philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 3, 2017 10:10:59 GMT 1
We didn't yet have a thread for Boeing's proposed small widebody family (possibly dubbed 797). We don't know all details, but we have heard from many aviation professionals that Boeing has been in talks with airlines and lessors for months, some of them showing interest. The proposal is said to be for a new seven-abreast twin-aisle aircraft family, including two different sub-types, with a capacity of up to 220 (??) passengers and a range of 4500/6000 NM (??). Whatever marketing claims may be, this is not a 757 successor, it is indeed a 767 successor, aimed at 767 and A330 replacement. It may explain in part why Boeing has not been actively trying to keep the 788 in the market, preferring to push customers to upgrade/upgauge to the 789. Flightglobal writes that Safran's CEO Philippe Petitcolin just disclosed that the thrust requirement is for a 178/222 KN (40 000/50 000 pounds) powerplant. CFM intends to offer a new engine, competitive proposals being expected from Rolls-Royce and P&W. www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/cfm-in-talks-with-boeing-over-mom-engines-436574/Could a seven-abreast aircraft be competitive, or is it a 'seven-and-a-half' fuselage, actually intended for eight-abreast operation ? |
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957 
|
Post by s543 on May 3, 2017 21:42:39 GMT 1
The only winning thing can be the speed of boarding / leaving the aircraft, otherwise more empty weight/space carried around...
As always we will see. There is probably no other way for BO what to do.
The cost of the project would be HUGE since all is new, new wing, new fuselage, new engines, new you name it. And of course some delays on the way......
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 4, 2017 9:13:23 GMT 1
IF (a big if !) Boeing launches it, then a substantial market segment exists. We already know that many 767 operators are unsatisfied with existing replacements.
What I don't believe is that such a plane could make a dent in A321 sales, as Boeing has been claiming.
|
|
|
|
Post by airboche on May 4, 2017 10:18:35 GMT 1
Boeing have an upgraded 767 (future Tanker with new glass cockpit) that could be build cheap and competitive. Why another one? There are so many widebody twins these days, A330, A350, 777, 767, 787 plus single aisles stretched to the max. Who could buy all of them?
|
|
someone
in service - 1 year
Posts: 3,230
|
Post by someone on May 4, 2017 12:39:18 GMT 1
Boeing have an upgraded 767 (future Tanker with new glass cockpit) that could be build cheap and competitive. Why another one? There are so many widebody twins these days, A330, A350, 777, 767, 787 plus single aisles stretched to the max. Who could buy all of them? Yes, a 767 can be built cheap, but they have to come up with something that is cheap to operate. Wings, aerodynamics, engines, maintenance are all factors where the 767s are obsolete |
|
|
|
Post by airboche on May 4, 2017 13:58:39 GMT 1
To me the product strategy on both sides of the atlantic looks rather chaotic. Somehow they seem to have missed the lower end of the widebody market for some time and now they flood it with unproven concepts. I want to see that fuselage diameter first please.
It can't be wrong to ask for engines first but this size might end as a niche. Like the 757, the 787-3 and the A310 have proven.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 5, 2017 7:17:04 GMT 1
It can't be wrong to ask for engines first but this size might end as a niche. Like the 757, the 787-3 and the A310 have proven. The A310, a derivative of the first twin-engine widebody (the A300), was rendered obsolete by a new Boeing design, the 767. The A300/A310 family can be considered as relatively successful for a then new manufacturer. The proposed 787-3 was a cheap far-from-optimised shrink, derived from a comparatively heavy airframe allowing eight-to-nine-abreast seating, the 788, which itself already has no future in the market. That nobody wanted the 783 is no surprise. The 757 is a narrowbody launched at the same time as the 767, tailor-made for US 'continental' flights. It made sense until improvements in engine and airframe technology increased narrowbody range, allowing the 737 and A320 families to perform such flights. The 767, the only seven-abreast airliner ever made, sold well until the A330 made its passenger versions uncompetitive. The A330 takes advantage of a wider cross-section allowing eight-abreast seating and carrying two LD3 containers side-by-side in the hull. As you pointed out, the question now is whether the market for a small widebody is large enough to warrant the costly development of a new family. Market reactions to Boeing's offering will provide an answer. Many have doubts that a seven-abreast cross-section can be made competitive, but we don't know Boeing's plans. |
|
|
|
Post by airboche on May 5, 2017 8:09:18 GMT 1
To me this would only make sense if the new aircraft forms the base for the 737-successor family. But that war is so intense there is no room for error. Those engines must be ready and reliable first and you need more than one option.
The best way to go from my view might be to build a lightweight 787 like the 737-700 if that can be done cheap enough. It will need some truly optimized shorter range wing. However shrinks are tricky.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 5, 2017 8:47:41 GMT 1
To me this would only make sense if the new aircraft forms the base for the 737-successor family. But that war is so intense there is no room for error. Those engines must be ready and reliable first and you need more than one option. The best way to go from my view might be to build a lightweight 787 like the 737-700 if that can be done cheap enough. It will need some truly optimized shorter range wing. However shrinks are tricky. Airboche, we are talking about a new widebody with a power requirement well beyond LEAP capacity (see first post). This has nothing to do with a 737 successor. A 'lightweight' 787 is an oxymore, the 787 being a heavy aircraft presently competing with the A330neo. With a smaller wing, we have the unsuccessful 783. Boeing's approach (a 767 successor) must not be despised. They may have a market since 767 operators have no satisfactory replacement at present. |
|
|
|
Post by airboche on May 5, 2017 9:17:57 GMT 1
It possibly has as airplane sizes grow. A 737 successor will be bigger in any case and might even be non-single aisle. (Avoiding the term widebody for something in between here)
|
|
