rickair7777

This is a REALLY bad time to pull the trigger...

a) The tech in question is specific for fuel efficiency/carbon reduction; both the US and EU governments are directly driving the R&D. It looks to be about ten years out, maybe less. Net fuel burn reduction might approach 60-80%, and further reduction could be accomplished with bio or synth fuel (certified today at 50% blend).

b) It's very likely that said tech (or something with equivalent environmental impact) will be mandatory due to climate change, either legislated by governments or de facto by popular demand of the flying public.

So in this case both the tech and the mandate will arrive at about the same time. Probably not wise to clean-slate a new plane which will be obsolete just as production reaches full swing. The new tech may require radical fuselage/engine designs, and would mostly not be suitable for retrofit on legacy designs.

Airbus was fortunate that the A320, designed in the 80's, was originally designed for higher-bypass turbofans than the 73, and thus has longer landing gear. Easier for them to fit even higher bypass fans under the wing.

Airbus got lucky on that, but not so much on other projects where they blew their R&D budget on the wrong plane at the wrong time. The A380, A330NEO, and A350 are inter-related due to mis-allocation of R&D.