Finally, someone has taken the time to explain how profit per flight is not determined only by the cost per seat - which assumes a percentage loading, rather than the actual number of passengers flying, and this is often the same number, regardless of the aircraft you are flying them on. Thank you!
They don't have enough time to develop a new aircraft to compete with Airbus. They've done a spectacular job squeezing the 737. Instead of just competing head on with the A320 against the 737. They have the A321LR and A321XLR to squeeze the 737 and steal away some of the orders for the 737 Max 10. Whilst the A220 squeezes from below and takes away orders from the Max 7 (not that there were many to begin with) and Max 8
@@KaptnKork i think it is very certain that the A220 and A350 will be around for another 20years. So for airbus their next clean sheet should be covering the A321neo/XLR, and A330neo.
Main reason why airlines like Aer Lingus got new A321 is after they done a transatlantic flight they can go short haul as A330 will sit on the ground for the rest of the day
If Odyssey Airlines gets off the ground, then yes, a Transatlantic London City Airport to New York flight using the A220-100 could happen this year! (I'll believe it when I see it)
Why do I have a feeling that the narrowbody airliners will takeover the aviation industry in the near future, I mean I know it's about how much passenger it can carry but think about it if the narrowbody could go further in miles same as them wide bodies
The advantages of aircraft like the A321LR/XLR are for example that you can connect smaller cities, which is off course much more popular among travelers from these cities compared to having to fly to a hub to get a long haul flight! I hope this only goes to a specific extend as at some point it won’t be economical and environmentally friendly anymore! I‘m also quite sure that wide bodies will stay on long and dense routes!
Yea, not updating the 757. Not updating/building 717 replacement... The McDonald Douglas merger really fucked Boeing over when McD's management came in and gave all engineering jobs on 787 to outside contractors... Boeing died in 1999. McDonald Douglas is what the company actually is.
@@rkan2 Well, 737 is in effect 100% FBW now, that they added the additional sensor which now does pitch entirely by computer. Already did roll/yaw by computer.... but not doing it initially was really stupid. The real question is why they did not bother to just dump the 787 FBW system into the 737... They are doing so for the 777X.
@@w8stral Why they didn't do FBW for 737? Same reason as before... money.. The 737 Max "fixes" certainly didn't change the Max to anything resembling Boeing's other FBW aircraft. The only thing that it has resembling FBW are the spoilers, other than that it is still almost identical to the original 737, with slightly more computer control. There are no FBW flight-envelope protections. There are no control laws, no load factor protection, no alpha prot, no bank angle prot, no low speed prot and afaik no high speed protection. The only thing MCAS tries to give protection is for excessive thrust caused by engine location relative to the airframe. If the 737 were FBW, you could probably mount the engines almost where ever you would've liked, and just tweak the control surface area and FBW software a little bit.
@@rkan2 Pretty much true, But to do all the things you listed is now easily doable, but there is no benefit to do so to Boeing as it would not allow them to design a LIGHTER airplane which is 100% why you do them to begin with as it allows you to decrease loads and therefore decrease structural weight. But, in effect, the 737 is 100% computer controlled now in all 3 axis, just it is heavier and not achieving superior performance by being FBW... A halfway house, more expensive, but no benefits from being more expensive... OUCH!
When one becomes arrogant, or greedy, or both, one is doomed to fail. Time for Boeing to abandon the Max on its entirety, it’s reputation and original design are both beyond repair.
@@nickolliver3021 Boeing will come back but they got to complacent thinking they were the biggest and the best and could do no wrong, they have now handed the best over to Airbus on a plate and will be playing catch up for a long time.
@@pparker2861 I'm sure they will but they probably regret because now they are worrying about the time to get back up to proper standard. I guess 2023 to 2025/6 when these major carriers are wanting g more 787-9/-10s to replace 777s. They were the best but if we could not bash them so much we could see them sort themselves out when their aircraft become better. It's just hope
The real reason why planes like the A321NEO family will take over many, if not most, of the medium-long haul routes is due to oil depletion and over-population (too many people chasing too few resources). Accordingly, expect ticket prices to be comparable with those at the beginning of the jet age in time (inflation adjusted of course). This means commercial aviation is set to contract significantly in the foreseeable future, and most importantly, permanently. Infinite growth on a finite planet is beyond stupid.
If History has taught us anything about Boeing is that they have both lost and won many battles but are always in the war. Every aircraft they have developed has sold at least 865 units and all except the 707 have sold at least 1000 units. We all know what Boeing aircraft the A321Neo, LR and XLR got their inspiration from so there is no need to guess if now that Boeing has some catching up to do...if they will eventually come up with a challenger. It's just a matter of when.
It will be an uphill struggle for Boeing. They've squandered their billions on unnecessary stock buybacks that have lost their value, and from losses due to their MAX. Based on that Airbus has a 10 year lead on the A321. Oh and COMAC says hello.
@@jace1113 Boeing had a 30 year lead with the 737 on the A320 series and look what happened but Airbus didn't throw in the towel. Oh...and COMAC isn't even in service yet and even if they were it comes in a full 1700nm short on the range for the newest Airbus and 850nm short of the longest range MAX.
@@rogerrussell9544 I don't understand your logic with that comment. Boeing changed leadership during the MAX crisis. In fact, when it comes to consistently designing aircraft Boeing has first done market research, design the aircraft then Airbus sets out to design a competing response aircraft. It happed with the 737 and A320 series, the 747 and A340 and A380 series, the 777 & 787 with the A350 series, the 767 and A330 series, and now the 757 and now finally A321series. Airbus did come out with the A300 as a good first aircraft but Boeing made twin-engine widebodies a lot more relevant with the longer range, first ETOPS 767. The one thing Boeing has consistently done is market research before bringing an aircraft to market so I don't understand why you say they don't to the quality of aviation needs. Unless you want to right off Boeings' history of course.
@@Dexter037S4 I can't believe this is Boeing we're talking about. In a purely capitalist society they would be allowed to go the way of Studebaker, but you're right. Now we have another thing entirely, crony capitalism. Horrible thing it is.
The B737max wings are too small to carry all the extra fuel weight and the CFM leap-1B engine is not powerful enough. To create the max10ER, you practically have to redesign the entire mid section of the plane and install a new engine. It will be another upgrade all together, Similar to that of the B777X.
Dude the 737 is very limited plane you cant change 737 on a 757 specially with 737-10 extra tank fuel the plane gonna take of like for ever. Boeing just loose in replace the 757. No 797 or no 757 PLUS. Stupid Management.
How long did it take airbus to copy Boeing ,the 757 is 25 years old, Boeing only has to flex its muscle , change a few things up,and we will have a plane that will wipe the floor with airbus. Remember the A380 was supposed to wipe out the queen of the skys Good luck
@@johnthomson9558 Airbus has seen that there is a big opportunity in the market covered by the 757, why shouldn't they take advantage of it, you can't tell me Boeing wouldn't have done exactly the same if it were the other way around.
Finally, someone has taken the time to explain how profit per flight is not determined only by the cost per seat - which assumes a percentage loading, rather than the actual number of passengers flying, and this is often the same number, regardless of the aircraft you are flying them on. Thank you!
Boeing has clearly lost the battle.
They don't have enough time to develop a new aircraft to compete with Airbus. They've done a spectacular job squeezing the 737. Instead of just competing head on with the A320 against the 737. They have the A321LR and A321XLR to squeeze the 737 and steal away some of the orders for the 737 Max 10. Whilst the A220 squeezes from below and takes away orders from the Max 7 (not that there were many to begin with) and Max 8
@@KaptnKork i think it is very certain that the A220 and A350 will be around for another 20years. So for airbus their next clean sheet should be covering the A321neo/XLR, and A330neo.
@@chingweixion621 Shhhh!!!! ...Don't tell Boing....
The a321LR did not open new market opportunities for Aer Lingus-they are being used on routes previously served by 757s.
Lovely long live AIRBUS
TAP has been doing the same with their 321LR to the U.S. and Brasil since 2019
Airbus could make an NMA plane by 2030 because after the A321XLR they have no more planes to develop.
They are already workoing on Hydrogen planes. Totally revolutionary. Boeing is fucked.
Main reason why airlines like Aer Lingus got new A321 is after they done a transatlantic flight they can go short haul as A330 will sit on the ground for the rest of the day
you can build an entire airline with some 220, 320LR and 330. would be the best fleet to conquer the world
You could add 350 for main hubs in large distances.
Imagine transatlantic in a a220
If Odyssey Airlines gets off the ground, then yes, a Transatlantic London City Airport to New York flight using the A220-100 could happen this year! (I'll believe it when I see it)
Wow
Why do I have a feeling that the narrowbody airliners will takeover the aviation industry in the near future, I mean I know it's about how much passenger it can carry but think about it if the narrowbody could go further in miles same as them wide bodies
The advantages of aircraft like the A321LR/XLR are for example that you can connect smaller cities, which is off course much more popular among travelers from these cities compared to having to fly to a hub to get a long haul flight! I hope this only goes to a specific extend as at some point it won’t be economical and environmentally friendly anymore! I‘m also quite sure that wide bodies will stay on long and dense routes!
"How Boeing cornered themselves"
Yea, not updating the 757. Not updating/building 717 replacement... The McDonald Douglas merger really fucked Boeing over when McD's management came in and gave all engineering jobs on 787 to outside contractors... Boeing died in 1999. McDonald Douglas is what the company actually is.
@@w8stral I'm not sure not updating the 57' was a bad idea... But the whole fbwless 737 Max after building both the 777 and 787... eh..
@@rkan2 Well, 737 is in effect 100% FBW now, that they added the additional sensor which now does pitch entirely by computer. Already did roll/yaw by computer.... but not doing it initially was really stupid. The real question is why they did not bother to just dump the 787 FBW system into the 737... They are doing so for the 777X.
@@w8stral Why they didn't do FBW for 737? Same reason as before... money.. The 737 Max "fixes" certainly didn't change the Max to anything resembling Boeing's other FBW aircraft. The only thing that it has resembling FBW are the spoilers, other than that it is still almost identical to the original 737, with slightly more computer control. There are no FBW flight-envelope protections. There are no control laws, no load factor protection, no alpha prot, no bank angle prot, no low speed prot and afaik no high speed protection. The only thing MCAS tries to give protection is for excessive thrust caused by engine location relative to the airframe.
If the 737 were FBW, you could probably mount the engines almost where ever you would've liked, and just tweak the control surface area and FBW software a little bit.
@@rkan2 Pretty much true, But to do all the things you listed is now easily doable, but there is no benefit to do so to Boeing as it would not allow them to design a LIGHTER airplane which is 100% why you do them to begin with as it allows you to decrease loads and therefore decrease structural weight. But, in effect, the 737 is 100% computer controlled now in all 3 axis, just it is heavier and not achieving superior performance by being FBW... A halfway house, more expensive, but no benefits from being more expensive... OUCH!
When one becomes arrogant, or greedy, or both, one is doomed to fail. Time for Boeing to abandon the Max on its entirety, it’s reputation and original design are both beyond repair.
Yeeeeet
What ever it's is still Boeing 757 it's kelp matching to this Lr and XLR of Airbus. But in the hand the technology that Maters to some airlines...
It´s game over for Boeing
They can make a comeback. its not the end of the world like many people think it is :(
@@nickolliver3021 Boeing will come back but they got to complacent thinking they were the biggest and the best and could do no wrong, they have now handed the best over to Airbus on a plate and will be playing catch up for a long time.
@@pparker2861 I'm sure they will but they probably regret because now they are worrying about the time to get back up to proper standard. I guess 2023 to 2025/6 when these major carriers are wanting g more 787-9/-10s to replace 777s. They were the best but if we could not bash them so much we could see them sort themselves out when their aircraft become better. It's just hope
@@nickolliver3021 If they were competent they wouldn't need to sort themselves out.
@@rogerrussell9544 if they are still making aircraft then that means they are not giving up.
Lol airbus!!!
0:39
The real reason why planes like the A321NEO family will take over many, if not most, of the medium-long haul routes is due to oil depletion and over-population (too many people chasing too few resources). Accordingly, expect ticket prices to be comparable with those at the beginning of the jet age in time (inflation adjusted of course). This means commercial aviation is set to contract significantly in the foreseeable future, and most importantly, permanently.
Infinite growth on a finite planet is beyond stupid.
If History has taught us anything about Boeing is that they have both lost and won many battles but are always in the war. Every aircraft they have developed has sold at least 865 units and all except the 707 have sold at least 1000 units. We all know what Boeing aircraft the A321Neo, LR and XLR got their inspiration from so there is no need to guess if now that Boeing has some catching up to do...if they will eventually come up with a challenger. It's just a matter of when.
It will be an uphill struggle for Boeing. They've squandered their billions on unnecessary stock buybacks that have lost their value, and from losses due to their MAX. Based on that Airbus has a 10 year lead on the A321. Oh and COMAC says hello.
@@jace1113 Boeing had a 30 year lead with the 737 on the A320 series and look what happened but Airbus didn't throw in the towel. Oh...and COMAC isn't even in service yet and even if they were it comes in a full 1700nm short on the range for the newest Airbus and 850nm short of the longest range MAX.
@@semperjr To be honest, Airbus A300 program, and all Boeing itself, was almost over. It survived only because of extreme luck.
Not under these failed executives at Boeing. They don't have the will to design and consistently build to the quality aviation needs.
@@rogerrussell9544 I don't understand your logic with that comment. Boeing changed leadership during the MAX crisis. In fact, when it comes to consistently designing aircraft Boeing has first done market research, design the aircraft then Airbus sets out to design a competing response aircraft. It happed with the 737 and A320 series, the 747 and A340 and A380 series, the 777 & 787 with the A350 series, the 767 and A330 series, and now the 757 and now finally A321series. Airbus did come out with the A300 as a good first aircraft but Boeing made twin-engine widebodies a lot more relevant with the longer range, first ETOPS 767. The one thing Boeing has consistently done is market research before bringing an aircraft to market so I don't understand why you say they don't to the quality of aviation needs. Unless you want to right off Boeings' history of course.
vawiable costs awe howwible fow an aiwline
Boeing did this to themselves. Mistake after mistake as led them to the point where they are no longer competitive.
Talk talk
Boeing is not going anywhere.
They are, and it's not a good place.
@@rogerrussell9544 They are too big to fail, the US Government will just buy more F-15EXs to bail them out, or force Canada to buy Super Hornets.
@@Dexter037S4 I can't believe this is Boeing we're talking about. In a purely capitalist society they would be allowed to go the way of Studebaker, but you're right. Now we have another thing entirely, crony capitalism. Horrible thing it is.
Wish boieng made a 737Max 10 LR for longer flights and can replace the 757 like how they made the 777-200LR that replaced the 747SP
The B737max wings are too small to carry all the extra fuel weight and the CFM leap-1B engine is not powerful enough. To create the max10ER, you practically have to redesign the entire mid section of the plane and install a new engine. It will be another upgrade all together, Similar to that of the B777X.
@@chingweixion621 dude im not stupid i know this i said i wished i didnt say u want it to happend
Dude the 737 is very limited plane you cant change 737 on a 757 specially with 737-10 extra tank fuel the plane gonna take of like for ever. Boeing just loose in replace the 757. No 797 or no 757 PLUS. Stupid Management.
@@arielsegal7515 ok
Not possible. plane too old and has terrible reputation.
How long did it take airbus to copy Boeing ,the 757 is 25 years old,
Boeing only has to flex its muscle , change a few things up,and we will have a plane that will wipe the floor with airbus.
Remember the A380 was supposed to wipe out the queen of the skys
Good luck
True
757 is quite different to A321 Neo. Some (albeit stopgap) Aer Lingus 757 were replaced by these A321Neos.
Boeing has shot itself in the foot and hasn't got that much muscle to flex,
@@rkan2 narrow body for narrow body and it still took 25 years to copy
@@johnthomson9558 Airbus has seen that there is a big opportunity in the market covered by the 757, why shouldn't they take advantage of it, you can't tell me Boeing wouldn't have done exactly the same if it were the other way around.