Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Fleet Discussion and News >

Fleet Discussion and News

Search
Notices

Fleet Discussion and News

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-23-2017, 11:34 AM
  #311  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 611
Default

Originally Posted by Half wing View Post
I'm thinking the MOM will be a 787-8 with a wing chop, down to a span of 170 feet, about 160,000lbs of fuel total, smaller engines and a smaller price tag. Remind anyone of the proposed 787-3? That is the cheapest way to make the MOM and reminds me of what Boeing does with the 737 program, changing as little as possible from one variant to the next.
The 787-3 was way too heavy for its proposed mission. That's why nobody wanted it.
N6279P is offline  
Old 08-23-2017, 11:43 AM
  #312  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ItnStln's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,584
Default

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?
ItnStln is online now  
Old 08-23-2017, 12:38 PM
  #313  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
CLazarus's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: 777FO
Posts: 703
Default

Originally Posted by ItnStln View Post
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
CLazarus is offline  
Old 08-23-2017, 12:47 PM
  #314  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
CLazarus's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: 777FO
Posts: 703
Default

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.
CLazarus is offline  
Old 08-23-2017, 03:18 PM
  #315  
Moderate Moderator
 
UAL T38 Phlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Default

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.
UAL T38 Phlyer is offline  
Old 08-23-2017, 04:51 PM
  #316  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ItnStln's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,584
Default

Originally Posted by CLazarus View Post
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


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.
ItnStln is online now  
Old 08-23-2017, 05:30 PM
  #317  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
CLazarus's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: 777FO
Posts: 703
Default

Originally Posted by ItnStln View Post
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.
CLazarus is offline  
Old 08-23-2017, 05:58 PM
  #318  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ItnStln's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,584
Default

Originally Posted by CLazarus View Post
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.
ItnStln is online now  
Old 08-23-2017, 06:01 PM
  #319  
Not at work
 
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: 737 ca
Posts: 293
Default

cs is 5 across so length isn't comparable to load
blockplus is offline  
Old 08-23-2017, 06:32 PM
  #320  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
CLazarus's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: 777FO
Posts: 703
Default

Originally Posted by blockplus View Post
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.
CLazarus is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Guard Dude
Delta
201720
04-06-2022 06:59 AM
gooddeal
Major
25
10-18-2014 03:43 PM
vagabond
Hangar Talk
20
06-22-2011 06:02 AM
Sink r8
Major
27
01-12-2010 07:47 AM
Lipout1
Cargo
3
07-25-2007 07:43 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