General Thread for Airliner News

[11bee]

I've changed the title of this thread. Thought it might be a good idea to have a general Airliner thread as a repository for the latest news on this subject. Not sure if it will catch on since there doesn't seem to be much interest in this subject vrs military aircraft.

Anyway, just stumbled upon a nice article that goes into detail on the rapidly fading away 747. I especially love those pictures of the cabin interior from the late 60's. Nice spacious 2-4-3 economy seating configuration (now a tighter 3-4-3 arraignment with much closer seat density) and the lounge up front. Sad to see the 747 going away but at least it is due primarily to the success of another Boeing product (777). I'll miss seeing the 747 "Queen of the Skies". I still occasionally see British Airway and Lufthansa jumbos on approach to Boston - Logan. What an elegant aircraft. Nothing else comes close IMO.

http://qz.com/217727/boeing-747-airplane-is-going-extinct/

Edited June 14, 2014 by 11bee

[TaiidanTomcat]

I've changed the title of this thread. Thought it might be a good idea to have a general Airliner thread as a repository for the latest news on this subject. Not sure if it will catch on since there doesn't seem to be much interest in this subject vrs military aircraft.

Anyway, just stumbled upon a nice article that goes into detail on the rapidly fading away 747. I especially love those pictures of the cabin interior from the late 60's. Nice spacious 2-4-3 economy seating configuration (now a tighter 3-4-3 arraignment with much closer seat density) and the lounge up front. Sad to see the 747 going away but at least it is due primarily to the success of another Boeing product (777). I'll miss seeing the 747 "Queen of the Skies". I still occasionally see British Airway and Lufthansa jumbos on approach to Boston - Logan. What an elegant aircraft. Nothing else comes close IMO.

http://qz.com/217727/boeing-747-airplane-is-going-extinct/

Interesting post!

[11bee]

Jet Blue just started their premium "mint" JFK to LAX service using specially equipped A321's. I haven't had the need to fly to LAX in quite a while (thank god) but for $599, this flight sounds like a huge bargain.

Nice review posted here.

https://www.yahoo.com/travel/flight-review-jetblues-mint-service-89262336412.html

Good to see someone giving the legacy airlines competition. Sounds like American has already dropped their prices as a result.

[11bee]

Interesting website dedicated to the "red-headed stepchild" of the 747 program.

http://www.747sp.com/

BA's first attempt at developing a 787.

[DutyCat]

Cathay's current scheme (which is now 20 years old) is still one of the classiest in the sky IMHO. It looks good on almost anything they put it on.

It sure is. I also like the Continental (ahem United) scheme, although seeing United on it just looks weird and does not have the same elegance as the word Continental.

We go through these phases of airline livery, and most companies go garish, bright and abstract. Others go understated and classy, like that CP scheme.

[11bee]

News blurb that suggests that Boeing is indeed looking to develop a successor to the 757. I doubt that Air Astana (Kazakhstan) has the buying power to push BA towards a final decision but other airlines are also looking for something between the largest 737Max version and the 787-8. Assuming this happens, the final design should be interesting.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-26/boeing-advancing-on-successor-to-757-jet-air-astana-says.html

Also, not a huge surprise, looks like Airbus is moving forward with an upgraded A330. The question I have is whether it will do more damage to A350 sales rather than hurting Boeing.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-rt-us-airbus-a330-20140626,0,6721373.story

[11bee]

Norwegian looks to be placing a larger order for more 787's. Very good thing in that these guys are finally adding a bit of competition to the US - Europe routes. The additional aircraft will hopefully put even more pressure on the legacy airlines to drop transatlantic pricing.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/norwegian-air-ceo-seeks-more-boeing-787-9s-1404404649

Monarch has selected the 737Max over the A320Neo. Especially nice win for Boeing since Monarch is currently an all-Airbus operator. BA has done a nice job lately of getting Airbus operators to "flip".

http://online.wsj.com/articles/monarch-airlines-to-order-30-boeing-737-max-jets-1404247974

Interesting article explaining how Boeing's 777 is hurting the market for dedicated cargo aircraft due to the large amount of cargo that can be uploaded into the passenger jets. One of the victims of the 777 is Boeing's own 747-8F.

http://www.timesofoman.com/News/35854/Article-Big-belly-Boeing-777-blunts-demand-for-cargo-only-jets

[11bee]

Wonder if Boeing has a "factory damage outlet" where they can sell discounted aircraft with some minor dings?

Looks pretty bad for those 737's....

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Train-to-Renton-derails-in-western-Montana-3-cars-in-river-265851031.html

[dkobayashi]

Haha! No way though. In all of the pictures i have seen they pretty much all have some skin buckling. Just the fuse though, so i would guess they are worth their weight in scrap metal.

[Helidriver]

With regards to the 747-8 series, I read something pretty interesting in Aviation Week a year or so ago. This was just a paragraph in an article about airliners and airlines in general, so nothing dedicated to the subject.

However, what the author said was that Boeing had known all the time that the 747 program is more or less doomed, the -8 included, mostly due their own success with the 777 series. Seems like they went ahead with the development of the -8 mainly to force Airbus to lower the prices on the A380 to an unsustainable level, and hoping to break even in the process. Grabbing market share or prolonging the 747 line was never a goal.

If true, it shows a little of how cut throat the airframer business really is.

What do you guys think?

Ken

[11bee]

With regards to the 747-8 series, I read something pretty interesting in Aviation Week a year or so ago. This was just a paragraph in an article about airliners and airlines in general, so nothing dedicated to the subject.

However, what the author said was that Boeing had known all the time that the 747 program is more or less doomed, the -8 included, mostly due their own success with the 777 series. Seems like they went ahead with the development of the -8 mainly to force Airbus to lower the prices on the A380 to an unsustainable level, and hoping to break even in the process. Grabbing market share or prolonging the 747 line was never a goal.

If true, it shows a little of how cut throat the airframer business really is.

What do you guys think?

Ken

I read the same thing somewhere. At the time, Boeing thought that the 747-8 was going to be a low cost upgrade that they could use to seriously impact A380 profit margin. I think they may have succeeded but the costs for the -8 ended up being much higher than anticipated. Plus the -8 isn't exactly setting the market on fire. My guess is we'll see a few more sales (mostly for the freighter) a couple to be the new Air Force One and that will finally put an end to the 747 program.

[TaiidanTomcat]

I read the same thing somewhere. At the time, Boeing thought that the 747-8 was going to be a low cost upgrade that they could use to seriously impact A380 profit margin. I think they may have succeeded but the costs for the -8 ended up being much higher than anticipated. Plus the -8 isn't exactly setting the market on fire. My guess is we'll see a few more sales (mostly for the freighter) a couple to be the new Air Force One and that will finally put an end to the 747 program.

I talked to a Boeing guy who said he felt 747 would be going strong as the demand was still high. *Shrug* anecdotal but interesting nonetheless.

[vvac201]

http://www.katu.com/news/local/Train-derails-in-western-Montana-3-cars-in-river-265898791.html?mobile=y

Whoops!

[11bee]

Airbus announced a couple of orders for the A320 and upgraded A320Neo, 150 aircraft in all.

Anyone remember when an order for 20 jets was considered big news? It will be interesting to see if all of these mega-orders that Airbus and Boeing have booked actually happen.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-books-undisclosed-orders-for-150-a320s-401085/

Also, Norwegian has begun transatlantic flights, good news (unless you are employed by Delta, US Air, American, etc). Hope these guys end up with a good chunk of the market.

Now if only they can start flying those 787's from Boston.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/08/norwegian-flights-take-off_n_5564767.html

Edited July 8, 2014 by 11bee

[11bee]

Boeing has announced a high capacity version of it's upcoming 737-8. By tightening up the seat pitch and adding another emergency exit, they have been able to squeeze in another 11 seats, for a total of 200. Seating pitch has been reduced from the 31-32 inches now considered standard down to 29 inches. Ryanair has been pushing Boeing hard to offer this option and this announcement should pretty much guarantee a big order from that airline. This change brings the seating capacity of the -8 well ahead of it's Airbus competitor. A good thing for Boeing and the airlines bottom line, maybe not such a good thing for the poor passengers. Thankfully this is only an optional configuration. I'm hoping it will never make it to US airlines....

http://online.wsj.com/articles/boeing-to-offer-737-with-more-seating-1405268315

Also, as expected, Airbus announced they are moving ahead with the re-engined A330Neo. Also, as expected, they racked up a good number of orders for this aircraft at Farnborough. The Neo will compete with the 787 on shorter routes. It will be interesting to see how well it fares.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/14/business/airbus/

[11bee]

Interesting article about Boeing's "secret" hybrid laminar-flow control system used on the new 787-9.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-aero-secrets-of-boeings-new-dreamliner-401784/

[Jennings]

The days of all four-engined airliners are numbered except for the A380, which I doubt will ever break even for Airbus. The market for 95% of routes can be filled by twin-engined airplanes, which are much, much more economical to operate than a four-engined type. The other 5% will be filled by the A380 and to a minor extent the 747-8. I doubt we'll see more than a tiny handful of 747-8 passenger airplanes built, and my guess is the last two off the line will be the VC-25B's for the USAF presidential transport mission.

The linked article on the increased capacity 737-800 requires subscribing to read (I hate that), but I'm betting this is being driven by the likes of Ryan Air and not US carriers. I have NO desire to fly on a 737-800 with 199 other people. Ever. :)

[11bee]

The linked article on the increased capacity 737-800 requires subscribing to read (I hate that), but I'm betting this is being driven by the likes of Ryan Air and not US carriers. I have NO desire to fly on a 737-800 with 199 other people. Ever. :)/>/>

Sorry about that, I thought it was full-access.

You are correct, Ryan Air was the main force behind this but I have a feeling that once it's available, other airlines are going to be purchasing it. 11 extra seats, with no increase in operating costs = major increase in profitability.

Interesting fact, they could actually get another seat squeezed in but at 200 pax, the regs require another flight attendant, which would increase costs. So 199 will be the final seat count.

If these planes show up in the US, I'll be avoiding them like I do the Canadair and EM-145 regional jets.

Edited July 26, 2014 by 11bee

[Don]

Canadair makes a fine product for a niche market. They can't and won't compete with the duopoly of Airbus and Boeing. Their completely new CS100 to CS300 line of regional jet/short to medium haul aircraft are fantastic and taking composite/materials design (a la 787), low operating cost, and IFE for this class of jet to new heights. Rather then continually shoehorning updates into an old design, Bombardier has designed a completely new aircraft:

http://airchive.com/blog/2013/03/08/the-bombardier-cseries-rolls-out-but-is-it-a-game-changer/

http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/bombardier2/

Beautiful looking aircraft and I would have no problems flying in them myself.

[11bee]

Canadair makes a fine product for a niche market. They can't and won't compete with the duopoly of Airbus and Boeing. Their completely new CS100 to CS300 line of regional jet/short to medium haul aircraft are fantastic and taking composite/materials design (a la 787), low operating cost, and IFE for this class of jet to new heights. Rather then continually shoehorning updates into an old design, Bombardier has designed a completely new aircraft:

http://airchive.com/blog/2013/03/08/the-bombardier-cseries-rolls-out-but-is-it-a-game-changer/

http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/bombardier2/

Beautiful looking aircraft and I would have no problems flying in them myself.

I agree 100%. The new aircraft looks to be a winner (assuming they get the engine problem fixed and find a few more customers before they run out of money). I was referring to the earlier generation of Canadair jets (CR200-900) which are by far the most uncomfortable aircraft I have every ridden on (short of a C-130 / C-141). Thin seats, noisy, no legroom and the tiny window is down by your elbow. Claustrophobic isn't the word to describe those POS's. On the other hand, I've flown a few times on the Bombardier Dash 8 and absolutely love them. Bigger windows, comfortable seats and you are flying at a lower altitude so the view is much better. Plus, something about flying on a propeller plane is just cool (at least to me).

My #1 pic for regional jets is still the EMB-190 series. Great ride, I go out of my way to try to book myself on those planes.

[Don]

Like everything in life it comes down to the individual. I personally don't mind the CRJ's, old ones and the new ones and have flown on far worse. The old ones certainly are not the best small/medium range aircraft...but I personally wouldn't rather harshly call them a POS. But again, that's me. Each to their own. I have a soft spot for anything Canadair as my cousin is a big wig up there and has gotten me many behind the scenes tours and rides. They'll get the new CS series out there on fleets. It's just such a sweet aircraft, especially when you see them up close ;) .

[Emvar]

Well I'm not a big fan of any of those regional Jets. For the PAX the emb-190 might be nice.... but when we have to load the baggage. ... it's not so nice. Very finicky bird. Hence our nick name the 180.

[Ben Brown]

11bee, I guess you never had the "pleasure" of riding in a Shorts 330/360 Swine Liner, Jetstream 31, Metroliner III, or Beech 99? :D/>/>/> Compared to them , the CRJ/ERJ and probably the C-130, are Rolls Royces! The unpressurized Piggys were actually pretty good rides, except in the summer when it was bumpy below 10,000 ft. The Metroliner was designed by a descendant of the designer of torture devices used by the Spanish Inquisition (no comfy chairs to be found!) and the engines were designed by a former grenade manufacturer. The RJs aren't the most comfortable, but they're definitely not POSs. The CRJ-700/900 took care of a lot of the -200's shortcomings, such as having the windows too low. The -700 seemed to have a lot more power than the anemic -200, too. I was impressed when I rode on one earlier this month. The ERJ-135/145 cabin is interesting.... None of the smaller RJs are good for more than a 1 hour flight. I read somewhere that the RJs' cost per seat, which isn't great to begin with, goes way up on longer flights. Disclaimer: I have a lot of time flying Dash-8s (one of my favorites) and CRJs, so I'm a bit biased.

Cheers!

Ben

Edited July 28, 2014 by Ben Brown

[Sebastijan]

Interesting how you hate CRJ's... After a transatlantic flight on a 767-200 from Orlando to Frankfurt, I felt like riding in a limo on my way from Frankfurt to Ljubljana with the CRJ200...

[11bee]

11bee, I guess you never had the "pleasure" of riding in a Shorts 330/360 Swine Liner, Jetstream 31, Metroliner III, or Beech 99? :D/>/>/>/> Compared to them , the CRJ/ERJ and probably the C-130, are Rolls Royces! The unpressurized Piggys were actually pretty good rides, except in the summer when it was bumpy below 10,000 ft. The Metroliner was designed by a descendant of the designer of torture devices used by the Spanish Inquisition (no comfy chairs to be found!) and the engines were designed by a former grenade manufacturer. The RJs aren't the most comfortable, but they're definitely not POSs. The CRJ-700/900 took care of a lot of the -200's shortcomings, such as having the windows too low. The -700 seemed to have a lot more power than the anemic -200, too. I was impressed when I rode on one earlier this month. The ERJ-135/145 cabin is interesting.... None of the smaller RJs are good for more than a 1 hour flight. I read somewhere that the RJs' cost per seat, which isn't great to begin with, goes way up on longer flights. Disclaimer: I have a lot of time flying Dash-8s (one of my favorites) and CRJs, so I'm a bit biased.

Cheers!

Ben

Let me rephrase - I don't "hate" CRJ's, I just hate riding in them. I'm sure they are very safe and well built aircraft. And I should also qualify that most of my anger is directed at the CRJ200. The later versions are a bit better. I had the misfortune to have to fly on the CRJ200 on multiple flights between Atlanta and Providence, RI. Flight time was ~ 3 hrs and that was way too long for me. No idea why Delta was using those jets on that route, all the other times, they had 737's.

From what I have read, the CRJ's and ER145's are being retired at a very rapid pace here in the US. Seems like the airlines are not happy with the economics of these smaller aircraft and are going with larger airframes.

Last note - as Sebastijan observed, any aircraft can be uncomfortable. All depends on how many seats the airlines want to squeeze into the aircraft.