23 hours ago, paulyg123 said:

Obsolete plane.  Make a 797 next decade

Boeing just did MAX, why would they do a 797? I didn't research on a 797 much but airlines only wanted an economic update to a 737NG, mainly new engines and wing revision to save money on fuel. Boeing could have attached a whole 787 nose to it with a 787 cockpit but airlines didn't want it, they never have money for additional expenses )))

the 787 is such a cutie, a little brother 797 would make a nice modern pair to go along with 787, but airlines "live on a marginal profit" so Boeing is forced to continue patching up its dinosaur 737 (and same with the A320 NEO). A 787 and an A350 seem to be a different story because they are a new type. What do you guys think?

On 2/25/2019 at 11:05 AM, alexzar14 said:

Boeing just did MAX, why would they do a 797? I didn't research on a 797 much but airlines only wanted an economic update to a 737NG, mainly new engines and wing revision to save money on fuel. Boeing could have attached a whole 787 nose to it with a 787 cockpit but airlines didn't want it, they never have money for additional expenses )))

the 787 is such a cutie, a little brother 797 would make a nice modern pair to go along with 787, but airlines "live on a marginal profit" so Boeing is forced to continue patching up its dinosaur 737 (and same with the A320 NEO). A 787 and an A350 seem to be a different story because they are a new type. What do you guys think?

The airlines are notoriously fickle on what they say they need vs what they purchase. A couple years back Delta's CEO made a comment about not being interested in "paper airplane(s)", a then reference to the 787 and 777x, then ordered the a350 and a339 NEO (both farther away in terms of launch and delivery). Similarly, in Delta's case, the response to queries about a 757 replacement received little interest with carriers claiming they would opt for 737/a32x fleets. Fast forward to today and Delta is stating that it wants to be launch customer for the NMA, but saying such costs them nothing. It's part of the "authority to offer" vs launch dance.

As for why a 797 (NMA), it's not a 737/a320 replacement but will fill in the gap being vacated by 757/767 retirements (230-260ish seat range). While some operators can fill this with a330's and 77/87's, it still means operating aircraft oversized (and hence not optimized) for those particular route scenarios and long range variants of the 73/32 platforms don't truly address these segments. The market indicates potential for 2-3,000 planes, Airbus claims no such need exists (largely due to their inability to launch a competing product in the near term), and Boeing's shareholders want dividends and buybacks instead of investment in a new aircraft. Navigating that minefield is as complicated as actually designing the right aircraft (or aircraft family vis a vis 757/767, something still quite possible).

Edited March 7, 20197 yr by sddjd

go PMDG Give us the B767 pleae!!!