Post by BBPost by matt weberTo be blunt, there are only a handful of markets where the A380 is
attractive. That's why orders are now stuck in a holding pattern, the
people who have those routes have ordered... However as for market
size, I suggest you count up the number of 747, versus 757 and 767's
sold. I think you will surprisingly little difference in the totals to
date!
There are more options aircraft-wise for operators of 757/767 class
aircraft - you're looking at sales from one manufacturer... On the other
hand the 747 really has had no real competitor through nealy all of its
life - if you wanted very large that was all there was.... You would expect
the sales of 747s would be proportionally higher as a result... I think what
is more interesting is whether the large aircraft market (ie A380 vs. 747)
can support both....
Post by matt weberPost by BBWill the 7E7 be a viable replacement for the 757?
It is probably a bit large, but the 737-900X has close to the same
seating capacity as a 757, and while he 737 doesn't have the range of
the 757, only charter operators seem to care.
From what I gather one of the reasons the airlines so like the 767 is
that it was (or still is) a good "gap filler" aircraft that relatively cheap
to operate domestically but could also do international duty if required...
Qantas tried to do the same with the A330 but of course it didn't work... To
be a true 767 replacement the 7E7 would have to offer the same versatility
as the 767....
Post by matt weberthe 737-900 is currently capacity constrained due to the number of
exits. a non problem for 2/3 class service, a very real problem for
single class service!.
Is the 737-900X (with the extra exits) still on the drawing boards?
I haven't seen any orders, but realistically the effort to produce it
from the -900 is pretty trivial. If you look at the A319's delivered
to EZ-Jet, you get an idea. (The A319 in single class service has the
same problem the 737-900 has). It didn't add to the delivery time for
EZ-Jet to put in the extra exit.
The Boeing Board of Directors did authorize the aircraft to be
'offered'.., but the demand for new aircraft in the charter/leisure
market is pretty soft at the moment, you can get excellent deals on
pretty good aricraft presently parked at Mohave, Goodyear, Marana
...... There are a good number of 757's, 767, and 737-300/400/500,
and the price is right. You can have A300's and A310's for a song...
Post by BBSo Airbus's designers are overstretched while (after the 747-500X, -600X
and Sonic Cruiser) Boeing has a lot idle?.... :-)
At the moment, that's very much the story. With KC767 in a holding
pattern (perhaps permanently).
There is a huge difference between a marketing proposal, and actually
building the aircraft. None of the versions of the proposals that went
nowhere, like the various versions of the 747X, A330-500, A30X, or
sonic cruiser consumed more than a few million dollars of engineering
work. Sonic Cruiser may have used more, but a lot of the aerodynamics
and materials engineering work from the Sonic Cruiser has ended up in
7E7, so it hasn't been a total loss.
Sonic cruiser BTW remains a bit of a mystery. Let me know when you
find a good picture, model, or drawing that shows the underside of the
aircraft. It is now widely thought that in the Sonic Cruiser Work,
Boeing stumbled onto something that may turn out to be very valuable,
and Boeing has been exceptional coy about that part of the aircraft.
Airbus currently has several programs that are still consuming vast
amounts of engineering resources
The A340-500/600 are being delivered, but are by no means complete.
There is probably another $20-$30 million USD in engineering work that
needs to be done on those aircraft before they meet guarantees. The
question for Airbus is: Is it cheaper to fix, or pay the penalties. I
honestly don't know.
RR was paying penalties to QANTAS on the RB211-524G's on the
747-400's for more than a decade. MD paid penalities on the MD11, and
probably still is to some operators.
The A380 and A400M are still years from first flight.
Boeing has the 7E7 on the civilian front, and that's about it (KC767
is in a holding pattern that it may NEVER emerge from).
Also in the USA, employees pretty much serve at the will of the
employer. Boeing can hire and fire at will, and the termination
payments are at the discretion of Boeing, they aren't part of US
employment law unless it is part of the employment contract. In short
if Boeing wants to layoff 10,000 engineers tomorrow, they are required
to give notice, but that's about all they have to do..
Post by BBThe 777 is a great a/c and the GE90 is a great engine - they spent a lot
of money on it too.... Unfotunately for GE it is an engine built for one
aircraft type and one only (as long as the customer specifies your engine as
well) - and you only get to fit 2 of them to each airframe!...
Think A340-200/300, the CFM56 that goes on it is a one of a kind. The
A340-500/600 also use a one of a kind engine, and I'll bet you more
777-300ER's get sold then A340-500/600's when the smoke clears.
Interestingly enough, GE was offered an exclusive on the A340-500/600,
they declined. They couldn't see enough of them selling to recover the
NRE.
The real headache is A380. four engines, but I suspect RR and GPW
will be lucky if they each sell 400 engines, and at a 92% discount
like RR gave QF, we know they aren't making money anytime soon.
Also a lot of what went into the GE90 is now showing up in product
improvement kits for other engines. Hasn't received a lot of PR, but
Southwest Airlines in the USA in addition to ordering the Winglets,
also ordered about $300 million USD worth of kits for the CFM56s.
Basically the Tech-56 program was the application of the things
learned in the GE90 program and applying them to the CFM56.