fanaticalflyer

Yeah but Council 12 says new airbus's on the horizon.

From the council 12 update:
Hiring Plan

The Company has reportedly reevaluated their pilot manpower requirements for summer 2018 and 2019 and have decided to spool up pilot training and hiring. We are reluctant to raise our pilots' expectations as previous estimates have fluctuated substantially, but here is the latest from management.

The company is planning additional near-term vacancy bids and four new-hire classes for the rest of 2017. The first class is planned for 11/13/17 and would include 23 returning furloughees in a class of approximately 75 total pilots. 3 more new-hire classes of approximately 50 pilots are planned for 2017.

According to senior management, based on their imminent acquisition of 30-40 used A319s & A320s they would need to hire an average 60/pilots per month or nearly 2,000 pilots over next 32 months based on their current 2019 block hour projection. This will require restarting interviewing pilots in December.

While it is good news that the company appears to have developed a hiring plan, it is always subject to change.

jsled

No. I am not. We have a Committee that watches that like a hawk.

CLazarus

Some months ago, Aviation Week had an online poll asking something like: "What shape do you think the next generation airliner will have?". I voted for something from Aurora Flight Sciences called the D8... and then immediately regretted it thinking 'I should have followed the crowd and voted for BA's Transonic Truss Braced Wing concept'. Well, BA just announced last week they are buying Aurora, coincidentally a couple weeks after word surfaced that BA had formed a 797 program office.

Boeing's Latest Buyout May Offer Clues To Possible New '797' Plane - Nasdaq.com

A Closer Look At NASA?s Options For Large-Scale X-Planes | Aircraft Design content from Aviation Week

D8 ? Aurora Flight Sciences

I've already posted my guesses at 797 configurations on this thread previously (2x4x2 seating, folding wingtips). I do not think the engines will be aft mounted (see D8 concept link), as I think boundary layer ingestion is another generation away if ever.

The 797 plot thickens.

APC225

Look to nature!

UAL T38 Phlyer

I still think more conventional, except the option to go single OR double aisle, with standard cargo containers:

UAL T38 Phlyer

And general layout......

UAL T38 Phlyer

Company livery, if you like:

Chuck D

No way basic coach is ever 1-2-1 in a 2 aisle layout... Maybe some sort of premium service section. I bet the bean counters are getting ulcers over the fuel burn add for even 10 more inches of aisle, unless they can recoup that in bigger cargo capacity or somewhere else. Physics being pretty immutable, punching a bigger hole in the sky will always burn more fuel.

My $1 bet is on slightly wider aisle and an inch or so per seat in a 3-3 layout.

oldmako

The next narrow body fuselage needs to be at least a foot wider than the A319. Minimum. Either that or go to 2 / 3 seating like Douglas did with the Guppy fuselage.

Americans are hogs compared to just 20 years ago. Imagine how rotund the average person will be in another 20 years.

Pass the Pepsi!

RSRVWINDSURFR

A wider fuselage = higher fuel burn. No way cheap airline management would ever go for a wider cross section unless it means more seats/cargo. I guarantee they could care less about boarding/unloading times and being able to pass a cart in the aisle. It's all about the Benjamin's unfortunately.

EDIT: Chuck D beat me to it.