The Plane Airbus Won’t Build
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 08. 2024
- Discord: / discord
Website: www.foundandexplained.com
This is the Airbus A322. Carrying over 250 passengers to a range of 5,000 nautical miles, this future stretch of the A321 could be an absolute gamechanger for the aviation industry. But this plane of the future might never be built by Airbus - leaving the goal wide open for Boeing to sweep in and reclaim its title.
What is this plane? Why is it so revolutionary, and why is Airbus choosing... not to build it. Let's fine out!
Airbus has been very clever with its A320 range, delivering several different derivatives to meet varying market demand. These versions are bigger or smaller, with differing passenger capacities and ranges depending on their customer airlines use case.
For example, they created the smallest version of the A320, the A318, for regional routes in Europe, and then up to the fantastic A321XLR stretch for long-range single aisle routes. But a question remains if there have been two shrinks of the flexible A320 frame so far, and only one stretch, why can’t there be a second stretch beyond the A321.
This hypothetical new version, which we have called the A322 or the A321 plus plus, would be lengthed by 4 meters and would allow up to 24 more passengers than the original A321. If airlines wanted it, the plane could carry 260 passengers in a strict high density, or a very flexible 220 passengers with two classes - including lie-flat business class seats. We have already seen JetBlue put such a concept in their A321 narrowbody for flights across the Atlantic, and I can't imagine that they and others wouldn't snap up the A322.
As the plane would be heavier but without extra power, a MTOW of only 101tones, its range would be limited initally only to around 3,500 nautical miles, a thousand nautical miles shorter than the XLR.
The range could be further improved with better engine technology and better wings. A 5-7% better engine than the A321neo Engines and a bit higher thrust of 35-37,000 lb. would allow it to push aggressively into the longer-range market. Pratt and Whitney have proposed a 35k PW1135G engine but the timing is still unknown when that will reach the market. Airbus has also been working on new wings, like the one for the A350, for the A320 series.
Plus the deal gets better, if the plane was built on the same production lines of the A320 series, costs could be reduced to around 50% of its twin-asile counter part - like the slower to sell, and might I add older, A330 series. This makes it a no brainer for airlines looking for a bigger capacity aircraty aircraft, but who don't want to commit to the wide-body design, or perhaps can't afford to with their network - like Aegian in Greece who mainly operates to smaller island airports.
We should also mention that the secondary market for narrowbody aircraft, like the A321neo, are hot right now, much higher than the widebody market. You can check out a slightly out of date of how much an aircraft costs right here on the channel.
Lastly, this plane could be built within the next five years.
The Airbus A322neo should be a perfect replacement for the stretched Boeing 757-300, even though that it was not as popular as the -200 back in the old days. If it were to happen, Delta and United would probably be the first top two priorities to order them by replacing its aging Boeing 757-300 fleet before any other airlines even want to order them. It would also be a stop-gap for airlines operating the 767.
Airbus won't build this plane at all.
According to some, and this is entering rumor territory here, Airbus was about to build this A322 when it was also pitching the XLR - two versions of the A321neo. However, remember those engines and new carbon fiber wing that it would need to be able to reach 5,000 nautical miles? They don't exist yet, and therefore the plane would be too limited in range for customers. With the XLR version also entering the market, and these new technologies too unknown, airbus realized that its so-called game-changer A322 wouldn't beat any competition and it would also cannibalise sales from the XLR itself!
Plus, we have to keep in mind that Airbus doesn't actually want to step on Boeing's toes at this point. The A320 series is currently more popular than the 737, and it has more breathing room for future updates to the design - unlike the 737 which we can agree on thanks to the MAX, has reached its hopeful final iteration.
Airbus is waiting for Boeing to design the 797, or the 757 replacement aircraft, and then it would release the A322 at a lower cost and quicker to the market.
Without the 797 existing, or even remotely ready to come to the market, airbus has nothing to gain by building the A322.
At the end of the day, we don't know for sure why Airbus hasn't built this plane - but we do that when Boeing finally decides to bring a new short-haul aircraft to the market, airbus will be ready to pounce with the A322.
The biggest things in the universe, the amount of stock footage, animations, and manufacturing clips on the mans computer
I go through about 100 gigs of rendered footage a week
@@FoundAndExplained Airbus should make A321XERs
Love your videos Nick! It's still sad that you're underrated. Hope you'll become really successful soon!
Maybe one day!
Yeah the production value and quantity of videos is something out of a large channel with millions of subs. Additionally, aviation content is huge on youtube. It's not _if_ but _when_ this channel blows up
I got this in channel in my recommendations only in the last couple of weeks. I'm sure it'll pick up pace quickly if the quality of content stays on this high level.
@@FoundAndExplained awesome! Finally someone willing to take a bite into the game theory on why airbus is holding back on further NMA capitalization. Great job nick!
I think Airbus does have one worry: loading and unloading passengers on such a long, single-aisle plane. As Boeing discovered, the very length of the 757-300 actually slowed down passenger loading, and that's why the 757-300 sales ended up being pretty limited.
FAKE FAKE FAKE
A322 is longer
Also in a duopoly there is no need to push your opponent to desperation. It's pretty common in duopolies where the two sides 'agree' to a balance of power to avoid a price war which could harm profit margins of both sides (like a mild form of collusion that's just barely legal). Airbus already has an edge and couldn't take advantage of even more market share due to production limits anyway.
I wonder if that's why Airbus seems to be dragging its feet over an A350 freighter... not to mention cancelling the A380 freighter over a decade ago.
@@visionist7 well 380 was bad seller and freighter would be even worse. a350 line is very full i think thats why they could design it but it would take years to make new line. question is how will redesign 380 line and how fast can they do it
yes it's in the game theory. pushing to innovate will cost both billions
An A220-500 would make much more sense. :)
If with double bogey like A320 Air India
@@Irfan2010raudhah hell yea. The mosquito with the double bogey. We just need the Zorro mask on it and it's literally the best looking fly
Your channel is amazing, your videos should be viewed more!
Glad you think so!
I agree 👍
Summarized: "Nothing to gain" (for Airbus. They still have to wait for the perfect moment) - excellent analysis! Thanks.
This is exactly what I’ve been telling everyone. They’re printing cash with the current lineup and need to focus on building them as fast as possible. The LR (which you didn’t mention btw) and XLR are demanding premium prices but don’t cost significantly more to build.
Fuel and cargo capacity are also huge restrictions - the XLR gets away with it because long-haul routes aren’t typically high-density, but if you did try to cram that many people into an XLR you’d have luggage issues (same with LR) as they’re adding the extra fuel in the cargo sections.
Of course this would be solved with a larger wing, as the 321 is pretty much maxed out. You get into the same issue as the 777-300ER where unusually high power is required for its size due to wing constraints (why the 777X has less power but the same MTOW.)
The trouble, trying to comment in short format, is that the whole MIddle of Market situation is both difficult to solve and difficult to explain. Part of the A322 question sits on the questionable assumption that the market could be perfectly satisfied with a modern take on the Boeing 757. There is, admittedly, a temptation to believe it, even though the most painful problem is the single aisle. You mentioned several of looming issues with regard to stretching the A320 design past it's current A321 limit: the need for new wings to keep the weight down, a new tailplane, and very likely a taller gear to lift a bigger fan farther from the ground. The only thing we have got is a long METAL fuselage, and we don't really want that either. Lack of an efficient 43,000 pound engine comes down as the insurmountable obstacle. That's what it takes to fly the 757-300.
The market is watching for a clean-sheet carbon-fiber gizmo and Boeing is apt to render an optimal architecture that works in both single and twin-aisle segments, in order sell airplanes for 20 or 30 years. You have to wonder. Safran already has a 35,000 pound LEAP engine so whatever Boeing is doing with the -5x, it is probably a good guess that they are gunning for the short end of the middle first, something you could fly with that sort of thrust and extend upward and possibly downward in the future as MoM engines come online. Right now, there really is an impossible hole in the middle of the thrust range. Home Runs from Boeing and Rolls-Royce are the nightmare Airbus dreads, a complete do-over coming sooner rather than later. Why even think about a short life airplane that does not say anything about fuel efficiency or sell long-enough to recoup investment? The 757 concept is a has been.
Boeing could ape the 757/767 dual research with a new all composite narrowbody/widebody.
The 767 sold well but the 757 was never as popular as Boeing hoped.
I think that the A220 actually does refigure the equation you are talking about though. It has been so beneficial for the people that have bought it, that it really would free up Airbus to go for a cleansheet design which is based around the size of the A321/A322 and have a shrink down to the A320, and then do a stretch of the A220 to cover the A319. This would then allow a clear distinction again between the short range small aircraft and the middle ranged middle aircraft which has become somewhat muddied with the stretches of the A320 and 737. I know many people have spoken about it and there are definite issues to be solved with the design, but a 2-2-2 design could be what we're looking for here as the larger fuselage could carry more fuel and/or cargo, allowing less restrictions to get the higher ranges
Yeah, I couldn't believe it, when i saw your subscribercount for the first time a few weeks ago. You're content is amazing, and I don't understand, why there are so few people, who watch it. Keep up the great work!! :D
There is one reason you don't mention - coffin corner. A stretch of the A321 requires a larger wing to be able to fly without overspeed or stall, which is why Boeing used a larger wingspan on the 757. So, if Airbus wanted to produce all A320 variants, including an A322, on the same line, then all aircraft would have a larger wingspan, thus no longer fitting in aerodrome code C and reducing its market appeal.
There’s something called the folding wingtips, which I believe, the last one I’ve checked, is currently in use and proved to be feasible
@@MrBryan86 As far as I know, folding wingtips are currently only in use on aircraft that operate from aircraft carriers. To date, no commercial jet airliner has entered service with folding wingtips, even though it has been available as an option on some (the original 777, for example). And the one aircraft with it that is slated to be brought into service "soon", the 777X, was recently delayed by another couple of years. See: simpleflying.com/airbus-folding-wingtips/ for more info.
I do think it's very interesting technology. But at the same time, the one's benefiting most from its introduction will be the manufacturer and its suppliers. After all, additional safety critical systems have their price.
That would only be the case if they would increase the MTOW over that of the A321XLR.
An A322 with the same MTOW (and consequently lower fuel capacity and therefore range) would do fine with the same wing.
@@martinbrandmuller8272 Correct. However, an increase in size also brings with it an increase in OEW. So keeping the MTOW constant when stretching an aircraft significantly decreases payload-range capabilities, not fuel capacity. Since Airbus hasn't done that yet and Boeing designed the 757 with a larger wingspan, I'm guessing it's not economically attractive. I'll gladly be proven wrong, though.
@@MrBryan86 Even if they use folding wingtips the wings would be too big for 150 or 180 seat aircraft, a bigger wing is heavier and has more drag. It's no coincidence A 320 and the 737 uses a almost identical wing size (120 m²), the 757 has 180 m² and could not replace the 737 economically on shorter routes.
Appreciate the factual and not rumor driven perspective. Too many channels just spout rumor and hearsay.
"Always wait the enemy to attack first" - SunTzu
Won't be surprised if one day Airbus makes an A323 where they stretch the A320 air frame so much that it competes with A330 in terms of length considering how much they stretched the A330 fuselage for it to become A340-600.
Maybe Airbus could make A220 - 500 and more.... ✈️
When you look at how long the 757-300 is it should be possible. The 757-300 didn't sell well at all though.
@@visionist7 because of the market then. if it would still exist now, i think airlines would buy it.
Whether a seriously updated, or clean sheet design A320 series, I think that an A322 is inevitable (eventually).
Whichever route is decided, I feel that it should be optimised around the A321 rather than the A320, with the A319 disappearing to be covered by an expanded A220 range.
New wings should allow taller undercarriage, giving better tail clearance at take-off for the longer variants, as well as allowing better placement of larger and/or more powerful engines - who knows an option of 757 class power could be offered for the reducing number of airports for which the 757 was designed, or to expand the number of airports from which A320 series of aircraft can operate.
However, I fully agree with you on the possibility (probability?) that being in such a good position relative to Boeing they could well (possibly even should) wait until Boeing shows their hand.
@Sebastian Floyd An A322 is not fake! It is what a hypothetical further stretch of the series could be called.
Apparently, the reason we haven't seen one yet is because there are no engines able to provide the power required.
As to whether this will happen when new engines become available or whether sufficient weight could be saved elsewhere, for example, through the increased use of composites, who knows.
What we do know is that Boeing's eventual NMA will require a new range of engines as the current crop of small engines can't be scaled up, and the larger ones can't be scaled down.
Remember, the A321 is only the first stretch, and most airframes are capable of more stretches than that - just look at the 737, and how much that fuselage has been stretched, even though it has significantly shorter landing gear.
@Sebastian Floyd You clearly don't understand the difference between hypothetical and fake.
You also appear to lack an understanding of the meaning of retired, as you can only retire something that actually exists.
As aircraft have got more efficient, and fuel is a lesser proportion of service cost, it is surprising, that airlines are not giving people more leg room.
Why would they? People will fly anyway.
It's because of money.
Excellent video.
I suspect the main reason Airbus haven't made the A322 (yet) is because it's main competitor would be the A330. Not much point in making a new plane that will mostly take business away from another model in your line. Now if Boeing announce a new narrowbody with capacity up to 250, that would be the perfect time to pounce with the A322.
An A322 would be the link between the A321 and the A330-800
@@spongebubatz That's true, but I think such a plane would generate very few "new" sales, it would mostly win conversions from A330s and 787s, and I suspect more of those conversions would be from the A330 side. There's not much incentive to develop a new plane when most of the sales will be poached from another of your own (more expensive) models. If Boeing announce a new jet in this market, it makes sense to jump in with with the A322 to save sales from going to Boeing, but without that there's not a lot of benefit to Airbus.
@@spongebubatz I think the A338 is cancelled? I don't think they've sold enough of them
@@visionist7 it’s not cancelled. Kuwait Airlines and Uganda Airlines already took over at least 2 each
The new winged version of the A320 series should be called "A320new" (New Engine and Wings) or "A320net" (New EveryThing)!
A420
A325
Pronounce with me
This is the A Three Twenty-two
The main reason we haven’t heard anything of an A322 yet is that the wing would need be severely modified to carry the aircraft when fully loaded, so for the routes it’s designed for
@Sebastian Floyd yes, by now Airbus has already announced that they won’t pursue any plans. But that was after o have written my comment
Airbus won’t build it unless Boeing makes a move. They love to wait and see. 🙄
737MAX-11 LOL
Agreed wait and see much easier for Airbus.
I also don't think this would reduce sales of the 321XLR - it's being sold to airlines who want the range - this would take sales from the 321 base model.
The main issue with such a long narrowbody is going to be boarding times. An extra 5-10min possibly costs you a turn a day, which possibly means the aircraft actually carries less pax
well if boeing wants to make "new 737" it will probably be much better than 320 family so why waste so much money when you will probably have to make entire "new 320" family. its really how it works.
I think after they lost so much money on the A380, they’re a lot more careful these days about keeping their ambitions in check.
Airbus and Boeing should jointly build Gundam
they are making a movie!
Well, looking at the numbers, only 55 B757-300 have been ordered and delivered, where the ret if the 1049 deliveries were variants of B757-200
The A322 wouldn’t be as big as the 757-300, rather something in between the both 757 variants but rather towards the -200
You deserve way more subs man
:)
Please no... an a321 already takes longer than a 777 to deboard, so imagine trying to squeeze even more passenger through a single bridge and a single aisle! Increased turnaround time is a big no-no, and I doubt it would be much more popular than the 757-300
I do agree that Airbus will hold its next move until Boeing does, but I disagree that Airbus will never build a A322. Quite on the contrary, it is a mathematical certainty that they will. This for several reasons. Firstly it is the path they followed with A330 and A350, with excellent results. Once Boeing shows its cards Airbus can follow either of two paths. It could introduce a modest stretch of a dozen more seats or so (more is unviable, an overly long fuselage would tailstrike on departure when rotating). Then there is the erroneous concept among the general public that A321XLR can take 240 pax for 4,700NM. There is no such thing. It can either take a light premium cabin of 150 pax for 4,200NM (still air, 3,700MN with headwind, and not even considering a 5% deterioration with age), OR a tight 240 pax low cost configuration for 3,500NM (ditto, 3,200NM in practice). Adding 12 pax or 1.2 tons the plane will carry 1.2 tons less fuel, half an hour’s flying time, or 200NM from the above figures. Still an attractive proposition for certain missions. Optionally, Airbus can elect to lauch in the second half of this decade (unlike the above, that might be ready by 2025) a new composite wing that could either stretch range to 5,000NM or so with a light cabin OR a shorter distance with more payload. Again, not both. In the former case, a crew compartment would necessarily be introduced for 10 hours+, plus a bigger galley. We see here the upper limits of this configuration. When all is said and done, gains are modest. The shorter range, in absence of these cabin changes looks more viable. The development costs for such iterations are nowhere close to those of a new type. Boeing on the other hand, even in their present impecunious condition, has no recourse other than tackle an entirely new plane. 737-9 & 10 are embarrassingly outsold by Airbus. There remains the question whether Airbus will also introduce a new composite wing for A320. I think not. They have a clear and comfortable upper hand in single aisles for at least 5 years. After that, we can discuss the matter further.
If Airbus makes an A322 Boeing would probably make a 737MAX-11 if they keep their leadership. An A322 or 737MAX-11 would look cool though
I don't think they'd have a crew rest compartment. They'd curtain off the rearmost lieflats and on shorter routes use those for passengers.
Can we just appreciate how much time and effort this men put in his videos for us.
True
I think Airbus will be making another set of models after the A3~ series. A5~ series.
To replace the A321neo, Airbus should improve to make a longer wing and larger engines to make it more similar to the 757's high thrust to weight ratio.
If Airbus make A322, :
+New wing with carbon fibre
+Landing gear with double bogey
+New powerful engine
+Extra fuel tank
+Cargo compartment ULD with AKH containers and PKC pallet
+Passenger more than 230 people
+Range flight more than 10,000km, 15-20% more range than A321XLR
+ Can be converted to freighter or combi (passenger + freighter)
✈️✈️✈️
That would be the perfect 757 successor 🤩
@@spongebubatz maybe.... If wing not to width , it can be park at narrow-body apron bay. For loading and unloading is more easy using airport heavy equipment like lower-deck loading equipment.
If this plane existed, it would fill the gap that the 757 has left on the Airline market, its the perfect plane to replacing the 757, and could travel, regional, and intercontinental, as this is the perfect plane for airlines looking for good range and 230-270 passengers.
Landing gear too short for anything longer than 321, it would also need a new wing for the higher mtow. A360 would be the perfect name cuz it’ll be essentially a 21st century A300B1.
"Unbeatable Passenger Capacity" XDDDDD
Bleh
Let’s not forget that airbus is having trouble building as many A320s as they are getting orders, perhaps as their backlog decreases they could think about designing an A321XLR stretch.
there wont be. simple reason... new a320 series coming... 30%+ more efficient goal. might be called a323 (3rd gen) of the series.
The A320 successor?
We will support your channel
thank you sir!
🙏🙏
Support from mumbai
Airbus knows that the customers who want the A322 would just get the A321neo. Very few A322 customers would switch to the 737MAX-10 or 787-8. For budget airlines the A322 could work as cargo isn’t needed and an A322 just holds more people.
@Sebastian Floyd who asked?
@Sebastian Floyd I know. Did you watch the video
@sebastianfloyd9705 que
After learning of Boenig's incompetency, Airbus rested easy and didn't bother.
Loved the ad warning and nice video and great explanation
If the Boeing 757 were still in production, a A322 might compete well against the 757-300.
The plane is basically just an airbus 757
Airbus are developing a new wing for the A320 series currently. So rumors are that they will start with the A322. The new wing would also allow to react quickly to any Boeing attempt to replace the 737. so far the A320 has a market share of 60% and the A220 is also used as a 737 replacement. Airbus has no interest to finish Boeing as it would just attract new competitors.
That plane do be lookin kinda thicccc
A330+a321
Great video ! At 2:57, there is a very nice graph. Is it possible to have it ?
Audio was fine. Both Boeing & Airbus are both heavily vested in new alternative engines coming up the line. That could be a deciding factor in bringing this range of aircraft to production.
Nah. A300neo or A310neo would be a better concept. A 220-260 passenger capacity with up to 5500nmi range able to land in small tight regional airports like LGA or IAD. With an easy cargo conversion and smaller wingspan compared to the a330neo
"A321++"
*Intel has entered the chat*
I noticed something missing 🤔 ... quite a few airlines prefer to load passengers from the second row of doors (door 2 left). While this is usually reserved for wide body aircraft, it was uniquely incorporated on the 757 family; which Boeing's next narrow body will almost definitely offer as well.
If (when) the real A322 is made (because let's face it; Airbus will prefer the cheaper response to NMA/797, which would be modifying A321 instead of creating a new product)... when they do this, they will almost definitely offer it with a second set of doors forward of the wing, just like the 757 and other wide bodies as well.
The reason for this is 3 fold.
First, airlines hold extreme importance on creating the most exclusive/competitive experience for their First class passengers. One of the first things to ruin this experience is to board first class passengers, and then make them sit there, while 150 coach passengers are made to tediously walk through First class; exposing everyone to the uncomfortable reality of the inequities of different classes of travel...
Not only do First class passengers dislike being on display in general, they find that many passersby tend to give extra long, hard (and rarely complimentary or approving) looks and stares. Multiply this awkwardness by 150 or so coach passengers and you can see a part of the travel experience that everyone can do without -- simply by boarding from door 2, where First class passengers go left and get comfy while business and coach turn right and continue boarding.
Second reason: as mentioned previously, one of the big drawbacks to the 757-300s was that all passengers had to board from one door, which extended turn around times by anywhere from 10 to 30 minutes, gate-to-gate.
The fact is that even in all economy configuration, with availability of a second row boarding door, passengers can board at door 2; and since it's closer to the center of the cabin, boarding can expedited by roughly 20-35% by allowing either simultaneous boarding of doors 1 and 2, or allowing passengers to load rear first, then front, then middle - or any other mix; GC and weight/balance permitting.
Last but not least, a critical issue that is immediately helped by this door is emergency evacuation. Without such a door, getting additional passengers out in the 90 seconds or less becomes greatly hampered.
Anyway, you may want to updated the model for your next video. Because A322 will happen - probably right as Boeing gains momentum on 797. And when it does, A322s First class passengers will once again enjoy "turning left" on narrow body aircraft.
The explanation... purr-fect
I need the airbus A325 neo with extra fuel tank
There are plenty of lightly used A 380s to get for a huge discount at the moment. You would probably get a third for free if you take 2 ;-)
I hope some airlines to orders new A322neo. Whatever if they want. DL, B6, AA, UA, NK, F9 or HA will eventually orders A322neo. More capabilities, more fuel-efficient, and more range, too. If they have 5,000 miles.
The plane airbus won’t build: a 26 decker spacecraft capable of traveling to our closest star using engines the size of 26 football fields
Yay, a Philippine Airlines Livery on a found & explained video!
Perhaps AIRBUS should think of replacing IS A330s with an A333 plane.
What is important these days is to come up with not only efficient engines but ones that can reach a speed of about 750 to 800 miles per hour.
A feat that will reduce a non-stop 11-12 hour long haul flight to just under 8-9 hours.
No amount of boring in-flight entertainment or sterile talk of 'luxury, or caviar and champagne can beat that!
This will save time and money for passengers, for whom these planes, are built in the first place.
No passengers, no airlines...no aircraft!
Pratt and Whitney or GE Aviation were rumoured to have designed an aircraft engine that's capable of reaching a speed of just around 800 MPH.
The suggestion was that airlines did not go for it as it was a huge kerosene gazumper.
That it is suitable on an outbound segment of long haul flights but is an absolute no-no for the inbound segment, due to overcrowded airspace, at US and European airports.
Dubai too is a very busy airport.
A 750 to 800 mph plane would make no sense, too costly to build and to run ! Remember the failed projet of the Sonic cruiser, and before tha the failure of the Convair 880/990 which was faster than the Boeing 707...
The A380 was developped because of overcrowded airspace, yet they are being left over.
Apparently, Airbus is not returning the narrator's phone calls.
At gross weights above the 321, the current wing, already undersized for the 321, becomes a serious limiting factor. More power always helps as weight climbs, but laws of aerodynamics will require takeoff and approach speeds to go up to compensate. As this occurs, the already undersized wheel and brake package becomes the limiting factor. There is a good reason the 757 had 4 wheels per truck, and that gave it superior short field/high density altitude performance. There is also the issue of tail strikes, which are not uncommon on the 321. Adding 13’ of length makes this a big deal. In the end, we reach the conclusion you did address, which is avoiding a recertification of the aircraft. If they were to commit to a 322 without the new wings and landing gear, they would be repeating Boeing’s mistake with the 737: pushing an old design past its intended use. The 320 family is much more flexible in this regard than the 737, but it does have limits. The 318 was a failure as it was too much aircraft for its capacity and hence too heavy. This proposed 322 could fail on the other end of the spectrum.
It better have tailstrike protection
Let's say Engines aren't ready jet.
Let's say wings aren't ready jet.
Let's say the A321neo is already pretty long so they would have to extend the forward section to avoid tail strikes.
Boeing should have shrunk the 757, or do 757-style revamping of the 737 with raising the wheels, replacing the wings, replacing the nose and cockpit, and everything else
putting new wings on the 737 and a longer landing gear would have essentially meant a complete new aircraft, because they would have to modify everything.
However they needed a fast answer to the Neo, and a new aircraft would have taken almost a decade until EIS.
3:00 I do declare, where is the fantabulous 747SP on this chart!? Enquiring minds need to know!
This chart only shows aircraft built after a specific year, the SP isn’t the only 747 variant missing
Or how about a clean sheet next gen single aisle ultra long haul. Maybe even with a bit wider fuselage for extra comfort. Either that or a A220 XLR
The main goal of the A322 isn’t range, capacity is. The A220 would fail even more and at some point the aircraft is getting too small and isn’t economically as well environmentally justifiable anymore
I don't think a second streched version of the A320 is needed - it is not for nothing that there wasn't a A318 Neo. It will properly go over similar on the other end of the spectrum. Here is what I would do: A220-500 to fill the role of the A318/19, making the classical A320 the shorest member of its familiy with focus on the A321 with normal and extended range. A A325 from the ground up.
How are you making all those incredible 3D animation ?! Is it Blender/ 3dsmax or msfs2020 or another software that I don't have knowledge of ? (my sentence is not grammaticaly correct but whatever ^^)
Blender!
Excellent video, as usual
The 737 has not reached the limits of its design. Boeing can quickly build the 737 X ... with composite "gull" wing, allowing the same large new turbo fan engines. This will then be the final enhanced version of the 737.
Even Boeing is not that insane to put newly developed carbon fiber wings on a 1960s airframe, if Airbus could simply develop a bigger variant of the A 220/C series with a much more modern fuselage construction which could compete with the smaller versions of the 737
@@simonm1447 The 737 NG & Max are nothing like the 737 of the 60's. Boeing messed up back in the late early 80's when they were developing the 757 & 767 ... together for the same market.
Only the 767 should have been developed for the medium plane market. The 757 should have been developed to replace the 737 with a slightly larger fuselage, tall landing gear and high bypass turbo fans.
Boeing then messed up again, in the late 80's when Boeing introduced the A320 which was clearly a superior plane to the 737 ... and was essentially a smaller 757 with a slightly larger fuselage. Boeing should have immediately started developing the NG and continuously improve, upgrade the 757 for when the A320 will eventually beat the 737 and enter the medium market the the 757 was built for. Again, the A320 was clearly without any doubt a superior plane to the 737 and ... future proof. Boeing ignored this fact in the late 80's and then 10 years later had to make the 737 NG as more an more airlines switched to Airbus.
Boeing has made many blunders over the last 40 years which enabled Airbus to take over as the leading plane maker. Boeing has taken huge losses due to the Max crashes, and is now not willing to spend $bn on the new plane. And they don't have to.
A composite gull wing on a 737 Max air frame as well weight reduction using lighter materials will make the 737 X competitive with the A321 XLR.
Yes. It would ideal to have started with with a completely new small, medium & large planes which are future proof back in the 80's ... and to continuously improve and enhance them to get the most from the designs ... but apart from the Max crashes, Boeing had been making money from the old planes.
We are now starting to reach the limits of the current airliner designs, so it is pointless for Boeing to invest 10s of billions on a better version of a the A320. The Next Gen airliners will be radically different and they will only be introduced when Airbus & Boeing are no longer making money from their "future proof" planes.
Again. The A320 was clearly a "radical" design, superior in every way to the 737, and ... future proof. The 757, 767 & 777 were all great designs and future proof ... but Boeing did NOT continuously improve and enhance these designs to get the most from them.
The 787 is essentially a 767X. Boeing wasted $30 bn making the 787 when they should have simply made the 767 Classic, NG, Max, X over the last 36 years. Likewise the 737, 757, & 777 should have all been continuously improved & enhanced to get the most from the designs. And again, the 757 should have been designed to replace the 737 ... and then Boeing would have had a small, medium, and large FUTURE proof twin jet, with tall landing gear and high bypass turbo fan engines.
So no. Boeing should not invest any any new design which is based on the current generation of airliners. Get the most for the existing designs while you are still making profits, and only more to the Next Gen if you have to.
Great analysis melding technology, market analysis, competitor behaviour and more.
Next task. How will airlines
manage their multi country (and domestic) and varying market variabilites as we eventually come out of Covid? What aircraft will airlines pull out of storage first - then change as the market returns, and poss change to class configurations. Lots to get your teeth into there!
PS - just subscribed here. 😊
Since I wrote my comments on Airbus and its possible building of a New A.320 Stretch called the A,322, I did wonder at the state the industry finds itself in today after Corvid 19? Can the Airline Industry afford New Aircraft after taking such a Hit with its profits? There could be lots of very New Second Hand Aircraft around at Rock Bottom Prices or available a Low Leasing Rates? so it could be a difficult time for both Boeing and Airbus in the next few Years although currently, both Plane Makers have very full order books.
now it says Airbus might build it
Airbus is already designing the replacement to the A320 series, another reason why they won't release such a concept. By the time Boeing release the 797, Airbus will already have a brand new clean sheet design that will beat both the 737 and 797.
Here's the thing, the original long-haul jet aircraft, the Boeing 707, Douglas DC8, Vickers VC10 were narrowbody aeroplanes, so surely some of the solutions to the problems with flight attendants were solved on those aeroplanes, so why not use those solutions on the new Airbus A321LR, XLR and the A322?
These already found solutions will be used on the A321 and would be used on the A322, the 757 is another more modern example for the same problem
Where you find models of airplanes?
Very interesting , I am a avid Airbus and Aviation Fan , IO to have thought about your A.322 Aircraft and wondered if Airbus has a Design in their pocket for the near future should Market need arise.
@Sebastian Floyd I only named the stretched A.321 as A.322 as a possible name , has Airbus got a design on the drawing Boards ? I bet they have but they will not build it until they feel the Market is ready. and from what we are seeing with the A.321 LR & now the A.321 XLR there is no need currently.
they will probably build it, they just want to finish with a350f and a321xlr first.
Small correction!😅 It's not proffered Aejjean. It's Aegean, g same sound as in Agile😁 Excellent video though!!!
Is the narrator the same guy on Coreteks channel
Make a video about Lh2222 to toluse aslo why this plane A322???
I think it will happen but it isn’t a priority at this moment as the Neo series is already dominating the aviation market 👌
So possibly 2030s we can see this happening
Great video! However here in Europe we say A3-twenty.... A3-twenty one ...A2-twenty...😉
322?
321++
how 'bout the 320MAX? there's name for 'ya.
We don't call A320 a-three-two-zero. Why do you call A322 a-three-two-two?
Yeah, it would be confused with a A222
And Boeing thinks about a 797 but isn't sure if it's something they can handle.
@sebastianfloyd9705 Santa is fake, the 797 is not yet real.
Nice video
Would likely be a successful jet if the a321 XLR wouldn't have been announced
Bro how do your animation
Hi Sir Airbus is a leader in Passenger Aviation and Boeing have a lot of problems on their plate if any new aircraft has to come to market is has to come from Airbus Because having lost their way they just cant Build a safe aircraft any more if it is not on the thing it is another so good luck to them and a 797 it won't get the praise like an A322 it would bo still know as a flying reject waiting to fail or crash or something so Airbus leads the way because of safety
Reason it's not on the table is the A220, and it's future stretches.
I'm wondering if Covid might change Airbus' mind on this? The collapse in traffic is killing widebodies like the... uh... plague. Even after Covid passes, it seems that while tourism will bounce to pre-pandemic levels in a few seasons, business travel is unlikely to come back in the same way, now companies have got a taste of how much they can save with videoconferencing and homeworking. In the Americas in particular, I suspect that airlines will be taking a long term look at their fleets, and continuing the cull of widebodies, will clinging on to the 757s and desperately seeking replacements as they near end of life. if that replacement is an affordable member of existing aircraft family with no/.minimal crossover training required for flight and ground crew, double bonus.
Interesting video Nick, maybe you should go for a job at Airbus or Boeing and give them a kick up the arse to stop flogging the dead horses that are the 737 and A320 series.....
The Airbus A322 new love US and Boeing 797 is year new Aircraft
The A322 could have been the 2nd 797 killer
its soo good
they should have built it
it woulda changed airbuses single aisle aircraft history
Wizz air: WHERE IS MY PLANE
There is an a322 it’s the 757!
Very cool video!
797? this time for real?
When they make A322 they will killing A350 or A321 or must of them
An A322 wouldn’t even kill an A330
ur right the B737 MAX8 & B737 MAX9 has reached its MAX!!! there can no more upgrades on the B737 & Boeing will have to come up with a completely new narrow body jet altogether!!! for better or worse the B737 is done!!!
But isn’t it already a problem for Airbus that they have too big of a portfolio?
airbus is on a good state atm, doubt they need to make the a322, they need a totally new plane all together to beat boeing on their next upcoming b797
one note, i hardly found any differences with the voice, but its amazing how you mentioned it, it shows that you care for your viewers which is really nice :)
I think that Airbus should look into a wide-body NMA plane with 7 seats across like the 767. An Airbus NMA could replace the 767-300 and A330-200 while competing with the 787-8 and filling the gap.
@@TysonIke exactly my point
@@TysonIke NO need. Airbus just need to further shrink the A330-800. This shrink will make it similar in size to the A300, the grandfather of NMA. The problem with the A330neo is that it inherited a super heavy wings from the A340. Redo the midsection and downsize the wings from a class 5 to a class 4 using lightweight composite and you will have an upper end of the NMA that is competitive against the B797 but with less than half its investment. Cheaper aircraft, earlier availability and comparable efficiency, i think it will give the B797 a run for its money. EIS after 2025 and they'd be able to use either the RR Ultrafan or PW 2nd gen GTF which could be an advantage against the CFM or GE engines.
Ching Wei Xion so you basically think that Airbus should make an A310NEO. Well an A310NEO could work but I think that it would be smarter to start an all new plane type instead. The A310 doesn’t have an optional airframe as it is very wide which made it inefficient
@@TysonIke A310 is 2.5 sizes down. I'm referring to A300 not A310. The A300 is the true direct competitor to the B767-300ER while the A310 competitor is the B767-200.
It would not be another aircraft family but rather a further shortening and downsizing of an A330neo leveraging on many other A330neo commonality.
I do agree that A310 is way too short to be efficient. Hence i think the starting point should be about the length of an A300. Its cargo advantage against a light twin like the B797 could provide it a stable base of operators
Boeing does not have the A322 in it's back pocket (8:35). I think you got Boeing and Airbus mixed up in that sentence.
Thanks
@@FoundAndExplained Tu es payé par Boeing? juste un influenceur ou alors tu es content du rachat de Bombardier par la France
I think we will sooner see an A349 - A350 shortened, or an A329 - A330 shortened.