Tweet
Interesting article from Seattle Times about the shape of things to come:
including this graphic:
including this graphic:
-
-
That would be a good plan. Sometimes the papers can be trusted. -
more like 3 families of aircraft...
common replacement for the 717 and 737 seems logical as they overlap to a large extend, but it will be a complete family rather than a single aircraft (can't make one aircraft that can be used economically with anywhere from 100 to 200 pax flying from 0.5 to 3.5 hours).
Same with the 757 and 767, which are really one family already (or sorta).
777 and 747 might also be replaced by a single family, but again you're talking about aircraft with room for between 250 and 500 passengers and ranges from 6-16 hours cruise. No way a single type is going to provide that economically.
So I'd expect a 3 aircraft family to replace both the 737 and 717 (call it the 7A7 for argument's sake) with seating for 100, 140 and 180 pax in standard 2 class cabins.
Similar a single aircraft in 3 variants for the 7E7, seating 200 and 250 pax with the 3rd a longrange version seating 250.
Then a 5 variant family on the high end for 300, 350, 450 and an ER version of the smallest and largest.
Add cargo versions of the 2 upper familes and you're about where Boeing is today (though with less model numbers).Comment
-
It would be nice to see an aircraft family above the 747 on the diagram.Comment
-
that would be nice....maybe the 747-777 combination could be called the 777-400Comment
-
It would make alot of sense and keep costs down. The airlines are already doing it by keeping their fleets to a common type. It only makes sense to build what the airlines want.Comment
-
Hold on, it said:
""We're talking about just another airplane, not about changing the market," said Ennis. "The hazard of that approach is that somebody may change the rules. I don't think it's a tube-and-wing in 2020." "
2020 is when im gonna be able to fly (around 30 which is when i heard they hire pilots)
umm, is that bad?
Comment
Comment