Not that much since Boeing isn’t giving a complete redesign or making a completely new aircraft such as the 787. It’s somewhat innovative but Boeing doesn’t want to go completely all in since they plan on replacing the 777 with the Yellowstone project later on.
I personally don’t see how the Max 10 doesn’t cut it. It has about the same amount of seats as a 757, It’s very efficient, and it can fly medium distances. How can a 797 offer anything better?
The Max 10 goes about 3200 miles tops on range, while the 757 allows for another 1200 miles. That’s the reason why airlines such as Icelandair and many pond hoppers rely on it so much. Sure, the max 10 could probably do New York to London, but the 757, while the same size, is able to do trips like Reykjavik to Denver, something the Max 10 surely wouldn’t be able to accomplish. Regardless of being the lowest price per seat, a new narrowbody could only improve that.
I don’t see why Boeing could’ve tried to revive the 787-3, it would have probably had similar range and pretty good fuel efficiency. If only Boeing launched it later…
@Chatta290 Well that might be true but the CS family is passenger based experience and the performance of this aircraft exceeds that of the 737MAX or the A320NEO
We have had so many airbus vs Boeing wars, please, don’t drag bombardier into this.
Not to mention the 757 has incredible short field performance, the 737-9 and the Max 9&10 eat up a runway in no time.
I think it is pretty clear. You just have to look at the current market. A380 and 748 are absolute failures. 787 and A350 absoulute success. NEO and MAX are also successes. 777X is apparently going to be a success. A330NEO looks like is going to go quite well.
It is not unpredictable. Just keep making fuel efficient, medium sized long haul aircraft, and you’ll make money.
Id say the 787 is a failure for the reason that it does not look like Boeing will recuperate the investment capital put into thw development of the 787 (only after 1,100 are sold is Boeing expected to make a profit on the program). That to me regardless of order amounts are a failure.
My criteria for sucfess goes like this
Failure- unable to break even on the aircraft
Minor success- break even or a minor amount of total capital gained
Major succes- Large amount of captial gained
By following that criteria the failures are 787, 748’ A380
Minor successes- A330neo (as of current order standings), 777X (as of current order standings)
Major successes- A350, A330ceo, A320ceo, A320neo, 777, 737 NG, 737 Maxes,
Yeah but the profit is marginal. Not making a profit after over 1000 aircraft sold is a huge failure in business. Look at the A350 it will be making more of a profit than the 787 and it has sold far fewer aircraft as a whole. Look at the development cost of the A350 to the B787 11bn vs 32bn They had nearly 3 times the development cost as the A350 while selling only 300 more aircraft. That is a failure. It is only thanks to the -10 that Boeing will even make a profit on the aircraft, pending any delays (doubtful now)
Okay, I understand. But what I think is that your definitions of failures and successes are quite subjective. Some people might measure success by how much profit Airlines make with the plane. Some might measure it with the amour of aircraft built. Some a combination of all.
Fair enough, Im just looking at how Boeing would most likely look at the overall success of the aircraft. While the aircraft itself was successful the program would not be.
Exactly. If we analyse it from Boeing’s perspective, it is not a success. But what in my opinion makes the 787 a success is that it sets a new standard. The 787 was the first of many aircraft that are made for long-haul, thin routes with unmatched fuel efficiency (until better aircraft came out) and passenger comfort (That last bit maybe not). As I said, the 787 and other 787-like aircraft are probably going to dominate the market, regardless of what Boeing thinks is the success. After all, it’s Airlines that but planes and use them.
I would also take into consideration that some of the new technologies developed in the 787 are not exclusively used in the 787. Certain process and component improvements can be passed on to other aircraft.
Boeing has put in billions of dollars into R&D for the 787, but the technologies and intellectual property developed will bring in cash for years to come at little to no additional impact to cash flow. Aerospace R&D dollars are difficult to account for because the benefits of the R&D dollars can often span multiple, if not all products.
The 787 is a very ambitious product; it is too early to call the program a failure because the effects of the newly developed intellectual property have not been fully realized yet. The 737MAX, 777X, and to a lesser extent, the 777-300ER are all borrowing technologies developed for the 787, but they do not contribute to the 787 program’s bottom line.
Well Boeing outsourced a lot. Pretty much half a Boeing plane and the rest is from various companies. Even the design wasn’t done by Boeing, it was co designed with Mitsubishi.
The 777X is the plane which will require a lot of R&D. Because they want to actually make things in house unlike the B787.
Keep in mind that savings can still be had with third-party contractors. Boeing is in charge of integrating the components and therefore holds the majority of the intellectual property rights developed for the 787. The intellectual property and R&D dollars are not in the third-party parts; it’s in the airframe itself, which Boeing makes. Third-party components are relatively “off-the-shelf” compared to the specialized individual parts that make up the aircraft. Just because Boeing has outsourced manufacturing for components (just like every other manufacturer), it doesn’t mean they do not hold the intellectual property rights for the parts that matter and are the most valuable. Boeing isn’t a fool; they know what they need to keep in house, what to outsource, what to patent, and what to keep a trade secret.
The 777X will require some development, but nowhere close to the 787. Most of the 777X takes advantage of mature technologies debuted on the 787 though the folding wingtips will need a little work and money.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.