Search

Notices

Boeing 797

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-21-2017 | 07:14 PM
  #21  
Don't say Guppy
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 0
From: Guppy driver
Default

Whatever Boeing does, they are going to have to absolutely knock it out of the park efficiency wise. Airbus is going to be able to sell 330NEO's and 321NEO LR's for a song as the development costs were paid for a very long time ago.

I think Boeing is going to lose this one They have dug themselves into a 737 hole, and they can't figure out how to get out.

As far as single or double isle, double isle isn't any good until you get to 9 across. The 767 was 7 across. For 1 extra seat per row, you also got an isle. The 767 was 50% heavier than a 757, for 16% more seats. That was not a good tradeoff. There will never be another double isle aircraft with 7 across seating in coach.
Reply
Old 06-21-2017 | 07:19 PM
  #22  
Don't say Guppy
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 0
From: Guppy driver
Default

Boeing has let their marketing people do deception before. The Sonic Cruiser was just that.

If I wanted a double isle MOM aircraft, I would take a 787 fuselage, and put a new, smaller, lighter wing, with smaller engines, and less fuel capacity. Same systems. Development costs go way down, obviously same type rating.
Reply
Old 06-21-2017 | 08:35 PM
  #23  
pokey9554's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
From: Cessna 150
Default

Looks legit:

Reply
Old 06-21-2017 | 08:41 PM
  #24  
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,209
Likes: 6
From: 777
Default

Originally Posted by pokey9554
Looks legit:

CG looks a little off, but other wise, good to go!
Reply
Old 06-21-2017 | 08:44 PM
  #25  
pokey9554's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
From: Cessna 150
Default

They're going with the proven MD-11 aft CG theory.
Reply
Old 06-21-2017 | 08:59 PM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,508
Likes: 109
Default

Originally Posted by Probe
Boeing has let their marketing people do deception before. The Sonic Cruiser was just that.

If I wanted a double isle MOM aircraft, I would take a 787 fuselage, and put a new, smaller, lighter wing, with smaller engines, and less fuel capacity. Same systems. Development costs go way down, obviously same type rating.
It was called the 787-3... and it didn't get a single order.
Reply
Old 06-22-2017 | 03:09 AM
  #27  
BoilerUP's Avatar
Doing One Pilot's Job
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,883
Likes: 119
Default

Originally Posted by Grumble
It was called the 787-3... and it didn't get a single order.
JAL and All Nippon originally ordered the 787-3 (more than 40 airframes between the two airlines), but all orders were ultimately converted to longer range, earlier certified 787-8.
Reply
Old 06-22-2017 | 05:42 AM
  #28  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 274
Likes: 3
Default

Originally Posted by Probe
As far as single or double isle, double isle isn't any good until you get to 9 across. The 767 was 7 across. For 1 extra seat per row, you also got an isle. The 767 was 50% heavier than a 757, for 16% more seats. That was not a good tradeoff. There will never be another double isle aircraft with 7 across seating in coach.
But the 767 blows the 757 away with cargo capacity and range. I routinely come back from Europe with a car and pallets in the belly. The capability and mission are totally different, which I'm sure more than absorbs trade off of weight and capacity.
Reply
Old 06-22-2017 | 05:49 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,508
Likes: 109
Default

Originally Posted by BoilerUP
JAL and All Nippon originally ordered the 787-3 (more than 40 airframes between the two airlines), but all orders were ultimately converted to longer range, earlier certified 787-8.
Thus the 783 has no orders.
Reply
Old 06-22-2017 | 06:05 AM
  #30  
BoilerUP's Avatar
Doing One Pilot's Job
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,883
Likes: 119
Default

Originally Posted by Grumble
Thus the 783 has no orders.
The 787-3 has no orders because it was canceled after all the original 787-3 orders were changed to the 787-8 variant.

But we're arguing semantics - that variant ended up as little more than vaporware.

3000nm is too little range, but a lighter, shorter-winged, less expensive 5000-5500nm version might be attractive without cannibalizing -8 orders too much.

Still wouldn't fix the issue of continued evolution of a 50 year old narrowbody design instead of a revolutionary new narrowbody design, though...
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jcountry
Major
56
02-22-2017 09:52 AM
iceman49
Union Talk
11
12-06-2013 10:19 PM
vagabond
Safety
0
06-14-2012 03:24 PM
vagabond
Union Talk
0
07-13-2009 05:45 PM
captain_drew
Hangar Talk
0
12-30-2005 07:03 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices