• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Boeing 'Middle of the Market” (MOM) Airliner

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
609
Reaction score
174
LowObservable said:
I assume "hybrid cross-section" means "sized to accommodate human-hamster hybrids".
Boeing has had a few patents for a oval cross section fuselage in recent years. It was one of the things they were looking at with the Yellowstone design studies.

Anyway, going off the image posted and correcting the perspective distortion the length of the mom/797 looks to be right around 150 feet.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,945
Reaction score
1,739
Hi,

http://aviationweek.com/paris-air-show-2017/boeing-unveils-notional-new-midsize-airplane-timetable
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
266
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Boeing’s next all-new jet moves closer to reality"
Originally published September 25, 2017 at 6:15 pm Updated September 26, 2017 at 6:34 am

by Dominic Gates

Source:
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeings-next-all-new-jet-moves-a-step-closer-to-reality/

Boeing put program leadership in place Monday in readiness for an anticipated launch in 2018 of its next all-new jet.

Commercial Airplanes boss Kevin McAllister has created a new airplane program office to “move us one step closer to a decision on a New Mid-market Airplane (NMA) and also serve as a vehicle to evolve how we design and build airplanes.”

The proposed new jet, which industry experts are anticipating as the “797,” is conceived as intermediate in size between the single-aisle 737 and the twin-aisle 787 Dreamliner, with a range that could make it transatlantic and suitable for long thin, point-to-point routes.

Although the move clearly indicates growing momentum toward a formal launch of this new airplane, which would be targeted to enter service around 2024, in an internal memo sent Monday afternoon to all Commercial Airplanes employees, McAllister stressed that Boeing is not actually pulling the trigger just yet.

“To be clear, today’s announcement represents neither a program launch nor an indication of when we will decide whether to take the next step with NMA,” McAllister wrote. “Those questions and others still lie ahead.”

Experts expect Boeing to make a formal launch decision no later than next year.

McAllister said he’s appointed Mark Jenks, who has been heading the 787 program, as vice president and general manager of the new NMA program office, which will be based in Renton.

“With a wealth of lessons learned on the 787, (Jenks) has the right expertise to lead production system development, reduce program risk and manage the tradeoffs between cost and investment in meeting development targets,” McAllister told employees.

The NMA, first discussed publicly at the 2015 Paris Air Show, gathered momentum at this year’s Paris Air Show.

Boeing said then it had consulted with 57 different airlines about the concept, which is for a twin-aisle airplane seating 220 to 270 passengers with a medium range of 5,500 to 5,700 miles.
 

DWG

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
546
Reaction score
219
OTOH, note the "heavily discounted" and the dependence on oil prices. It's an artefact of Boeing having the airframe in production for the tanker contract, rather than being independently viable. Those are going to be some deep discounts as owners will need to protect themselves against any future oil price rises leaving them stuck with a new and commercially non-viable project.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
266
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Boeing weighs urgent plans to double 767 production in Everett for a big buyer"
by Andrew McIntosh – Staff Writer, Puget Sound Business Journal
Oct 19, 2017, 3:28pm PDT Updated Oct 25, 2017, 3:06pm

Source:
https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2017/10/19/boeing-767-production-increase-everett-united.html

Boeing is urgently weighing plans to double 767 production in Everett, the Puget Sound Business Journal has learned.

The Chicago-based jetmaker (NYSE: BA) is asking its employees and suppliers whether they can deliver on the rate increase to win a big aircraft order, according to a Boeing document and three industry sources who requested anonymity to protect business relationships.

Boeing has not made a passenger version of its 767 for years. The production increase would offer a steady stream of new work to suppliers in the Puget Sound region.

Boeing spokesman Paul Bergman declined to comment.

The moves come amid rumors Boeing has secured or is close to securing a huge order for 767s from a major airline, possibly United Continental (NYSE: UAL). Between 50 and 100 jets are potentially involved, sources said.

United Continental spokeswoman Andrea Hiller had no immediate comment Thursday.

Chicago-based United's airplane fleet includes 51 Boeing 767s, including 16 that are 25 years old, according to Planespotters.net. United also operates 77 Boeing 757 jets with an average age of 19 to 20 years old.

There have also been rumors of a sale of 100 Boeing 767 freighters to Amazon's growing Prime Air cargo fleet.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
266
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Success of Max 10 to dictate Boeing's NMA: Ascend"
18 October, 2017 SOURCE: Flight Dashboard BY: Sophie Segal New York

Source:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/success-of-max-10-to-dictate-boeings-nma-ascend-442262/

Boeing's NMA strategy could depend on the reception of its 737 Max programme, Flight Ascend Consultancy has suggested.

"Boeing's performance in the 737 market will impact its decision on this airplane because right now the Max 10 is a competitive response to the A321LR," said the consultancy's head Rob Morris at an industry briefing in New York on 17 October.

Given Airbus's majority market share with the A320neo, "Boeing needs to give it a bit of time to see what happens", he adds, noting that only time will tell if the US manufacturer is able to reach equilibrium with its European rival.

Morris says that today there are still more questions than answers about Boeing's New Mid-market Airplane and whether it will look more like a 757 replacement, a 767-200, or an A321LR.

The Max 10 "is not the panacea that Boeing thinks it would be... to create equilibrium" in market share with the A321LR, Morris opines. He adds: "So what do Boeing do next, if they can't correct with a Max derivative? Maybe they launch with an MoM [middle-of-the-market] airplane" – which could potentially have negative consequences for longevity of the 737 Max product line.

Morris suggests that an appropriate delivery price for a middle-of-the-market aircraft would be about $70-75 million, given its market position between the top end of the existing single-aisle programmes and bottom end of small twin-aisles. But he questions whether that price would make economic sense against the development costs of the aircraft. "There are many more questions to be answered," he notes.
 

DWG

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
546
Reaction score
219
Presumably Boeing would have to build the passenger 767s on the tanker/transport line, the economics of a single order won't sustain a new line. That means producing -2C (tankers), -300F and -300ER hulls on the same line. Certainly not impossible, and in fact rather ordinary, but I do hope Boeing have talked to USAF about this, because they aren't happy about KC-46 delays, and anything that even raises the faint possibility of disrupting the line is likely to have the Pentagon ringing Boeing for a little chat.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
266
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Boeing 767 passenger jet relaunch would be good for discount and charter airlines, aerospace analyst says Boeing 767 passenger jet relaunch would be good for discount and charter airlines, aerospace analyst says "

by Andrew McIntosh – Staff Writer, Puget Sound Business Journal
a day ago

Source:
https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2017/10/30/boeing-767-passenger-jet-relaunch-aeroanalysis.htmlhttps://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2017/10/30/boeing-767-passenger-jet-relaunch-aeroanalysis.html

Boeing's potential plan to "relaunch" production of its 767-300 passenger jet could be ideal for discount and charter airlines that want new aircraft but can't afford Dreamliners.

Boeing's newer 787-8 Dreamliner (the smallest in the Dreamliner family) offers better range and fuel efficiency than the jet maker's older 767-300 extended range jet, which has not been made for years.

But the Dreamliners come with a pricetag that not all airlines can or want to pay, said Dhierin Bechai, an analyst with AeroAnalyst in London.

"For airlines, the problem is capital costs," Bechai wrote in a recent report. "The Boeing 787-8 sells for roughly $115 million, while a Boeing 767-300ER at 35 percent of list price would sell for $70 million at most, I would reckon," Bechai wrote.

"That means the Boeing 767-300ER has 40 percent lower acquisition costs," Bechai wrote.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
221
So, there's a story going that Boeing has solicited engine makers for engines to go with a MOM aircraft (NMA or 797).

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/27/boeing-797-ge-pratt-whitney-rolls-royce-told-to-bid-for-new-plane.html

Now, the first version is reported to be the NMA-6X, a 228-passenger medium-range aircraft with a 5,000 nautical mile range. A second version, the NMA-7X would be larger with 267 seats, but a range of 4,200 nautical miles.

.....

Morris said Pratt & Whitney’s proposal could also be in the mix if it can demonstrate that its GTF technology could scale up to the 45,000 pounds of thrust that Boeing is said to be demanding.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,128
Reaction score
103
Delta in talks to be the NMA launch customer.
"We've had discussions with Boeing about being a potential launch customer," says Ed Bastian, chief executive of Delta, at the National Press Club in Washington DC today.

While Bastian caveats any launch order on the final parameters of the NMA that Boeing has yet to finalise, the Atlanta-based carrier is "interested" and will continue to discuss the programme with the airframer, he says.
As Boeing finalises the NMA, Delta's biggest consideration on a possible launch order will be getting the "cheapest price possible", says Bastian - maintaining a sentiment frequently espoused by his former boss.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
609
Reaction score
174
797 has been trademarked by Boeing. Hope we get a launch at Farnborough in a few days.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-secures-797-trademark-450071/
 

Boxman

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
293
Reaction score
45
The Lazy B gets lazier.

A321 XLR launched in June '19, already has 450 orders on the books. Now Boeing doesn't even have a paper airplane anymore to compete with it, nor do they seemingly have anything coming for the next decade as an NMA/MOM/797 or 737 MAX replacement.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
221
Lazier? Starting over because the design you had wasn't going to make money isn't lazy. It's a lot more work. Lots of things to criticize Boeing for here, mainly for misreading the market and designing the wrong type of aircraft. But I don't see lazy.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
1,159
Reaction score
139
Yes, lot of work but also for the market and the new management team, a certain insurance that no gremlins will compromise the future. That way the market will be supportive and heavy investments are postponed a bit.
Hence probably not a novel design but a clean sheet (cheaper) design for sure.
 

Boxman

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
293
Reaction score
45
Lazier? Starting over because the design you had wasn't going to make money isn't lazy. It's a lot more work. Lots of things to criticize Boeing for here, mainly for misreading the market and designing the wrong type of aircraft. But I don't see lazy.
Agreed, it's a bit hyperbolic, but the point, admittedly not so artfully made, is Boeing is where it is today largely because it failed to act decisively to replace the 737/757 with a clean sheet design when Airbus launched the A320 NEO family. There was/is a market for the aircraft (the A321LR/A321XLR order book already speaks to that fact) and Boeing has all but surrendered it by vacillating for well over a decade about the NMA/MoM. Now they are in a spot where their competitor moved into that market space - and will likely fill that market space for the next 10-15 years, to such a degree that perhaps Boeing may not have the confidence it will ever be able to build and sell enough NMA/"797s" to recoup their investment in developing a new airframe.

I'd like to think this sudden pivot with respect to the NMA is the precursor to Boeing getting its house in order before biting the bullet and winding down the MAX in favor of the launch of a clean sheet narrowbody before the end of this decade. Ideally that airframe will either be derived from, or also serve as the foundation of, a notional NMA (or whatever Boeing will call it) that will be in operation 20+ years from now. However, the performance and some of the decision-making of management at Boeing over the past 20 years (the one that said as recently as 2015 that the NMA market was only "300-1,000 aircraft") doesn't exactly inspire confidence. I suspect this latest twist in the NMA/MoM/"797"-story isn't so much driven by a lack of market space for the aircraft, as it is by the fiscal disaster that is the 737 MAX and the financial and engineering capital it will require to replace it with a clean sheet design. Much like the 787's woes that influenced Boeing's response to the NEO, the consequential 737 MAX fiasco has also likely now hobbled Boeing with respect to launching the NMA (at least as it has been conceptualized over the past couple of years).
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
427
A crazy idea, but what if Boeing left the 737MAX replacement to Embraer who still has an untarnished reputation and a large slice of the feederliner market while they concentrate on on a larger MoA which joins closer to the 787 segment?
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
An interesting idea. Probably a non-starter though, unfortunately.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
1,074
Reaction score
155
A crazy idea, but what if Boeing left the 737MAX replacement to Embraer who still has an untarnished reputation and a large slice of the feederliner market while they concentrate on on a larger MoA which joins closer to the 787 segment?
Please think about what you are saying and calmly, very calmly - step away from that thought. We have enough to worry about without people bringing common sense into the issue.......
 

Boxman

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
293
Reaction score
45
A crazy idea, but what if Boeing left the 737MAX replacement to Embraer who still has an untarnished reputation and a large slice of the feederliner market while they concentrate on on a larger MoA which joins closer to the 787 segment?
Please think about what you are saying and calmly, very calmly - step away from that thought. We have enough to worry about without people bringing common sense into the issue.......
I'd like to have the popcorn (and pitchfork) concession in Renton and Wichita if that were to happen.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,128
Reaction score
103
A crazy idea, but what if Boeing left the 737MAX replacement to Embraer who still has an untarnished reputation and a large slice of the feederliner market while they concentrate on on a larger MoA which joins closer to the 787 segment?
Really really skeptical of that approach for a few reasons, but perhaps the biggest is that Boeing needs to build confidence in its primary brand right now. Any action that looks like "we still don't think 'Boeing' is going to be healthy or fixed anytime soon" is BAD for employee, supplier, customer, and investor confidence. If BCA wants a future it needs to prove it has its swing back, not retreat and hope nobody notices how much of a mess they are. A joint-development between the Brazilian and North American engineering teams is fine enough, but that's different.

Second biggest reason not to go this path, at least to me, is that it seems like the ship has absolutely sailed on a conservative, conventional design. If they were to replace the 737 in 2010 with a clean-sheet conventional design, they were already facing a large challenge to meet the A321neo's costs, support base, pilot familiarity, etc while still having a profitable aircraft. A decade later the problem's only gotten harder, and Embraer's not the solution to all of those. The way to claw back that market now is to provide the sort of performance (fuel burn per seat mile) enhancement only possible with an innovative new design. We already saw them sorta edging outside the comfort zone with the wide fuselage on NMA, but really something like hybrid/turboelectric, high aspect ratio wing, boundry layer ingestion, etc in some combination is needed.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
1,159
Reaction score
139
The solution is always a leap forward when you have the ressources (human, technological and financial). New here is the mass criteria of Airbus market share (and in vis à vis Boeing) that makes the fall precarious. That's where the integrated industry (with Embraer) will be a ressource: high tech at a lower cost to trim risk.
 

coanda

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
109
Reaction score
11
From what I've heard it feels like they were looking for commonality across a wide size range for the expensive bits, and some demonstrators of those bits had been made.

Maybe a twin aisle short range aircraft was in BCAs future at one point.

I have to say, I'd prefer a larger cabin for the missions that XLR are looking at due to the length of time on board.
 
Last edited:

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560



 

DWG

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
546
Reaction score
219
This sounds like more of the indecision problem Boeing's board has suffered from ever since 777's entry into service (which is now almost 25 years ago). All the 777 guys (FCS at least) expected to move straight over to 747X (a 747 fuselage with a 777 technology wing), Boeing's board got cold feet and nothing happened. Then there was the Sonic Cruiser, which admittedly was a mistaken decision rather than indecision. If you're launching a new airliner, first check it's one the airlines want. That became 787, with its own set of problems. Then it was time for a new single aisle to replace the 737. The board ummed and ahhed and when Airbus announced Neo was shoehorned into MAX. So Boeing was going to launch NMA to compete in the 757/767 replacement market (last 757 delivery 2005, last 767 passenger variant delivery 2014), but tumbleweed instead of an actual announcement. Meanwhile Airbus has been going great guns with A321LR/LRX in the middle of the market segment, with no Boeing competition. And now Boeing's board have gotten cold feet over their NMA concept and gone back to the drawing board.

I suspect Boeing may be considering downsizing NMA as an A321LRX competitor and competing for 737/757 replacements, rather than 757/767, leaving 787 to handle the 767 replacement market.
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
78
Would Boeing now be better served by doing what they should have done with the MAX, retain the 737 fuselage for now, and concentrate their design efforts on new wings, tail, and corresponding undercarriage ?

cheers,
Robin.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
Aside from the PR optics, I doubt that they would be able to squeeze anything more out of the 737 airframe that's worthwhile.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,128
Reaction score
103
Would Boeing now be better served by doing what they should have done with the MAX, retain the 737 fuselage for now, and concentrate their design efforts on new wings, tail, and corresponding undercarriage ?

cheers,
Robin.
Possible, but as GH says they're probably limited in what they can really do in that scenario. At some point, you either run out of options with the airframe or you spend so much money "updating" it that you're giving up any advantage versus a clean sheet of paper.
 

Desertfox

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
170
Reaction score
47
A clean sheet 737/757 design would be the best option right now with another joint Embraer/Boeing 717/737 design for the lower capacity market. Maybe some sort of 757/767 co-design work.
 

DWG

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
546
Reaction score
219
Addison Schonland, chief executive of AirInsight Research feels that the NMA could be a revived 787-3. Perhaps unlikely but it would take care of the upper end of the segment and open the way for a narrowbody 737 replacement.

https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/analyst-boeings-previously-scrapped-787-3-could-be-reborn-as-the-nma/136589.article
"The short-haul 787-3 "

There's the rub. There's a lot of enthusiasm for long range in the middle of the market right now, look at how the A321LR/LRX have been carving up the market because of their ever longer range capability. It's not impossible to go after the top end of the MoM segment with a twin-aisle, that's what Airbus have done with the A330 Neo, and the 787-3 would carry slightly more passengers, but the problem is range, the 787-3 has a max range of 3050nm. You could probably boost that to 3500nm with extra tankage and increased max weight, but the A330-900 has a range of 7200nm, and the A330-800 has a range of 8,150nm. No matter how much tankage you squeeze in, you won't double the range of the 787-3.
 
Last edited:

DWG

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
546
Reaction score
219
Would Boeing now be better served by doing what they should have done with the MAX, retain the 737 fuselage for now, and concentrate their design efforts on new wings, tail, and corresponding undercarriage ?
That's basically a completely new aircraft anyway. New wings would mean new wingbox, and at that point the fuselage is little more than the tube that connects the other bits, particularly as bringing 737 aero-efficiency up to scratch probably requires a nose job.

On top of which the PR optics will be against anything that can be perceived as another warmed-over 737.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
 

DWG

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
546
Reaction score
219
Top