Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Boeing's regrettable decisions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Boeing's regrettable decisions

    Hey everybody,
    I was editing some pictures from my last trip to the US and it struck me, that there are possibly two decisions that Boeing might truly regret these days:

    1. Cancelling the 757.
    2. Not promoting and later even cancelling the 717.

    What do you think about that? I believe there would be quite a market for both of these models today. One might even go so far as to say that if Boeing hadn't given up on the 717 and continued production and further development, they wouldn't have to worry about the CSeries today.

    P.S. Please limit the discussion to the two points I have made and not go off on tangents of what else Boeing should or shouldn't have done. Thanks

  • #2
    Both would have to old engines by today. From the two I see more potential with the 717, which had a new engine by the time production ended and could have probably challenged the EMBs.

    Comment


    • #3
      I don't actually think you can separate out the 717 and 757 from the whole company. Even a business as large as Boeing can't do everything, especially these days. They have to make choices. Their corporate financial, engineering, staff and managerial resources are not unlimited, and they have been burned before on quality control issues in recent years. So in the past decade or so they have focused on new 737, 747 and 777 variants, plus the 787, plus projects like the P-8 and the new tanker, plus all their other defense and space programs. That's a lot.

      Do they regret closing the 757 and 717 ? Maybe, but I doubt it. The 757, on balance, was - for the most part - too heavy and expensive for many operators, and any upgrade would have competed with the newest 737 models. The 717 is a nice machine but - well, it's a McDonnell Douglas and had limited commercial prospects. It certainly could have continued, with some modest sales no doubt, but it was their considered business decision to chop it, on overall cost/benefit grounds. I doubt they regret it today.

      Comment


      • #4
        It's still somewhat ironic that the 1960's machine (737) displaced the 1980s machine (757)- especially with the need for bigger engine fans.

        Of course, someone will point out that the newer 737's are generally much more advanced than 757's.....

        Still that under-wing clearance is significant and it's always amazing to consider that stabilizer and fuselage shapes are pretty much 1960's (or should I say 1950's) designs.

        ...and you can say much of the same about the B-717 which is basically the old DC-9 wing- as opposed to the newer MD-80 wing.
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
          1. Cancelling the 757.
          How could they regret that? They weren't selling.
          When something consistently doesn't sell: you discontinue the related expenditure, cut your losses and move on.

          In the post 9/11 era years, Boeing was offering the 757s at enormous discounts. I've heard as much as 45%+ off...

          ...yet in those four years, the only clients to bite were the Chinese and ATA; for a grand total of 9 (yes, nine) aircraft.

          That's an average of barely 1 ship sold every five months. Boeing could not justify that sort of thing to shareholders-- no company could. So they had no choice but to pull the plug.
          Us, lighting a living horse on fire:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH2_Q3oJPeU

          Check it out!

          Comment


          • #6
            My rationale behind thinking that Boeing regrets cancelling the 757 is this: Even if the aircraft was not selling for some time, it did sell over 1000 units and there is no aircraft to replace these once they have reached the end of their service life. Once the 757 is gone for good, which aircraft will operate the thin transatlantic routes? I don't think either the A321neo or the 737MAX-9 are up for that task... and the only consolation to Boeing would be that Airbus doesn't have an appropriate product either...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
              My rationale behind thinking that Boeing regrets cancelling the 757 is this: Even if the aircraft was not selling for some time, it did sell over 1000 units and there is no aircraft to replace these once they have reached the end of their service life.
              Well, think about what you're actually saying though:

              "Hey Boeing circa 2004. You might regret cancelling a product that you're selling an average of two per year of, which is wasting valuable floor space in your factories that could instead be used to create hundreds of 737s............ because two decades from now, three airlines might need to replace the barely twenty 757s that are being used to operate a niche so small that both you and Airbus never saw fit to address it directly."


              Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
              Once the 757 is gone for good, which aircraft will operate the thin transatlantic routes?
              An alternative question would be:
              Why should there be "thin transatlantic routes" if they can't even fill the most baseline of modern aircraft, after having existed for years on end?

              Airlines have to draw the line somewhere, and that line is currently the ability to fill about 180-200 seats, with at least 16 of them being premium.

              Airlines could go lower, today, if they wanted to: current 737s have the ability to do BOS/NYC to Ireland and the UK. But they've chosen not to. The minimal market sweet-spot is the aforementioned capacity, and that's with using 1970s-designed technology. Who's to say that 787s won't raise that capacity bar?


              Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
              I don't think either the A321neo or the 737MAX-9 are up for that task.
              Based on what?

              Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
              and the only consolation to Boeing would be that Airbus doesn't have an appropriate product either.
              Tell me: why is that?
              Answer's pretty simple really.
              Us, lighting a living horse on fire:
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH2_Q3oJPeU

              Check it out!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
                My rationale behind thinking that Boeing regrets cancelling the 757 is this: Even if the aircraft was not selling for some time, it did sell over 1000 units and there is no aircraft to replace these once they have reached the end of their service life. Once the 757 is gone for good, which aircraft will operate the thin transatlantic routes?
                I would wager to say your concerns are largely unfounded.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Apart from the other, valid points raised about the 757's successor - consider that for many carriers, of who the options (if made available) would have been ordering new 757s or new 737-9 (MAX), the option is between older technology and newer technology, and with many opting for the operation of other 737 family members - there is the ability to operate 737s that can stretch the capacity gap from 126 passengers (on the 737 MAX 7) to 220 passengers (on the 737 MAX 9) all under one common crew certificate.

                  In such a case, the 757 will be an expensive addition as crews would need to be trained solely for the type - a specialty aircraft, a specialty crew.

                  Another issue lies in the fact that there are a rather large amount of 757s currently in operation with many of them being built rather recently (in the past 20 years). Easily, carriers can acquire more of them from first hand operators (as did Delta), if they so desired them. Airlines like AA, of whom the aircraft has been quite proficient work-horses have made the course of change recently toward the A321 (and by extension the A321 NEO). For the capacity - it is an apt successor. For the range, perhaps there is a slight deficiency, however not a large enough one for carriers such as DL, AA or even UA to pressure Boeing to create a successor, or for it to be a grand enough issue to not order the A321.

                  The question of range only truly presents itself on niche routes (where we have seen the 757 used on trans-atlantic routes). DL currently operates the 757-200 on the Pisa to JFK route (6648 KMs - 9hrs 40mins). A current 737-700ER's max range is 10695 KMs. UA uses a 757-300 on the Houston to Anchorage route (5254 KMs - 7hrs 17mins). A current 737-900ER's range is 6045 KMs.

                  If the routes are run on pencil-thin margins, then consider that 787-8, or even the fuel efficiency of the 737 MAX-9 might allow them to be operated by future aircraft.

                  Don't get me wrong - I would have loved to see a composite, re-engined 757 (757 MAX perhaps?), but the costs of research, development, and production (as previously stated) would have to compete with resources slated for future projects (a 737 replacement, a 777 replacement, improvements to the 787) - all of which have proven to be worthy and profitable endeavors.
                  Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Regarding the 717, it is important to consider the place of the aircraft within the Boeing company.

                    Undoubtedly, it is one of my favorite aircraft, but let's consider that the aircraft was not originally Boeing, built outside of the familiar Boeing structure with production taking place at a (until recently) non-Boeing plant, designed by non-Boeing designers and work crews, at the Long-Beach plants no less.

                    They attempted, perhaps with lack-luster effort to locate markets for them, but considering the success (with the hope that the AC would place a massive order, they instead opting for Embraer jets), and the relative failure of the 737-500/737-600 and the A318, the market was just not there for them. Others here can explain (as I assume) scope clauses prevented them from being attractive options when compared to lower-paying pilots operating RJs.

                    As I have said before, there are few fans of greater extremity than I when it comes to the 717, but my previous argument also holds true here as well. With the behemoth of operational versatility of the 737 line, a common crew certificate and the ability to operate multiple capacities with said same crews apart from the economies of scale offered in parts et al, the 737 seems a winner.

                    Will the Embraer, and C-Series entrants find market - surely, but they are likely initial stepping stones onto larger aircraft, hoping to tackle the 737 and A320 lines directly as they (the new entrants) are able to increase their capacities.
                    Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      First of all, let me say thanks for the input. There are several points I had not considered before. Secondly, let me clarify something from my initial statement at the beginning of the thread: I did not want to infer, that the 757 or the 717 should be marketetd today in the same configuration as they were 20 years ago. If Boeing had decided to keep offering these products, they would most certainly have been further developped, improved, and enhanced and most likely (in the case of the 757) re-engined.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ConcordeBoy View Post
                        (...)

                        Originally Posted by Peter Kesternich:
                        Once the 757 is gone for good, which aircraft will operate the thin transatlantic routes?
                        An alternative question would be:
                        Why should there be "thin transatlantic routes" if they can't even fill the most baseline of modern aircraft, after having existed for years on end?
                        Well -the question why there should be thin transatlantic routes has already been answered. There is a demand, and airlines are answering to it - with the only aircraft type that is somewhat viable for these routes. They ARE using the 757 on the transatlantic.

                        (...)

                        Originally Posted by Peter Kesternich:
                        I don't think either the A321neo or the 737MAX-9 are up for that task.
                        Based on what?
                        Based on my understanding that these types won't have the range to replace the 757 on the transatlantic routes it is used for.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
                          Well -the question why there should be thin transatlantic routes has already been answered. There is a demand, and airlines are answering to it - with the only aircraft type that is somewhat viable for these routes. They ARE using the 757 on the transatlantic.

                          Based on my understanding that these types won't have the range to replace the 757 on the transatlantic routes it is used for.
                          Maybe Icelandic could use 737 type aircraft on their US-Europe routes when they eventually scrap their 757s.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
                            Maybe Icelandic could use 737 type aircraft on their US-Europe routes when they eventually scrap their 757s.
                            https://newsclient.omxgroup.com/cdsP...ssageId=667110

                            The order is for nine 737 MAX 8 airplanes for 153 passengers and seven 737 MAX 9 aircraft which hold 172 passengers. In comparison Icelandair Group’s current Boeing 757-200 aircraft hold 183 passengers. Boeing 737 MAX is a new, improved and longer reaching version of the present Boeing 737’s. Fuel savings compared to Icelandair present fleet of Boeing 757 is more than 20% per seat.
                            Done last year.
                            Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X