@@sapede Not the best analogy unless you're referring to the weak links the FAA and Boeing relationship has uncovered? Even then I am exponentially more likely to die of cancer than on a commercial flight, especially a US based one. In over a decade, ONE person, ONE has died on a us-based commercial flight. That is an insanely good statistic. More people get killed by vending machines. The MCAS issue is a completely solvable "curable" problem and while I do wish Boeing would stop trying to fortify their near 70 year old design, I'm postulating a lot has been learned, mended, solved. This is all due to our perception of danger with flying vs. our relatively irrational lack of fear towards what is most likely to kill us: heard disease or cancer. Cancer while heavily scrutinized, has not been cured. Over 600,000 people die from it in the US every year. Big difference.
@@wizardmix the MAX 8 may have been scrutinized, not the MAX 10! This should also come with a bunch of new tricks to further stretch the 737 e.g the main landing gear trick. I don't like to compare airplanes manufacturers that have different statements of work but the changes required for the XLR look far less riscky based on an already flying A321. The low clearance architecture of the initial 737 must be a real engineering challenge to stretch as much as airliners designed from the beginning for wider turbofan engines. Long life to all manufacturers!
I have over 30,000 hours and over 50 years flying both Boeing and Airbus. I enjoy being able to fly the plane. Boeing is designed for pilots that still appreciate skill. Airbus is designed for pilots that are content to let the software designers decide how the plane should be flown.
People flew for many years in the 707 on transatlantic routs, the same flight on the A321 it's going to be more comfortable! Less noisy and with in flight entertainment.
@@jantschierschky3461 Yes, of course. But what would really improve comfort for passengers are larger legroom and seat width, not the fact that you have 6 rather than 9 seats in a row.
Good job kid. The 321 in all its variants is the killer app. The 1960's designed 737's are hot and cramped. The landing gear is short, making the long bodies of the larger 737's susceptible to tail strikes so the VREF speeds are higher, increasing landing distances. Boeing should stick to wide bodies, and for the love of God, get rid of the yoke.
In terms of pilots, potential 321XLR operators won't have difficulty recruiting somebody to pilot them given the abundance of qualified A320 family pilots.
It is a bit of an open goal for Airbus. Boeing's arrogance has come back to haunt them. Just so people dont get angry, about 90% of my flights have been on Boeing aircraft, I dont care what I fly on as long as it is safe.
Let me be more optimistic, as soon as the pandemic will be managed, and it will be safe to travel, everyone will jump on a plane to go anywhere in the world like crazy...so I bet all most of the airlines that have survived will reconsider wide bodies much sooner than expected. That's just a guess, but I'm ready to bet on it:-)
I'm not sure because I've flown on a Turkish Airlines 737 900er for close to 8hrs. True for a narrow body it was comfortable, but still far from something like a 777 a350 or 787
@@arnavsharma9882 I mean Boeing isn't focusing on making a new 757, and the A220 will still dominate during the pandemic because of its efficiency, size, speed and more. There is a possibility that Boeing may make a new plane the size of the 757 like the B797, but it also most likely it will be replacing the 737 family.
@@mubassirzaman7202 Agree, The best to do right now for Boeing actually is to work on sector where Airbus is absent so the mid size long range 757 replacement is good plus long haul high capacity 777 9x
I've flown Qatar Business Q-Suite on the A350 - the comfort was superb. If an airline wanted, I don't know if they can provide the same comfort on the A320. One thing is sure; no matter the aircraft model, an airline can cramp as many people as they wish into it. We are just cargo for them.
MIO9, I like the A340 series. It kinda reminds me of the 757 but even with 4 engines, it's a very smooth, quiet plane. When Boeing's cult members boo and cry that it's "noisy" I'd like them to explain why I was able to get a decent night sleep on a night flight from Madrid to Chicago 9 years ago. And I don't sleep well on planes. I can't stand the vibration of the engines if I'm on a plane like the 777. I also wish airlines would phase out the ancient 757. Never flew on one that didn't have annoying squeaks and rattles and broken seats.
@@todortodorov940 The issue would be comfort for the masses as business class to economy class configuration ratio can be up to 2:10 for the traditional airlines. Especially with first class becoming almost redundant (singapore on their new A350-900's only have business class and premium economy, although this is because the extreme long haul routes are mostly for business travellers as it is more expensive, so they are more likely to be in a more expensive seat (ticket payed for by company)). With the redundancy of first class, I think we could expect to see even higher number of economy seats in configurations on newly ordered aircraft. So the issue for comfort would be for those economy seats. However, I agree that the A350 and 787 are more comfortable, as the stronger fuselage can withstand higher pressure, so cabin pressure is greater and closer to atmospheric sea level pressure.
The 737 family and the A320 family both have a 3-3 layout. The 737 is 6” narrower than the A320. The 787 and the A350 both have a 3-3-3 layout. The 787 is 6” narrower than the A350. I know which manufacturer’s aircraft if rather fly long haul in economy on.
Being a wide body doesn't automatically make it a more comfortable journey. It's all about configuration so there is no reason why flying a narrow body should feel any different if it's configured with similar pitch and equipment.
@@-Muhammad_Ali- it's only the fact that it has 1 less isle which has that visual kind of illusion effect of being more cramped. Im sure future single isle aircraft will fix this
@@gasviation9077 i enjoyed flying 7 hour flight on B767. When bored I just get up and do some walking. Two aisles let you do that without disturbing people much. On B757 or other single aisled narrow bodies that's extremely uncomfortable. Getting off you seat is additionally hard since you have to compromise with others walking or somebody getting out from the other side. That's the most scary part when trying to escape out from a burning plane. The safety part.
I've been on an A320 for 5 1/2 hours and that got pretty uncomfortable by the end . . . But id blame that on the cheap, thin seats the budget airline in question were using . . . The cabin is definitely more spacious than on a 73' and with the right interior fittings I can see it being easily comfortable enough for 8 or 9 hour flights.
I agree... I flown around 6 or 5 hours on that A321 , then due to the airline we were needed to stay on the aircraft after the other passengers at our connecting airport for a half an hour then took of again for another 4 hours. Pretty decent even though I have flown on it 9 hours on economy.
But im trying to say, flying in just a narrow body is not bad. It is not just tole ratable, but actually good in comfort. Depending on the airline of course, but it can be much much nice and better.
@massi mechoub I agree! I mean what do you actually do more in a flight apart from staying in your seat napping, eating, or watching a movie. I think a good and wide enough seat to so some stretching would be good enough for most people.
@@jetaddicted because they have newer planes. Boeing has a lead with 787. Unless they bring newer planes, they are screwed. Scrap 737 and build a new plane ground up. That segment moves a lot of planes. Perhaps even develop one in the regional jet market along with it.
1h in an Ryanair 737 is already too much The easyJet 320neos are much better Air Baltic A220's are fantastic I could fly long distance in a Lufthansa or Iberia 321neo no Problem but not with the low cost Carrier here in Europe.
@@Chris58851 Yea. I did a long 4 hours flight on a Biman 737, and a United Airline B737- 900 and it aint nice, neither is the 757 on an Atlantic flight but it still comfortable and I like the design. Though I did flown a A321-200 for 5 hours, then stayed on the aircraft at our connecting airport then flown 3 hours and arrived at our destination, and the flight was pretty comfortable and clean.
Though Im not gonna say it going to be comfortable for everyone, because it depends on the Airline your taking, but it kind of common sense. The 737 max 10 is still less wider then the A321 and A320. So the cabin is more tight there fore it more uncomfortable then the A321 and A320 ( unless if you flying on a airline that is decent with the 737s like Turkish Airlines) .
Comfort really depends on how you use the plane. The last time I crossed the Atlantic, it was in a Virgin Atlantic widebody in economy (probably an A330 or A350, I don't remember) and it was claustrophobic hell because they crammed so many seats in. I've had better experiences on every 737 and A320 I've ridden.
Well, they are kind of idiots at a macro-level but at an engineering level they crushed it. Too bad it broke them financially. Bombardier just can't get it's s h i t together in any manufacturing scale.
The 737 replacement needs to have variants suitable for the middle of the market segment. That's the only way this middle of the market riddle can be solved
@@theskyline1425 not entirely. The E195-E2 is only competing against the A220-100. The A220 300 is still way more efficient than the B737max7 or the A319neo.
Having flown on the 757 for many rather long distance routes (I live in Iceland) I can well imagine flying up to 8 hours on the A320 since it’s by far much better and more comfortable plain then 757. I have not flown on the new 737 but since Icelandair has started using them I probably will, unless I have other choicecs reaching my destinations (I ´m avoiding as much as possible Icelandair due to their disgusting treatment of staff, especially the cabin crew, during the C19 crisis, and disgusting “union busting” policy of the company, which the Icelandic union of airline pilots became active in as well).
Indeed. Airbus is well positioned to dominate the narrow body and mid-sized market with the A220/A320neo and A321XLR. Recent reports indicate that airbus holds 61% of the narrow body backlogs compared to the 39% by boeing and this gap will likely widens as boeing leaning airlines like United has also placed orders for the A321XLR to replace their B757. Airlines like Icelandic Air and KLM are seriously considering the A321XLR as the boeing's NMA is no where in sight.
This is why they are considering a new single aisle (not the NMA) as if the 737 Max makes no improvement to market share after re entering service it sounds like on paper they’ll ditch
@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 yes but one single airframe can only target that much of the market assuming the NSA is centered around the size that specifically targets the A321XLR, the B797-6 would be more efficient and capable than the A321XLR. It's larger sibling the B797-7 could be a simple stretch boasting better economics but shorter range. A smaller derivative, B797-5 would naturally be a simple shrink and thus be less economical that the max8. There is just no one size fits all solution and there is only that much that you could do with one single airframe family.
I'm not sure because I've flown on a Turkish Airlines 737 900er for close to 8hrs. True for a narrow body it was comfortable, but still far from something like a 777 a350 or 787
I would not like to fly in a narrow body plane for more than 5 hours. But I live in Frankfurt, which is a major hub, so we still have many wide-bodies here.
You've given a good explanation of that market segment, but what about the larger planes? There's nothing like the 777 and there's no clear winner between the 787 and A350.
787 competes more with the A330neo than with the A350 because the A350 is simply bigger than the 787 tough there is a little overlap. 777X delays are great for Airbus as that could very well translate into more A350 orders. 787 is winning over A330neo but A350 is winning against 777x because it's actually being delivered and it has hundreds of outstanding orders. I guess time will tell which becomes more common, the A350 or the B777x. Right now Airbus still has orders for 440 A350s, while Boeing has 334 B777x pre-orders, so any customer who decides to order the A350 now probably won't have to wait longer than if they ordered the B777x as Boeing still has to start and ramp up production.
Why is nobody talking about Cruptocurrency at this moment? It's on a bull run and a lot of people are defintely gonna miss out on that just like the last time
I think you're right, Coby. Boeing have been beset by problems, while Airbus have continued to focus on market share and this is another demonstration of that. From a comfort perspective, whether you're sitting in a 3-3 configuration or 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 (or whatever twin aisle layout you come up with), it's not really going to make that much difference. Business and first class is where the narrow bodies will struggle with their product offerings. Thanks for the video.
Airlines have total discretion on how comfortable they make the A320/321. It already has wider seats than the 737 (because its wider) and legroom is determined by how many seats the airline want to cram in. Or not.
Airbus wasted billions on the oversized and worthless A380. Boeing while they have had set backs I believe they will recover and with the most popular plane 777 the will be fine. The 737 max will get worked out and will still be the main aircraft used for short haul.
but... 757 is only 40 years old... 737 is what... 60? even a320 family is 40 years old. so 757 could still fly just fine if it got updates... so why boeing didnt make new updated models?
@@cobyexplanes yeah but than why didnt they continue production after 2004. at that point point to point travel was on horizon and twin jets were already the future.
The real issue isn't narrow body vs wide body, it's perceived personal space. 9 hours in a middle seat is hell on earth, no other way to sugar coat it. If this narrow body jet had a wider aisle than standard and wider seats and increased seat pitch, then yep, it's possible. Without those acomodations, its akin to being placed into a sardine can.
If you want fast flight, grab a Concorde. If you want to fly big, grab an A380. If you want to travel comfortably just grab an XLR. It'll be okay. It'll be better and safer to fly than the 737 at least.
No problem at all! I still remember long range flights on IL-62 and the western older generation did the same on Boeing 707, DC-8 or VC10. The main thing is that such an airliner must be equipped with adequate seats (not like Lufthansa A320/321)
If Airbus adopted something similar to the Boeing sky interior of the a320 it would be the king of narrow body comfort. Not sure why they’re still using those old overhead bin designs
I don't understand why many people have problems with flying long time in a narrow body plane. I mean you won't have the same seats, leg room and service like on a short flight. You will have your IFE and be sitting in a normal three seats row until you are in the aisle....
My guess: They think you get more "cramped" because it's a single aisle instead of twin aisle. Also something tells me people are looking for excuses to get more room and luxury for economy prices since the pandemic got airlines on their knees. People are just whining. Like you said, there is hardly to no difference sitting for 6 hours on a narrow body compared to a wide body.
It's actually a psychological trick. Most folks just end up sitting at their seat most of the flight regardless of if its a narrowbody or a widebody, but the perception of space that widebodies create with higher ceilings is more relaxing. It's why Boeing has put so much time and effort into developing the Sky Interior fro the 737 - the fuselage is cramped and they want to do everything they can to create the illusion of space
I've already taken an 8 hour flight on a narrow-body jet. I was shocked at first because I wasn't aware that was even possible Hahaha. I must say seats on Airbus planes tend to be quite comfortable so I do not mind it at all. The moment your flight is longer than 8 hours, I do prefer a wide-body jet.
This is a catching post title.... Great information as usual. Anyway, neither manufacturer will dominate the other. It's simply too tight. We shall see; the future is simply up in the air. haha
Funny, I just finished listening to Bussienss Wars Boeing vs Airbus and doing some extra research about current Corona times, and this video pops up, great timing :).
The A320 family is, indeed, a much more comfortable ride than the 737. Or, 757 for that matter. For an 8-9 hour route, though, it will all come down to the individual carrier's setup. For something like that, I would always try to upgrade my seats, at least Comfort + on Delta... But, currently, I have zero issues flying an Airbus from Boston to San Fran...
Keep in mind that at the beginning of the jet age, 707s and DC-8s were narrow bodies and they were used on long haul flights. In fact, bot the 737 and 757 have the same fuselage diameter as a 737. A320s are about a metre wider
8 hours on an A320 are better than they sound. I flew from Buenos Aires to Quito (7 hours) on an A320 and enjoyed the experience a lot. You are more likely to have a seat at or close to the aisle or window, there are less people in your immediate vicinity making it quieter.
No. First of all, Bombardier and Airbus doesn't have the capacity to scale up the A220 production to the rates we see on the A320/A321. That itself would massively limit its sales. Secondly the A220 does not share any commonality with any of the airbus aircraft. Crews will need to undergo the full certification course which would be costly and takes time to slowly build up the pool of certified crew. Thirdly, the A220 is more costly to built than the A320neo. So pricing wise it will not be as competitive.
@@chingweixion621 they will scale it to however the market demands it. The A220 has so many markets it can service, it should eventually outsell the A320...
@@derbagger22 yes, they will scale it to the market demand. But you will not expect the production rate to jump from 4 to 40 in just 10 months. Pre-pandemic Plans was to increase the A220 production rate to 10 per month while the A321neo will hit 60 unit per month or proportionately 30 units for the A321. It will take at least 5 yrs or longer to push the A220 production to such levels, by then the A220neo (along with the A220-500) will be on the horizon. So if we take a fix time frame of until 2030, I still don't see the A220 family (100+300) outselling the A321(neo+LR+XLR). If you are talking about eventually, then maybe 50yrs later the A220 would still be around, flying in its 3rd or 4th generation derivatives while the A321 would be history, there might still be a possibility. But stretching out the timeline to such extremities does not fit the question which limits to "this era".
Bye bye Boeing lol 😂 👊 specially after the 737 Max scandal (and I'm a Boeing fan saying this! 😂) In 2023 too Airbus > Boeing more like: Airbus: (releases the A320 neo family) it's over Boeing, I have the high ground! Boeing: you underestimate my 737 Max! Airbus: (meanwhile Boeing desperately trying to release the 777x) don’t try it! Boeing: (777x still delayed lol as well as the 737 Max 7 and 10 variants, meanwhile dying in 2 737 Max 8 crashes) aaaaaaaaaaaah 💀🤣
I flew Doha to Tunis on Qatar Airways A320 during 6h30 on both business and economy and it felt like forever and I felt trapped. Totally different from a A330 or B777.
If I were Boeing I'd be working on a 797 clean sheet that can straddle 737 replacement and Middle-of-Market. Three variants: 797-8 replaces 737-800/737 MAX 8, 797-9 replaces 737-900/737 MAX 9/757-200 and 797-10 replaces the 737 MAX 10/757-300. One R&D job, one pilot type rating and one aircraft family type for both short-haul and medium-haul routes. If single-aisle, bonus points if the 797 can have (a) a fuselage 9-12 inches wider than a 737 or 757, so the 6-abreast Y seats can be 18.5-19" wide, and (b) default door for boarding/deplaning is designed to be L2, to better manage gate times with a single aisle aircraft.
Mid-market isn't really a market segment, just a small niche in the narrowbody market. Only 1,050 757s were ever produced, including military and cargo versions, and the A321XLR's 450+ orders have already replaced most of the available demand. There's nothing in it for Boeing to develop a competitor. The 757-200 had a range of 3,915 nmi, which a number of 737 MAX variants closely approach (though not the MAX 10). The A321LR is already a like-for-like replacement for the 757-200, and the XLR is a variant that caters to an even smaller market segment (4000-4700 nmi, 220 pax). Again, no point in Boeing trying to develop a competitor; the market simply isn't big enough.
To me I feel Boeing management blew the call time and time again, and that landed the world in a very lopsided situation. Airbus didn’t simply earn it all themselves, and over three hundred people don’t just die in two major plane crashes either. Airbus earned a large portion of it, but not without Boeing blowing it. A lot of it comes down to which existing airframes are able to handle larger motors, since airlines don’t want to pay for retraining on a new aircraft type, and manufacturers don’t want to pay for a clean sheet either. And even before the two crashes Airbus was taking over the narrowbody sector. But now with widebodies dwindling in demand and Airbus having the only narrowbodies, Boeing might end up the way that Bombardier did. Ironic since Boeing tried to sue Bombardier but it ended up going completely in favor of Airbus. Things like this don’t just happen naturally. It speaks volumes about bad culture in corporate America. If Boeing fails, I can’t say I will feel sorry for their management.
I agree that the A-320 series planes are more comfortable than the 737, however I find it difficult to believe flying for long flights (over 5 hours) would be unbearable. I have flown over 2 million miles on all types of aircraft, including military types, and even flying from SLC to ATL on a single aisle aircraft becomes tough.I have flown the 787-10 from SEA-LHR and I really believe that Airbus blew it on the development of the A-350 by NOT increasing the window size as Boeing did on the 787. Unless you're under 5'10", bending down to look out of the windows becomes so uncomfortable that many AVGEEKS stop attempting. At least, that's my experience. It might sound like a small issue, but let's face it, when you're flying for long hours (over 5), comfort is a paramount desire!
I agree that the A320 is slightly more comfortable than a 737, but it’s a marginal difference. On a long haul flight, the fact that the A321XLR is a narrow body still makes it sucky, especially if it’s full. On an 8 hour flight to Europe, if one airline is flying an A321XLR, and another airline is flying a 787 or A350, I’ll avoid the A321XLR every time, even if the fare is cheaper. Now if the same route is a non-stop on an A321XLR vs. connecting wide bodies at a hub somewhere, I’ll probably choose the A321XLR non-stop, but curse the uncomfortableness the whole way.
Aairbus should also be doing the final stretch to the airframe, adding 4/5 seat rows, with a shorter range, higher capacity A322-200NX. This would be the rel 757 replacement/MOM, a US transcontinental, and US East Coast to western Europe capitals capable machine. I'll choose an A320/321 over a Boeing any day. The wider cabin means more comfortable seats, and there is much bigger overhead storage too. It's also quieter inside. Transatlantic in a 321? Absolutely.
While I agree the XLR does have a market advantage, it can't really take advantage of it just yet. Even the Cseries has been loosing orders, and Airbus has been forcing lawsuits and stiff penalties against companies that cancel. Not to mention there are rumors of a growing labor dispute out of Toulouse. Meanwhile, Boeing actually is at a bit of an advantage IF THE IDIOTS can take advantage of it. And Boeing has recently announced they are working on a new jet but have not given specifics. They could easily pull a 757/767 move and build a plane that can cover the 737-800 size up to the 787-8. Then they could keep the 737 around for that -600/-700 size until they could build a proper CSeries competitor...or just but one. Also, they still have the 787-3 design. Boeing was first to the NMA market, but did so at a time airlines wanted widebodies and cheap re-engined planes. Listening killed them (the MAX anyone?). Hopefully this time they stick with their gut.
Gotta say it, I hate the onboard experience of the B737. The A320 family is FAR more comfortable as an on-board experince. Unfontunatuley, Boeing dug their own grave (sorry for the analogy) with the Max. The idea would have been fine if it didn't involve a 60 year old airframe, but their priority of money over safety, and getting caught with their pants down when Airbus annonced the NEO killed them in that market. I really want Boeing to get it together in the small-to-medium range market because competition can only push competition, but that's not where either of them are looking right now. Boeing has to replace the 737. And Airbus has to (not only move the XLR program forward) find a real mid-range market aircraft, but also a replacement for the A320 family. The years ahead should be very interesting
Airbus will dominate future air travel ,if it can make the SKY whale concept plane a reality..else SKYLON with its reaction engines will rule if it can get its Space plane off the drawing board ..so as to speak
No, Airbus isn't going to dominate. Boeing actually took more aircraft orders in 2021 than Airbus did, and that's WITH the issues with the 737 Max, the 787, and the delays with the 777x. Boeing will rapidly get back on track and Airbus suffers from the problem of being based in the EU and the EU has a rocky future. Don't think that the EU has lost its last member with the exit of Britain. Airbus will encounter problems if the EU is not very stable...and I don't see that it will be.
People complain about the 3-4-3 composition on Boeing 777-300ERs, they probably won't want to fly on a narrowbody from Frankfurt to Chicago... But we shall see🤷🏼♂️
boeing - where corporate greed lost the company and arrogance buried it in the ground. No NMA is their undoing - they also knew about the coming black swan event. ALSO - cabin configurations have NOTHING to do with AB or Boeing themselves - 100% on the operator. Seat pitch and width are the main determining factors in comfort, NOT narrowbody vs widebody.
Does not have to be that way. Airbus has committed itself to a course of development. With Boeing's talent and tech already in hand, Airbus will find itself in the middle of it's development phases on several aircraft with resources tied up. Boeing would have the freedom to leapfrog Airbus with tech it already owns. While Boeing looks weakened right now and hey, yes it is, It's resource portfolio is broad and deep. So, a pause right now might actually enable broad strokes of genius in the future. Alas, if Airbus and Boeing cannot leave past century designs in the dust neither one will survive: Airbus or Boeing. They both could morph into more of a type of investment brokerage house than Aerospace innovators. Helicopters Tube airplanes Blended wing Flying Wing. These bad designs are responsible for the deaths of thousands upon thousands of lost lives. Bypass ratios 1000 to 1. Around the equator non-stop flights. No fatality mechanical failures of any kind. No airports needed. Unlimited hover. Airbus and Boeing and all the others already have the tech bird in hand! So, we are actually still in the 20th century after all. Time just seemed to stop in the 1960's for the aerospace industry. Just sayin'
The 757 is still my second favorite Boeing jet. It's by far the most beautiful and all told it's a real pilot's plane. I'd love to see it make a 21st century comeback but I know that's not likely. The only Airbus aircraft I've ever liked was the A380 and even that aircraft had an insanely rough landing.. The A320 and A330 family are just annoying with their hydraulic transfer pumps sawing and barking away on the ground. Whoever thought that would be a good idea? Best of luck to them with the long range narrow bodies, I'd still choose an old 757 or a 787 for one of those trips.
Revise my comment. If cards played right, the A321XLR will revolutionize the industry as much as the 747 did back in the 70's or the 767's in the late 80's-early 90's.
Subscribe and make my day :) ua-cam.com/channels/QG9nN7aOAcZZZiaFV9UxPA.html
done & done
@Ryle The Game Explorer BOOO!!
@@cw3795 BOOOOOOOO!!!!!
@@cobyexplanes *booo whom ?*
@@cobyexplanes I can't wait too Fly on The A321XLR Hopefully on JetBlue on New York to London right after The COVID-19 Passes!!!!!
As long as their planes don’t nosedive into the ground they’ll be good
and at this point, I'll trust the MAX because no plane has been more scrutinized
@@wizardmix By that rule you trust in cancer also.
@@sapede Not the best analogy unless you're referring to the weak links the FAA and Boeing relationship has uncovered? Even then I am exponentially more likely to die of cancer than on a commercial flight, especially a US based one. In over a decade, ONE person, ONE has died on a us-based commercial flight. That is an insanely good statistic. More people get killed by vending machines. The MCAS issue is a completely solvable "curable" problem and while I do wish Boeing would stop trying to fortify their near 70 year old design, I'm postulating a lot has been learned, mended, solved. This is all due to our perception of danger with flying vs. our relatively irrational lack of fear towards what is most likely to kill us: heard disease or cancer.
Cancer while heavily scrutinized, has not been cured. Over 600,000 people die from it in the US every year. Big difference.
@@sapede
Holy shit that was brutal
@@wizardmix the MAX 8 may have been scrutinized, not the MAX 10! This should also come with a bunch of new tricks to further stretch the 737 e.g the main landing gear trick.
I don't like to compare airplanes manufacturers that have different statements of work but the changes required for the XLR look far less riscky based on an already flying A321.
The low clearance architecture of the initial 737 must be a real engineering challenge to stretch as much as airliners designed from the beginning for wider turbofan engines.
Long life to all manufacturers!
I have over 30,000 hours and over 50 years flying both Boeing and Airbus. I enjoy being able to fly the plane. Boeing is designed for pilots that still appreciate skill. Airbus is designed for pilots that are content to let the software designers decide how the plane should be flown.
People flew for many years in the 707 on transatlantic routs, the same flight on the A321 it's going to be more comfortable! Less noisy and with in flight entertainment.
707 you talking nearly 60 years ago
@@jantschierschky3461 Yes, of course. But what would really improve comfort for passengers are larger legroom and seat width, not the fact that you have 6 rather than 9 seats in a row.
@@0lorenzo0 I fully agree, is all about the seating
I don’t think it would be uncomfortable as long as airlines leave enough leg room on them
Great videos Coby. And, go Blue Devils.
Good job kid. The 321 in all its variants is the killer app. The 1960's designed 737's are hot and cramped. The landing gear is short, making the long bodies of the larger 737's susceptible to tail strikes so the VREF speeds are higher, increasing landing distances. Boeing should stick to wide bodies, and for the love of God, get rid of the yoke.
Airbus shuttle he working right now on a 320 made with 100% composites. That would completly steal that market from boeing.
In terms of pilots, potential 321XLR operators won't have difficulty recruiting somebody to pilot them given the abundance of qualified A320 family pilots.
A320XLR? Eh, I'll wait for the A320DIN
I dont like narrowbodies but i do like 757
It is a bit of an open goal for Airbus. Boeing's arrogance has come back to haunt them. Just so people dont get angry, about 90% of my flights have been on Boeing aircraft, I dont care what I fly on as long as it is safe.
THANK YOU
Say what you want, if I had the choice, I’d never step on an Airbus product.
Let me be more optimistic, as soon as the pandemic will be managed, and it will be safe to travel, everyone will jump on a plane to go anywhere in the world like crazy...so I bet all most of the airlines that have survived will reconsider wide bodies much sooner than expected. That's just a guess, but I'm ready to bet on it:-)
As long as the airline provide seat back entertainment system, I think it will be fine to fly on the 321XLR on long routes
And a decent legroom
Good luck with that
Agree. It all depends on how the airlines configured their cabins. Cebu Pacific A330neo is much worse than AirAsia A321neo.
I'm not sure because I've flown on a Turkish Airlines 737 900er for close to 8hrs. True for a narrow body it was comfortable, but still far from something like a 777 a350 or 787
Yup The A321XLR's will be good for me too travel on Between New York to London on JetBlue Airways after The COVID-19 Passes.
me: looks at thumbnail
also me: reads title
me after clicking the video: How EasyJet Will DOMINATE Boeing in 2021
Lol. FAAAACCSS
True Facts my guy, Ima take Easy Jet when they get their A321 neo
@@mubassirzaman7202 They already have quite a few of those, but deferred all pending deliveries as they need smaller planes right now...
The only pandemic proof plane. You must have forgotten the A220.
Airbus is really gonna dominate post pandemic air travel with the A220 and A321LR
*not until the 757 plus comes out*
@@arnavsharma9882 I mean Boeing isn't focusing on making a new 757, and the A220 will still dominate during the pandemic because of its efficiency, size, speed and more. There is a possibility that Boeing may make a new plane the size of the 757 like the B797, but it also most likely it will be replacing the 737 family.
@@mubassirzaman7202 Agree, The best to do right now for Boeing actually is to work on sector where Airbus is absent so the mid size long range 757 replacement is good plus long haul high capacity 777 9x
@@massimechoub3343 best way for Boeing to do that would likely be the 787-3 with a new, lighter wing and engines.
0:37 Airbus are *XLRating* development lol
i don't mind spending hours on the A320 family, cus it really doesn't matter, you're on the A350XWB, and the airline cramp you into the seat anyways
I've flown Qatar Business Q-Suite on the A350 - the comfort was superb. If an airline wanted, I don't know if they can provide the same comfort on the A320. One thing is sure; no matter the aircraft model, an airline can cramp as many people as they wish into it. We are just cargo for them.
MIO9, I like the A340 series. It kinda reminds me of the 757 but even with 4 engines, it's a very smooth, quiet plane. When Boeing's cult members boo and cry that it's "noisy" I'd like them to explain why I was able to get a decent night sleep on a night flight from Madrid to Chicago 9 years ago. And I don't sleep well on planes. I can't stand the vibration of the engines if I'm on a plane like the 777. I also wish airlines would phase out the ancient 757. Never flew on one that didn't have annoying squeaks and rattles and broken seats.
@@todortodorov940 The issue would be comfort for the masses as business class to economy class configuration ratio can be up to 2:10 for the traditional airlines. Especially with first class becoming almost redundant (singapore on their new A350-900's only have business class and premium economy, although this is because the extreme long haul routes are mostly for business travellers as it is more expensive, so they are more likely to be in a more expensive seat (ticket payed for by company)). With the redundancy of first class, I think we could expect to see even higher number of economy seats in configurations on newly ordered aircraft. So the issue for comfort would be for those economy seats. However, I agree that the A350 and 787 are more comfortable, as the stronger fuselage can withstand higher pressure, so cabin pressure is greater and closer to atmospheric sea level pressure.
@@todortodorov940 Also, with these smaller 'medium haul' aircraft, there are likely to be less lie flat business class seats.
The 737 family and the A320 family both have a 3-3 layout. The 737 is 6” narrower than the A320. The 787 and the A350 both have a 3-3-3 layout. The 787 is 6” narrower than the A350. I know which manufacturer’s aircraft if rather fly long haul in economy on.
When you also look at the strength of the a350 and a220 programs it really seems Boeing has their work cut out for them
777x
777x can't compete with the A220, I'd love to see you land a full laiden 777x on a short runway
@@SpudderRail i don't think Boeing is interested in competing with the a220.
The 787 is a great plane that beats the A330neo
Being a wide body doesn't automatically make it a more comfortable journey. It's all about configuration so there is no reason why flying a narrow body should feel any different if it's configured with similar pitch and equipment.
The A220's standard economy seats (19 inches wide) are bigger than any economy seat you can find on any other larger or wide-body aircraft!
Other the 787 and 747, I'll take an A320 family flight over over a wide body any day.
Actually narrowbody feels little. Less open space to stretch and do some walking.
@@-Muhammad_Ali- it's only the fact that it has 1 less isle which has that visual kind of illusion effect of being more cramped. Im sure future single isle aircraft will fix this
@@gasviation9077 i enjoyed flying 7 hour flight on B767. When bored I just get up and do some walking. Two aisles let you do that without disturbing people much. On B757 or other single aisled narrow bodies that's extremely uncomfortable. Getting off you seat is additionally hard since you have to compromise with others walking or somebody getting out from the other side. That's the most scary part when trying to escape out from a burning plane. The safety part.
I've been on an A320 for 5 1/2 hours and that got pretty uncomfortable by the end . . . But id blame that on the cheap, thin seats the budget airline in question were using . . . The cabin is definitely more spacious than on a 73' and with the right interior fittings I can see it being easily comfortable enough for 8 or 9 hour flights.
Narrow body on 9 hours flight Is not really a big deal as long as the seat are decent...on an average economy class no way !
I agree... I flown around 6 or 5 hours on that A321 , then due to the airline we were needed to stay on the aircraft after the other passengers at our connecting airport for a half an hour then took of again for another 4 hours. Pretty decent even though I have flown on it 9 hours on economy.
Just fly an airline like jet blue
@@rameyheimgartner2334 or turkish airlines...
But im trying to say, flying in just a narrow body is not bad. It is not just tole ratable, but actually good in comfort. Depending on the airline of course, but it can be much much nice and better.
@massi mechoub I agree! I mean what do you actually do more in a flight apart from staying in your seat napping, eating, or watching a movie. I think a good and wide enough seat to so some stretching would be good enough for most people.
Damn that A330neo in the beginning, sexy plane.
Airbus does have a lead with the a220
A massive one since Boeing is completely absent
And another with the 320/321 XLR, and yet another with the -350.
@@jetaddicted because they have newer planes. Boeing has a lead with 787. Unless they bring newer planes, they are screwed. Scrap 737 and build a new plane ground up. That segment moves a lot of planes. Perhaps even develop one in the regional jet market along with it.
@@massimechoub3343 yeah but boeing seems to be winning generally like the sounds, popularity, etc
@@whyers4782 Yes, now passengers associate death with Boeing products thanks to MAX incidents
Keep up the good work coby! These videos are great quality I like the part where you showed the images like flipping I a newspaper. 👍
Glad you like them!
1h in an Ryanair 737 is already too much
The easyJet 320neos are much better
Air Baltic A220's are fantastic
I could fly long distance in a Lufthansa or Iberia 321neo no Problem but not with the low cost Carrier here in Europe.
@Distant Travels narrower fuselage, for one...
@Distant Travels 737 has smaller fuselage diameter width than A320. It’s a vintage product from late 60s.
@@Chris58851 Yea. I did a long 4 hours flight on a Biman 737, and a United Airline B737- 900 and it aint nice, neither is the 757 on an Atlantic flight but it still comfortable and I like the design. Though I did flown a A321-200 for 5 hours, then stayed on the aircraft at our connecting airport then flown 3 hours and arrived at our destination, and the flight was pretty comfortable and clean.
Though Im not gonna say it going to be comfortable for everyone, because it depends on the Airline your taking, but it kind of common sense. The 737 max 10 is still less wider then the A321 and A320. So the cabin is more tight there fore it more uncomfortable then the A321 and A320 ( unless if you flying on a airline that is decent with the 737s like Turkish Airlines) .
Only thinking about flying Ryanair is already a nightmare!
Comfort really depends on how you use the plane. The last time I crossed the Atlantic, it was in a Virgin Atlantic widebody in economy (probably an A330 or A350, I don't remember) and it was claustrophobic hell because they crammed so many seats in. I've had better experiences on every 737 and A320 I've ridden.
I'm a simple man, I see a new Cody Explanes video, I upvote before watching.
:)
so do i
I think when Bombardier was developing the C series that became the A220, many thought they were idiots
That exactly what happened, Airbus used the Uno Reverse card
Well, they are kind of idiots at a macro-level but at an engineering level they crushed it. Too bad it broke them financially. Bombardier just can't get it's s h i t together in any manufacturing scale.
@@linesided True, but they always make super nice decent regional planes.. and trains, and other stuff.
@@mubassirzaman7202 Not any more they sold the CRJ and Dash-8 lines. Yes, they still have some good trains, I'll give them that!
@@linesided Oh.. I knew about the de havilian but the crj to Japan? That a bit... wierd.
The 737 replacement needs to have variants suitable for the middle of the market segment. That's the only way this middle of the market riddle can be solved
And boeing also needs a competitor against the A220
@@chingweixion621 too bad they terminated their deal with Embraer. They could have had an A220 competitor
@@theskyline1425 not entirely. The E195-E2 is only competing against the A220-100. The A220 300 is still way more efficient than the B737max7 or the A319neo.
@@chingweixion621 the only Issue is that both the 737-700 and the A319 never sold that well. So will the the Max 7 and A319 Neo
True
Having flown on the 757 for many rather long distance routes (I live in Iceland) I can well imagine flying up to 8 hours on the A320 since it’s by far much better and more comfortable plain then 757. I have not flown on the new 737 but since Icelandair has started using them I probably will, unless I have other choicecs reaching my destinations (I ´m avoiding as much as possible Icelandair due to their disgusting treatment of staff, especially the cabin crew, during the C19 crisis, and disgusting “union busting” policy of the company, which the Icelandic union of airline pilots became active in as well).
* Disgusting
@@tramlink8544 thank you
"plane than" **
Indeed. Airbus is well positioned to dominate the narrow body and mid-sized market with the A220/A320neo and A321XLR. Recent reports indicate that airbus holds 61% of the narrow body backlogs compared to the 39% by boeing and this gap will likely widens as boeing leaning airlines like United has also placed orders for the A321XLR to replace their B757. Airlines like Icelandic Air and KLM are seriously considering the A321XLR as the boeing's NMA is no where in sight.
This is why they are considering a new single aisle (not the NMA) as if the 737 Max makes no improvement to market share after re entering service it sounds like on paper they’ll ditch
And since they will have A321XLR in fleet it will be cheaper for those previously Boeing airlines to potentially transition to Airbus
@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 yes but one single airframe can only target that much of the market assuming the NSA is centered around the size that specifically targets the A321XLR, the B797-6 would be more efficient and capable than the A321XLR. It's larger sibling the B797-7 could be a simple stretch boasting better economics but shorter range. A smaller derivative, B797-5 would naturally be a simple shrink and thus be less economical that the max8.
There is just no one size fits all solution and there is only that much that you could do with one single airframe family.
As always, seat size and legroom are a big part of the equation, 'narrow bodies' with 1 /2 seating so different than 2+2 in acceptability
I'll spend time in a narrow body if I can just travel again :)
Yes same
Seems like the A321XLR will changed the way we fly forever.
We will soon be flying narrowbodies across pacific. Mark my words
Yeah the a380 and 787 were supposed to do that, I'll believe it when I see it.
I'm not sure because I've flown on a Turkish Airlines 737 900er for close to 8hrs. True for a narrow body it was comfortable, but still far from something like a 777 a350 or 787
737 is narrower than A32X. In fact it's easier to find a 18" wide economy seats on A320 than on 10-abreast 777 or 9-abreast 787.
I think the narrow body airbus family has more room for comfort than the B757 and B737 for short and long haul flights
I mean Boeing kinda deserve that, Airbus has been innovating and pioneering and Boeing was just too comfortable. Good for Airbus!
Interesting, what did Airbus pioneer?
@@ACPilot i love both but there isn't much other than new Narrow bodys so no invarion
Damn you’re on a roll, all your recent videos have been fire
Nice video as always!
sigh... I was so excited when I booked the Virgin Atlantic 747. Only to get cancelled and replaced with a 787 (instantly lost interest).
I don't blame you. The 787 is the only truely BAD plane Boeing has ever built.
I would not like to fly in a narrow body plane for more than 5 hours. But I live in Frankfurt, which is a major hub, so we still have many wide-bodies here.
You've given a good explanation of that market segment, but what about the larger planes? There's nothing like the 777 and there's no clear winner between the 787 and A350.
787 competes more with the A330neo than with the A350 because the A350 is simply bigger than the 787 tough there is a little overlap. 777X delays are great for Airbus as that could very well translate into more A350 orders. 787 is winning over A330neo but A350 is winning against 777x because it's actually being delivered and it has hundreds of outstanding orders. I guess time will tell which becomes more common, the A350 or the B777x. Right now Airbus still has orders for 440 A350s, while Boeing has 334 B777x pre-orders, so any customer who decides to order the A350 now probably won't have to wait longer than if they ordered the B777x as Boeing still has to start and ramp up production.
I've flown the Easy jet NEO from London to Egypt about 6 hours no big deal.
Why is nobody talking about Cruptocurrency at this moment? It's on a bull run and a lot of people are defintely gonna miss out on that just like the last time
I'm a huge fan of Crypto. I hold a few coins in my blockchain wallet
Been investing in the crypto world for 2yrs now I can say its really profitable
Bitcoin Trading is the best thing I've ever done since the inception of Cryptocurrency
@Nina Pedro Yeah right but that's if you have a very good broker. If not you'll loose money instead
@Dante Rafael You trade with mr David too? Wow that's great. I actually thought I'm the only one that knows him 😂
Rip boeing......
Any other person: NOOO WHY A NEW PLANE AIRBUS WE ARE IN THE WORST CRISIS EVER AND YOU AND YOUR PROGRAM!!
Airbus: Haha A321XLR go brrr
I think you're right, Coby. Boeing have been beset by problems, while Airbus have continued to focus on market share and this is another demonstration of that. From a comfort perspective, whether you're sitting in a 3-3 configuration or 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 (or whatever twin aisle layout you come up with), it's not really going to make that much difference. Business and first class is where the narrow bodies will struggle with their product offerings. Thanks for the video.
I like the family 320, better than the Boeing counterparts ... with a USB plug and my BOSE I could stand it...
Airlines have total discretion on how comfortable they make the A320/321. It already has wider seats than the 737 (because its wider) and legroom is determined by how many seats the airline want to cram in. Or not.
Airbus wasted billions on the oversized and worthless A380. Boeing while they have had set backs I believe they will recover and with the most popular plane 777 the will be fine. The 737 max will get worked out and will still be the main aircraft used for short haul.
I like how the thumbnail golden ticket reminds of the one from the movie Charlie and the chocolate factory
r/noshitsherlock
but... 757 is only 40 years old... 737 is what... 60? even a320 family is 40 years old. so 757 could still fly just fine if it got updates... so why boeing didnt make new updated models?
ua-cam.com/video/tKqhb_lpO-4/v-deo.html&ab_channel=CobyExplanes
@@cobyexplanes yeah but than why didnt they continue production after 2004. at that point point to point travel was on horizon and twin jets were already the future.
Stay Safe guys!
But I like to lick doorknobs :(
Don't worry, Biden won the election so covid is over.
The real issue isn't narrow body vs wide body, it's perceived personal space. 9 hours in a middle seat is hell on earth, no other way to sugar coat it. If this narrow body jet had a wider aisle than standard and wider seats and increased seat pitch, then yep, it's possible. Without those acomodations, its akin to being placed into a sardine can.
Am i the only one wondering why delta dosent order 120 a321 xlr and a 20 787s to replace the 757-200s (a321xlr) and 757- 300 (787-8)
If you want fast flight, grab a Concorde. If you want to fly big, grab an A380. If you want to travel comfortably just grab an XLR. It'll be okay. It'll be better and safer to fly than the 737 at least.
I would avoid a narrow body for any long flight. It may be good for Airbus, and the Airlines, but it's a loss for passenger comfort.
Why not just modernize the 767? Isn’t this essentially what the 767 already is?
It’s so disappointing how Boeing went from an engineering company to piggy bank for politicians.
Is it me or airbus seems like they knew about the virus before it happened? Thus aircrafts looks like it comes from the future hehe
Even without the coronavirus it is a plane that airlines desperately need - a new, fuel efficient replacement for their aging Boeing 757s
No problem at all! I still remember long range flights on IL-62 and the western older generation did the same on Boeing 707, DC-8 or VC10. The main thing is that such an airliner must be equipped with adequate seats (not like Lufthansa A320/321)
Wow, the VC-10! Flew in one as a kid from Los Angeles to Sydney on B.O.A.C. The flights both ways were not the most fun memory of my misspent youth. 🙂
Airbus will dominate BIGLY!
Make Airbus Great Again.
@@jetaddicted I don't mean to ruin the joke but that would be fitting for Boeing.
Hey Coby, you were quick to trash the new MAX while bragging on the 321XLR. Have you flown on both? What was it about the Boeing you found lacking?
I know i don't favorite ether but he's quick to shit on boeing and not airbus like he is bais
Single-aisled jets are less comfortable. These new narrow bodied jets are really not made for a 8 hour flight.
The fuselage on the A321 is a bigger diameter than the 757 & the seats are wider.
Airbus >> Boeing, just based on who their brands are, one doesn’t cut corners
If Airbus adopted something similar to the Boeing sky interior of the a320 it would be the king of narrow body comfort. Not sure why they’re still using those old overhead bin designs
a good seat pitch (i.e upwards of 31”) and a width of 18” would do anybody good on the A321XLR 👍
That's the point! More than cabin size
I wonder if Boeing launches a 737 Max 10 ER as a response (if building it is even possible)
Well they need to get the Max 10 flying first
Boeing honestly shouldve built a 757 replacement instead if focusing too much on widebodies
2020s, not 2020's
I don't understand why many people have problems with flying long time in a narrow body plane. I mean you won't have the same seats, leg room and service like on a short flight. You will have your IFE and be sitting in a normal three seats row until you are in the aisle....
My guess: They think you get more "cramped" because it's a single aisle instead of twin aisle. Also something tells me people are looking for excuses to get more room and luxury for economy prices since the pandemic got airlines on their knees. People are just whining. Like you said, there is hardly to no difference sitting for 6 hours on a narrow body compared to a wide body.
You do lose efficiency in service and typically there are fewer lavatories. But I have no problem on 5-6 hour flights. But some may...
It's actually a psychological trick. Most folks just end up sitting at their seat most of the flight regardless of if its a narrowbody or a widebody, but the perception of space that widebodies create with higher ceilings is more relaxing. It's why Boeing has put so much time and effort into developing the Sky Interior fro the 737 - the fuselage is cramped and they want to do everything they can to create the illusion of space
I've already taken an 8 hour flight on a narrow-body jet. I was shocked at first because I wasn't aware that was even possible Hahaha. I must say seats on Airbus planes tend to be quite comfortable so I do not mind it at all. The moment your flight is longer than 8 hours, I do prefer a wide-body jet.
The seats are chosen by the airline not the aircraft manufacturer.
This is a catching post title.... Great information as usual. Anyway, neither manufacturer will dominate the other. It's simply too tight. We shall see; the future is simply up in the air. haha
Funny, I just finished listening to Bussienss Wars Boeing vs Airbus and doing some extra research about current Corona times, and this video pops up, great timing :).
Hope it was informative!
The A320 family is, indeed, a much more comfortable ride than the 737. Or, 757 for that matter. For an 8-9 hour route, though, it will all come down to the individual carrier's setup. For something like that, I would always try to upgrade my seats, at least Comfort + on Delta... But, currently, I have zero issues flying an Airbus from Boston to San Fran...
Keep in mind that at the beginning of the jet age, 707s and DC-8s were narrow bodies and they were used on long haul flights.
In fact, bot the 737 and 757 have the same fuselage diameter as a 737. A320s are about a metre wider
8 hours on an A320 are better than they sound. I flew from Buenos Aires to Quito (7 hours) on an A320 and enjoyed the experience a lot. You are more likely to have a seat at or close to the aisle or window, there are less people in your immediate vicinity making it quieter.
Do you think the a220 would shine as much as the 321XLR in this era ?
No. First of all, Bombardier and Airbus doesn't have the capacity to scale up the A220 production to the rates we see on the A320/A321. That itself would massively limit its sales.
Secondly the A220 does not share any commonality with any of the airbus aircraft. Crews will need to undergo the full certification course which would be costly and takes time to slowly build up the pool of certified crew.
Thirdly, the A220 is more costly to built than the A320neo. So pricing wise it will not be as competitive.
@@chingweixion621 they will scale it to however the market demands it. The A220 has so many markets it can service, it should eventually outsell the A320...
@@derbagger22 yes, they will scale it to the market demand. But you will not expect the production rate to jump from 4 to 40 in just 10 months. Pre-pandemic Plans was to increase the A220 production rate to 10 per month while the A321neo will hit 60 unit per month or proportionately 30 units for the A321. It will take at least 5 yrs or longer to push the A220 production to such levels, by then the A220neo (along with the A220-500) will be on the horizon.
So if we take a fix time frame of until 2030, I still don't see the A220 family (100+300) outselling the A321(neo+LR+XLR). If you are talking about eventually, then maybe 50yrs later the A220 would still be around, flying in its 3rd or 4th generation derivatives while the A321 would be history, there might still be a possibility. But stretching out the timeline to such extremities does not fit the question which limits to "this era".
Agree! I would be ok flying on a airbus for 8-11 hours. They are more spacious even than the boeing wide bodies.
Bye bye Boeing lol 😂 👊 specially after the 737 Max scandal (and I'm a Boeing fan saying this! 😂)
In 2023 too Airbus > Boeing more like:
Airbus: (releases the A320 neo family) it's over Boeing, I have the high ground!
Boeing: you underestimate my 737 Max!
Airbus: (meanwhile Boeing desperately trying to release the 777x) don’t try it!
Boeing: (777x still delayed lol as well as the 737 Max 7 and 10 variants, meanwhile dying in 2 737 Max 8 crashes) aaaaaaaaaaaah 💀🤣
I flew Doha to Tunis on Qatar Airways A320 during 6h30 on both business and economy and it felt like forever and I felt trapped. Totally different from a A330 or B777.
If I were Boeing I'd be working on a 797 clean sheet that can straddle 737 replacement and Middle-of-Market. Three variants: 797-8 replaces 737-800/737 MAX 8, 797-9 replaces 737-900/737 MAX 9/757-200 and 797-10 replaces the 737 MAX 10/757-300. One R&D job, one pilot type rating and one aircraft family type for both short-haul and medium-haul routes. If single-aisle, bonus points if the 797 can have (a) a fuselage 9-12 inches wider than a 737 or 757, so the 6-abreast Y seats can be 18.5-19" wide, and (b) default door for boarding/deplaning is designed to be L2, to better manage gate times with a single aisle aircraft.
Mid-market isn't really a market segment, just a small niche in the narrowbody market. Only 1,050 757s were ever produced, including military and cargo versions, and the A321XLR's 450+ orders have already replaced most of the available demand. There's nothing in it for Boeing to develop a competitor.
The 757-200 had a range of 3,915 nmi, which a number of 737 MAX variants closely approach (though not the MAX 10). The A321LR is already a like-for-like replacement for the 757-200, and the XLR is a variant that caters to an even smaller market segment (4000-4700 nmi, 220 pax). Again, no point in Boeing trying to develop a competitor; the market simply isn't big enough.
To me I feel Boeing management blew the call time and time again, and that landed the world in a very lopsided situation. Airbus didn’t simply earn it all themselves, and over three hundred people don’t just die in two major plane crashes either. Airbus earned a large portion of it, but not without Boeing blowing it. A lot of it comes down to which existing airframes are able to handle larger motors, since airlines don’t want to pay for retraining on a new aircraft type, and manufacturers don’t want to pay for a clean sheet either. And even before the two crashes Airbus was taking over the narrowbody sector. But now with widebodies dwindling in demand and Airbus having the only narrowbodies, Boeing might end up the way that Bombardier did. Ironic since Boeing tried to sue Bombardier but it ended up going completely in favor of Airbus. Things like this don’t just happen naturally. It speaks volumes about bad culture in corporate America. If Boeing fails, I can’t say I will feel sorry for their management.
I agree that the A-320 series planes are more comfortable than the 737, however I find it difficult to believe flying for long flights (over 5 hours) would be unbearable. I have flown over 2 million miles on all types of aircraft, including military types, and even flying from SLC to ATL on a single aisle aircraft becomes tough.I have flown the 787-10 from SEA-LHR and I really believe that Airbus blew it on the development of the A-350 by NOT increasing the window size as Boeing did on the 787. Unless you're under 5'10", bending down to look out of the windows becomes so uncomfortable that many AVGEEKS stop attempting. At least, that's my experience. It might sound like a small issue, but let's face it, when you're flying for long hours (over 5), comfort is a paramount desire!
I agree that the A320 is slightly more comfortable than a 737, but it’s a marginal difference. On a long haul flight, the fact that the A321XLR is a narrow body still makes it sucky, especially if it’s full. On an 8 hour flight to Europe, if one airline is flying an A321XLR, and another airline is flying a 787 or A350, I’ll avoid the A321XLR every time, even if the fare is cheaper. Now if the same route is a non-stop on an A321XLR vs. connecting wide bodies at a hub somewhere, I’ll probably choose the A321XLR non-stop, but curse the uncomfortableness the whole way.
Aairbus should also be doing the final stretch to the airframe, adding 4/5 seat rows, with a shorter range, higher capacity A322-200NX. This would be the rel 757 replacement/MOM, a US transcontinental, and US East Coast to western Europe capitals capable machine.
I'll choose an A320/321 over a Boeing any day. The wider cabin means more comfortable seats, and there is much bigger overhead storage too. It's also quieter inside. Transatlantic in a 321? Absolutely.
While I agree the XLR does have a market advantage, it can't really take advantage of it just yet. Even the Cseries has been loosing orders, and Airbus has been forcing lawsuits and stiff penalties against companies that cancel. Not to mention there are rumors of a growing labor dispute out of Toulouse. Meanwhile, Boeing actually is at a bit of an advantage IF THE IDIOTS can take advantage of it. And Boeing has recently announced they are working on a new jet but have not given specifics. They could easily pull a 757/767 move and build a plane that can cover the 737-800 size up to the 787-8. Then they could keep the 737 around for that -600/-700 size until they could build a proper CSeries competitor...or just but one. Also, they still have the 787-3 design. Boeing was first to the NMA market, but did so at a time airlines wanted widebodies and cheap re-engined planes. Listening killed them (the MAX anyone?). Hopefully this time they stick with their gut.
Come 2024, Airbus is STILL dominating over Boeing. And the latter's quality control issues don't help at all. Just look at the door plug blowout...
Gotta say it, I hate the onboard experience of the B737. The A320 family is FAR more comfortable as an on-board experince.
Unfontunatuley, Boeing dug their own grave (sorry for the analogy) with the Max. The idea would have been fine if it didn't involve a 60 year old airframe, but their priority of money over safety, and getting caught with their pants down when Airbus annonced the NEO killed them in that market.
I really want Boeing to get it together in the small-to-medium range market because competition can only push competition, but that's not where either of them are looking right now. Boeing has to replace the 737. And Airbus has to (not only move the XLR program forward) find a real mid-range market aircraft, but also a replacement for the A320 family.
The years ahead should be very interesting
Airbus will dominate future air travel ,if it can make the SKY whale concept plane a reality..else SKYLON with its reaction engines will rule if it can get its Space plane off the drawing board ..so as to speak
No, Airbus isn't going to dominate. Boeing actually took more aircraft orders in 2021 than Airbus did, and that's WITH the issues with the 737 Max, the 787, and the delays with the 777x. Boeing will rapidly get back on track and Airbus suffers from the problem of being based in the EU and the EU has a rocky future. Don't think that the EU has lost its last member with the exit of Britain. Airbus will encounter problems if the EU is not very stable...and I don't see that it will be.
People complain about the 3-4-3 composition on Boeing 777-300ERs, they probably won't want to fly on a narrowbody from Frankfurt to Chicago... But we shall see🤷🏼♂️
boeing - where corporate greed lost the company and arrogance buried it in the ground. No NMA is their undoing - they also knew about the coming black swan event.
ALSO - cabin configurations have NOTHING to do with AB or Boeing themselves - 100% on the operator.
Seat pitch and width are the main determining factors in comfort, NOT narrowbody vs widebody.
Does not have to be that way.
Airbus has committed itself to a course of development.
With Boeing's talent and tech already in hand,
Airbus will find itself in the middle of it's development phases on several aircraft with resources tied up.
Boeing would have the freedom to leapfrog Airbus with tech it already owns.
While Boeing looks weakened right now and hey, yes it is,
It's resource portfolio is broad and deep.
So, a pause right now might actually enable broad strokes of genius in the future.
Alas, if Airbus and Boeing cannot leave past century designs in the dust neither one will survive:
Airbus or Boeing.
They both could morph into more of a type of investment brokerage house than Aerospace innovators.
Helicopters
Tube airplanes
Blended wing
Flying Wing.
These bad designs are responsible for the deaths of thousands upon thousands of lost lives.
Bypass ratios 1000 to 1.
Around the equator non-stop flights.
No fatality mechanical failures of any kind.
No airports needed.
Unlimited hover.
Airbus and Boeing and all the others already have the tech bird in hand!
So, we are actually still in the 20th century after all.
Time just seemed to stop in the 1960's for the aerospace industry.
Just sayin'
The 757 is still my second favorite Boeing jet. It's by far the most beautiful and all told it's a real pilot's plane. I'd love to see it make a 21st century comeback but I know that's not likely. The only Airbus aircraft I've ever liked was the A380 and even that aircraft had an insanely rough landing.. The A320 and A330 family are just annoying with their hydraulic transfer pumps sawing and barking away on the ground. Whoever thought that would be a good idea? Best of luck to them with the long range narrow bodies, I'd still choose an old 757 or a 787 for one of those trips.
Revise my comment. If cards played right, the A321XLR will revolutionize the industry as much as the 747 did back in the 70's or the 767's in the late 80's-early 90's.