777X STRETCH? - Boeing's Long-Term Future
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 08. 2023
- Beyond more pressing concerns such as the 737 MAX certification, 777X certification and quality assurance, what are Boeing's plans leading into the 2030s and what has been discussed? Today I explore some of the more speculated opportunities such as the 777X Stretch, 787 Freighter and the need to eventually source a replacement for the ageing 737 fuselage.
🔔 Subscribe to GlobeTrotting: bit.ly/SubscribeGlobeTrotting
🖥️ Visit our website: djsaviation.net
CONNECT WITH US
🐦 Twitter: / djsaviation
👥 Facebook: / djsaviation
💬 Discord: / discord
💻 Patreon: / djsaviation
BUSINESS ENQUIRIES
📧 Email: contactdjsaviation@gmail.com
CHECK OUT THE PODCAST
🎙️ Spotify: bit.ly/DjsAviationPodcast
🎙️ Apple: bit.ly/DjsPodcastApple
SUBMIT VIDEO IDEAS
✍️ Form - bit.ly/SubmitVideoIdeas
===============================
ℹ️ MORE INFORMATION ℹ️
creativecommons.org/
Licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.0
-
-
-
-
-
Video written by
🎵 OUTRO TRACK 🎵
Krys Talk - Fly Away [NCS Release]
Music provided by NoCopyrightSounds.
• Krys Talk - Fly Away |...
Free Download / Stream ncs.io/flyaway
#aviation #news #flight #aircraft #avgeek #airplane #airlines #airport #planespotting #airbus #boeing
777x needs to get certified quicker than quick before we can talk about new products
better late than sorry
A 777-11 we can call it the Seven-eleven. :D lol
I think Emirates may end up with much smaller A380 fleet, primarily aimed for very high density markets or markets with very strict landing slot controls. They may end up buying a lot more 777-9's to replace the lost capacity from the culling of the A380 fleet.
Exactly, the 777-9 is what comes closest to the capacity of the A380. If there will be a 777-10 Emirates will happily order it.
They really don't have a choice.
They extended A380 up until 2040, so it’s a possibility they’re gonna wait until a 777x-10 is unveiled for a proper replacement
The 777X will be a success as the 777-200/300 start to age out of service.
The 777X comes too late for the majority of 777-200(ER), they are already getting replaced by 787-9, 787-10, A350-900. However there will be a huge number of 777-300ER that will need replacement over the next 10-20 years plus some 747-8i as well as huge numbers of A380s. While no aircraft reaches the capacity of the 747 it's the 777X that comes closest. Long Term I see at least 700-800 sales of the 777X.
@@widget787 Right
@@widget787There are so few 747-8i in service they are not worried about that. It does almost perfectly match the capacity of the 747-400 though.
@@johniii8147 add to the 747-8i the A380s and around half the 777-300ER and you get a very decent number, which adds to the already 300+.
Let's not distract Boeing any further from delivering on the 777-8/9... they have a lot to prove before talking about a possible -10
Yes
I think it’s the opposite. 5 year testing seems to be the new norm so I think they should start working on the 10 now.
@@austin67605 They are really not seeing demand for it other than EK and it won't be a one carrier plane. Just like the 380 NEO. You don't build a plane for a single carrier.
Waiting for the Boom Overture!
The X-66A is not a 737 killer, it is the 21st century solution and replacement. Obviously, that is the path for Boeing. Whether a larger version will be the basic design for the NMA, don't know. Those wings will be huge!!
That remains to be seen.
Boeing knows they need to be patient, if they get focused on an X-66 style "NMA" they can release a "revolutionary" modernized narrow body aircraft of the future that would make any A320 a pointless buy. For the rest of the 2020s selling as many of their existing models and 777Xs as they can will be enough to stay afloat an regroup
Dream on.
Problem with that idea is that, the fleet of A320neo will be quite young, so most carriers would not switch quickly unless there's an covid like event to halt everyone and facilitate fleet update and gives enough time for crew training on the new type without the costs of not flying planes because pilots are being trained on a new type.
This scenario also doesn't take into account that given their backlog for the next 12 years. Airbus will have, by that time, a market share more than 1.5x Boeing's Market share, it will have significant more planes in service than Boeing (it already has more planes, but just a couple hundred).
Airbus already has more factories, a bigger and with more widespread of experience than Boeing, which has lowered itself to "steal fresh engineers from Brazilian, Indian, South Korean and even Chinese companies, but they had just limited success in attracting the more experienced engineers.
So it will not be as simple as getting focused on NASA's X-66. The plane is developed by NASA's, not Boeing, even if Boeing is one of the private companies investing on the research, a substantial part of it comes from American Government through NASA's budget.
Even if the X-66 prototype and testbed do get all the research done on time and achieve all the expected improved efficiency goals, and then Boeing receive prioritary access to the research final results (as on of the main investors), they still have to turn it on a marketable product, which more often than not, isn't ppssible with NASA's experimental aircrafts.
But even if it can be done and Boeing announce it will make the civilian version of the X-66 as either the replacement of the 737 or/and the MMA, these planes will come 10 late to the market, and in the same time-frame Airbus can do similar research faster, or even just wait NASA's publication of the final results and enter the race with Boeing to see who will implement it faster. And given the current backlog, Airbus will be bigger enough than Boeing that it probably would win this race. Just look how fast it could rework the original A350, into two plane the A330Neo to compete with the 787, and the A350 to compete with the 777. In the meantime, Boeing didn't even got finish certification of the 777X yet.
People thinks that Boeing is the powerhouse it always have been, but often forget that Boeing's backlog and planned production capacity increase is eclipsed by Airbus with a lot to spare, and even at the present moment, Airbus is more financially solid, stable and have more available cash to develop whatever the hell it wants, its production capacity has been grater than Boeing for quite some time now, and its projected increase in production is bigger than Boeing's current capacity.
So if Boeing really wait for the 2030s to attempt to take over Airbus position, it will simply be too late for them, they should have a dressed this 5 years ago, and this decade should be focused in getting enough orders so that Airbus can't grow so big that Boeing wouldn't have the money to compete with it.
It is not impossible, but as Airbus have shown, it took 41 years of carefully planned strategy and government money from 5 different countries for it to beat Boeing, right now Boeing is where Airbus was 10 years ago, and it's backlog doesn't inspire confidence that it could stay on the game long enough to wait another decade to make ita move.
@@nichendrix Airbus' huge backlog for the A320 means they're doing great, but it also is a limitation to how far ahead of Boeing they can get, because anyone who wants a new narrow body anytime remotely soon has to go with Boeing, airlines don't want to wait nearly a decade for new planes.
Airbus will obviously be able to launch a similar new aircraft to Boeing whenever Boeing launches theirs, but Boeing is getting started first, and their new model won't have the baggage the MAX has. Airbus will hold their lead for the next ten years at least, but Boeing won't fall super far behind and airbus will never fall super far behind either
@@jaxonmattox9267 I think you're underestimate Boeing's backlog too, Boeing's backlog is full until at least the end of the decade, the difference between Boeing and Airbus backlogs is that Boeing right now is having trouble keeping their production line due to worker shortages, and concentration of manufacture in the US. Airbus has 6 different production sites around the globe and is opening another 3 until 2025, so yeah, Boeing will be behind, because they are completing planes at a slower rate than Airbus, and the Airbus backlog is mostly firm orders, so its not like these airline can walk off the deal and switch to Boeing without paying compensations.
Boeing is already far behind Airbus, that's the reality most doesn't seem to understand. Airlines don't buy planes all the time, they renew their fleet roughly every other decade, it is the time-frame for fleet renewals, that was the opportunity Boeing missed and keeps missing, when they finally get to the drawing board next decade, fleet renewals for most airlines would be complete, so they will have to wait another 5-10 years to start attempting getting their place back, which puts Boeing essencial 20-25 years away from even attempting getting their lead back. Unless they somehow miraculously finds a sh*load of money, a town full experienced engineers and still get lucky to develop some insane technology unavailable to it's competitors, it would not have a change before that time-frame.
@@nichendrix Airbus has its own delays. They a good year or so behind in its own deliveries.
Do a video on the certification process for the 777's. Why is boeing flying 4 of them now and what each unit is doing. Also, the plane Emirates will be getting for flight testing, talk as to why this is important in detail. ty
dj doesn't have the knowledge to comment in any detail the FAA certification process. He just reads articles we all can and makes videos off of that.
What is that little parachute behind the 737 Max at the end for?
It's called a "trailing static cone"
"is a testing device used to calibrate the static pressure (i.e. altimetry ) of an aircraft. It provides accurate atmospheric pressure measurements surrounding the aircraft."
The 380 is dust witle the Boeing 777X has been waiiting on the FAA and other models too...
Can you explain why the 767 was a good freighter because I understand that it does not use a standard large aircraft cargo device? Isn't that one of the main problems it had in passenger aviation? I heard that underneath it could not use the regular cargo pallets?
It has lower costs per ton mile for its size and range. You're talking about the passenger version on the cargo container size. But even that was easily resolved with different sized containers. Carriers that had large enough fleets for them (ie DL, AA, UA) they found that fairly easy to work around and ordered the right size for cargo. It's not really a constraint on full cargo versions.
I wish they would keep a redesigned 747. It’s such a classic and I have good memories, my first trip across the US was in a 747
It had its day, was just time to move. The original design dates back to the early 1960s. It was a great job it lasted as long as it did.
First get the 777-9 properly working...
Stretching is losing balance,it is already long, it's better to reduce dead weight by replacing aluminum with graphene or carbon fibers and some abaca fibers reinforced polyamide.
And how long will that plane be?
I think Boeing said a -10 would be stretched by 4 rows so another 40 passengers in a 10 abreast economy configuration putting the number to around 450 passengers in 2 classes.
We are talking about close to 80 meters here, insane.
As soon as Boeing returns to its roots, which is a company that engineers aircraft, they will create new game changers.
In the meantime they wasted a lot of time borrowing from the Airbus playbook by cutting corners to modernize old designs.
The 787 was a huge risk, but a great success for aviation much as the 777 before it, the 757 before that, the 747 before that and the 737 before that.
I'm happy to see them gambling on another brand new narrowbody aircraft, which will no doubt also be a game changer and reinstate their reputation as an aircraft engineering company.
The 757 was never a huge success. It's why it was discontinued. It only sold 1000 units in 30 years of sales. It was also expensive for them to make.
@@johniii8147 The 757 was slightly ahead of its time, and it sold over 1200, not 1000. More than half of them are still flying, which underscores their durability.
Any commercial aircraft that sells more than 1000 is a success, because, aside from pure economics, those aircraft tend to have a long lasting impact on the industry. The 757 has done that, which is why Airbus has so many orders for the A321.
@@sainntThe exact number produced was 1050. Not good over 30 years of sales. Boeing didn't consider that a success and moved on. It was also very costly for them to produce. The market shifted to the 737. They tried other proposed versions and airlines just didn't go for it.The 321 is having so much success since it's much lighter and at least 25% more efficient.
@@johniii8147 The A321neo, you mean. The older A321 didn't sell anywhere close to the 757, and it's selling more now because it has no competition. Boeing created the market and let it go, but they'll recapture the market again when they build an all new aircraft.
By the way, Boeing also created the market for the 737, and when you compare just the A318, A319 and A320, Boeing is still selling more units than Airbus. The 737-10 will capture a little bit of that market, but not even the A321neo is as capable as the 757.
@@sainnt Look up your numbers before you bother commenting. The CEO version of the 321 sold 1791 units and didn't do a first delivery until 1994. Well after the 757. Do your research. It's not hard
do you think they should have special fatty seats so normal weight flyers dont get squashed out ?
There's always the cargo hold that could be used if you don't fit into the normal seats?
@@almac414 I only fly first or business for this reason darlinks
When I was a kid and specially a teen a 737(-200, -300, -400 and -500) , had quite comfortable seats to most except those very high out of the curve, I'm 1,88m tall, and was l 1,80 by the time I was 14, and at that time I almost never had problem sitting on a plane, nowaday, due to a spinal fusion and the tendency of carriers to use high density configurations, and seats without adjustments, I have to either spend more for a seat that can at least recline a little and have a modicum of leg room, so I can acomodate myself with bearable doscpnfort, or else I have to spend the entire trip with the curved front head support of the seat pressuring my mid upper back and the seat in from pressuring my knees fot the entire flight. Which is a great combination for cramps and back and leg ache for a couple days after flight.
Awesome Video globe trotting at dj's aviation I think it should be the 777X that should be concentrated on
The primary focus now is to certify the airplanes that need to be certified. The 777-9X was pushed back to 2025. The 737-MAX-7, and -10 apparently also around that same year. Once all the smoke is cleared, Boeing will stabilize, and regain customer support, and satisfaction. Safety is paramount to Boeing since those unfortunate major setbacks. The Boeing company, and the careful planning that they are currently undertaking, will bring them back hopefully to the right areas. The plan is to get all these airplanes up and flying for the airlines soon. Hopefully this will sway them to offer an upgrade to the 777X program into a possible -10 series.
Safety has not been paramount to Boeing. They're 787s made in SC have been made so shoddily that Boeing engineers stated they'd refuse to fly on the plane to this day.
The MAX7 is much closer to certification than the 10. While the 10 may slip into 2025 the 7 should be ready to go in 2024.
@@jakewatson2660 Says the one who is referring to the Al Jazeera documentary back in 2010! Boeing engineers say that they dont refuse to fly on the plane as they are fixing the issue. Just because of the early "shoddily" made 787s back then does not mean that the engineers to this day refuse to fly on them
@@widget787 The -10 has slipped to 2024 not 2025
But I don’t know why boing can make 767 and 757 max 🤔🤔
The 757 MAX is not happening, the production line ended almost 20 years ago, the 767 MAX won't likely happen, but Boeing still has the 767 production line open.
@@heidirabenau511 but the need 757 max too compete with A321 neo , I want too see 767 max in the future
sadly wont happen@@anthonypolanco4499
They just can’t learn that you can only improve a model so much the disastrous event of the MAX8/9/10 cannot be washed away Boeing ! Go to the drawing board and make a new deign !
The 777X more or less is a new design. Not at all comparable to 737NG -> 737MAX.
Airbus cant learn that they cant improve a model so much the XLR issues cannot be washed away either! Perhaps they should go to the drawing board and make a new design! Anyway why would the stretch off 777-8 relate to the event of 737MAX 8/9/10?
Why is making no 787-6 or 787-7 as an NMA.
They proposed a -3 but nobody wanted it. 787 is too heavy for the MOM
A shortened 787 would be too heavy by at least 30 tonnes. However a new, smaller and lighter wing could help ... Another problem then would be the wide, short fuselage: more drag. A problem that the A310 and 767-200 had. One of the reasons why Boeing seems to plan with a Narrowbody now for the MOM.
Could probably bring back the 707 faster than getting the 777 stretch
LOL
I’d be quite happy for Boeing to make lots of freighters - given the problems they are continuing to have with 737 and 777, I’m far happier flying in an Airbus. Frankly Boeing lost their way years ago with no replacement for the 757/67. How long can they keep updating an aeroplane which dates back to the late 60's.
Why have you said Boeing lost their way years ago because of no replacement for 757/767? Perhaps how long can Airbus keep updating the a320 which dates back to the the 80s? The 737 and 777 aren't having continuous problems. The 777x is having documentation issues with TIA to begin this year. 737 is having supply chain issues now. The 737 is free of problems apart from an engine Anti ice issue with the engines
I'm afreight That Boeing will get organized again, which is essential for them. But by reorganizing they will loose part of their engineering capacity
So pre-mature. This topic is silly. How about keeping the existing orders from Emirates.
Boeing should just scale down the 787 into a single isle, much like they did with the 767. They are in the middle of Carbon Fiber production and could use the 787 avionics. The 757X would have a similar look of the traditional 757 but with the benefits of the 787.
Such a "scale down" would never work for a lot of reasons. Trust me they looked at that and it was just not feasible. A composite structure doesn't make a lot economical sense on a narrow body. Any weight savings on short to medium are far outweighed by MUCH higher production costs, time to develop, or improvement in overall efficiency. Boeing looked at all that and the market size for such an aircraft and the market business case just wasn't there to justify it.
@@johniii8147 Where you getting that info?
Surprised they don’t shift & make 777x8 for cargo… make 777x10
There is a 777-8F in development already.
Bro. 8 and 9 aren't even out yet. Quit wasting resources.
Why speek about this plane, it is now the longest period that they are testing and testing and so on ! Just forget about it, it takes too long, I will never fly this plane 😡
why never fly this plane?
@@nickolliver3021 Boeing has too much problems!
@@Sharky2901 airbus does more than Boeing. Boeing are fixing them