 77E. If the capacities get too close, the MoM will be dead on the vine.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 162):

The -2B is only 1500lb heavier than the RB211's used on the 767. The real weight difference is OEW, which is 70-80,000lbs with the 332, 0ver 90k with the 333, compared with the 762/3.

All of those tens of thousands of pounds cost a lot of fuel to haul around and lots of money to buy.

You sure that's apples-to-apples? I hear the RR are often weighed with nacelle and T/R. Despite the higher OEW, the 330s tend to do better, because they're bigger and have better CASM. I don't think the 767 is a viable platform, even if re-engined.
 
User avatar
zippyjet
Posts: 5189
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 1:59 am

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 15):

If this gets produced, my name for it would be the Tub Jet or Jet Tubby/Tubby Jet
I'm Zippyjet & I approve this message!
 
JHwk
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:11 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:00 am

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 161):

The other problem Boeing have is that the 737 frame really is at the limit now.

I'm sure there is a lot of poker going on with Boeing's decision process. There are a lot of variables that Airbus can play with for the next 15-20 years and Boeing doesn't have that same flexibility. If Bombardier can (survive long enough to) pull off the CS500 it could damage the 738, and the 739 is basically lost to the 321... I guess the question really becomes where the center of the narrow body market will be in 10 years.

If Airbus does do a 322 (because engine economics don't favor a clean sheet design), the MOM is further challenged. There are a number of ways for Boeing to fail with a new plane-- the question really becomes if they will be better off waiting and losing share in the narrowbody deliveries for a decade.
 
incitatus
Posts: 3400
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:02 am

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 164):
I'm starting to think single aisle narrowbody with a wider aisle for quicker boarding.

Give airlines a cross section that 3 inches wider than the A320 and what do you think they would do with it? Wider aisles? I think they would bring pitch to 29" to add more seats and offer wider seats to compensate.
I do not consume Murdoch products including the Wall Street Journal
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:42 am

Quoting incitatus (Reply 168):
Give airlines a cross section that 3 inches wider than the A320 and what do you think they would do with it? Wider aisles? I think they would bring pitch to 29" to add more seats and offer wider seats to compensate.

Depends on the carrier. 29" is pretty damn uncomfortable regardless the seat width. I don't see the big four going there.
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 4:06 am

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 165):
That's for an open rotor design. Most of that gain comes from propulsion.

Agreed but even if that doesn't come to fruition the table indicates that there is an advantage over the neo to be had. I don't even think its needs major difference...just matching in efficiency and selling on range could work.

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 165):
Any time we've seen a less-capable frame with better costs against a heavier one, the lighter one often tends to end up winning in the long run, e.g 333 vs. 77E. If the capacities get too close, the MoM will be dead on the vine.

Absolutely agree. But as you say engines are the primary driver of gain. And aircraft seem to be re-engined quicker than they did. If Boeing spends $10 Billion on this and if the NSA comes to happen and runs into it I would guess there would be a re-engine program in the works pretty quickly to regain the dynamic. A330neo, A380neo, A320neo...sure does seem like this is here to stay. Product-line lives are getting shorter and build rates are getting larger.

Quoting JHwk (Reply 167):
I guess the question really becomes where the center of the narrow body market will be in 10 years.

I think that partially depends on what is available in the narrow body market. Some think the OEMs respond to the airlines but I think there is a fair share going the other direction too.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Topic Author
Posts: 7409
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 4:16 am

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 166):
If this gets produced, my name for it would be the Tub Jet or Jet Tubby/Tubby Jet

I prefer STOGIE...    ...

.
http://stogiegeeks.com/wp-content/up...s/2013/08/StogieGeeks-logoweb2.png
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10298
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:10 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 159):

5 years to get the regulation figured out? Terrible.

That is a best guess when it comes to the question what will come after Chapter 14.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:58 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 172):
That is a best guess when it comes to the question what will come after Chapter 14.

Hope you're wrong. We got a 20-unit order for a super-sonic business jet today and I would think they would need that answer too. Those are at $1.2 Mil a piece. Hard to think they weren't confident.


tortugamon
 
 
Gasman
Posts: 2204
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:14 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 116):
A32x is far from being at its limit. Airbus Industrie did not really do a "NG" version of it. A32xneo to A32xceo is like 737s Classic to 737 Initial Production models, a minimum change derivative.

737NG had all-new wings and empennage, while retaining the same fuselage. The same can still be applied to A32x: all-new composite wing and empennage, further aerodynamic clean-up, "Gen 2" GTF/Leap engine, and possible further stretch of A321 fuselage lenght, due to a new wing box.

I agree. I think both Boeing and Airbus have the bases all covered for a while yet.

Boeing will not build a 747 replacement. The 777 family is current and about to be refreshed with the 778 and 779. The 787 family is hot off the press, and has the medium capacity market cornered, as does the A350. And if the 737 fuselage was in some way inherently inefficient due to its 1960's design, it would have been discarded long ago.

Similarly for Airbus. Fresh range of products, the very limited VLA market is covered, the A350 is selling like hot cakes as is the venerable A320.

And oil is cheaper than it has been for a long time. I just don't see the payoff for either manufacturer to invest R&D in an all-new airplane.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:24 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 175):

Well said and summarized. I sincerely hope the OEMs disagree and push the envelope toward improvement.

tortugamon
 
WIederling
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:45 am

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 165):
The wings were both supercritical and both about the same on burn. There was a good thread where Longhauler explained that they did things differently, but fuel burn was about the same.

got a link for me to read up on this?
TIA!
Murphy is an optimist
 
LH707330
Posts: 2460
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:27 pm

Quoting WIederling (Reply 177):
got a link for me to read up on this?

Link for the wing: http://history.nasa.gov/SP-468/ch13-6.htm

For the other one, I searched but did not find.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10819
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:54 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 136):
I'm with Burkhard on this. If the NSA was 5% better than a neo, my guess is that most of that is new wing tech.

Everyone knew the 737 was dead decades ago, but Boeing somehow managed to keep it going.
To most of us now, the bottom line is that the 737 has to be replaced, whether Airbus can beat or match the replacement cannot be the prime motivation for product improvement, once the a/c are closer to par, "other incentives" become more meaningfull.

Quoting parapente (Reply 154):
One thing Boeing has is time, considering the vast 737MAX backlog (and no sign of it stopping).

Well if the share is now at 60/40 and the NEO continues to out-sell, the backlog may be the last substantial one that they have to produce.
Not preaching doom and gloom but a 60/40 split in the NB market place is not a good place to be in a duopoly, it essentially means that one product is inferior. If a number of airlines are placing orders with replacements spread over a number of years - example a 100 frame order that the 100th delivery will arrive on the retirement of the 1st delivery - the OEM can always work such airlines to push deliveries to increase the number of customers, the number of airlines who change OEM's in the NB market is getting smaller and smaller.
 
WIederling
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:12 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 178):
Link for

In the meantime I found this book:
http://books.google.de/books?id=l4fS...0wing%20design%20%20airbus&f=false

The referenced NASA lit is mostly "Whitcomb sole inventor" stuff.

There is a good document around that compares high lift devices.
This one afair:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960052267.pdf
Murphy is an optimist
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:33 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 179):
Well if the share is now at 60/40 and the NEO continues to out-sell, the backlog may be the last substantial one that they have to produce.
Not preaching doom and gloom but a 60/40 split in the NB market place is not a good place to be in a duopoly, it essentially means that one product is inferior.

Obviously, orders are not the same as deliveries. And not all orders are equal in anticipated value both in terms of the customer and the order itself. Lets see where production rates shake out and which orders come to fruition. I do believe that multiple customers have purchased multiple aircraft to fly identical passengers and obviously that won't work.

tortugamon
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:54 pm

Quoting WIederling (Reply 180):

Interesting stuff. High lift devices are fascinating, for geeks like me, anyway.
What the...?
 
User avatar
zippyjet
Posts: 5189
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:04 pm

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 171):

How about Dachshund?
I'm Zippyjet & I approve this message!
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:12 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 175):
Similarly for Airbus. Fresh range of products, the very limited VLA market is covered, the A350 is selling like hot cakes as is the venerable A320.

Agreed, but I can't help but feel sorry for the A330 here  
Four Granavox Turbines!
 
StTim
Posts: 3809
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:17 pm

The 330 is doing ok - it is hurting the 787 margins and keeping Boeing honest. Exactly the same way that the 747-8 did to the 380. It's business.
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 9:00 pm

Quoting StTim (Reply 185):
The 330 is doing ok - it is hurting the 787 margins and keeping Boeing honest. Exactly the same way that the 747-8 did to the 380. It's business.

All the more reason I feel sorry for it always being forgotten about.
Four Granavox Turbines!
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:33 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 179):
Not preaching doom and gloom but a 60/40 split in the NB market place is not a good place to be in a duopoly, it essentially means that one product is inferior.

Not necessarily. Remember, while there may be a split on orders, deliveries are at around 50/50...and because of the thousands of planes in each backlog, that will continue years into the future...and that situation keeps stretching further into the future as both get more orders.

Who knows what orders will happen in the next 5 years?

The only time that the split in orders makes a difference is at a point where one OEM is producing significantly more planes at any one time than the other. Until then, revenue, which is delivery based, will continue to be split pretty much down the middle.
What the...?
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Topic Author
Posts: 7409
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Boeing's Next -- A $15B Question

Thu Nov 19, 2015 2:14 am

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 183):
How about Dachshund?

I think that fits the A346 better...    ...

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johannes Klinghardt

"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield

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