5 ms·

There's no way they're going to develop a completely new plane. It may have new branding, but it's going to be a 737 at the bones. Since when has the airline in

There's no way they're going to develop a completely new plane. It may have new branding, but it's going to be a 737 at the bones. Since when has the airline industry ever considered passenger misery?

nradov 7y ago
Boeing will eventually have to build a clean sheet replacement for the 737 in response to airline demands for greater fuel efficiency. The long term trend is toward higher fuel prices, especially once some countries start taxing carbon emissions from commercial aviation. But it could be another 20 years until that "797" enters service.
- masklinn 7y ago
  They announced it back in 2014 at least, aiming for 2030: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-ceo-737/boeing-plans-to-develop-new-airplane-to-replace-737-max-by-2030-idUSKBN0IP27320141105 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-ceo-737/boeing-pla...
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    That's waaaay too late. They can't just not have a plane to sell in the small plane segment (which does the most sales volume) for the entire next decade!
PaulHoule 7y ago
The 737 faces competition from a few directions. First of all, smaller planes such as the A320 and E195 feel bigger inside than the 737 does. It's like the difference between the "boat of car" from American manufacturers to the Japanese cars that were small on the outside but big on the inside. If you just want a low-cost plane at the A320 level of technology, China is coming online with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_C919 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_C919 It will put up great production numbers by selling to Chinese airlines first, they will have all the protectionism and subsidies they need to grow to an economy of scale where at 2030 the C919 will beat the pants off the 737. If Boeing doesn't take advantage of it's comparative advantage and develop a much better aircraft, they are doomed.
- mpweiher 7y ago
  > First of all, smaller planes such as the A320 I was going to go all "what do you mean, smaller??? ... surely you mean the A220", but had to good sense to look it up and you are right, the A320 Neo is actually a tad smaller than, for example, the 737-800. Also lighter. Just carries more passengers a longer distance faster with slightly wider seats. Hmm..
  - masklinn 7y ago
    It's hard to realise how bloody old the 737 is, this thing dates back to the 60s, back when computers were a roomfull of people and assemblers were considered high-level programming languages. Not that the A320 is any spring chicken (dates back to the 80s), however that's still a quantum leap in technology (e.g. universal fly-by-wire) and I'm guessing more modular as it was intended as a family of planes sharing a type (from the 318 to the 321, though the 318 was dropped for neo).
  - temac 7y ago
    The A320 family actually includes the A319 (smaller) and the A321 (bigger), and the A321 (or A321neo) is quite similar to the 737 you selected: 737-800. Even the 320 is only slightly smaller than the 800; and it is quite bigger than the 700.
    - masklinn 7y ago
      The 320neo is the most suitable comparison to the 737-800 given they respectively top out at 195 and 189 passengers. The 321neo carries up to 240, even the 737-900 ER is left behind (220), though the 321 is longer than the -900 by quite a bit 44.5m to 42).
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- Xixi 7y ago
  What do you mean by bigger? The A320 has a cabin width of 395cm vs 380cm for the 737, so it is more spacious.
dredmorbius 7y ago
Airlines consider passenger misery a benefit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21530964 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21530964 Jules Dupuit, describing rail carriages, though the same logic applies: It is not because of the several thousand francs which they would have to spend to cover the third class wagons or to upholster the benches. ... [I]t would happily sacrifice this [expense] for the sake of its popularity. Its goal is to stop the traveler who can pay for the second class trip from going third class. It hurts the poor not because it wants them to personally suffer, but to scare the rich. https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/why-does-air-travel-suck-so-bad-this-19th-century-economist-explained-it-with-ju.html https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/why-does-air-travel-suck-...
- lokedhs 7y ago
  Or you can do what many other airlines do, which is to make business class so much better that even if econony is nice, business class is so much above that that it's worth the money. I tend to try to travel on Qatar, and their new business class cabins are amazing: https://www.qatarairways.com/en/onboard/qsuite.html https://www.qatarairways.com/en/onboard/qsuite.html It's also cheaper than the (worse) business class on many other airlines.
  - guitarbill 7y ago
    The inconsistency of business class does make it unappealing though. Sometimes, it's almost first class (Singapore Airlines). Many times, it's barely a step up from economy though, and just feels like a rip off.
    - cameronc56 7y ago
      Yes, but babies and children do not ride in business class.
      - lokedhs 7y ago
        Some do, but I agree it's much fewer.

nradov 7y ago

Boeing will eventually have to build a clean sheet replacement for the 737 in response to airline demands for greater fuel efficiency. The long term trend is toward higher fuel prices, especially once some countries start taxing carbon emissions from commercial aviation. But it could be another 20 years until that "797" enters service.

masklinn 7y ago
They announced it back in 2014 at least, aiming for 2030: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-ceo-737/boeing-plans-to-develop-new-airplane-to-replace-737-max-by-2030-idUSKBN0IP27320141105 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-ceo-737/boeing-pla...
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  That's waaaay too late. They can't just not have a plane to sell in the small plane segment (which does the most sales volume) for the entire next decade!

PaulHoule 7y ago

The 737 faces competition from a few directions. First of all, smaller planes such as the A320 and E195 feel bigger inside than the 737 does. It's like the difference between the "boat of car" from American manufacturers to the Japanese cars that were small on the outside but big on the inside. If you just want a low-cost plane at the A320 level of technology, China is coming online with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_C919 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_C919 It will put up great production numbers by selling to Chinese airlines first, they will have all the protectionism and subsidies they need to grow to an economy of scale where at 2030 the C919 will beat the pants off the 737. If Boeing doesn't take advantage of it's comparative advantage and develop a much better aircraft, they are doomed.

mpweiher 7y ago
> First of all, smaller planes such as the A320 I was going to go all "what do you mean, smaller??? ... surely you mean the A220", but had to good sense to look it up and you are right, the A320 Neo is actually a tad smaller than, for example, the 737-800. Also lighter. Just carries more passengers a longer distance faster with slightly wider seats. Hmm..
- masklinn 7y ago
  It's hard to realise how bloody old the 737 is, this thing dates back to the 60s, back when computers were a roomfull of people and assemblers were considered high-level programming languages. Not that the A320 is any spring chicken (dates back to the 80s), however that's still a quantum leap in technology (e.g. universal fly-by-wire) and I'm guessing more modular as it was intended as a family of planes sharing a type (from the 318 to the 321, though the 318 was dropped for neo).
- temac 7y ago
  The A320 family actually includes the A319 (smaller) and the A321 (bigger), and the A321 (or A321neo) is quite similar to the 737 you selected: 737-800. Even the 320 is only slightly smaller than the 800; and it is quite bigger than the 700.
  - masklinn 7y ago
    The 320neo is the most suitable comparison to the 737-800 given they respectively top out at 195 and 189 passengers. The 321neo carries up to 240, even the 737-900 ER is left behind (220), though the 321 is longer than the -900 by quite a bit 44.5m to 42).
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Xixi 7y ago
What do you mean by bigger? The A320 has a cabin width of 395cm vs 380cm for the 737, so it is more spacious.

dredmorbius 7y ago

Airlines consider passenger misery a benefit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21530964 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21530964 Jules Dupuit, describing rail carriages, though the same logic applies: It is not because of the several thousand francs which they would have to spend to cover the third class wagons or to upholster the benches. ... [I]t would happily sacrifice this [expense] for the sake of its popularity. Its goal is to stop the traveler who can pay for the second class trip from going third class. It hurts the poor not because it wants them to personally suffer, but to scare the rich. https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/why-does-air-travel-suck-so-bad-this-19th-century-economist-explained-it-with-ju.html https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/why-does-air-travel-suck-...

lokedhs 7y ago
Or you can do what many other airlines do, which is to make business class so much better that even if econony is nice, business class is so much above that that it's worth the money. I tend to try to travel on Qatar, and their new business class cabins are amazing: https://www.qatarairways.com/en/onboard/qsuite.html https://www.qatarairways.com/en/onboard/qsuite.html It's also cheaper than the (worse) business class on many other airlines.
- guitarbill 7y ago
  The inconsistency of business class does make it unappealing though. Sometimes, it's almost first class (Singapore Airlines). Many times, it's barely a step up from economy though, and just feels like a rip off.
  - cameronc56 7y ago
    Yes, but babies and children do not ride in business class.
    - lokedhs 7y ago
      Some do, but I agree it's much fewer.