Why THIS Airplane gives Boeing NIGHTMARES! 

Please do a video about the DHL 611 and BTC 2937 mid air collision 💥 in Germany 🇩🇪. Thank you

Who would win if you'll ask Incogni to delete your data from deleteme and deleteme to delete your data from incogni?

Never found a situation where an person I knew became more capable because he earned a master of business administration, the so-called MBA. A disaster for American industry.

FG​@@steveperreira5850

Being a truly great manufacturing company requires a truly great company culture. That culture must be fostered over generations to maintain the generational knowledge that comes from the expensive lessons learned. By the time new and profit focused management realise how crucial the culture of it’s company is to success, they are already 20 years too late.

Don't forget stranded astronauts

not enough stock buybacks.

I suggest you swap 1 and 2 above, so as to maximise management stock options!

Don't forget clouds

Unions

Very interesting and worrying comment, indeed.

Could NOT AGREE MORE! Well said.

Poisoned by MBA people overruling engineers.

Their coming back to Seattle under the new CEO and I’m sure you’ll complain again anyways given what the media has taught you to do with 0 critical thinking

More or less

This was the takeaway from this video, Calhoun short term thinking, not strategic long term thinking which is what he was employed to do

​@igorGriffiths , that's the Jack Welsh way..and Calhoun was one of his deciples. Jack Welsh was a con man that single handedly ruined many great US companies.

​​@@igorGriffithsthat being said, I'm not sure how well a NMA program would be perceived on the back of the turbulent 787 introduction, and both 737 Max and 777X programs still in crisis mode. Why should the public trust this new clean sheet aircraft Boeing is going to rush through the door while also putting out two other programs on fire?

Didn’t you listen?! It’s a “niche idea”.

You can't fix stupid Boeing's DEI hiring.

​@@seanromero2303but DEI hiring I'm sure you mean mediocre white men such as the CEOs who have run the company into the ground, right?

narcissists (DEI hires) always have a problem with acknowledging reality

​@@seanromero2303 It's more of a management problem when all engineers in management get replaced by sales people.

Bunch of old white dudes

Not as large as you think, and not large enough for two players.

@widget787 Pretty large for second-tier and low cost European airlines.

It is a niche, the XLR will not be able to make it as well as a purpose built clean sheet design. Said in another way, the XLR will eventually be obsolete overnight..

It's a nice which Boeing once filled nicely but has abandoned for 20 years.

A very large niche as it seems. 550 orders 😂

That adds up to a lot of weight, which eats into efficiency. Not quite to the level of inefficiency of the 757, but could give a lot of airlines pause.

​@@stephenj4937You have to also consider the lighter newer materials and new engines that are quite better.

@@stephenj4937 It can also add those spare tanks up front for specific long-range routes. 5000 nm (basic napkin math) in a single-row airplane would be impressive and I can see a lot of non-passenger uses for it.

@@stephenj4937 The A321XLR still burns 30% less fuel per trip than the 757, which is significant. And the extra potable water tank is sourced straight from the Airbus ACJneo Business jet lineup. I also forgot to mention the new E-Rudder, an electronic rudder system sourced from the A350.

I forgot to mention the new E-Rudder, an electronic rudder system sourced from the A350.

It's not necessarily MBAs. It's Jack Welch sycophants. One of the best CEOs that Boeing had wasn't an engineer. He was a lawyer. What Boeing needs is a problem solver who has a long-term vision for the company and isn't concerned with short-term gains beyond what benefits the company in the long-term.

@@vawlkus Too big to fail company. 2nd largest defence contractor and the only thing they have going for them on the commercial front is that between them, Boeing and Airbus have 98% market share so no way Airbus can just ramp it up and pick up the slack. Boeing has to survive one way or the other.

@@VTdarkangel It's the short term profit perspective and that leads to no future. This is the end game of that play. A few people got very rich screwing Boeing out of their value.

@cageordie the short-term can't be ignored. It's when short-term value is prioritized over the long-term health of the company is when the problems arise. That's what Jack Welch did to GE, and that's what happened to Boeing. In an effort to cut costs for short-term gain in value, the long-term was sacrificed by souring relations with employees, which caused brain drain and quality control issues.

Imagine being stuck on the ISS wondering when you'll get to come home.

An optional extra.

🔥

Anything to save a penny.

😂

I'm done 😂

I thought this when the crashes happened. The 737 design goes back to the 60's. It should have been replaced with a modern composite jet chassis similar to the 787 in design to compete with the A320 going forward.

The last transatlantic flight stopped just 5-6 years ago. But I am with you and sure that we will see new flights with the XLR.

I can see that happening more and more. With the big airports reaching capacity airlines will start offering flights from regional airports. Instead of you having to travel from Hamburg to Frankfurt and catch a plane to New York JFK you could catch a flight from Hamburg to Newark. Smaller airports, less traffic, closer to your home and where you actually want to go and so on. As a Brit I'm still pissed that BAe sold its 20% stake in Airbus for a measly couple of billion Euro twenty years ago. Still, at least all Airbus wings are still built here.

JFK vs Newark is a bad example. Both are 45 minutes from Manhattan. Delta and American Airlines only fly international from JFK. United only flies international from Newark, nothing to do with small vs big airport. All three of them will have A321xlrs but until the 757s are retired, if the A321xlrs fly from New York it will be to LA or Miami, not to Hamburg or Nice or Mallorca.

@@heylookarealdinosaur Delta has not ordered any XLRs so far. American and United both plan to fly the XLR into secondary airports in Europe and North Africa as well as South America.

@@heylookarealdinosaur If there are enough passengers an airline would fly from anywhere to anywhere. The failure of the A380 is because airlines didn't follow the hub and spoke model of using the giant hubs like Heathrow, JFK, LAX, CDG etc but flew smaller, fuel efficient, planes direct from smaller regional airports to other smaller regional airports. But you're right about Newark. I was thinking about LaGuardia.

I prefer it to the standard Air NZ livery. I also think their leased 777-300ER from Cathay Pacific with the all white livery looks better than the standard one too.

Agree completely. A great livery, and a great airline to fly.

You read my mind

Lookup Alsik Express planes

I gave up Air NZ on account of it having the snootiest, stuck up waitresses in the sky, even worse than Qantas was at the time, 30 years ago.

$32.8M pays for a lot of engineer-hours. But no, they'd rather pander to the managerial-bureaucratic class

Is that a job application? They should hire you!

@@vintagelady1you must be part of Boeing management?

Nah boeing really need to stop using the 737 airframe it has way too many problems on it at the start and they should just make a new airframe.

@@camaradeKC But that's exactly what Calhoun told them they *couldn't* do, wasn't it?

@@connclissmann6514 A The concept of larger higher capacity 737’s invented the concept. That was the point, add 3rd world pilots and whammo. You get what’s going on today. If Boeing goes offshore I cannot blame them based on how they have been treated. $2.1 billion settlement than a completely unrelated issue from a contractor occurs. No crash, no injuries. A charge from the DOJ and another $451 million added on. The families of the crash, they think the extra money is theirs. I hope not.

F1 cars do not always have the "traditional" pedal arrangement. But Boeing is in no way an F1 car, not even near one. The 737 max is more like Al Bundy's Dodge.

Pilot training is cumbersome but a minor cost compared to fuel and maintenance. They need very efficient smaller planes with a roughy 3000nm range as they don't do transatlantic flights and often their larger 737s are 3/4 full. In fact, more than half of all of Southwest's flights are not even 1500nm. Paying 150 million per jet that can do everything is like buying one of those Swiss Army knives with the 50-70 functions when all you need is a basic knife that can do 8 or 10 things. I have one of those giant ones ( about 40-50 functions ). I take my Leatherman with me instead when I am camping. It does what I need for less cost and less weight. One is a curiosity I bought when I was young and a bit foolish, with bigger eyes than my capacity (lol) that sits in a drawer, and the other I keep in my car and use constantly.

@@todortodorov6056 I liken the Boeing family to the Ford Mustang. All variants of a fantastic game-changing design. That is 50+ years old at its core. Boeing's real issue is that they kept trying to refine and adjust the same formula rather than actual out of the box radical re-designs. And they are end of life. In a way, I see why their CEO said no new planes. It's not possible to compete any more with ancient fundamentals. Yes, I own a Mustang myself and love it. But it's simply not a modern driving experience.

You rent a car with a different configuration every time you go to the UK, Japan, Australia.. etc (unless you live in one of those backwards countries in which case the opposite is true).

Yeah.. you never know 😂

@@marnig9185 Right, like when you prang a MD-80 and everyone slaps their heads and goes "screwjacks! Of course!" when the FAA report is released. But we won't be thinking of screwjacks as a cause initially because most control specs have been written in blood, you know. So it would be a (ahem) niche error that is widespread and/or a new unanticipated error like the Hawaii 737 that suffered aluminum fatigue which happened 40 years or so after air passenger pressurization started in the late 40s with the DC-7 and B377.

Bombardier tried with the C300, but Boeing and American protectionism killed them off. Though it did allow Airbus to sneak in, get a plane for free and sell it in the US.

@@karlbassett8485 yeah, an American company might have more luck which in some ways would make me happy but with our lucky lately it would probably be another Silicon Valley attempt at aerospace that gets people killed. What we need is Burt Rutan to link up with someone competent who has VC money haha

At this point Boeing needs to merge with Lockheed Martin and form a new company. Their combined technology and engineering would make it a better competitor to Airbus.

@@khakiswag tbh we’ve had enough of that and it seems to make things worse

Embraer comes to mind, this would be their chance to try their hand at larger aircraft

Enjoy!

​@@MentourNowThis is out of topic but can you cover the Japan Airlines Flight 516 accident? How does this do to the Airbus A350 after this unfortunate accident?

My only concern is how “comfortable” would it be for long hauls though

@@FrostlifeV Absolutely miserable.

If I have a comparable choice in price, I’m always going to pick a wide-body for long haul.

Single aisle, no wheelchair-accessible toilets. Far from perfect.

@@stephenj4937 that would be down to the cabin, which is the airline, not the aircraft

Indeed, when their main focus is placating activist shareholders.

One earns value for shareholders by valuing customers.

@@blatherskite9601 not always true, if the company has enough market dominance that there's no more expansion possible or customers have no choice that makes sense, it's a scummy practice, but I can see why.

Look at what happened to a major grocery chain that ran beautifully until it became in ester dependent and later was taken over by another grocery giant, but is run as two separate entities! They forgot that the employees are the foundation of a company and the administration is the roof, and is often too heavy for the structure until a lot of the deadwood is removed which is often too late!

And shouldn't be by artificially increasing invester gains by simply raising prices for the consumer and keeping wages low which is too often the case especially after a good company goes public! Such as the grocery chain I was referring to!

Should have. 25 years ago everyone feared this was going to happen when they absorbed McDonnell, but they soldiered on as the cracks kept growing. Now, it's a complete mess and won't likely ever regain its momentum.

Like most large US corperations it will compete in court saying Airbus is EU goverment supported demanding tariffs and anti monpoply action by the courts. It seems to be the trend in the USA at present, the quality of your legal team is more important than the quality of your product.

That might be the case

In addition to your thought, it also better fits the ULCC business model. Spirit ended up converting their A319neo’s to A321neos which they are probably regretting right about now. It’s basically the same reason @mentournow explained in a prior video why Boeing even bothered with the Max 7.

The international airports in Nepal are actually not that elevated: Pokhara with 2,625 ft / 800 m, Tribhuvan (Kathmandu) with 4,390 ft / 1,338 m and Gautam Buddha Airport (Siddharthanagar) only at 344 ft / 105 m. The Airports in Mexico City, Denver, Alcantarí (Sucre, Bolivia), El Alto (Bolivia) and Lhasa are much higher. I just checked at planespotters: Tibet Airlines (6 planes in operation) and China Southern Airlines (4 planes in operation) are the biggest operators. Tibet Airlines has already a large fleet of Airbus 319-100 and 319-200 (33 in total). They operate only Airbus planes.

Since 2017 20 A 319neo´s were manufactured - yes: 20 in 7 years! - 12 of them were selled to Airlines from China, 4 to Businessjet Provider, 1 to a private Customer and 1 to an Airline from Uzbekistan, the remaining 2 are the two Prototypes which stayed at Airbus. The Launch Customer was K5 Aviation, a German Businessjet-Provider. The Backlog of the A 319neo contains 50 Orders (yes: 50!): 17 from Airlines from China, 4 from Businessjet-Provider and 29 from at the moment unknown Customers, but they´re probably also Airlines from China, Businessjet Provider and maybe a few private Customers. The Chinese Airlines are using them for mountainous Airports in China (Tibet Airline in fact got 7 of the 12 A 319neo, which were delivered to China), the Businessjet-Provider are using them for "best Customers", who´re able and willing to pay for "more" than a Gulfstream or a Bombardier Global.

i was at lhasa gonggar airport 10 years ago, and no single boeing plane was spotted in the ramp. they only use a319 and a332 there...

I worked for one US airline in the UK and then three in FL including Eastern. Unfortunately, all four went bankrupt, but I stayed in the US. I miss the 70’s and 80’s when the industry was so much more exciting and of course free travel. I don’t remember Monarch, but I do remember British Caledonian, Laker and Peoples Express.

So a tour operator.. not really an airline. Should troop movements and Hajj charters be called airlines, too?

Bangor Maine! My first ever flight to the US. Felt like a remote military base there.

Thanks Sandra! Sorry, I'd forgotten about Monarch.

Given how some of themm act. I wouldn't trust them even counting actual beans.

A nearly 10 year waiting list is a problem and why Embraer and Comtac and others are now looking at the large demand and getting into the game in a serious manner. The main issue isn't the long-haul routes, but the tons of shorter, often less than 1500 nm routes and a massive fleet of aging planes worldwide. Money to be made for sure. :) Boeing at this point could actually make money by selling a new version of the 727. Demand is that high.

Airbus are terrified that Boeing will go bust because think what the reaction of many governments will be to an Airbus monopoly. You can bet both the Chinese and US governments would both immediately pour many billions into creating a competitor. Hell, the EU would regulate them to death. It's far better to be the market leader in a duopoly. It is the same reasoning the Microsoft had in the early 1990s when Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy - they actually covertly gave Apple a large loan.

Airbus has already stated they don't want the monopoly and it's not a good thing to have.

@@martinluke9470 Not much you can do when your competitor is imploding and everyone else left the commercial sector. Same as we see now with Intel and AMD. Poor Intel can't hardly keep from tripping over its own feet. This (very likely) strike will probably push Boeing over the edge. I get it that the workers need more, but the company is NOT doing well - for real this time.

@@martinluke9470 Indeed.

The 737 was the world best-seller for a reason. Boeing made an almighty dumpster fire of updating it though.

​@offshoretomorrow3346 Yes, it was. At a time when there was nothing else like it. But the world is moving on, and someone made something better, decades ago, and Boeing was so ignorant to respond.

Airbus backlog is a good thing for Boeing. It means that customers who desire earlier delivery dates will choose them. Remember that unfilled orders are like unrealized gains. Another pandemic and there could be huge cancellations.

Boeing tried that: The 787-3. No orders.

Like a "sabotage" unit sent from Airbus to wreak havoc

They have been coasting since there last merger....

There have been several already. Look them up.

The only thing Boeing should fear right now is Boeing, they are their own worst enemy. Airbus, COMAC, the economy, etc. could never do as much damage to Boeing as Boeing inflicted on itself.

Boeing is too busy get It's sh!t in order to a afraid of anything right now. They're at least moving in the right direction. Ortberg is taking up residence in the Renton area, to be on top of things. That's a plus. Maybe they'll move the entire C suite back to Renton

Boeing is still outselling Airbus in the wide-body market.

@@Danimalpm1 keep clutching at those straws. Boeing outselling Airbus in a much smaller volume market, however, the A350 is by far the best wide body in the air at the moment along with the A380. 777's are old and tired now and who knows when the 777x will eventually start in service

Wow, thank you!

It won’t because there simply isn’t the market for it. And the A321 XLR will suffer from the same problems the 757 did outside of its intended role. Too big and too heavy with too little capacity.

@@calvinnickel9995 no it won't, you just don't like Airbus so want to say something negative about it

It reminds me of those videos of Steve Ballmer at Microsoft laughing at the introduction of Apple's iPhone.

It is a niche but a niche that needs to be filled. That's why you have a range of products. If you don't fill that niche, your competitors will. Once your competitors have a way in, they can start chipping away at your other product line sales. Before you know it your competitors are out selling you 5 to 1 and you are just left wondering what happened.

My poor work horse 😢

@dsmx85 Except not. The A340 and A380 fill niche markets. Remember that Boeing has never clean-sheeted another airliner with more than two engines since the 747. The A340 and A380 were huge money losers for Airbus. Boeing did some small modifications to make the 747-8 and split the already tiny jumbo market to ensure that Airbus would lose even more money. People don’t want to go long distances on narrow body aircraft. The only places it works is long thin routes where there simply isn’t enough demand to make a wide body profitable. And lots of airlines would rather reduce frequency to fill larger planes (since there likely isn’t competition on those routes) rather than alienate customers with horrible aircraft.

@@calvinnickel9995 I'd like to add from the maintenance perspective, the 757 is far less troublesome than the A330s (barring that one incident with the goose, but Canadian geese are the devil). The 757 goes AOG far less often and gets thru its maintenance checks quicker than any other aircraft in our fleet. Every time we hear that parts for the A330s need shipped, everyone goes "fucking Airbus".

And Icelandair is competing in transatlantic market for smaller European airports with no direct flight there - e.g. for me to fly to the US I need to go to Franfurt / Heathrow / Helsinki etc first, so why not have a 4-hour flight to Iceland and then 5 or 6 hours to the US, instead of 2.5 hours to Germany and then 8 or 9 to the US? If the price is the same..

​@@ivankuzin8388Icelandair was flying from Edmonton in Western Canada to Keflavik, and then to Paris with a minimal amount of layover time. That was far more practical and shorter than flying to Toronto or Montréal and then Paris. But they stopped serving Edmonton 5 or 6 years ago. However, this year I discovered that KLM is doing a non-stop flight between Edmonton and Amsterdam.

The 321 XLR won't do western Europe to west coast U.S. It might be able to just make it eastbound but aviation is rightfully conservative and generous margins are allowed for.

@@danfuller4189 From Iceland it will, Iceland in quite much closer to US than the rest of Europe :)

So you work for Airbus? That's cool 😊 Seems like your company is in a good shape with your namesake at the helm haha 😅 Hopefully you enjoy working for them 😊

Exactly. Stale and sadly uninventive. So incredibly unamerican.

Boeing is all about hiring MBA grads to optimize shareholder value. Everything else is a sideshow, including aircraft.

Yeah, impossible until you recall how many other great Murican companies also destroyed themselves.

It's _Not_ "Boeing Management"!!! Boeing Management left the building in 1997. It's _McDonnell Douglas_ Management + Wall Street. Look, I get it; we like to romanticize Boeing as the great American _Commercial/Passenger_ aircraft manufacturing company of 50 years ago. When the merger consumated, Boeing ... I mean _McDonnell Douglas_ reverse-acquired Boeing to support its DoD ambitions. Airbus has $65Billion in annual revenue, from selling mostly passenger aircraft. Boeing has about *$300 BILLION* in DoD contracts, and $80 Billion in annual revenue - mostly from Hypersonic Missiles systems, to those "2,000 Lbs. munitions dropped on children", to petal mines. This is NOT your Father's Boeing. This is pure Evil.

@@Boababa-fn3mrCan’t get too far in the comments without finding some fresh American hate.

@@Danimalpm1 Where's the hate?

@@Boababa-fn3mr "Murican" = "wanting to project a sense to dislike towards that country and its inhabitants." [urban dictionary]

Calhoun has not yet fallen off the table

Yeah, keeping former whistle-blowers alive might also improve Boeing's reputation.

Wait. Doesn't Boeing have a brand new CEO?

@@jamesengland7461 Yes, they do!

Lots and lots of 737, 747, 727, 707 crashes. Same with Airbus takes a very long time, airbus almost 50 years, to become a major manufacturer of large jet aircraft. Well I like Elon Musk and the stuff that he's doing, he's not in the business right now at least of creating a new airline, whose stocks don't pay dividends, nor are they building new passenger aircraft, because there are Half a dozen major league companies in the US the UK Germany, Canada, Brazil, and Russia, all having one or more long lived Major aircraft manufacturer.

The 737's low design was specifically to accommodate manual cargo loading and passenger stairs. Airbus designed the 320 much later so could assume bulk cargo loading and airstairs - which by that time they most airports had.

Don't quite agree about the "quiet" bit for the A321neo. I've taken four flights on them this year with SATA (Azores), and they were all noisy. Different engine technology, obviously, but the loud noise startled me. It reminded me of the roar the B707 made taking off fully loaded. Vastly better climb rate, of course. Maybe AirNZ's Pratt & Whitney engines are quieter than the CFM Leap-1 engines SATA uses, or perhaps AirNZ uses a higher grade of oil ;-) The B787 is the quietest plane I've flown in recently - GE engines, I believe.

@@Peasmould nah, you're making that up, I've never been on a noisy neo including a VietJet flight from Bangkok to Chiang Mai in January

Fr

nope, BA flew them from London to New York via Ireland, 32 business seats

I keep praying Delta will never carry out the threat of the Max-10. That will be a major disappointment.

Well, then don't travel. Airlines should buy Airbus right now so that the little crystals can travel.

@@SweetCloud0598 nice, thanks for the compassion of a fear that is irrational but genuine. I get that statistically flying is the safest way to travel, but the fear of flying is irrational and if I can reasonably avoid doing it I will, but I will fly if there is no other reasonable way. I hope you never develop a fear of anything, and if you do that you receive more understanding than you have shown a stranger online 🫶

I admire the astronauts that trust going into space with a Boeing product, albeit the helium scare could have been a lot worse, but nevertheless, for now they are stranded up there!

Half the aircraft in the sky on any given day are Boeing. Probably more than half, actually. I hear this claim a lot these days and I’m not sure I buy it because most people are sensitive to pricing and convenience above all else.

This is exactly why you’ll keep contributing nothing to society! *They never ever do safety comparisons because you cannot do such comparisons in this industry unless you want a major lawsuit*

@@BusFan-nu1kd I never claimed to "contribute anything to society". You made that up because it's what you would do. In Europe we don't just kill whistleblowers but in the USA you do. And about big lawsuits, that's another big US thing and it almost never goes against domestic big business.

And this is a part of that

Boeings greatest fear should be itself at this point.

Whilst they should be fearful of losing safety record..... Everything else is secondary. I have already started to go out of my way or spend significantly more just to avoid a Boeing flight..

Losing doors ! & wheels 🛞

Losing wheels is fine, I trust my pilots training... But losing the door causing rapid depressurization, or adding nose dive MCAS without telling pilots; That's what I fear. If my pilot doesn't know shit Boeing has done, how will he keep me safe!?

Ha ha! Thank you!

@@dominicMcAfee Don't thank me, man. Thank(s) yourself for the graphic aviation wizardry you create for us to see.

@@Josie.A.F ach no, it really is a team effort bud. We have a fantastic and extremely talented team of wizards. Our own little Hogwarts, if you will! lol

Good point, and thank you!

@oscarwandel9612 You just lack the foresight of a true genius CEO. If you dig deep enough, surely you will come out of the other end eventually. (Make sure you negotiate your bonus and sell your shares before your inevitable success can become public, though.)

... or at least a restored culture and a long time. Due to the lack of competitive capacity, Boeing could probably still do it if its Board had the vision.

Seat pitch depends on the airline. I have flown on an A320neo where my knees simply got caught between the chair and the seat in front of me.

Legroom and seating layout is entirely the choice of the airline. Not decided by Boeing or Airbus.

Board as well - this has gone on for too long.

I thought a 757 with some updates would be their natural competitor to this 🤔

@@macflodthe base design of a 757 is too heavy and fuel inefficient for todays needs. It would require a new design.

757 MAX, 787 MIN

757 max would have been impossible. Tooling was destroyed way before and would require clean sheet airplane

Nobody seems to worry about those things with the A-380 3 story plane! Lufthansa in Frankfurt has a real need for those, or did the last time I heard about it!

for me it depends on the age of the Boeing 'plane - older ones fine; last 20 years, look for alternatives

That will no doubt happen at some point

I'm still happy to go on the older 737s ... like Petter flies with Ryanair ;-) Boeing only went into its tailspin when the motley MD hijackers took over.

MAS 737 economy is much more comfortable than AirAsia A330 economy and Emirates 777 economy.

they have different cabin layouts for long haul, same pitch and legroom as widebodies

It’s pretty simple a321xlr has its own crew rest area

@@ChoosewiselyeyeReally? Airbus has not announced that as of yet, and deliveries are scheduled for this year. Given it’s range, airlines will need to schedule up to 3 pilots, and to please regulators, the crew rest area will need to provide lie-flat seating with a privacy curtain. With this, they are legal for flights up to 12 hours, well beyond what the XLR is capable of. While a dedicated and separate rest cabin would provide better rest, I don’t bet on airlines to spend extra for that when all they need to do is set aside a first class seat and provide a curtain. This also gives them the flexibility to sell that seat to passengers on routes not requiring a third pilot.

@@RobertsonDCCD A lot of first class seating these days are effectively small cabins in their own right. Though asking airlines to give up such profitable seats is pushing it if they can find space somewhere else is asking a lot.

depends, we're talking kind of short long haul, so 3rd pilot not required

@@soilentgreen7 It could and will be used when only 2 pilots are required. It also has the range to stretch into 3 pilot territory, so it just depends on the airline and how they want to use it. A permanent crew rest compartment will eat up customer space, no way around it. The most sensible move will be to use first class seats when required for the resting pilot. Flight attendants, however, will not be treated to such accommodations.

Because the numbers added up to it being no better economy, no better capacity, and not less expensive to make than the competition. Basically like comparing a Honda minivan to a Toyota one. Nearly identical specs for a "new" vehicle/plane. When you need a full re-design with the next generation in mind. Something radically different that breaks new ground, or people will simply keep buying the Airbus models they know and like.

@@plektosgaming the Airbus A32X airframe is nearing 40 years of age now. The NEO range has new engines, wings and avionics, but in the end it’s only the better choice because the 737 base design is even older. With newer materials and most likely better aerodynamics, Boeing could easily have beaten today’s A32X NEO even with similar engines. The problem Boeing is facing now is airlines who used to fly Boeing, are switching ecosystem because they can no longer wait. It’s going to be much harder to win those customers back with a hypothetical mid 2030’s new Boeing MMA/737 replacement. Especially since Airbus will very likely be targeting their A32X replacement around the same timeframe.

Its hard to blame Calhoun because the real reason for that decision is simply that Boeing no longer has the financial reserves to risk a new clean sheet design - if the process went awry as the 787 did the company really would be bankrupted. That is because of a string of awful strategic decisions which predated him. Of course he dressed it all up as "it aint broke so we aint fixing it" but few people in the industry were fooled.

@@kenoliver8913 It will be bankrupted anyways if it doesn't innovate. I do blame him as he's part of that generation of "leaders" who thinks of business in terms of only loss and profit and his own golden parachute at the end. When he gets booted from this job, eventually, he will crawl like a roach to some other company. Most likely back to Blackstone. This current group of "leaders" will send the next year flinding blame everywhere but themselves.

This is a perfect analysis of why the airline industry is so slow with innovation. Maybe the chinese will tik tok the aircraft industry

Sadly, most other competitors went out of business.

probably not good news for "we the pax". Demand exceding capacity, ticket prices heading for the stratosphere :'-(

Airbus had almost double the orders Boeing had in 2023 and that’s before everything that happened in 2024

Good catch. It was probably an editorial mistake rather than Petter's, but it's a good note for future pre-release double-checking.

They've considered a re-engined 767 already. As you write, they make the KC-46 and actually they still make the 767-300F freighter, too. But new engines that would fit under the wing would be difficult to find -- they would need to convince GE to develop a modified version of the GEnX of the 787/747-8, to make it work. Even if they could do it, the plane would probably be too heavy and/or not efficient enough, unless they also make a new wing for it... which is what they did with the 777X, which isn't going well (or fast). Probably a topic for another video

@@MentourNow Thanks for the reply. I must have missed that they had considered it. I was thinking more in the line of the RR Trent engines of the A330 NEO. Your knowledge level is MUCH better than mine.

@@JohnMckeown-dl2cl ... also seems like a fundamental capacity mis-match - 767 is a wide-body, A321neo is a narrow-body

Before 777x and 737max 10&7 certifications

"what happened to that idea"?????? Duh!!!!! Did you not listen as you watched?😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

​@@Choosewiselyeyebefore the what now? 😂

Watch the video, and the mystery will be solved...

It was a big influence on Southwest's decision to launch the 737 Max.

Thank you!

Too dangerous. Requires special training and a whole other bag of certification nightmare that nobody will touch it with a ten-foot pole.

Boeing's next midsize plane will probably have two aisles and a 2-3-2 economy layout, like a 767. At least that was one of the last configurations before the NMA was postponed indefinitely.

@@MentourNow Exactly. I wanted to mention 767 but it has been out of production for years. So probably instead of developing a new NMA, it makes sense to just build a smaller version of 787. May be more cost-effective.

The problem is that physics says that the way to go is long and narrow. Because a short and wide fuselage has more drag than a thin and long one. Airbus also floated 2 aisle oval shaped, wide and short design concepts in the capacity range of the A320/737, but there is a reason it never materialized.

My wife and I just flew on a 321 this past June from Dulles to Dublin, Ireland and back (Aer LIngus). It was really not that great. The plane was an older version of the A 321 and the seating and entertainment reflected that. The crew complained that the galley was too small and that had very little space to work. I agree. The seats were not uncomfortable and the space between seats was not worse that was I found on some wide bodies. But t was a small plane for a transatlantic flight. We got anA 321 from Dublin to Rome and that was a much nicer flight. I am Franco-American, and have flown the transatlantic route a zillion times for the past 42 years. I flew on DC8 and 707 during the People Express first years (Boston to Paris)... I flew so many 747s that I would dare to say. I LOVE that airplane. I flew on A 330 (very nice plane). I flew on DC10, L-1011 etc...I flew the 757 many times on transatlantic and domestic routes. I had once a very bad experience with that airplane. It was in 2009 (O'Hare to CDG). It took us three planes to cross the Atlantic (AA). All of them had a problem. First one was "defective". They took another one out of the hangar. Flight left 7 hours late (we all had to walk to the other side of O'Hare to embark). There was no entertainment and they only had the time to load food. No one cared. People wanted to sleep. Just before crossing the Atlantic over Boston (2:30 am), the pilot announced that we had to go back to Chicago due to a problem on one of the engines. Spent the night at the airport. Got a new airplane (757) the same afternoon. A few hours before landing, one of the stewardesses who was in the preceding flight told me on the side that this particular airplane also had problems. She talked about full-system reboot above the Atlantic. No idea what it was! System reboot?.. Anyway. Since then, I never felt comfortable flying a 757, especially on the cross continental route (BOS/NYC to West Coast). This to say, an airplane may be incredible for pilots, but the passenger experience is what makes an airplane likable or not, even if it all is based on anecdotal experiences. Going back to the A321 flying transatlantic, I understand the airlines rational for doing so. But maybe it is at the expense of passenger's comfort? Safety not being an issue, as the A 321 is obviously very safe flying long hauls... Maybe with new A 321s and reconfiguration of cabins. it might be nicer?

Some airlines have started boarding single aisle planes window seats first, then middle seats, then aisle seats. That seems to reduce the mess quite significantly.

Awesome! I love my Discord crew!! 💕💕

😂😂😂😂

Nop, not really

Yep, you can pretty much fly San Francisco to London on a single aisle aircraft now (that's a 10 hour A320 flight). Honestly shocking how much technology is improving.

​@@MentourNow what's the answer then? Making old planes faster and blowing up some door because they don't give a frak about safety?

@@user-fp6iw2ex1xI surely wouldn’t want to. I’m always going to choose a wide-body for long haul unless there’s a very compelling reason not to.