737 Max 9. First plane rolls out.
03-08-2017, 01:04 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Posts: 149
You can blame the 737 madness on all the idiot executives from McDonnell Douglas. Boeing kept them during the merger because they did such a great job of running MD into the ground with poor performing derivatives that didn't answer the market needs. A large contingent at Boeing was pushing for a blank sheet airplane to replace the 737NG but was overridden by the MD morons who were risk adverse.
I've heard some say that being late on the MOM aircraft was the first step towards an eventual Boeing bankruptcy. That seems a bit harsh, but you can't deny they are headed down the same path that doomed MD (not enough effort into R&D, relying to heavily on defense, etc).
03-08-2017, 01:45 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,808
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-what-it-sees
03-08-2017, 03:50 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,725
03-09-2017, 04:23 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 400
New 757 Boeing considering United likes so much long way off but these folks are right. The -900ER is a dud especially next to 321neo.
Problem is the new airplane is so far out either they scrap ER orders and go used or stick with the ERs. Also Boeing may not build it at all but think they will. Huge market to replace the 757 which will poach orders from 321neo.
Problem is the new airplane is so far out either they scrap ER orders and go used or stick with the ERs. Also Boeing may not build it at all but think they will. Huge market to replace the 757 which will poach orders from 321neo.
03-09-2017, 06:37 AM
#17
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,609
Imagine if you will, a nextgen narrowbody designed in the aerodynamic and technological mold of the 787, to replace the venerable 737.
Four common type variants covering 130 to 220 passengers in dual class configuration, with a range up to 5000nm.
It would take almost a decade to certify and bring to market...but the technology & capability would be well beyond the Airbus NEO family and position Boeing for decades to come.
Four common type variants covering 130 to 220 passengers in dual class configuration, with a range up to 5000nm.
It would take almost a decade to certify and bring to market...but the technology & capability would be well beyond the Airbus NEO family and position Boeing for decades to come.
03-09-2017, 05:47 PM
#18
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
Imagine if you will, a nextgen narrowbody designed in the aerodynamic and technological mold of the 787, to replace the venerable 737.
Four common type variants covering 130 to 220 passengers in dual class configuration, with a range up to 5000nm.
It would take almost a decade to certify and bring to market...but the technology & capability would be well beyond the Airbus NEO family and position Boeing for decades to come.
Four common type variants covering 130 to 220 passengers in dual class configuration, with a range up to 5000nm.
It would take almost a decade to certify and bring to market...but the technology & capability would be well beyond the Airbus NEO family and position Boeing for decades to come.
Boeing is in a tough spot.
03-09-2017, 06:44 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 695
Came here to say this.
I've heard some say that being late on the MOM aircraft was the first step towards an eventual Boeing bankruptcy. That seems a bit harsh, but you can't deny they are headed down the same path that doomed MD (not enough effort into R&D, relying to heavily on defense, etc).
I've heard some say that being late on the MOM aircraft was the first step towards an eventual Boeing bankruptcy. That seems a bit harsh, but you can't deny they are headed down the same path that doomed MD (not enough effort into R&D, relying to heavily on defense, etc).
It's not Atlantic City casino bankruptcy stuff, but gosh it's close
That said, it seems pretty unlikely...
03-10-2017, 03:41 AM
#20
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,609
Yes, being able to build the plane at a price point where airlines see value enough to purchase is always difficult; see also: Bombardier C-Series. Boeing wouldn't be doing this for near-term gain, it would be to dominate the narrowbody market for the next generation or two...and if they don't, they'll be largely seceding the large narrowbody market to the 321NEO (especially if Airbus designs a new/larger wing for it).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
