Seattle - More information is now available about the Boeing's NMA, New Mid-market Airplane. Journalist Jon Ostrower reports the planning around the aircraft and holds an image giving some idea how the future device will look like. (jonostrower.com) 기타...
WOW! I have never seen a passenger jet that looked like this! Big wings on BOTH sides of a long, flattened cigar tube with a pointy front. And what do they call that big thing at the tail-end that sticks way up? What a radical departure from what one would commonly see at ANY airport.
It remains to be seen, however, if they can get the windows to actually line up with the seats.
By Boeing's best estimates these aircraft will not be into production for 8-10 years, but at the same time they are projecting the use of existing and proven technology. This is like the ultimate hybrid. The bugs on using composites have been worked out, the wing design looks like it only needs to be resized and even the windshields are to be borrowed designs. I suspect Boeing will have to put on a major push to get this aircraft put together if they are to stay in the 757 replacement market. As the costs of keeping the existing 757's in the air, replacement will look every more appealing and the only player for 10 years will be the A-321LR. If airlines buy them, they will expect 20 years out of their purchases which will leave the 797 out of the market for up to 20 years. As Boeing does not appear to be reinventing the wheel, they should be able to shorten the lead time by a couple of years.
No one else think that rendering looks like an A321, minus the boomerang winglets etc?? I've often wondered if there is a 'perfect' aerodynamic shape and it seems that as they get closer to achieving it, the aircraft begin to look more and more similar? Don't bash me in the comments, I'm an avid planespotter, I know the difference between an Airbus and a Boeing! Just saying'!
Quite reasonable. Sometimes technical requirements do result in similar designs. Shuttle/Buran, Concorde/Tu-144, etc. I used to be able to identify airliners quite easily; these days, all the regional jets and more manufacturers building twin engine birds, it can be challenging - especially if one is working with only a silhouette or less than optimal photograph.
Boeing would have been better off updating the 767/757s with new wings, avionics, and engines and calling it a day. Cheaper and they'd probably already have them on the market. Great going wasting your time Boeing developing the 747-8, 737 MAX 9, and 737 MAX 10.
its not quite that simple. they are too old, systems need redesign, needs new lighter materials which require new engineering. Add up all this and you have to build new to achieve the opex savings which are expected.
Isn't that what the A330 NEO is supposed to do? What Airbus doesn't have is a long range narrowbody that can do the job. 757 reborn? Very surprised that a widebody was chosen, but maybe the image is deceiving. It looks like the 787-3 that nobody wanted to buy earlier...
What the hell are you babbling about? The current A350 is a “ME TOO” clone of the 787. The original A350 was a failure. Airbus never does anything first, they alway wait and copy Boeing.
They were also the first to develop the twin-engine wide-bodied aircraft, the A300, which "holds the distinction of being the world's first twin-engined widebody airliner"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A300
So, your statement that all they do is copy is completely incorrect.
Not talking about fly by wire dipshit. I’m talking about the style and form. Name one aircraft airbus has done recently that wasn’t me too clone of something Boeing has done.
A330 was a 767 me too A320 was a 737 me too A380 was a me too pissing contest failure at replacing the 747 Original A350 was a half assed me too attempt at trying to kill off the 787 A350XWB was a blatant me too clone of the 787
So again Boeing leads, Airbus follows, they never go out on a limb first they just wait for Boeing to come out with something, watch to see the issues they run into and then just copy all of the positives. They are a less sleazy version of China, but they copy just as much.
767 was a A300 me too 727 was a DH121 me too 737 Max 8 was a A320Neo me too 737 Max 10 was a A321Neo me too KC-46 was a A330MRTT me too 797 is a A321LR me too
It's a different day. The aluminium skinned heavy planes of the last century are no longer desired b y the operators and passengers of today. New planes need to be lighter, fly higher, go faster, and use less fuel. The need and desire for air transportation in Asia is exploding and their needs are for a mid-market aircraft that can operate in the space between the 73's and the heavies. More and more people are ignoring the hub and spoke system in favor of a point to point route map.
I don't see how this wide-body twin aisle aircraft (797) will be able to compete with the much lower fuel costs of a narrow-body single aisle plane (A321). Can anyone explain?
One wood assume that the ovoid fuselage shape should mostly negate the extra fuel burn of the wider cabin or they would not have gone with a twin-asile design.
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
종료
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..
Great Grammar!
Pretty sure 'what' would have been a better choice, or lose the word 'like'