Boeing 737 Max Recertification Testing - Finally.

[CAEBr]

Originally Posted by Mike Flynn

The Comet was a great aircraft for its time but was doomed after the crashes following the window issue.

Not quite the same comparison though. The window issue - and RF aerial cutout - was an issue with the Comet 1 and was corrected in the later larger Comet 4. That aircraft was by no means doomed following those changes, simply no longer in prime position and eventually lost out accordingly numbers wise. It remained capable and used by a number of operators.

[Nil by mouth]

Originally Posted by Mike Flynn

That statement says it all. The Comet was a great aircraft for its time but was doomed after the crashes following the window issue.

Not exactly doomed, Dan Air, Nimrod ???

[WHBM]

Comet 4s carried on for a couple of decades, and some operators (like BEA Airtours) set up operations from scratch with a significant fleet.

What was surprising is how De Havilland kept the same name after it became so tainted, instead of choosing a different model name.

[PEI_3721]

Black Swans, pulling the rabbit out of the hat

Boeing: “We won’t contemplate a new airplane”

https://airinsight.com/boeing-we-won...-new-airplane/

… until we know we’re capable of doing that.

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by PEI_3721

Boeing: “We won’t contemplate a new airplane”

https://airinsight.com/boeing-we-won...-new-airplane/

… until we know we’re capable of doing that.

A more factual interpretation would be:
After the financial bath we've taken over the last four years (due to the MAX and COVID), we can't afford to launch a new airplane program for the next five or ten years.
So we're desperately hoping that the technological progress over the next decade makes that a financially wise move...

[Big Pistons Forever]

Boeing is this Twenty First century GE. A once great industry leader brought down by CEO hubris. Boeing Commercial has no future, it will just bump along becoming more and more irrelevant until it exist solely as a support provider for in service Boeing aircraft

[Organfreak]

It breaks my heart. I was a local lad when the first 707s were rolled over a crowd at the hydroplane races. We were so proud of this great company.

[Less Hair]

By the time Boeing starts the next clean sheet there will be nobody with the old experience left and nobody who already developed, designed and certified a new aircraft. It's derivatives, damage control and repaying their loans how they spend their money. If they get the 787 line up and running again with no more hickups that's at least one good program. The MAX might carry on, however I am not sure about 7 and 10. Will EASA agree to another grandfathering? And the 777X will take years to be through certification.
They should invest in some midsized model above the A321neo and prepare to launch the 737 follow on family. They must do it right the first time.

[Australopithecus]

When business schools teach case studies showing how massive corporations can be ruined by bad management I expect that many MBA students wonder how much money the CEOs got away with. With envy.

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by tdracer

So we're desperately hoping that the technological progress over the next decade makes that a financially wise move...

And of course this becomes self-fulfilling. Airbus don't do a clean sheet A320 replacement. Why should they, it would cost a packet, and they would just be competing with their own current product. Boeing will bounce along as a No 2 competitor, Russian and Chinese attempts are amateurish. I suspect the next advances will come not from the airframers, but from the engine manufacturers.

[PEI_3721]

TD, so 'until we know we’re capable of doing that' is much more influenced by the financial situation, opposed to existing or new engineering capability which can develop alongside the new technologies.

But then money = people (engineers); a delicate balance of investing for the future in people, technology, or something else.
What will commercial aviation look like over those time scales.

Public statements to the investors; stay with us for the long term … … hmm.
How big is the credibility gap; not that large when viewed together with the military perspective.

[kiwi grey]

Originally Posted by tdracer

A more factual interpretation would be:
After the financial bath we've taken over the last four years (due to the MAX and COVID), we can't afford to launch a new airplane program for the next five or ten years.
So we're desperately hoping that the technological progress over the next decade makes that a financially wise move..

Originally Posted by WHBM

And of course this becomes self-fulfilling. Airbus don't do a clean sheet A320 replacement. Why should they, it would cost a packet, and they would just be competing with their own current product. Boeing will bounce along as a No 2 competitor, Russian and Chinese attempts are amateurish. I suspect the next advances will come not from the airframers, but from the engine manufacturers.

.

On the other hand, Airbus has buildings full of design engineers and an industrial relations environment where they're difficult to lay off, so maybe they'll keep them gainfully employed. AB can now be confident that BA won't be launching any major threats to their product lines for a decade or so, which means they can afford to design & launch derivatives that will have a long-enough market life to earn their capital back. If they do it right, or even only fairly right, they can also make life even more difficult for Boeing and China to get into the market.
This could lead to:

• the A220-500;
• an A325 - an A320 with a small stretch;
• an A326 & A327 - a re-winged A321 & A321XLR; and
• an A350neo, including a -1200/-2000 model if the 777-9 looks like it might make any market impact

[Bidule]

Originally Posted by tdracer

A more factual interpretation would be:
After the financial bath we've taken over the last four years (due to the MAX and COVID), .

No, it is "after having bought back shares and given 62 billions to shareholders over a decade".
Having put only half of this amount in R&D/Engineering would mean that a new aircraft is there now!

.

[threep]

The next clean sheet design from either AB or BA will need to make a big step forward regards efficiency/carbon emissions. From an airframe manufacturers point of view they only place they can really go is a blended-wing design and making that work regards customer experience, emergency escape, cargo and a whole host of other design challenges.. I don't see either company eager to push the go button on that work from a commercial standpoint, but if we start getting any emissions targets for airlines coming from governments (eg COP27) then their hands may be forced.

[Less Hair]

I'd expect another "boring" tube and wing design, but with even higher bypass geared engines, made from CFRP in more advanced shapes on robot lines. The factories will change the most, enabling much higher precision assembly, with everything being more lightweight and cloud connected.

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by threep

The next clean sheet design from either AB or BA will need to make a big step forward regards efficiency/carbon emissions. From an airframe manufacturers point of view they only place they can really go is a blended-wing design and making that work regards customer experience, emergency escape, cargo and a whole host of other design challenges.. I don't see either company eager to push the go button on that work from a commercial standpoint, but if we start getting any emissions targets for airlines coming from governments (eg COP27) then their hands may be forced.

Take as an example, the A350 development. Airbus heavily objecting, because there was an A330, bla bla, though it turned out to be a significant success, with more growth potential.

So, I think, there are still realistic evolutionary developments possible for the BA line of airplanes.

The fact, BA doesn't have money, OK, that's a serious item and the longer they delay biting the sour apple, the less competent knowledge they will have in-house available. So, yeah, it doesn't look good and recovery can easily take 20-30 years, IF BA wants this at all.

Maybe split-off the airline airplanes from BA and sell this to China ???????? I think, China would be eager to obtain that BA part (the other parts too, though that's not going to happen).

[Less Hair]

The window to sell strategic US assets to China might have closed already.

[WideScreen]

Originally Posted by Less Hair

The window to sell strategic US assets to China might have closed already.

At first sight, yep, though you never know what is going to happen, when the US again becomes a one-man show, ruled by the Putin-lapdog. And, China is very good in finding out secrets, so, who knows, the ruler is also a Xi-lapdog nowadays (or maybe Putin did trade secrets with Xi around this subject, to get Ukraine support ....).

[ATC Watcher]

(or maybe Putin did trade secrets with Xi around this subject, to get Ukraine support ....).

Where did you get that Xi is supporting Putin on Ukraine,? Not yet at least , China refused their ammo request, and so far Xi had made very neutral statements,
The Max is still grounded in China and :

China formally announced longstanding deals for Airbus jets worth $17 billion during a visit last week by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

Add the COMAC C919 coming up next year and I cannot see a bright future for Boeing in China, But as you said, with the MAGA messiah possibly coming back in 2024, who knows what deals might be made then , and who will benefit ...

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by ATC Watcher

Add the COMAC C919 coming up next year and I cannot see a bright future for Boeing in China, But as you said, with the MAGA messiah possibly coming back in 2024, who knows what deals might be made then , and who will benefit ...

You mean the guy who first implemented heavy tariffs against China (much to the distress of the other party, even though they left them largely in place once they were back in power)?
It took a while (far too long IMHO), but the powers that be have finally figured out that China isn't our friend.