The 787-3 was way too heavy for its proposed mission. That's why nobody wanted it.

 

What model of the Boeing 737 does the CS100 and the CS300 compete against? It looks like the 737-600 and CS100 compete size wise whereas the 737-700 and CS300 compete size wise. Is this correct?

 

I'd say it is correct. However, BA sold almost no -600s and hasn't made any in years. The 700s aren't selling anymore and the 7MAX has not sold well (I think only two orders so far, SWA being one of course). BA's trade complaint against BBD isn't about the CS100 or 300 so much as preventing a CS500 which might be highly competitive against the 319NEO and 8MAX. The article below sums that case up succinctly.

Boeing?s Trade Complaint Harms American Consumers | HuffPost

 

One follow on note to yesterday's lengthy post - sometimes folks speculate on us taking DALs 767-400s and 777s in exchange for our A350 orders and there are even rumors floating around saying as such. I frankly have no idea whether or not such a deal might happen. However, I saw today that DALs A350s have RR engines. So, in light of our RR sticky wicket, such a deal would give us another avenue for unloading our superfluous A350 order. It would also allow us to retire our oldest 756s/777s fairly soon and replace them with a number of newer frames cheaply. In the process, DAL could start reducing fleet types as they move to a mostly AB fleet. Makes a lot of sense to me, but it takes two companies to tango.

 

I've seen some very interesting (and well-reasoned) posts here on the pros and cons of a new MoM aircraft, versus an improved "here and now." Enlightening for me were the concepts that it is a limited market (number of airframes), mostly for the Atlantic, and it entails a significant capital risk (and time) for a manufacturer.

Since Boeing has demonstrated since the 1930s the concept of "let's use these old parts on a new plane," (B-17/Stratoliner; B-29/Stratocruiser, 367-80/every narrowbody cockpit except the 757...), I come to the sad conclusion that the MoM will be:

The 737 MAX WETNESS. (MAX With Eternal Tanks Needing ETOPS Selectable Stores).

It will just be a 737 MAX with two underwing pylons. For Atlantic ETOPS, the airline can load an external drop-tank under each wing, just like a fighter (or B-50, B-47, and B-52). If you lose an engine, you pickle the tanks off. They will be "environmentally friendly" by having a parachute, and convenient pre-paid postage to be mailed back to the airline, when found.

For those short domestic hops, no tanks, OR, they can be used as "travel pods" to load low-revenue ticket holders' bags....or maybe standbys and jumpseaters.

It will come equipped with a hook and drag chute. Growth versions may adopt a conformal tank....

Boeing and SWA stock will rise immediately upon the announcement. Pilot and F/A morale will sag.

 

Thanks for the article, it’s interesting! I forgot about the rumored CS500, so it looks like
CS100=737-600
CS300=737-700
CS500=737-800
I wonder if they’ll make a CS700 to compete with the 737-900 in the future.

 

I doubt it, the CS300 is 127 feet long... just about the same length as a 737-800. So a CS-500 stretch would probably take it out to about 138 feet or so... the same as a 900. The Max-10 is going to be a touch longer than 143 feet. So to compete against the 900/9Max seatwise would require such a stretch that I presume would limit the number of gates it could fit in. The 757-200 is 155ft, I don't know if they are gate limited or not. I do know that 900s seem to fit everywhere.

 

That makes sense actually. I wasn’t thinking about the gate limits.

 

cs is 5 across so length isn't comparable to load

 

Yup. I thought that was already apparent, hence why the CS300 length is similar to the 800 ... but loadwise it really competes most directly against the 700.