Breaking news: Ethiopian Airlines flight has crashed on way to Nairobi

[elaw]

The CFM-56 used on previous versions of the B737 was a very reliable engine, but increasing profits demands lighter, more powerful solutions.

Fixed.

[Evan]

Fixed.

It's not just profits. It's range. It's environmental concerns and concerns about meeting the environmental requirements of the future. It's even about noise reduction.

High-bypass is the key to power and efficiency. Materials technology is how we can make it practical. But we have to be very careful about it. We can't let profits distract from that.

[TeeVee]

the real problem is trying to stuff 10lbs of new tech into a 5lb antique. no one wants to spend what it takes to develop a truly modern, efficient aircraft/engine combo when regulators allow them to get away with modifications (hello boeing). higher bp ratio = wider engine but no one wants to re-design the aircraft to fit it. engine makers dont wanna start from scratch, they wanna modify existing to the greatest extent possible.

don't buy the bs from airlines about environment, cuz they don't give a rat's ass. for them it's all about fuel savings. period. end of story.

[Evan]

no one wants to spend what it takes to develop a truly modern, efficient aircraft/engine combo...

Except...uh...Airbus, Bombardier, Embraer and Comac. And I expect Suhkoi can re-engine the Superjet fairly easily.

But everyone else... uh... has a new airframe coming out around 2030... so...

[TeeVee]

Except...uh...Airbus, Bombardier, Embraer and Comac. And I expect Suhkoi can re-engine the Superjet fairly easily.

But everyone else... uh... has a new airframe coming out around 2030... so...

ah so airbus is designing new from the ground-up, eh? the failed 380, yes. the 350? sure, only to compete with the 787. bombardier? sure. small regionals, same with embraer. i see you running to jump on a sukhoi.

but as always, your black and black thinking misses the point, which just so happens to be the same point you've been trying to make, but just can't bring yourself to say it.

you are more of a lawyer than most liars....i mean lawyers!

[Evan]

ah so airbus is designing new from the ground-up, eh?

You said:

the real problem is trying to stuff 10lbs of new tech into a 5lb antique. no one wants to spend what it takes to develop a truly modern, efficient aircraft/engine combo

The A320 NEO is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo.

The C300/C500/A220 is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo.

The E-Jet E2 is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo.

The COMAC C919 s a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo.

The Suhkoi Superjet is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft suitable to upgrade to a truly modern, efficient engine.

Guess who's been left out there?

Man, it's frustrating. The C919 is almost exactly what the Y1 (797) should have been. Just swap the sidesticks for yokes and call it a Boeing.

[pierpp]

Boeing releases its software fix, but as the article says, needs the airlines to install it, give feedback, train polits before being given the okay. How long would that take?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47722258

[Evan]

Boeing releases its software fix, but as the article says, needs the airlines to install it, give feedback, train polits before being given the okay. How long would that take?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47722258

And Boeing needs to conduct new tests at the onset of accelerated stall to ensure the modified system still solves the problem it was intended to solve.

[TeeVee]

You said:



The A320 NEO is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo. based on a platform first produced in 1984. yeah. new and modern

The C300/C500/A220 is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo. yes, for a regional, and one that likely would not have made it to production without bailouts, which, btw, i support. still doesn't have much in-service though so unproven

The E-Jet E2 is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo. a re-designed (albeit improved) 1st gen E1

The COMAC C919 s a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft/engine combo. as with all things chinese, let's wait and see

The Suhkoi Superjet is a truly modern, efficient FBW aircraft suitable to upgrade to a truly modern, efficient engine. As of March 2019, 15 of Interjet's 22 SSJs were out of service. Nuff said.

Guess who's been left out there? you notably left out the 787. which is likely more advanced than all but the A350

Man, it's frustrating. The C919 is almost exactly what the Y1 (797) should have been. Just swap the sidesticks for yokes and call it a Boeing.

see above

[Evan]

see above

You can choose to ignore my point, but the point is made.

Each of the airframes I've listed are modern airframes suitable for mounting the new generation of high-bypass turbofans. Some may have teething pains but those can be worked out.

Boeing, alone, lacks a suitable, modern airframe. Their awkward attempt to mount a new-gen engine on a 1960's-era airframe has indirectly resulted in the deaths of hundreds.

This is not because Boeing lacked a new airframe initiative or because they somehow failed to see the need for one. It is because top-level decision-makers kicked that initiative down the road for reasons that are still unclear.

Now Boeing, once the proud leader of aviation design, is left out of the truly modern, efficient, single aisle party.

It's embarrassing.

[Black Ram]

see above

The CSeries can be more than a regional jet. It has the potential for TATL flights. The CS300 can replace the A319, and if launched, the CS500 may eat into the A320's market share. Then it would be up to Airbus to rewing the A321 (and maybe develop an A322) for the MoM segment - otherwise the plane is modern enough.

I agree that the SSJ is done. It could get modernized, but probably won't. They now have a new plane, the MC-21 - maybe odd-sized, but we'll see what it does with the PW1000 engine. One of the biggest problems for Russian aircraft is the bad support/spares network infrastructure.

[Evan]

Trying to wrap my head around this one. Garuda has essentially cancelled an order for 49 -MAX aircraft, but they still want to negotiate a contract with Boeing:

Garuda asked Boeing to offer jets other than the Max 8, CEO I Gusti Ngurah Askhara Danadiputra said. But in a blow to Boeing's archrival Airbus, he added that the airline won't switch brands.

"We still believe in the Boeing brand, but we no longer believe in the Max 8 product," he said after meeting with Boeing executives, according to the Wall Street Journal. "Boeing understands Garuda's position and will study the possibility of restructuring" the contract.

So... do they want the less-efficient, outdated NG? Do they want to fly these routes on the 787's or triple-7's? Is Boeing going to rush out another airframe?

[Black Ram]

Trying to wrap my head around this one. Garuda has essentially cancelled an order for 49 -MAX aircraft, but they still want to negotiate a contract with Boeing:


So... do they want the less-efficient, outdated NG? Do they want to fly these routes on the 787's or triple-7's? Is Boeing going to rush out another airframe?

Is it just the 49 or do they have more one order? Did they overorder? Maybe they'll move planes around from their subsidiaries?

[flashcrash]

The original order was actually for 46 MAXs, but it included the conversion of 4 back-logged NG orders into MAX orders bringing the total to 50. On this basis, the contract might allow them to back-convert to NGs. But that would surely be a high (operating) price to pay for brand loyalty. Unless, of course, Boeing has significantly dropped the price of the NG. Investor news conference scheduled for April 24. I suspect questions will be asked.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/customers/garuda-indonesia/garuda-indonesia-announces-order-for-50-737-max-8s.page

[Evan]

The original order was actually for 46 MAXs, but it included the conversion of 4 back-logged NG orders into MAX orders bringing the total to 50. On this basis, the contract might allow them to back-convert to NGs. But that would surely be a high (operating) price to pay for brand loyalty. Unless, of course, Boeing has significantly dropped the price of the NG. Investor news conference scheduled for April 24. I suspect questions will be asked.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/cus...37-max-8s.page

I think cost of operation is probably more important than the cost of acquisition, and Boeing is slashing 40%-60% off the -MAX sticker price as it is. I can't see Garuda opting for an obsolete 5.5:1 CFM-56 over a 9:1 LEAP (or 11:1 LEAP if they lose the brand loyalty), but maybe its time to stop making sense out of all this.