4 ms·

It lost them money but it didn't hurt their brand. Those are great planes to fly in as a passenger, they're just not profitable in the end for Airbus. Boeing c

It lost them money but it didn't hurt their brand. Those are great planes to fly in as a passenger, they're just not profitable in the end for Airbus. Boeing can't even keep its newest plane in the skies, and may have killed off the 737 line for good. Think another revision after the MAX is ever going to be approved?

rsynnott 7y ago
I think a more modest re-engine of the 737 would absolutely be approved. They’d have to sell it at a discount vs the a32x, obviously.
- cameldrv 7y ago
  I think that the MAX was about as modest as they could make it. That was really the point of the whole exercise. A more modern engine core with a smaller fan wouldn't have moved the fuel economy needle enough to justify a new model I don't think, and Boeing would have lost a lot of orders to the A320neo. Everything would have been fine except there was so much pressure to make every change as modest as possible that it didn't quite all work. They needed to either make significant changes to the landing gear or significant changes to the flight control computer and they chose neither.
joking 7y ago
the a400m plane has been a brand failure, it's military and on a different league than civilian planes however.
- throw0101a 7y ago
  And how has the KC-46 done compared to the A330 MRTT?
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    Per a quick check of Wikipedia it seems like they're about equal. The KC46 is being fielded by the US and a few nations that the US traditionally use the same arms. The A330 is fielded by the UK, a couple commonwealth nations and KSA Total number built is in the 30s for both.
    - throw0101a 7y ago
      The MRTT is being used in the field. The KC-46 not so much: * https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29933/air-force-says-it-will-be-years-before-boeings-faulty-new-tankers-are-fully-operational https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29933/air-force-says-i... * https://www.aerotime.aero/clement.charpentreau/24184-no-fix-before-months-for-kc-46-pegasus-cargo-issue https://www.aerotime.aero/clement.charpentreau/24184-no-fix-...
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
>Boeing can't even keep its newest plane in the skies The 787 is the newest airframe and it's fine. The 737 is the Windows XP of the sky and there's only so much you can fix with service packs.
- inferiorhuman 7y ago
  The 787 is the newest airframe and it's fine. The 737 is the Windows XP of the sky and there's only so much you can fix with service packs. How about the KC-46 and 777X?
- snickerbockers 7y ago
  787 doesn't fill the same role as 737 and A320, it's a much larger plane that carries more passengers. 737 and A320 seem to be much more popular for domestic flights within the US than larger planes.
  - philjohn 7y ago
    And the economics of a small single-aisle plane for medium haul, e.g. the East Coast, seems to be what is pushing the needle.
- rsynnott 7y ago
  They need a replacement for it, then, tho. The 737/a32x size is hugely important. Nearly all the planes I’m on are one or the other.
yardie 7y ago
The 737 needs to go away. It's a great plane from a different era (staircases instead of jetways). That era has long passed. They've been trying to shoehorn it in. Rather than scale up the 737 cockpit flight controls they could have scaled down the 777 cockpit. Or even developed an all new one license cockpit in the same vein as the A320 series.
- usr1106 7y ago
  One of the bigger 737 operators is Ryanair. They mostly fly to small airports, so it's staircases not jetways. Their product and their brand are worse than bad, but they make a lot of money. Yes, I agree the 50 year old design seems to have reached its end of life.
philjohn 7y ago
As well as being great to fly in (seriously, business class on the upper deck by the window is an absolute dream) they have that "WOW" factor that I haven't experienced since first seeing a 747 or Concorde.

rsynnott 7y ago

I think a more modest re-engine of the 737 would absolutely be approved. They’d have to sell it at a discount vs the a32x, obviously.

cameldrv 7y ago
I think that the MAX was about as modest as they could make it. That was really the point of the whole exercise. A more modern engine core with a smaller fan wouldn't have moved the fuel economy needle enough to justify a new model I don't think, and Boeing would have lost a lot of orders to the A320neo. Everything would have been fine except there was so much pressure to make every change as modest as possible that it didn't quite all work. They needed to either make significant changes to the landing gear or significant changes to the flight control computer and they chose neither.

joking 7y ago

the a400m plane has been a brand failure, it's military and on a different league than civilian planes however.

throw0101a 7y ago
And how has the KC-46 done compared to the A330 MRTT?
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  Per a quick check of Wikipedia it seems like they're about equal. The KC46 is being fielded by the US and a few nations that the US traditionally use the same arms. The A330 is fielded by the UK, a couple commonwealth nations and KSA Total number built is in the 30s for both.
  - throw0101a 7y ago
    The MRTT is being used in the field. The KC-46 not so much: * https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29933/air-force-says-it-will-be-years-before-boeings-faulty-new-tankers-are-fully-operational https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29933/air-force-says-i... * https://www.aerotime.aero/clement.charpentreau/24184-no-fix-before-months-for-kc-46-pegasus-cargo-issue https://www.aerotime.aero/clement.charpentreau/24184-no-fix-...

dsfyu404ed 7y ago

>Boeing can't even keep its newest plane in the skies The 787 is the newest airframe and it's fine. The 737 is the Windows XP of the sky and there's only so much you can fix with service packs.

inferiorhuman 7y ago
The 787 is the newest airframe and it's fine. The 737 is the Windows XP of the sky and there's only so much you can fix with service packs. How about the KC-46 and 777X?
snickerbockers 7y ago
787 doesn't fill the same role as 737 and A320, it's a much larger plane that carries more passengers. 737 and A320 seem to be much more popular for domestic flights within the US than larger planes.
- philjohn 7y ago
  And the economics of a small single-aisle plane for medium haul, e.g. the East Coast, seems to be what is pushing the needle.
rsynnott 7y ago
They need a replacement for it, then, tho. The 737/a32x size is hugely important. Nearly all the planes I’m on are one or the other.

yardie 7y ago

The 737 needs to go away. It's a great plane from a different era (staircases instead of jetways). That era has long passed. They've been trying to shoehorn it in. Rather than scale up the 737 cockpit flight controls they could have scaled down the 777 cockpit. Or even developed an all new one license cockpit in the same vein as the A320 series.

usr1106 7y ago
One of the bigger 737 operators is Ryanair. They mostly fly to small airports, so it's staircases not jetways. Their product and their brand are worse than bad, but they make a lot of money. Yes, I agree the 50 year old design seems to have reached its end of life.

philjohn 7y ago

As well as being great to fly in (seriously, business class on the upper deck by the window is an absolute dream) they have that "WOW" factor that I haven't experienced since first seeing a 747 or Concorde.