Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

WSJ: Boeing gets support for NMA; new medium-range airplane

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

WSJ: Boeing gets support for NMA; new medium-range airplane

Old 11th Sep 2015, 00:46
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WSJ: Boeing gets support for NMA; new medium-range airplane

Previously called "MoM" middle of the market aircraft it seems Boeing will at one point launch a NMA, slightly larger than the 757.

Boeing has said it thinks there is sufficient demand for such an aircraft, which would fit between its single-aisle 737 and long-range 787 Dreamliner.

Boeing has said it is considering a new jet that would have 200 to 250 seats and be capable of flying around 4,800 nautical miles.

The company has been polling more than 30 possible customers, including airlines that have traditionally shied away from expensive twin-aisle aircraft like low-cost carriers.

The Bank of America analysts think a new plane would be a small, oval-shaped, twin-aisle aircraft with seven economy-class seats across the cabin to quickly board and deplane passengers.

Boeing Gets Support for New Midrange Jetliner - WSJ

Leeham News and Comment has also been reporting and making estimations about this future project:

keesje is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 11:10
  #2 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boeing Middle of the Market Development, Continued

In Q4 2015, Q1 2016 we saw a lot of activity around the possible launch of a new middle of the market aircraft. Conner Boeing Aircraft CEO even stated he wants a plan this year. Which would probably mean a Boeing aircraft around 2023. Working names sofar are MoM, NMA, 797 and even a rewinged 737-10X is considered.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...-end-y-421802/


During the last few weeks however, the tide seems to be turning. One of the reason probably is Airbus making more sales and the 737 MAX prospects list for Boeing is shrinking, as are its margins.

A New MOM Aircraft? It?s the Economics, Stupid | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week

This will probably lead to Boeing looking for a combined 737 successor / MoM solution. In my opinion it is impossible to compete effectively for 170 seats 1000NM as well as 240 4000NM with the same wing / engine combination. Compromises would hurt efficiency in both segments.

A common fuselage might however work. While a single aisle might be impractical for short 240 seat flights (boarding/de boarding) and twin aisle e.g. 2-3-2 might make the aircraft to big/ heavy to compete with e.g. a A321 NEO an in between fuselage, 1.5 aisles, could cover both requirements.

keesje is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 11:41
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For years you have posted bizarre things like this, not really asking questions and with poorly photoshopped images. Why?
violator is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 12:01
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: France
Age: 69
Posts: 1,142
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
And please learn the difference between 'to' and 'too' too!
eckhard is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 12:35
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,810
Received 199 Likes on 92 Posts
Originally Posted by keesje
an in between fuselage, 1.5 aisles, could cover both requirements
If you get in quick, you might be able to patent that idea.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 14:19
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Funny that you mention cross sections & patents. Once (July 2011) I posted a large circular two deck configuration, trading cargo for seats.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/extrawide10abreasttwindeckWB80mlongcrosssection.jpg

What a laugh. . 2 years later (Jul 30, 2013) Boeing files a brilliant patent: http://www.google.com/patents/US20130306793. I got a very formal answer..

2007"ECOLINER". 2012: Boeing patents design for double-decker, mid-wing jet - seattlepi.com

2006 A320NEO: Proposing the A320 enhanced performance — Civil Aviation Forum | Airliners.net

2009 777X: Boeing 777-400NG Stretch, New Wing, Engine — Tech Ops Forum | Airliners.net

Often we see the Pavlov "who do you think..." reactions.

I might be wrong many times & of course it's all far more complicated. After decades you find out sometimes your ideas are off / not new. On other occasions you find they're not. Even more people jump on you. For many it just takes lots of time to recognize. Often (drilled to be) procedural types. To make money, you just ignore / move on

I won't post a Statler & Waldorf here
keesje is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 17:40
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What on earth are you talking about?
violator is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 19:01
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Violator March 1st 2013 on long range NEO's: "How many times do you have to be told that there is no market for the aircraft you're talking about "
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/50898...ay-lenght.html reply #17

In 2015 Airbus launches the A321LR & Boeing sees a big MoM market.
Airbus Sees 1,000-Aircraft Market For A321LR | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week, Boeing Could Sell ?Thousands? of New Midsize Airplanes | Dubai Air Show 2015 content from Aviation Week

Predicting fleet requirements just isn't your thing. For the rest you seem into personal attacks, aggressive in your language, using words like daft, half-baked, simplistic. Maybe that's normal for you?
keesje is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 20:42
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,810
Received 199 Likes on 92 Posts
Ah, you mean the thread where you proposed that Airbus could/should/would launch an A320½neo, midway in size between the A320 and A321 ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 21:08
  #10 (permalink)  
ENTREPPRUNEUR
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The 60s
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Keesje

Can you expand on what you mean by 1.5 aisles, and why it might be a good thing?
twistedenginestarter is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 22:38
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
twistedenginestarter, Aisles are generally 18-20 inch wide, dependent on how you measure. Twin aisles require double that in cabin width / fuselage cross section. A wide, single "1.5" ~30 inch wide aisle has some of the advantages of twin aisles;
  • People are able to pass each other, instead of blocking each other, shortening (de)boarding times and waiting lines.
  • For the larger NB segment (>170 seats) the larger cross section offers structural efficiency for the longer fuselages (753 & A346 had issues)
  • It lowers the claustrophobic experience on longer MoM like flights (up to 9 hours). People dislike the TATL 757s because of it.
  • It avoids the 2-3-2 cabins weight that make the associated cost per unit uncompetitive with single aisles.
  • It offers more cabin options for narrow body premium cabins like introduced by Delta, JetBlue and American these days. And real big luggage bins, facilitating more people handling their own.
The MC-21's single aisle cabin is already wider than the cabin of an Airbus A320 by 12 cm and a Boeing 737 by 28 cm. The large MS21-400 will be significant bigger then a A321NEO.
keesje is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2016, 03:57
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If anyone ever thought to ask passengers what they would like, the answer would be 2-2-2. Twin aisles, no middle seats. Only requires a fuselage 20 inches wider than current NB.
Derfred is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2016, 05:36
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 449
Received 21 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by keesje
I won't post a Statler & Waldorf here
It's really an excellent salad

Boeing won't do anything until they have absolutely no choice. When they do; it will be too late, uncomfortable, full of 737 parts, outsourced, the product of a union purge and likely to burst into flame. They don't call them "lazy Boeing" for nothing
JPJP is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2016, 11:01
  #14 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
JPJP, it seems Boeing is going to have to make some choices. The MAX is loosing out to the NEO. Only stick to the plan when it's a good plan. Leeham News & Comment (Seattle based Aerospace Consultancy) is one of the first observing / reporting what no one wants to hear.

https://leehamnews.com/2016/04/04/bo...refocus-goals/
keesje is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2016, 17:35
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Poorly photoshopping stolen images is not "predicting fleet requirements"
violator is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2016, 01:21
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What Boeing needs to do is start planning a clean-slate 737 replacement design. The market for the size is clearly there and all they have been doing for the past 25 years is putting LCD screens in the cockpit and more powerful engines under the wing.
FlyingStone is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2016, 19:46
  #17 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
violator, totally unimpressed by the quality & debt of your "contributions". You can do better!
keesje is offline  

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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.