Supposedly, they changed the designation of their short-range 707 to "720" so that it would sound like a whole new airplane. That made it easier for an airline CEO, who had already chosen the DC-8, to explain this new purchase to the BOD. ;)

You mean like this: https://leehamnews.com/2015/02/25/78...ement-for-757/

It was cancelled for lack of orders.

Not quite. The 787-3 was built as a people mover like the 747-400D. That's why only Japanese airlines ordered it. The 787-3 was supposed to hold 300+ that's why it had no range. 4500 NM is not enough for what we need a plane to do. What the market needs is a 787-8 sized aircraft with 12hr endurance. That should allow for a higher MZFW for more cargo.

Yep; I read an article on single vs twin aisle a few years ago. The bottom line was that airline executives wanted more seats across, not a second aisle. The logic was that seats bring in revenues; aisles don't do anything for revenue.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the future minimum twin aisle configuration be 10 across (3x4x3).

Are you kidding? The weight and added drag of a larger fuselage for a second aisle is why you don't see any passenger 767-200 aircraft around anymore. It had the highest CASM for that reason alone.

The two aisles is designed to have an airplane with over 200 seats that doesn't take 45+ minutes to board and deboard. You'd need over 90 minutes to switch crews with a single-aisle 200+ seat plane. Certainly getting the plane to turn an hour is not going to happen unless they are 2 aisles with 230 seats.

Does Spirit take 90mins to turn a 321? Honestly not sure but I think they're around 220 seats. I know SWA does a clean as you go method to speed up turns. I really wonder whether a few minutes of turn time makes up for boring a much larger hole in the sky w/ a twin aisle at 200-230-ish pax and a much bigger fuel burn normally. Any way you cut it - even w/ a non round cross section, about 2x the internal volume will be apportioned to aisle vs a narrow body. We'll see if Boeing reinvents aerodynamics with the 797 or sticks w/ single aisle haha.

Nope. I didn't say seven across, I assume at least 2+4+2 or greater (never more than one seat away from an aisle, that would be nice). If you take a gander at some of the advanced military airlifter concepts out there, lifting bodies are coming. I'm sure a 797 won't be a pure lifting body, but it will benefit from the subsidies... er, research.

Like I said before, an aircraft able to carry 250ish people that can fit comfortably into existing narrowbody gates and be turned faster than an 8 Max. It is the only compelling design I can think of that we'd want to be a launch customer for. It might not look all that different than what is already out there, and Boeing certainly made it seem that way this week in Paris.

However, I duly note the possibility that Boeing's marketing department might be dispensing bundles of chaff.

Boeing BWB.

I like the looks (and livery) of this one better:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5220/5...be48de70_b.jpg

[but we all know it will end up as a boring mini-787 tube with wings]