Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6606
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:56 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 143):
Agree.
Airbus probably don't need to disturb the MLG, which I see as a big ticket item, as it sits in the confluence of the most constrained structures, and highest density systems, on the airframe.
Big airframe impact IMO, and why Boeing excluded it from the MAX so far.

Agreed.

And that's why Boeing has to hit a home run for this project to make sense, and the 737 MaxMax will be challenged to be a home run. If the relationship between the revised Boeing and Airbus aircraft is not at least like the 787/A330neo relationship -- that is, with a small but decisive edge for the Boeing product -- then this is just Boeing catching up, and return on a major investment will be challenging because Airbus will be able to undercut the new Boeing on price.

The all-new aircraft will make it much easier for Boeing to get that edge, but will also be even more expensive to create. By exactly how much, and with what schedule impact, is the question Boeing green eyeshades are working overtime to figure out.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 147):
And they can go twin bogey Air India style. With a strengthened design, I can see them go to 110t easily.

I think we're more likely to see an A350 Lite single bogey from both OEMs (that is, one with bigger wheels that blazes new trails in terms of contact patch size).

[Edited 2016-02-03 11:59:45]
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24286
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:37 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 143):

I don't see why. A new high A/R CFRP wing of greater span, and 1/2 generation more advanced engines should facilitate a c. 5000Nm A321 and 4 200Nm+ A322 on the 97t MTOW of the A321LR

I really hope we see this, regardless of what Boeing does or does not do. I'd love to see what the frame could really do.

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 145):
Yes, I still hang around here from time to time. If by "time to time" you mean multiple times a day, absolutely. Here's the full graf from the article. I think I'm cool on fair use if I wrote it, right?

Great to see you're here frequently, Jon. Keep up the good work!

Any idea why the media at large is ignoring the Daallo A321 explosion? Might be an interesting scoop for you. Read the dried plumb pilots site for some interesting back stories which may or may not be factual...

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 145):
Two separate ideas here. Airlines want a genuine NMA (new middle market airplane) that's bigger than Max 9, but smaller than 787-8. 100% clean sheet small-twin, no 737 commonality whatsoever.

This was well known to the a.net community IMHO.

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 145):
Boeing is ALSO looking at an evolved 737 derivative, one with new wings, new engines and longer gear.

This didn't seem to register with the a.net community, despite your linked articles.

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 145):
Whether or not Boeing can still claim 737 commonality with an all-new middle section of the airplane is a separate discussion.

Indeed, to me it would be a different picture if they can't achieve 737 commonality.

[Edited 2016-02-03 13:38:52]
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
BasilFawlty
Posts: 933
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:23 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Wed Feb 03, 2016 8:37 pm

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 149):
Pretty sure a multi-billion dollar corporation, with a century of experience, who directly talks to airlines about their needs-- might have a better handle on the combination of what airlines want + are willing to provide an ROI on, than, say... you.

If they did topics like this one (and many others) wouldn't exist.  
'Every year donkeys and mules kill more people than plane crashes'
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:08 pm

Quoting 32andBelow (Reply 148):
Wouldn't t make sense to design this in conjunction with NSA then offer several sizes. One being this size?

Absolutely, I've been beating this drum for a while.

The NSA should have 2 wings and 4 fuselage options (with associated engine options obviously).

Wings: One for missions less than 3000nm and one for missions up to 5000nm.
Fuse: 175 pax, 200 pax, 225 pax and 250 pax (1-class, typical)

Final range and fuel burn will obviously depend on what fuse/wing combo the airlines decide to go with.


But the larger fuselage needs to have a boarding door well down the cabin, even if it sacrifices a couple of half-rows of seats (6) it will still be far more efficient than a 7-across twin.


[why does the forum not accept common symbols?!?]
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5631
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:17 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 143):

I don't see why. A new high A/R CFRP wing of greater span, and 1/2 generation more advanced engines should facilitate a c. 5000Nm A321 and 4 200Nm+ A322 on the 97t MTOW of the A321LR

You may be right. That certainly will make it easier for Airbus. It will also make it a bit easier for Boeing if they do not have to go double bogeys. They do need a longer MLG, however, which would have to be new-there is no existing one they could adapt.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:38 am

Quoting BasilFawlty (Reply 152):
If they did topics like this one (and many others) wouldn't exist.

Topics like what? ....offshoot of a 737 coming early; with glancing speculative mention, by a 3rd party, about a product that isn't offered and only exists in the minds of AvGeeks, as of now?

Hmm, no. Those will exist no matter what any OEM does.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21833
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:04 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 112):

I have flown a few times on the FI 757-300 sitting in the back, boarding and deplaning through L2. I have never waited for even 30 minutes to get off the plane, my guess would be 20 minutes max and even than one waits for the luggage after going through immigration (LHR) or after waiting 1 to 2 hours at immigration (JFK) the luggage has of course arrived before you.

The time it takes to empty a 757-300 is so overdrawn here on a.net it is not funny anymore.

I timed it. I was in the second-to-last row. It was 35 minutes. This was back in 2004/2005, but I remember being ready to chew nails by the time I finally got out the door.

Maybe the Icelanders are less idiotic about deplaning than Americans.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 133):

The A321 has too high of wing loading and CFRP allows a far better aspect ratio. We're talking a 3% or so possible fuel burn reduction. The A321LR needs a larger wingspan. What it will do is impressive, but is not close to optimized for even a 90 minute mission. That is a wing optimized for a 75 minute A320 mission where Sharklets optimize out to 90 minutes for the A320.

Can you explain how you get these optimization times?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1890
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 6:53 am

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 153):
Wings: One for missions less than 3000nm and one for missions up to 5000nm.
Fuse: 175 pax, 200 pax, 225 pax and 250 pax (1-class, typical)

That's the same idea I had for Boeing's new narrow body. Except pax capacity should be expressed in two classes.
Same fuse width for both planes, "light" wing for 3500nm range, 165 and 195 2-class pax capacity, "heavy" wing for 5500nm range, 215 and 245 2-class pax capacity.

Keeps fuselage, cockpit, cargo, empennage and systems commonality, while wings, engines and landing gear are different between the two.

...and don't listen to Southwest anymore. They are blocking progress.
The queen of the skies is dead.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9628
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 7:20 am

This sounds good, but does not reflect the current useage of the 737 / A320 families. We have the large versions flying on short routes and we have the small version doing long and thin routes and vice versa too. Both families have become so incredibly capable and flexible that replacing them will be a big challenge. And while the idea to compartmentalize the family into specialised versions for different roles, I am not sure this is what airlines would want, because they end of with a less flexible product, when you look at the whole narrow body fleet. Today I can sent the 220 seat version on a long flight on monday and can sent the small version on tuesday, when the booking numbers favour this solution.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9293
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:12 am

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 153):
The NSA should have 2 wings and 4 fuselage options (with associated engine options obviously).

Fuselage, wingbox, wings and high lift devices are "one thing", a synergistic composition.

I have doubts that you can do a competitive wing design that
fits both a widebody and a narrowbody fuselage.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:14 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 158):
This sounds good, but does not reflect the current useage of the 737 / A320 families. We have the large versions flying on short routes and we have the small version doing long and thin routes and vice versa too

Well, that is where mixing and matching the engines comes in.

Quote:
And while the idea to compartmentalize the family into specialised versions for different roles, I am not sure this is what airlines would want, because they end of with a less flexible product, when you look at the whole narrow body fleet.

Well, the airlines that don't want the flexibility will just have to compete with their peers that have aircraft with 10% better fuel burn.
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 2060
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:19 am

Quoting mat66 (Reply 5):

VERY interesting and not easy for Airbus to answer to.
Bring it on Boeing

Because Airbus can't change the wing on the A320, jack it up and stretch it?

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 88):
Jon Ostrower used to write the FlightBlogger blog at FlightGlobal before going to the WSJ. I find him to be knowledgeable and professional and seems to be an authentic avgeek. I respect him.

Yup Jon knows what he's talking about and has sources, though some try to manipulate his output as wit all journalists.

If I was Airbus I would not respond directly to this witches brookstick idea, I'd keep churning out NEO's until Boeing were comitted to this route and answer with an A310 replacement, twin isle 48m 180-270 PAX GTF 3500NM range.
BV
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:29 am

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 137):
Bigger engines. The A321 could take a further enlarged fan with a neo2 while the 737 would be screwed.

Just to be clear, are you suggesting that a rewinged 737 with taller landing gear will not be able to accommodate as large of a fan as a neo2? Why would that be inherently impossible, given that we don't know much of anything about either hypothetical beast?

I probably am missing something in the context.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9386
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:43 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 116):
Can you help me to understand why the 737 fuse is not the answer but the 757 fuse is? That is confusing.

Neither is the answer. New ffuselage can n

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 156):
I timed it. I was in the second-to-last row. It was 35 minutes. This was back in 2004/2005, but I remember being ready to chew nails by the time I finally got out the door.

Maybe the Icelanders are less idiotic about deplaning than Americans.

I have been on the 757-300 often and years ago on the long DC8-61/63 one class, 256 pax. Never experienced over half an hour deplaning rather astonished sometimes how fast it goes. Plenty USA pax on those flights. Perhaps less business class pax caring everything and the kitchen sink. Icelandair always uses L2 and starts to deplane economy before business class is empty, perhaps that makes a difference. With the DC8 it was still stairs but always two.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19092
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:44 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 162):
Just to be clear, are you suggesting that a rewinged 737 with taller landing gear will not be able to accommodate as large of a fan as a neo2?

My point above was that anything Boeing can do to the 737, Airbus can do to the A320. IF Boeing gave the 737 new gear that lifted the body by a foot, then yes, if Airbus did the same thing, they'd be able to fit a larger fan than the 737 because the A320 would still sit higher off the ground. Whether or not a larger fan would be required is debatable.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:52 am

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 161):
Because Airbus can't change the wing on the A320, jack it up and stretch it?

Of course they can. My mistake. I should have been more precise. It would not be easy for Airbus to improve the A321 in a way to retain their 75% market share in this segment. A new wing and a stretched A322 would probably just get them to the usual 50%. Which is fine but not what they have now against the 9max.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:54 am

Was on a 753 recently in Europe for skiing.Perhaps 280 pax! Yes there was a long wait ( I was in the front and they had to deplane the aircraft from the rear first so that it did not become a tail dragger)!
But great to go on one one.Quite a specialised aircraft really.Fantastic for charter companies.I guess they will keep them going for very many years.Cant see a replacement considering how many were sold.
As for the topic.I see the first pictures of the finished Cfm A321 NEO.Makes one wonder whether the horse has already bolted frankly.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:05 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 162):
Just to be clear, are you suggesting that a rewinged 737 with taller landing gear will not be able to accommodate as large of a fan as a neo2?


Well, probably wasn't my clearest sentence ever, this sequence might help:

Quoting scbriml:

I don't think there's anything Boeing could do to the 737 that Airbus couldn't do to the A321.
Quoting SEPilot:
Of course there isn't, but it will cost Airbus almost as much as it will cost Boeing.
Quoting Me:
Bigger engines. The A321 could take a further enlarged fan with a neo2 while the 737 would be screwed.

If Boeing were to increase the u/c size* and put bigger engines on, Airbus could do the same without adjusting their undercarriage. Which would mean the Airbus response would cost a fraction of the Boeing move in time and money.


*With associated implications for wingbox, wing torquebox and MLG support structure == Expensive.

[Edited 2016-02-04 01:07:42]
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1901
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:20 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 165):
Of course they can. My mistake. I should have been more precise. It would not be easy for Airbus to improve the A321 in a way to retain their 75% market share in this segment. A new wing and a stretched A322 would probably just get them to the usual 50%. Which is fine but not what they have now against the 9max.

But Boeing will, with a stretch of the 737 or a new design (no commonality, extra costs due to certification so higher prices) be able to capture more than 50% of the market? Why haven't they done it already if it was that easy?
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9628
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:43 pm

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 160):

Well, that is where mixing and matching the engines comes in.

That is not the same for the airline. As a European holiday airline for example, you could use a A321LR to fly to the Caribbean in winter and to fly to the Mediterranean in summer. Just remove the extra fuel tanks in 48 hours and the plane will perform on both missions. A mix of wings and engines means you can´t do this.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:53 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 169):
That is not the same for the airline.

Then that airline has to take the performance hit of having a sub-optimal wing/engine combination for one or more likely both scenarios.

Note that the same airline already has this performance hit. Its just being applied across the board, including carriers with more uniform mission profiles.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 3:13 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 164):
My point above was that anything Boeing can do to the 737, Airbus can do to the A320. IF Boeing gave the 737 new gear that lifted the body by a foot, then yes, if Airbus did the same thing, they'd be able to fit a larger fan than the 737 because the A320 would still sit higher off the ground. Whether or not a larger fan would be required is debatable.

Again, I think it remains to be seen. They can jack the undercarriage on both but end up with more clearance than they need for the required powerplant. Unless the idea is that they'd want to strap some of the 777 engines underneath an A320 wing? In other words, I can see Boeing being able to get to "engine parity" with Airbus, especially if Airbus avoids the not-insignificant cost of all-new gear.

But I'm happy to be wrong if I'm missing something.

Quoting enzo011 (Reply 168):
Why haven't they done it already if it was that easy?

Not sure it's that easy (or inexpensive....or time-consuming).

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
nycbjr
Posts: 215
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 3:42 pm

First time I've posted here in 5 years!

Saw this on Flightglobal this morning, looks like talk of a 737 stretch is premature

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/reports-of-new-737-max-derivative-premature-boeing-421577/
 
LPSHobby
Posts: 454
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:14 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 3:58 pm

this topic is about a 200-250 seat plane, for what I know the 767-200 is stilll in production, the military KC-46 for USAAF, so why not a 767-200MAX? Couldn´t this be a solution for this market segment?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24286
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:40 pm

Quoting nycbjr (Reply 172):
First time I've posted here in 5 years!

Saw this on Flightglobal this morning, looks like talk of a 737 stretch is premature

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/reports-of-new-737-max-derivative-premature-boeing-421577/

Thanks for the post. Then like now the forum only makes links for http: not https: so:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...erivative-premature-boeing-421577/

And the statements there are more along the lines of "no comment" rather than denial. The article does remind us of the hard denial of a 757neo. It also says anything that will happen will be post-77X which is reasonable yet also somewhat depressing to hear. As noted here and elsewhere A321/A321neo is a strong product right now and has plenty of ways to improve with relatively small improvements.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
nycbjr
Posts: 215
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:46 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 174):
Then like now the forum only makes links for http: not https: so:

Thanks for the tip I won't make that mistake again! I have a feeling now that I'm posting again I'm going to be wasting (err spending) more time on this site!
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:55 pm

The analyst's name is quite fitting. How dare the CFO douse cold water on such a fun subject?  cold 
Nonetheless, any further rumored iteration of the 737Max and pretty soon it'd be MadMAX.    .

Quoting Revelation (Reply 174):
It also says anything that will happen will be post-77X which is reasonable yet also somewhat depressing to hear. As noted here and elsewhere A321/A321neo is a strong product right now and has plenty of ways to improve with relatively small improvements.

Bring on the NMA already!!!   

[Edited 2016-02-04 09:23:14]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:10 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 53):
You can't really blow the A321neo out of the water because the A321neo is part of a larger family

That's like saying the A321neo can't blow the 737 MAX 9 out of the water for the same reason.

One problem: It has, and it will.

Quoting 32andBelow (Reply 148):
Wouldn't t make sense to design this in conjunction with NSA then offer several sizes. One being this size?
Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 153):
The NSA should have 2 wings and 4 fuselage options (with associated engine options obviously).

Wings: One for missions less than 3000nm and one for missions up to 5000nm.
Fuse: 175 pax, 200 pax, 225 pax and 250 pax (1-class, typical)

Final range and fuel burn will obviously depend on what fuse/wing combo the airlines decide to go with

Exactly what I've been saying, like what Embrear did with the E-Jet family.

However, I firmly believe that the 737 MAX can be replaced with an NSA family of two models, one sized between the 73G and 738, and one sized between the 738 and 739/73E.

And then, perhaps with a similar fuselage, but larger wing, engine, tail, taller gear, etc., create the MoM/NLT with two models as well, one sized between the 739 and 752, and the largest sized between the 752 and 753.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
tortugamon
Topic Author
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:20 pm

Quoting parapente (Reply 135):
The article clearly states they want/need 'max'(read one class) 245 seater.

Not sure why it would need to be a max-245 seater. Prior info indicated it would be 20% larger than a 752.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 133):

A fantastic post. Great information here.

Quoting tjh8402 (Reply 136):
If you want to go up to 240-250 2 class seats, especially with TATL range, wouldn't the A322 likely require new wings, landing gear, and engines?

I do believe so.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 123):
Given how the mentality has taken hold, I can see there won't be much concern about Y class comfort in upcoming design decisions.

Well I think the focus has always been on aircraft flexibility and I don't expect that to change. The fastest growing airlines are the LCCs so I think OEMs are focusing on efficiency for that segment but need flexibility for premium products to appeal to the legacies. Keep everyone equally unhappy I guess.

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 145):
The odd market reality is that no airline offers 10% more pitch for about 15% more airfare (except maybe the 380 - may it live long). Such a section would hold 10% less customers, and produce 5% more income, weigh less, use a little less fuel and seem like an all around winner for airlines and customers. But for some reason it must be a fantasy or someone would be doing it.

Exit row fees are less than 15% more usually. Airlines know the demand for that. Truth is people don't pay for it but I do think we will see increased interest in premium economy with more than just the legroom difference.

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 145):

Great having you hear Jon. Keep up the good work. What do you think will happen in this space? Clean sheet, 737 Derivative or option #3?

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 161):
I'd keep churning out NEO's until Boeing were comitted to this route and answer with an A310 replacement, twin isle 48m 180-270 PAX GTF 3500NM range.

Completely agree! I must be wrong then  
Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 167):
If Boeing were to increase the u/c size* and put bigger engines on, Airbus could do the same without adjusting their undercarriage. Which would mean the Airbus response would cost a fraction of the Boeing move in time and money.

Why do you think the undercarriage wouldn't need adjusting? This isn't a small stretch.

Quoting LPSHobby (Reply 173):
this topic is about a 200-250 seat plane, for what I know the 767-200 is stilll in production, the military KC-46 for USAAF, so why not a 767-200MAX? Couldn´t this be a solution for this market segment?

Too heavy, too old, terrible aerodynamics....Only way I could see it is if they made it a 2-4-2 seater in Y which is dang close. Still need a new wing and engines though.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 174):
And the statements there are more along the lines of "no comment" rather than denial. The article does remind us of the hard denial of a 757neo

agreed

Quoting Revelation (Reply 174):
It also says anything that will happen will be post-77X which is reasonable yet also somewhat depressing to hear

With a 6 year timeline it wouldn't be before the 77X if launched today anyway. No real news there. But I do think we will see it launched before the 78X EIS.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9628
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:24 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 177):
That's like saying the A321neo can't blow the 737 MAX 9 out of the water for the same reason.

One problem: It has, and it will.

A321 never blew the 737-9 out of the water, simply because the biggest competition to the 737-9 is the 737-8. I would say that 737-9 established a very impressive customer base, although it was late to the market and is not offering the same increase in capacity over the smaller than version of the family as the A321 does.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2593
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:38 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 143):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 162):
Just to be clear, are you suggesting that a rewinged 737 with taller landing gear will not be able to accommodate as large of a fan as a neo2? Why would that be inherently impossible, given that we don't know much of anything about either hypothetical beast?

A rewinged and reengined 737 with taller landing gear still wouldn't be able to carry LD3-45 ULD containers. The existing A320 series can accommodate those containers with the exception of the out of production A318. A stretched rewinged regeared A321Neo would be cheaper to develop than a new plane based on a 737 Max fuselage, 787 cockpit and systems, and other parts from Boeing's bins and would still carry standard freight containers.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:42 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 179):
I would say that 737-9 established a very impressive customer base, although it was late to the market and is not offering the same increase in capacity over the smaller than version of the family as the A321 does.

Clearly, the A321 is a superior plane to the 737-900, although the -900 is perfected for it's respected missions.

However, airlines aren't going to use the 737-900ER for a Transcon premium service, and seeing as the 757 is getting up there, the only thing that comes to mind is the A321.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9628
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 6:04 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 181):
However, airlines aren't going to use the 737-900ER for a Transcon premium service, and seeing as the 757 is getting up there, the only thing that comes to mind is the A321.

So few 757s are used on such routes...
 
tjh8402
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 6:41 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 181):
However, airlines aren't going to use the 737-900ER for a Transcon premium service, and seeing as the 757 is getting up there, the only thing that comes to mind is the A321.

Why couldn't they? They already use 739s on non premium transcon routes. A lower density (lie flat seats up front) version of the plane shouldn't have any more trouble than the higher density ones already making the trip. They'll losing a little bit of seating capacity with the 739 being slightly shorter but no reason you still couldn't do the trip.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 6:48 pm

Quoting tjh8402 (Reply 136):
If you want to go up to 240-250 2 class seats, especially with TATL range, wouldn't the A322 likely require new wings, landing gear, and engines?

Yes 'IF ' TATL range is required.in the vast majority of cases these planes in reality fly much shorter distances.
We know that the A321NEO LR will fly circa 210 people TATL.But a much greater attraction is what it can do on 'normal' schedules. Such as 240pax in sinle class
A 322 could be stretched to carry 250-260 (one class).You would 'simply' loose range.But for many/most does that matter?
Boeing know this full well. If they do nothing Airbus surely will stretch it some time down the line.Why would they not?
The market seems to be moving in that direction anyway.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:28 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 181):
However, airlines aren't going to use the 737-900ER for a Transcon premium service, and seeing as the 757 is getting up there, the only thing that comes to mind is the A321.

4 airlines fly a premium config on such routes. 2 use 757s (and both operate the 739) and 2 use the A321. Seems like a toss up.

The major US airlines in particular operate at such a scale they will and can operate most aircraft, even within the same class (739+A321 738+A320 A330+767+787+777) as they can match specific functionality and use cases to specific route profiles.

I think this further hurts the chances of seeing a new aircraft type anytime soon.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:01 pm

Quoting parapente (Reply 184):
We know that the A321NEO LR will fly circa 210 people TATL

I'd be highly surprised if it's anywhere near that number, in real world operation/configurations.

Can probably knock a good 30-40 seats off of that, for any legacy type carrier.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:08 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 174):
And the statements there are more along the lines of "no comment" rather than denial. The article does remind us of the hard denial of a 757neo. It also says anything that will happen will be post-77X which is reasonable yet also somewhat depressing to hear. As noted here and elsewhere A321/A321neo is a strong product right now and has plenty of ways to improve with relatively small improvements.

I agree. That article doesn't exactly pour cold water on the reports, just adds credibility to them in my opinion.

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 145):
Yes, I still hang around here from time to time. If by "time to time" you mean multiple times a day, absolutely. Here's the full graf from the article. I think I'm cool on fair use if I wrote it, right?

Great to see you here.  
Quoting Devilfish (Reply 176):
Nonetheless, any further rumored iteration of the 737Max and pretty soon it'd be MadMAX.

The 737-10 MadMAX. I like it.
  
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19092
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:22 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 177):
However, I firmly believe that the 737 MAX can be replaced with an NSA family of two models, one sized between the 73G and 738, and one sized between the 738 and 739/73E.

I can't see Airbus or Boeing offering anything smaller than A320/738 size when they eventually get around to replacing those families. There's next to no demand today, they'll be even less by 2030. Indeed, I would expect the smallest offering to be somewhat larger than today's A320/738. That's the way the market is going.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:30 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 150):
Quoting astuteman (Reply 143):
Agree.
Airbus probably don't need to disturb the MLG, which I see as a big ticket item, as it sits in the confluence of the most constrained structures, and highest density systems, on the airframe.
Big airframe impact IMO, and why Boeing excluded it from the MAX so far.

Agreed.

Disagreed  

I suspect a re-winged A321/2 would come with higher a MTOW and as such the landing gear would need to be strengthened / replaced to handle the revised loads.

This is a game of chess. Airbus already have a strong customer base for the A321. I don't think they would act in a manner that undermines their existing orders and customers. A re-winged A321 would do this!
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4204
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:35 pm

In a few years the backlog of the 787 will begin to clear. It could give the 737MAX2 and the 321 competition trans Atlantic, 242 2-class seating and extra revenue from those 28 cargo bins. Obviously no weight limitation.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10322
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:43 pm

Quoting travelhound (Reply 189):
This is a game of chess.

It will only be a game of chess when Boeing gets a piece to put on the board, right now the A321 is playing by itself.
Unfortunately, everyone looks at competition versus looking at the product Boeing has to offer in that space, whether Airbus can match or beat the new product is not the whole story, Boeing needs a competitor in the space.
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:53 pm

My personal opinion is that the future for the 739 is in not even trying to be a 757 replacement.

If the 739 has a good future it will be in upgrading from the 738 in its part of the market space , not in competing with the 321 or in replacing the 757.(Although some will use it like that)

I think Boeing know this and are addressing this part of the market to a certain extent with the MAX 200, but the 739 could make sense here.

IMO this view is also supported by Boeing interest in a MOM aircraft.

Ruscoe
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10322
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:15 am

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 192):
My personal opinion is that the future for the 739 is in not even trying to be a 757 replacement.

Ship sailed a long time ago, the A321-100 took sales because it was more efficient, only the USA needed the -200 for the extra range. As per A.Net fact, the bulk of the 757 missions were taken by the A320 / 737NG, only TATL and deep South / Central America remained, the A321 lack of cargo capacity hurts on the South / Central America market.

Trimming weight from the 767-200 in my opinion is still their best counter in the space until the NSA in its multiple variants arrive, unfortunately, the tanker initial phase has not gone as well to allow them to gain economies of scale.
What it would have done would be to clearly define the line between a small widebody comfort versus the long NB.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24286
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Fri Feb 05, 2016 1:19 am

Quoting travelhound (Reply 189):
This is a game of chess. Airbus already have a strong customer base for the A321. I don't think they would act in a manner that undermines their existing orders and customers. A re-winged A321 would do this!

Indeed Airbus has the upper hand in this space. Boeing has the pressure to act or to continue to lose sales to A321.

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 190):
In a few years the backlog of the 787 will begin to clear. It could give the 737MAX2 and the 321 competition trans Atlantic, 242 2-class seating and extra revenue from those 28 cargo bins. Obviously no weight limitation.

If the customer needs such an aircraft, A330ceo can do it today and A330neo in the near future. Boeing's concern seems to be filling the gap between 739 and 787-8 with something that can compete with A321.

As per #171 above, all Boeing will say now is:

Quote:
“We’re in constant dialogue with our customers to understand their needs today,” Smith replied, then added later: “We do see an opportunity in that segment of the market.”

and in this case, "that segment" refers to the "gap between the 737 Max 9 and the 787-8."
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Fri Feb 05, 2016 1:20 am

Quoting Flyingclrs727 (Reply 180):
A rewinged and reengined 737 with taller landing gear still wouldn't be able to carry LD3-45 ULD containers.

That's fine, but you quoted me talking about the engines,which you didn't discuss in your reply.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Fri Feb 05, 2016 2:33 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 194):
If the customer needs such an aircraft, A330ceo can do it today and A330neo in the near future. Boeing's concern seems to be filling the gap between 739 and 787-8 with something that can compete with A321.

The conundrum is it's Airbus meeting both needs and Boeing is conflicted about the tab developing the clean-sheet NMA would entail. Could revisiting an 'optimized' regional 787 derivative cost less to launch?         
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Fri Feb 05, 2016 2:42 am

I've thought about it some more, and I'm not as negative towards the idea as I was.

The thing is that yes, Airbus can counter a 737-10/11 MadMAX with stretching the A321neo into an A322. But designing a new wing with wingbox and MLG is not that much more expensive than designing a new wing, wingbox and keeping the old MLG as Airbus could do. And even then, I believe Airbus would benefit from creating a new MLG as well. Looking at pictures of the new A321neo, the ground clearance under the engines is now fairly low, and the rotation angle will be even less with an A322.

If Boeing decided to go forward with the 737 option, there are several benefits. The development costs will be much less, they could utilize the current 737 production line with some adjustments, they could "fix" the problems that hinders the current 737-900/ER/MAX from reaching it's fullest potential as well as fit larger variants of the LEAP engines. Probably the same size as the LEAP-1A and C. This means the 737 MadMAX could be developed into an improved 737-9 size, a 737-10 size and a 737-11 size. The -10 being 10-15% higher capacity than the 757-200, and the -11 20-25% higher capacity.

The whole idea of another variation of the 737 is still a little ridiculus in my opinion, but it all boils down to how cheap can they develop the aircraft, and how fast can they have it on the market. According to Boeing it will be after the 777-X program, and I would be surprised if there's not already an A322 on the market by then.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4204
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Fri Feb 05, 2016 6:04 am

Quoting Revelation (Reply 194):
If the customer needs such an aircraft, A330ceo can do it today and A330neo in the near future. Boeing's concern seems to be filling the gap between 739 and 787-8 with something that can compete with A321.

Indeed - Boeing seems a little reluctant to make this decision, I am speculating why. I have some doubts about trans-Atlantic. Given Boeings experience converting the 777 converting the 737 would not seem difficult, they obviously are not jumping onto it.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

New 757 Replacement NMA Information - Part 1

Fri Feb 05, 2016 7:02 am

Quoting tjh8402 (Reply 183):
Why couldn't they? They already use 739s on non premium transcon routes.

Well, I don't mean to talk down the 737 a little, but it's not strictly speaking the most comfortable plane, especially compared to the A321, which can get a little bit more done.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 188):
I can't see Airbus or Boeing offering anything smaller than A320/738 size when they eventually get around to replacing those families. There's next to no demand today, they'll be even less by 2030

Okay, that plausible I suppose. I don't think Boeing would be too concerned with surrendering the sub-150 seat market to planes like the C-Series and E2.

But then, if we have the 2 NSA models being the size of the 738 and 739, and the MoM models being the size of the 752 and 753, I would expect the largest to affect 787-8 sales further since the aircraft is in a three-member family.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 196):
Could revisiting an 'optimized' regional 787 derivative cost less to launch?

It was called the 787-3, and unless Boeing wants to derate those engines, it would be a flop!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 194):
and in this case, "that segment" refers to the "gap between the 737 Max 9 and the 787-8."

I think we can safely assume that this is what Boeing will do next after the 777X.

I think MoM two models is perfect, one seating 210-220 in a 2 class config with 4500-5000nm of range, and one seating 240-250 with 4000nm of range. I'm guessing an EIS around 2023-25.

By then, older 737NGs will probably start to need replacing, and NSA development shortly thereafter if not started by then.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931

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