|
Post by stealthmanbob on Apr 21, 2016 23:22:12 GMT 1
If true, this will be an interesting new development. What can Boeing offer now that they couldn't when they first designed the MAX 7 ? I am not sure about this model being a pax airliner, I heard it was going to be a long range BBJ 7000+ miles range ?
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Apr 22, 2016 2:03:07 GMT 1
It is debatable as to whether it is worth the effort to put in extra resources into something that is not going to be profitable to sell. If this is to keep BBD at bay, in the sub 150 seat category, this is going along the same lines as what Boeing did with the 737-800 to keep it competitive with the A320.
|
|
|
Post by airboche on Apr 22, 2016 11:38:00 GMT 1
Sort of brutal to watch battles like B versus C going on right now. I had expected it to be more like MAX versus neo. Now the smaller sized number three is attacked. Bit of a surpise to me. At least the big player B takes C serious and has woken up.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Apr 22, 2016 17:20:33 GMT 1
I am not sure about this model being a pax airliner, I heard it was going to be a long range BBJ 7000+ miles range ? If Boeing builds it, then be sure it is an improved MAX 7 designed to compete with the CS300. There will of course be a BBJ version, but business jets cannot be the main market targeted by Boeing. It might as well be a trick to incite customers to wait.
|
|
|
Post by stealthmanbob on Apr 22, 2016 20:03:04 GMT 1
I am not sure about this model being a pax airliner, I heard it was going to be a long range BBJ 7000+ miles range ? If Boeing builds it, then be sure it is an improved MAX 7 designed to compete with the CS300. There will of course be a BBJ version, but business jets cannot be the main market targeted by Boeing. It might as well be a trick to incite customers to wait. I wish Boeing would concentrate on the models they have, are trying to produce, don't keep trying to compete with other m*gs products Successes. Spreading yourself to thin with to many variants is not a good business plan ?
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957
|
Post by s543 on Apr 22, 2016 20:40:33 GMT 1
They do not want to make the mistake they made when Airbus started - they completely ignored it.... They want to make life on any competition tough - to conserve the duopoly.... what ever it might mean
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on May 2, 2016 13:34:24 GMT 1
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on May 4, 2016 14:27:53 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by fanairbus on May 4, 2016 15:22:32 GMT 1
The link states 'The engine will provide operators with double-digit improvements in fuel consumption and CO2 emissions compared to today’s best CFM engine'.
I wonder how it is comparing with the Airbus LEAP-1A version? Presumably the manufacturer receives data from both Boeing and Airbus.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 6, 2016 0:56:10 GMT 1
I wonder how it is comparing with the Airbus LEAP-1A version? Presumably the manufacturer receives data from both Boeing and Airbus. Both versions are supposed to be equally efficient, though many believe the wider fan diameter should favour the LEAP 1-A
|
|