General Aviation Thread

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Im not an aircraft designer from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, but in my opinion they should have MAXimized the 757. I dont think airlines are waiting for some kind of 787-7, that will be as attractive as an A330-100... :-D
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
What's the matter John, can't sleep?

I don't know. I would have thought that they would go for a B757 replacement which is something that I think that the market wants. One thing that I sort of sense since the McDonnell Douglas cabal takeover of Boeing management, is the arrogance that set in and apart from the B787 the apparent lack of a new clean design product. It had all the appearances of them sitting on their laurels and making only incremental changes to their current catalogue.
Fell off my ATV and I have a sore neck keeping up. Between the MD merger and Boeing’s Chicago HQ move, nothing seems to be working for them. A narrow twin aisle...against a A321XLR, I don’t see airlines rushing in especially if the airlines in question are operating the larger 787 versions.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
not an aircraft designer from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, but in my opinion they should have MAXimized the 757.
There are thinking on that, There's article from Reuters that saying Boeing considering 757 Plus concept. Miss that article, however found this video that talking on that concept.


Problem are, Boeing close 757 line too soon. They're seems miss the market trend that moving to Cities Business model more instead Big Hub model. Thus building 757 replacement base on 757 it self in theory should be faster. However since they're already closing the production line, then they have to build it from scratch. Thus it's not much difference then building completely new design.


would have thought that they would go for a B757 replacement which is something that I think that the market wants. One thing that I sort of sense since the McDonnell Douglas cabal takeover of Boeing management, is the arrogance that set in and apart from the B787 the apparent lack of a new clean design product.
Based on several media articles toward the years, what seems already cleared for this Middle of the Market segment is that the market wants Airliners between 220-270 capacity with the range of 5000+ miles, and have economics of operation more comparable to single aisle rather large twin aisle.

There're concepts on how to achieve that, just like what Merry Lynch talk with Boeing to create this NMA from 737 based but fatter thus can be fit with 2-3-2 configuration. The idea is to utilize 737 line thus reduce the costs.


However we have seen what happen on stretching the 737 design too far. We see the results on MAX. Thus I don't think Boeing will move on that path again.

There's the idea on using 767 or downsize 787 just like @John Fedup put. Still I suspect using 767 or 787 as based will not provide the economics of operation that the market ask. It will not be able to compete with A321 XLR economics.

Personally I like the idea of 757 Plus, rather than build small size twin aisle. Yes it will still be costly to reopen 757 line. However considering Cities to Cities business model that taking on, also after COVID I suspect many passanger want to go direct and minimising transfer in Big Hub.
Thus who knows, perhaps they're thinking on building new Airframes based on the Airframes being replaced, is more acceptable for the Market.

I think right now, perhaps some Boeing Executives smack their face and say; "why we close 757 line to begin with".
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Fell off my ATV and I have a sore neck keeping up. Between the MD merger and Boeing’s Chicago HQ move, nothing seems to be working for them. A narrow twin aisle...against a A321XLR, I don’t see airlines rushing in especially if the airlines in question are operating the larger 787 versions.
Bugger. You been sniffing that hillbilly juice again? Hope that you recover quickly. Well I thought that they wanted a single aisle that the range and payload of the B757, but was between the B737 and B787 / B777 because one was too small with not enough legs and the other was too large meaning more seats had to be sold per cycle. It's fine for high density routes, such as transatlantic, but not so much for less dense routes. That's all .
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
Just add this 2016 article from Business Insider. On this matter I found articles from Business Media will reflect more on what the market wants.


This article happen relative long before what happen to MAX, but in my opinion it shows the arrogance of Boeing to try dictate the market instead try to answer it just like Airbus did.
Eventough the article based on interview with an Boeing 757 pilot, but it can be seen as what the Airlines wants. They want another 757.
In later end of the Article, Boeing executive try to put the idea that MAX is better than 757. Eventough Market don't see that. Even before the problem of MAX come out, they already see that 737 design is can't be stretch more to fill 757 need.

In my opinion, Boeing Executives simply did not want to accept their mistake on closing down 757 line. It's true at the early 2000'ish the market still thinking on Big Hub concept. The market changes to Cities to Cities model is not there yet.
If Boeing still not willing to accept that, then Airbus will take over most of this middle of Market segment. People with or even without COVID, prefer to go direct route as much as possible. That's what create market move on cities to cities model.
Transferring in Hub is not a pleasent Experience for most customers. After all only minority of Hub is a nice one like Changi or Dubai.
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
..
Based on several media articles toward the years, what seems already cleared for this Middle of the Market segment is that the market wants Airliners between 220-270 capacity with the range of 5000+ miles, and have economics of operation more comparable to single aisle rather large twin aisle.

There're concepts on how to achieve that, just like what Merry Lynch talk with Boeing to create this NMA from 737 based but fatter thus can be fit with 2-3-2 configuration. The idea is to utilize 737 line thus reduce the costs.
...

However we have seen what happen on stretching the 737 design too far. We see the results on MAX. Thus I don't think Boeing will move on that path again.
..
The original Boeing 737-100 & -200 were between 50 & 58 tons max take-off weight. B737 MAX is at 80-88 tons. Everything's stretched: length, wingspan . . . A320-200 to A321XLR is an increase from 78 to 100 tons. That's a hell of a lot less stretch. And someone's talking about a further 737 stretch? Doh! Where's that clean sheet of paper gone . . .
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Stretch is for bean counter management, clean sheet is for engineering management. The former resides in Chicago and some portion of the latter still remains in Seattle. The duopoly hasn’t exactly been innovative lately wrt to customer needs with the exception of the A321XLR.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
The thing is bean counter management is much more attractive to most Companies Board. Engineering approach in many times will tend to be idealistic, and idealistic seldom related with the most efficient way to the bottom line.

The trick is always found middle ground from effective thinking of engineering and efficient approach of bean counters. However on today condition, market increasingly will determine the way products build. Even when control by Duopoly Industry.

MAX is an example of how the Market knows stretched 737 will not mean covering all what they need, but the attraction of commonality in operation between NG and MAX plus the additional improvement of capabilities in MAX, makes existing 737 customers take it (due to influence of bean counters thinking). After the modification of MAX, I suspect market then will see if the commonality on operation between NG and MAX will still be enough, to give substantial saving they're been promised by Boeing.

Back to NMA market that mostly use 757 at this moment. NMA market at beginning mostly come out in North America and Trans Atlantic routes. However NMA according some analysts begin to spring out in Asia-Pacific. This's region where thinner secondary cities to cities route shown increase. Direct International route to Greater China for example not dominate to Shanghai or Beijing. However cities like Guangzhou, Xian or Wuhan now getting more direct International route. Thus this NMA market is actually increasing.

Again logically Boeing should build something in the range of 757, to regain the lead in this segment from A321XLR. Building modified 757 is right way technically for example, but in the end it will be determine it's right financially or not for Boeing condition. So far the sign still shown Boeing still hoping to face A321 XLR with 737-10, despite most of the market clearly say it's not.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Let’s face it, Boeing wants the 737-10 as an answer to the A321XLR because they are so financially challenged at the moment. The other unknown is the future of city to city routes into China from the rest of Asia. In theory, a real growth potential but as the geopolitical situation sides downhill, perhaps not.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
The other unknown is the future of city to city routes into China from the rest of Asia. In theory, a real growth potential but as the geopolitical situation sides downhill, perhaps not.
Secondary Cities to Cities route, or some call it medium-long range thin routes, basically that give the need for most of middle of market segment. Off course it's mostly build up first in North America and Inter Atlantic routes with Europe cities. However with the increase economics growth in Asia-Pacific, those thinner Medium-Long range routes will not only come from China market, but also between secondary cities throughout region.

This's just evolutionary routes trend that already happen in North America and Trans Atlantic. It's just matter of time it will come out in AsPac region. Even COVID situation will perhaps only delay that for couple of years.


This Video I take, since it's talk on the problem facing China-Russia C929 wide body Airliners project. Russian is the only one from the two that already have experience on wide body twin aisle Airliner, but China is the one that can bankroll it.

Shown it's still not easy to come out with project that can challenge the Duopoly.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Secondary Cities to Cities route, or some call it medium-long range thin routes, basically that give the need for most of middle of market segment. Off course it's mostly build up first in North America and Inter Atlantic routes with Europe cities. However with the increase economics growth in Asia-Pacific, those thinner Medium-Long range routes will not only come from China market, but also between secondary cities throughout region.

This's just evolutionary routes trend that already happen in North America and Trans Atlantic. It's just matter of time it will come out in AsPac region. Even COVID situation will perhaps only delay that for couple of years.


This Video I take, since it's talk on the problem facing China-Russia C929 wide body Airliners project. Russian is the only one from the two that already have experience on wide body twin aisle Airliner, but China is the one that can bankroll it.

Shown it's still not easy to come out with project that can challenge the Duopoly.
Yes, it is difficult to challenge the duopoly, as Bombardier discovered. I still wonder if P&W’s geared turbines hadn’t suffered delays/initial problems and oil prices didn’t collapse, could the C-Series have created a wedge into the duopoly, especially when you factor in Boeing’s MAX issues. Of course the big negative was Bombardier’s appalling family management problem.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member

Seems MAX will be flying again by end of this year. For some Airlines, it will give them right time to begin retirement for their older Airplanes like NG or even some twin aisle.
In the end Boeing still need to begin work on new single aisle. The damage on MAX reputation already big enough, in my opinion. So perhaps the new NMA will in the end build on platform that being flexible enough for 160 - 240 passanger.

Perhaps they should talk with Embrear again for E Series for 80 - 150 passanger range.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro

Seems MAX will be flying again by end of this year. For some Airlines, it will give them right time to begin retirement for their older Airplanes like NG or even some twin aisle.
In the end Boeing still need to begin work on new single aisle. The damage on MAX reputation already big enough, in my opinion. So perhaps the new NMA will in the end build on platform that being flexible enough for 160 - 240 passanger.

Perhaps they should talk with Embrear again for E Series for 80 - 150 passanger range.
I think Embraer would be very wary after Boeing acted like a spoilt teenager and dumped them late last year. With reference to the NMA something with similar capabilities to the B757 would be good.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Bill Gates predicts one consequence of COVID will be a 50% reduction for business travel which provides around 50% of airline revenue. If this comes to pass, airlines will have to really give thought to how to enhance tourist travel. New more efficient jets with IMPROVED passenger comfort might be a better solution than cheaper fares.
 
Top