Boeing looking at stretching The 737-9

[underfire]

there was the 320 NEO plus at 200 pax,
a 321 NEO XR, (new wing)with 220 pax..
and a 322 NEO (244 pax?)

[DaveReidUK]

Those will be news to Airbus, more amateur(ish) Photoshoppery.

[underfire]

I suppose the photoshop job is by others, but Airbus did mention the A322 back in May. At that point, A320neo program manager Klaus Roewe stated they could do a stretch A321 (with a new wing)to an A322, but at that point, it was not necessary...

Will be interesting to see what Boeing does with the engine size on the Mad Max -10 stretch as the 737 platform is about maxed out on engine size...

[DaveReidUK]

Yes, only a couple of days ago Flight quoted John Leahy as saying there was no need for an "A322".

Interestingly, he also predicts that more than 50% of Neo sales will be for the A321.

https://twitter.com/Flighteditor/sta...22465226027009

[SeenItAll]

You can put 240 seats into a one-aisle aircraft, but it will only work for the long flight market. The loading and unloading times are too long for efficient short to medium hop usage. This is why the 757-300 turned out to be a niche plane -- efficient for 2000 to 3000 mile stage lengths, only. Thus, Boeing's MMA being two-aisle.

[peekay4]

Interestingly, he also predicts that more than 50% of Neo sales will be for the A321.

What Leahy actually said is that over 50% of the production (not sales) will be for A321s.

Essentially, Airbus will be prioritizing A321 deliveries over the rest of the A320 family. And why not -- when you have a clear market advantage, it's in your best interest to move as quickly as possible to fill it -- before your competitor across the pond can respond (e.g. with a MAX 10).

From a sales perspective, the A320neo accounts for roughly 70% of the orders vs. 30% for the A321, plus a few A319s. I don't see this split changing significantly considering where we are in the industry's order cycle.

[keesje]

Originally Posted by SeenItAll

You can put 240 seats into a one-aisle aircraft, but it will only work for the long flight market. The loading and unloading times are too long for efficient short to medium hop usage. This is why the 757-300 turned out to be a niche plane -- efficient for 2000 to 3000 mile stage lengths, only. Thus, Boeing's MMA being two-aisle.

On another forum I looked at a way out of this 1 or 2 aisle barrier. Maybe a fat one aisle plane handling some of the disadvantages you mention, is a better (cheaper, more efficient) solution than a small two-aisle. It's a kind of 1.5 aisle concept.