There are two aviation conferences in Washington State this month.
The first is from the Pacific Northwest Aerospace Alliance October 8. The PNAA Space & Security conference, a one day event, will be at the Museum of Flight at Boeing Field in Seattle. The conference is quite timely, considering Boeing just announced job transfers out of Puget Sound from its Defense unit. Two local defense programs that remain, the P-8A Poseidon (based on the 737) and the KC-46A (based on the 767) are on the program for updates.
The British American Business Council (Northwest), or BABC, holds a one day Aerospace Conference, also at the Museum of Flight, on October 28. Airbus Americas will discuss the A-Series Neo programs. NASA will discuss future airplanes, with composites, interiors and other materials also on the agenda.
Do we know what Boeing will discuss at BABC?
Tanker and Poseidon
What about the NSA? B-747-8 PIPs? B-767pax/freighter? B-737 PIPs? B-787 PIPs? B-777 PIPs (before the B-777-8/-9 EIS)? There are possibilities for both Boeing and Airbus to improve current products as well as continue to work on future programs.
I think either Boeing or Airbus, or both, will be thinking about a state of the art 757, 767, A300, A310 replacement aircraft. Medium capacity, medium range, super efficient. A much larger segment than anything above 350 seats. And (temporary) underserved by the OEM’s.
Transcon, transatlantic, intra asia, leisure, big city pairs,..
Airbus does not have the funds for that (the A350-1100 in the woods still to be sorted out)
Boeing needs to replace the 737 and its successor will take a bit out of what’s left of the old 757 market (assuming they realize what they have to do).
Some markets may just have to make do with what is available.
Either its there and you can make money at it with a non optimal platform or its so marginal you can’t and you won’t.
There is a finite limit to how many models either Mfg can come out with and maintain themselves as a viable (financially solvent) organization.
I don’t think we will see a 7-abreast aircraft like the 767 again. The step from 6-abreast with one aisle to 7-abreast with two aisles is about 3 ft additional width (18” + 18 ”). 9-abreast would be just 6 ft additional width ( 3 x 18 ” + 18”). E.g. A320 is 13 ft width and A350 is 19 ft 6 in width.
To fill the gap between 240 seats (A322) and 400 seats (A332) a new wing design would be necessary. Maybe a 50 m long A350-500 with folding wingtips so the aircraft would still fit in A320/B737 size gates?
It won’t be a 767 like aircraft. Lighter, have limited cargo capability (LD3-45/46 only) and be optimized for shorter flights. Both Airbus and Boeing have been looking at it for some time. A market too large to ignore.
Shrinking a A350/787 leaves you with a heavy uneconomical compromise. Boeing was wise enough to withdraw the 787-3.
Above 250 seats single becomes a burder and a wider fuselage becomes the preferred lighter option for long fuselages (>50m). Business/first at 6 abreast is very efficient.
Such an aircraft will enable A/B to develop an un-compromised aircraft to replace the 737/A320 and for Airbus to phase out the A330 in time..
The B-787-3 was to use the B-787-8 fuselage and wings. But the wingspan was some 26′ shorter because the -3 would use blended winglets, while the -8, -9. and -10 all use raked wingtips.
“Airbus does not have the funds for that (the A350-1100 in the woods still to be sorted out)”
Knee jerk denial? 😉 Arguably A is healthier then ever, the A350-1100 doesn’t exist and the -1000 seems on schedule.