Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-02-2021, 02:50 PM   #1  
Prime Minister/Moderator
Thread Starter
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 29,188
Default Boeing Concerned about 321XLR Safety

Their concern about fuel tanks seems a legit discussion item to me, but this kind of theoretically constructive industry commentary doesn't usually make the news.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKCN2AU2RJ
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-02-2021, 05:20 PM   #2  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 6,108
Default







Were I of a suspicious nature, I might view this as attempting to scuttle a rival.....
Excargodog is offline  
Old 03-02-2021, 05:49 PM   #3  
Gets Mon-Sun Off
 
TransWorld's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Position: Up Front
Posts: 3,229
Default

Could have told them to do this a decade ago. Between the 737 and the 787.
TransWorld is online now  
Old 03-02-2021, 06:34 PM   #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
flyinthrew's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 127
Default

This is more Boeing business chicanery. It’s kinda their thing.
flyinthrew is online now  
Old 03-03-2021, 04:01 AM   #5  
777 - ret
 
Huell's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2020
Position: Waco CG-4 center seat
Posts: 863
Default

You would think McDonald-Douglas was running the company.
Huell is offline  
Old 03-03-2021, 06:21 AM   #6  
Prime Minister/Moderator
Thread Starter
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 29,188
Default

A purpose-built mid-size plane would have to be more efficient than a stretch 321. If only they can build one before the XLR consumes all of the market niche...
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-03-2021, 06:44 AM   #7  
Gets Mon-Sun Off
 
TransWorld's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Position: Up Front
Posts: 3,229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huell View Post
You would think McDonald-Douglas was running the company.
James S. McDonnell and Donald W. Douglas see what you did. And no hyphen in McDonnell Douglas, as well.
TransWorld is online now  
Old 03-03-2021, 07:30 AM   #8  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 6,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
A purpose-built mid-size plane would have to be more efficient than a stretch 321. If only they can build one before the XLR consumes all of the market niche...
Aerodynamically more efficient? Possibly. Economically more efficient when you consider the existing A320 family worldwide logistics and training infrastructure? Far less likely.

No, it was Boeing who tried to stretch an existing aircraft a model too far with the MAX. They should have had a 757 follow-on waiting in the wings a decade ago. Now they are trapped in lag for at least a few years, more likely a decade.
Excargodog is offline  
Old 03-03-2021, 08:13 AM   #9  
Prime Minister/Moderator
Thread Starter
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 29,188
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Excargodog View Post
Aerodynamically more efficient? Possibly. Economically more efficient when you consider the existing A320 family worldwide logistics and training infrastructure? Far less likely.
Fuel burn is going to be the metric that punches well above its weight, if current green trends play out. Either due to a need to reduce burn/emissions, the high cost of SAF, or both. Also while the bus is newer than the guppy, it's still 40 years old. A clean-slate design could have enough baked-in economic advantages IMO.

Boeing has a well established support network.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-03-2021, 09:26 AM   #10  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 6,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post

Boeing has a well established support network.
But it doesn’t have sims, parts, or type-certified pilots for the -5x, or even a flying prototype. And with the FAA under scrutiny for giving them too much license to self-certify on the MAX, they are not going to get any of that for a considerable time by which - as you mentioned - the niche will largely have been filled.

And SAF is still buying indulgences from the church of the envirowackoes. It makes more sense to continue to pump Jet-A and offset it by producing non-carbon power on the ground, through geothermal, hydroelectric (rare and inconsequential minnows be damned), and nuclear until we can get working fusion power plants. That’s still buying indulgences, but at least you are buying them at a cheaper rate.
Excargodog is offline  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? Guard Dude Delta 200491 05-03-2021 09:32 PM
Boeing 737 MAX Cleared docav8tor Major 7 11-20-2020 09:41 PM
NTSB cites competing pilot warnings docav8tor Safety 4 09-26-2019 12:50 PM
New Yorker: Dreamliner and Boeing MacMan Cargo 13 02-02-2013 09:45 PM
Boeing, Cargo Oppose 757 Fuel Tank Fix vagabond Safety 0 06-14-2012 03:24 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:54 AM.