Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was debating if it would be possible for Airbus to build a single aisle jet that could fly for 5000 nmi. Of course there used to be a single aisle jet that could fly that far, over 6 decades ago, but at great expense in fuel. There has never been a twin engine single aisle jet that could fly that far.
A two engine A321neo long range
Exit Limit:: 240 @ 28 in (40 rows)
Length: 146 ft
Max. takeoff weight: 213,800 lb / 97 t
Fuel capacity: 8,700 USgal
Engines Unit thrust: 33,110 lbf
Max Range: 4,000 nmi
A four engine Boeing 707-320B Pan Am World Airways first order for five made on 13. Feb. 1961
Exit Limit: 189@ 34 in (31.5 rows)
Length: 153 ft
Maximum takeoff weight (MTOW): 333,600 lb / 151.5 tonnes
Fuel capacity: 23,820 USgal
Engines Unit thrust: 19,000 lbf
Max Range: 5,000 nmi
Boeing has upped their market projections for a new mid market airplane to 5000 jets. But the hypothetical Airbus response is often called an A322 and is assumed to be a single aisle jet. It wouldn't have the passenger capacity of the Boeing NMA, but it might have the range capacity.
What do you think? Could/would Airbus try to develop a single aisle jet with that kind of range?
What do you think? Could/would Airbus try to develop a single aisle jet with that kind of range?
I think a better question is, SHOULD they? The technology exists, as demonstrated by the 707. But why would anyone want to be stuck in a single-aisle plane for 5,000 miles? Once they started building twin-aisle planes that could go those distances, the market for long-range single-aisle planes dried up.
As far as the technical questions with today's engines and fuel capacities and so on, I don't have the ability to give an informed answer on that.
Well the B737max-8 can fly 3500 nmi reliably, and the A321LR which will be delivered this fall can fly 4000 nmi. Airbus is advertising the A321LR as a replacement for the B752 which could also fly 4000 nmi. The B737max-8 and the B752 are two twin engine single aisle jets being used today for TransAtlantic, and certainly by next year the A321LR will be used for TransAtlantic. The Bombardier CS300 (now the Airbus A220-300) will be used for TransAtlantic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by M3 Mitch
I would ask what business niche such an airplane would service? Or, why would (certain) airlines want to buy it?
American Airlines and Delta airlines have signed orders for 100 A321neo apiece, and United has orders in for 161 B737Max. There is some belief that some of them will be used for TransAtlantic. If not, then Norwegian Air Shuttle has ordered 30 Airbus A321LR and 111 Boeing 737 MAX 8. They absolutely are going to use some of them for TransAtlantic
So a hypothetical 5000 nmi single aisle jet would certainly have customers. I am saying that Airbus will probably want a competitor to the Boeing NMA or B797 which will probably have a 5000-5400 nmi range.
Glide distance is directly proportional to wing span. That could imply to get another 25% range the wingspan might have to increase 25%. But that is probably too much. A b757 has a wingspan 8% longer than a B737 or an A321.
But that's a bit radical. Perhaps Airbus will do nothing to respond to the B797. The A320neo has now taken in 30% more orders than the B737Max, and that is likely to increase. It's possible they may think leaving well enough alone is the smartest strategy.
Glide distance is directly proportional to wing span. That could imply to get another 25% range the wingspan might have to increase 25%. But that is probably too much. A b757 has a wingspan 8% longer than a B737 or an A321.
But that's a bit radical. Perhaps Airbus will do nothing to respond to the B797. The A320neo has now taken in 30% more orders than the B737Max, and that is likely to increase. It's possible they may think leaving well enough alone is the smartest strategy.
The article below says they want to add a little fuel to get some range, but they don't specify a goal. It sure doesn't sound like 25%.
Quote:
Airbus plots response as Boeing warms to new jet -Air Lease CEO JANUARY 22, 2018 By Tim Hepher and Conor Humphries
DUBLIN, Jan 22 (Reuters) - Plans for a potential new Boeing mid-sized jet are gaining momentum, prompting Airbus to respond by beefing up its strong-selling A321neo model, Air Lease Corp Chief Executive John Plueger said on Monday.
“I think they (Boeing) feel they have momentum from the customers and that they are building momentum internally for the business case,” Plueger told Reuters on the sidelines of the annual Airline Economics conference, referring to a project for a 220-260-seat jet known as New Mid-Sized Airplane (‘NMA’). “I think that they ... are feeling better about the NMA, so I wouldn’t be surprised if some time this year we saw a decision about a launch or not a launch,” he said in an interview.
Boeing’s plans call for a mid-market plane with an estimated 220-260 seats - larger than the single-aisle workhorses of short-haul travel but smaller than traditional dual-aisle long-haul aircraft.
But airlines and leasing companies have set Boeing stringent goals on the price at which they would be prepared to buy, insisting on only a narrow premium to single-aisle models.
Plueger said Air Lease would be interested in the new Boeing jet at the right price.
Speaking separately, Aengus Kelly, chief executive of lessor AerCap, said failing to set a competitive price would make it a “tougher sell to get a big user base behind it.”
The new plane should probably trade at some premium to the Airbus 321neo, but at a “very big discount” to small widebody jets like the Airbus 330neo and Boeing 787-8, he told delegates.
AIRBUS OPTIONS
Plueger also added texture to Airbus’s plans to respond to the NMA by fine-tuning its biggest single-aisle jet. Officially, Airbus says its 185-240-seat A321neo dominates the “middle of the market” just above 200 jets, something Boeing denies.
But it is also studying a new version capable of lifting more weight, Plueger told Reuters. Extra carrying capacity typically allows airlines to carry more payload or fly further.
A person familiar with Airbus’s plans said it was studying two main options to respond to the new Boeing mid-jet, but was pausing decisions to try to force Boeing to show its hand first.
The first would involve raising the maximum take-off weight to about 100 tonnes from the 97 tonnes on the already enhanced A321LR version, now being prepared for its maiden flight.
That calls for changes to the existing wing and a stronger landing gear but could need more engine thrust, the person said.
A costlier option would include a lighter new wing with a larger area: something that helps reduce thrust requirements by allowing the jet to take off or deal with an engine problem with help from the wings without extra thrust or a longer runway.
Both options would involve stretching the aircraft slightly to accommodate one or two extra rows of seats, the person said.
Airbus declined comment. (Reporting by Tim Hepher; Editing by Sudip Kar-Gupta and Conor Humphries)
The problem seems to be that customers want to pay maybe 10% or 20% more for a MoM than they would normally have to for an A321LR. I think that is the true basis for those Boeing estimates of a market for 5000 midmarket jets.
Boeing offficials deny they will discontinue the 788. Still, sales and delivery data appear to support the thesis that the 787-8 won’t have a future beyond 2020. Thus, Boeing’s product gap clearly begins with the 737-9/10 and ends with the 787-9.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup
Hoejstly that article sounds like it was written by a third grader who no knowledge at all of aeronautical engineering or aircraft design.
May be you can help with this comment below.
Airbus Americas president Barry Eccleston feels that arguing about configurations is pointless. It comes down to thrust
Quote:
“Suppose Boeing or we decide to make a new Middle of the Market airplane. If we could actually agree on what that is, it is probably going to need an engine that is 50,000 lbs thrust. Don’t tell me 45, because the airplane is only going to grow, it’s going to need more thrust. It’s going to need 50 on day one anyway and probably more than that to grow over the life of the program,” said Eccleston.
“How many proven 50,000 lb thrust turbo fan or unducted fan engines are there right now? Do you think there will be by 2025, given the engine business today?
“A 50,000 lb engine with a gear box in the middle of it is a lot of shaft horsepower and a lot of heat. That’s an engineering challenge of a magnitude beyond producing a 30,000 lb engine. I think 2025 is probably a little aggressive to me. Twenty 27 is probably still a little aggressive. Twenty 30 maybe, but by then maybe you have an unducted fan anyway.
“The point is, none of have an engine to build an airplane around even if you could figure out what the airplane is.” https://leehamnews.com/2016/10/12/ai...agree-nma-now/
I am not sure if I understand the issue. Certainly there are turbofan engines with maximum thrust well over 50,000 lbf.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
