Ok, Boeing, lawyering and protectionism isn't going to save you. Bombardier (Airbus) has a brand new beautiful 21st-century narrowbody on the market. Lower fuel burn, quieter cabin, bigger windows, FBW and lower maintenance. Maybe it's time to stop tacking features onto a 50 year-old airframe and start sketching something new. HINT: The point of competition is to inspire better products.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Bombardier wins in tariff dispute with Boeing
Collapse
X
-
Bombardier wins in tariff dispute with Boeing
Ok, Boeing, lawyering and protectionism isn't going to save you. Bombardier (Airbus) has a brand new beautiful 21st-century narrowbody on the market. Lower fuel burn, quieter cabin, bigger windows, FBW and lower maintenance. Maybe it's time to stop tacking features onto a 50 year-old airframe and start sketching something new. HINT: The point of competition is to inspire better products.Tags: None
-
Originally posted by Evan View Posthttp://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-42825916
Ok, Boeing, lawyering and protectionism isn't going to save you. Bombardier (Airbus) has a brand new beautiful 21st-century narrowbody on the market. Lower fuel burn, quieter cabin, bigger windows, FBW and lower maintenance. Maybe it's time to stop tacking features onto a 50 year-old airframe and start sketching something new. HINT: The point of competition is to inspire better products.
-
Originally posted by Evan View Posthttp://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-42825916
Ok, Boeing, lawyering and protectionism isn't going to save you. Bombardier (Airbus) has a brand new beautiful 21st-century narrowbody on the market. Lower fuel burn, quieter cabin, bigger windows, FBW and lower maintenance. Maybe it's time to stop tacking features onto a 50 year-old airframe and start sketching something new. HINT: The point of competition is to inspire better products.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View PostBoeing had to decide where to allocate the money and, especially, their human resources. They put it in the 787 and new 777. The smaller the airplanes, not only the smaller the prices but the smaller margin %. Boeing prefers to win the the big planes market and relegate the small airplanes. I think we'll see the next 757 (which will be a widebody) before seeing the next 737.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Evan View PostThe 'new 777' or the 20 year-old airframe with some features tacked on?
More than an incremental upgrade of the 777, the X will be the bigger version of the 787 leveraging on the 777.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View PostIf you call a brand new composite wing from scratch "some features"... Plus new state-of-the-art engines, bigger windows, wider cabin, higher ceiling, lower cabin altitude, increase cabin air humidity, longer fuselage, 10 abreast as standard and 20% lower fuel burn per seat, and a 787 cockpit.
More than an incremental upgrade of the 777, the X will be the bigger version of the 787 leveraging on the 777.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View PostBoeing prefers to win the the big planes market and relegate the small airplanes. I think we'll see the next 757 (which will be a widebody) before seeing the next 737.
As for that 757 wide-body replacement (dubbed the MoM), that's a very hot discussion. Some would say it's the next big thing, others say it will always be a niche market.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
More than an incremental upgrade of the 777, the X will be the bigger version of the 787 leveraging on the 777.
Comment
-
The 777X doesn't have a composite fuselage but will have a lower cabin altitude (6000ft) and bigger 787 windows.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
Comment