Boeing CEO says company could walk away from 737 MAX 10

fooferdoggie

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
4,380
Reaction score
7,742
so Boeing after killing how many people to save some bucks wants this???
In late 2020, Congress passed the Aircraft Safety and Certification Reform Act, requiring planes certified as of 2023 to comply with the latest crew alert regulations mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

The 737 MAX is the only new Boeing jet not to feature this technology, given that the plane is based on an aircraft that was designed in the 1960s. So Boeing is in a tricky situation — if the 737 MAX isn’t certified by the end of 2022, the plane will need to feature all new safety technology, which will be costly, further increase the timeline for certification, and will also require additional training for pilots on the jet (and a big selling point of the 737 MAX in the first place was the lack of additional training required).

Of course it’s possible that the plane gets certified before the end of the year, though at this point it seems unlikely.

 

AG_PhamD

Elite Member
Posts
1,028
Reaction score
969
Given the collusion between Boeing and the US Government, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if they are granted an exception. I suppose even if they do cancel the MAX 10 probably it’s not a huge deal, as it only accounts for a fairly small percentage of 737 orders. Inevitably they will argue they will lose the market segment if they can’t build the MAX 10 and no one in congress will want to be responsible for the job losses at Boeing and their subcontractors around the country.

Given the lack of 757 replacement and lack of competition in terms of range with the A321XLR, Boeing has a big incentive to create their NMA design. I’m sure if they can’t get the MAX 10 exception they will somehow finagle some sort of government incentive to to build the NMA to retain a competitive edge.

The 737 is a super dated platform and the MAX is the definition of cost cutting. Boeing has had a terrible track record lately whether it be the MAX, Starliner issues, 777x delays, 787 build quality, screwing over Embraer in the now defunct acquisition, etc.
 

Huntn

Whatwerewe talk'n about?
Site Donor
Posts
5,254
Reaction score
5,189
Location
The Misty Mountains
Given the collusion between Boeing and the US Government, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if they are granted an exception. I suppose even if they do cancel the MAX 10 probably it’s not a huge deal, as it only accounts for a fairly small percentage of 737 orders. Inevitably they will argue they will lose the market segment if they can’t build the MAX 10 and no one in congress will want to be responsible for the job losses at Boeing and their subcontractors around the country.

Given the lack of 757 replacement and lack of competition in terms of range with the A321XLR, Boeing has a big incentive to create their NMA design. I’m sure if they can’t get the MAX 10 exception they will somehow finagle some sort of government incentive to to build the NMA to retain a competitive edge.

The 737 is a super dated platform and the MAX is the definition of cost cutting. Boeing has had a terrible track record lately whether it be the MAX, Starliner issues, 777x delays, 787 build quality, screwing over Embraer in the now defunct acquisition, etc.
The 757 is a great plane except the way it is typically configured sucks for passengers, which creates second thoughts about just how great is it. Both the 737, and the Airbus narrow bodies, have relatively plump fuselages in comparison, making them by basic nature, more comortable, by virtue of more cross sectional space.
 

AG_PhamD

Elite Member
Posts
1,028
Reaction score
969
The 757 is a great plane except the way it is typically configured sucks for passengers, which creates second thoughts about just how great is it. Both the 737, and the Airbus narrow bodies, have relatively plump fuselages in comparison, making them by basic nature, more comortable, by virtue of more cross sectional space.

The benefit of the 757 is the range for the given size of the plane, which is in demand but no one is really quite meeting- the A321xlr will be the closest competitor. And with the last 757 made in 2004, it’s an aging plane with a big gap in the current market. The closest offering from Boeing currently is the 787 which has the range, but is a larger and (I would imagine if 757s were still built) a significantly more expensive plane.

The other benefit of the 757 is it’s quite overpowered, making it ideal for hot, high altitude airports. This also allows for a short take off distance and lower takeoff speed compared to a 737 or A320. That’s part of the conflict the US Govt is having replacing its 757 fleet that the VP uses or the President if flying to an airport too small a 747. Nothing quite meets the size and performance of the 757.

It’s possible Boeing could bring back 757 production, rewing the plane for something more efficient, and find more efficient engines. But given the supply chain and production lines are gone and so much needs to be re-engineered, I think a full replacement is the more likely route. Plus, more efficient engines generally means bigger engines, which I’m guessing probably won’t fit with the existing design. But a clean sheet design would probably take what? At least decade to bring to fruition.

I’m not sure passenger comfort is the primary concern for most airlines, especially in economy, given how planes are configured these days with 3” of legroom and seats wide enough to barely fit an underweight toddler. The financial calculus is the foremost concern with factors like fleet size, seating capacity, fuel efficiency, routing, etc is being considered long before comfort.
 
Last edited:

Huntn

Whatwerewe talk'n about?
Site Donor
Posts
5,254
Reaction score
5,189
Location
The Misty Mountains
The benefit of the 757 is the range for the given size of the plane, which is in demand but no one is really quite meeting- the A321xlr will be the closest competitor. And with the last 757 made in 2004, it’s an aging plane with a big gap in the current market. The closest offering from Boeing currently is the 787 which has the range, but is a larger and (I would imagine if 757s were still built) a significantly more expensive plane.

The other benefit of the 757 is it’s quite overpowered, making it ideal for hot, high altitude airports. This also allows for a short take off distance and lower takeoff speed compared to a 737 or A320. That’s part of the conflict the US Govt is having replacing its 757 fleet that the VP uses or the President if flying to an airport too small a 747. Nothing quite meets the size and performance of the 757.

It’s possible Boeing could bring back 757 production, rewing the plane for something more efficient, and find more efficient engines. But given the supply chain and production lines are gone and so much needs to be re-engineered, I think a full replacement is the more likely route. Plus, more efficient engines generally means bigger engines, which I’m guessing probably won’t fit with the existing design. But a clean sheet design would probably take what? At least decade to bring to fruition.

I’m not sure passenger comfort is the primary concern for most airlines, especially in economy, given how planes are configured these days with 3” of legroom and seats wide enough to barely fit an underweight toddler. The financial calculus is the foremost concern with factors like fleet size, seating capacity, fuel efficiency, routing, etc is being considered long before comfort.
Technically the 757 is an impressive aircraft, just not comfortable for passengers, even first class as compared to a wide body. I traveled to Hawaii from Minneapolis once in first class 757 and what a dissapointment. Before when it was Northwest, they used to run a 747 on the route. Now that in business is comfort, and it’s a long enough flight to be worth it. :)
 

AG_PhamD

Elite Member
Posts
1,028
Reaction score
969
Technically the 757 is an impressive aircraft, just not comfortable for passengers, even first class as compared to a wide body. I traveled to Hawaii from Minneapolis once in first class 757 and what a dissapointment. Before when it was Northwest, they used to run a 747 on the route. Now that in business is comfort, and it’s a long enough flight to be worth it. :)

Agreed, from a passenger standpoint it definitely deserves its nickname “the flying pencil”- particularly when talking about the center isle. I’m not sure it makes a particularly huge difference in the seat width. A Delta 737 has 0.1 in more seat width than a 757. Granted an A320 from delta has almost 1” more width.

I’m not trying to have an argument of what plane is best, just stating the reality that no one is currently producing a plane that can fill the “middle of the market” segment. And there is definitely a demand at the moment for longer range, smaller capacity planes. The 757 was successful but production stopped because of the effects on the market from 9/11. Boeing has flip flopped many times on building a replacement, currently I think it’s shelved but that could very well change again.

Unfortunately the 747 is quickly vanishing from passenger airlines due to its poor efficiency. The 747 is one of my favorites.
 

Huntn

Whatwerewe talk'n about?
Site Donor
Posts
5,254
Reaction score
5,189
Location
The Misty Mountains
Agreed, from a passenger standpoint it definitely deserves its nickname “the flying pencil”- particularly when talking about the center isle. I’m not sure it makes a particularly huge difference in the seat width. A Delta 737 has 0.1 in more seat width than a 757. Granted an A320 from delta has almost 1” more width.

I’m not trying to have an argument of what plane is best, just stating the reality that no one is currently producing a plane that can fill the “middle of the market” segment. And there is definitely a demand at the moment for longer range, smaller capacity planes. The 757 was successful but production stopped because of the effects on the market from 9/11. Boeing has flip flopped many times on building a replacement, currently I think it’s shelved but that could very well change again.

Unfortunately the 747 is quickly vanishing from passenger airlines due to its poor efficiency. The 747 is one of my favorites.
As you state it, the seat width is small, but in the 757 coach, I could feel the sides of the seat on my thighs, in the others, not. Yes, it could be a thigh problem, where 1” makes all the difference! ;)
 

AG_PhamD

Elite Member
Posts
1,028
Reaction score
969
As you state it, the seat width is small, but in the 757 coach, I could feel the sides of the seat on my thighs, in the others, not. Yes, it could be a thigh problem, where 1” makes all the difference! ;)

1” can be a huge difference when it comes to width. A lot of it depends on seat design, which of course can vary from airline to airline. I am a skinny person and find almost all coach seats uncomfortable, less to do with the legroom despite being 5’11” and almost entirely to do with the seat width. For example, I find the seats on Southwest 737’s far more tolerable than United 737’s. I randomly looked up Aer Lingus’ 757 and their seat width is 18” which is the same as the Delta a320’s. I suppose it’s worst for the cabin crew who have to squeeze down the isle and serve food and drinks.

I’ve been wanting to fly on the A220, formerly known as the Bombardier C-series, which I’ve heard great things about. They have the 2-3 seating configuration in economy and have 18.6” of width, which is quite impressive for such a small plane. Plus you’re far less likely to get stuck in a center seat with the 2-3 arrangement.
 

Huntn

Whatwerewe talk'n about?
Site Donor
Posts
5,254
Reaction score
5,189
Location
The Misty Mountains
1” can be a huge difference when it comes to width. A lot of it depends on seat design, which of course can vary from airline to airline. I am a skinny person and find almost all coach seats uncomfortable, less to do with the legroom despite being 5’11” and almost entirely to do with the seat width. For example, I find the seats on Southwest 737’s far more tolerable than United 737’s. I randomly looked up Aer Lingus’ 757 and their seat width is 18” which is the same as the Delta a320’s. I suppose it’s worst for the cabin crew who have to squeeze down the isle and serve food and drinks.

I’ve been wanting to fly on the A220, formerly known as the Bombardier C-series, which I’ve heard great things about. They have the 2-3 seating configuration in economy and have 18.6” of width, which is quite impressive for such a small plane. Plus you’re far less likely to get stuck in a center seat with the 2-3 arrangement.
The A220 is relatively comfortable, recently flew in one from IAH to SLC.
 
Top Bottom
1 2