Boeing must kick themselves every time they wake up in the morning because they never did a re-engined, upgraded 757. Everybody loves that plane. And it was exactly the right size and range to take on stretched A320s like the A321.
@@simonbarber2098 The 757 was much longer and 50,000 pounds (GW) heavier than the 737. Its airframe was considerably more expensive. And its passenger capacity was too high. As such, it was expensive and inefficient for the short-range market of the 737. The length of the 757 also made boarding and deplaning much longer than on the 737: Too many passengers with baggage sharing one congested aisle. That is why the then-expected replacement, the New Midrange Aircraft, was a shorter and wider jet with twin aisles, so it could carry the same number of passengers while boarding and deplaning more quickly.
Boeing got into trouble the moment Airbus developped the A320NEO. That caused boeing to develop the 737 MAX, and end up in the mess they're in. Airbus is once again showing the future of air travel, leaving Boeing for dust.
The biggest problem Boeing has is Boeing itself. The business model itself needs to be scrutinised, business practices that teeter on the edge of "criminal". Merciless profit maximisation through excessive outsourcing at the expense of safety and reduction and neglect of controlling. Reason: First and foremost competitive pressure from the professionally organised efficiency of Airbus...well...and now also from China, which is striving to stir up the Asian and African markets with its new model and almost uncontrollable state subsidies. The Airbus A 321XLR is a huge slap in the face for Boeing and its badly damaged image. If the traditionally Boeing-affine US airlines now migrate to Airbus because of this, things will look grim for the former primus. Well, unless the US government intervenes with drastic subsidies, which would, however, be problematic under international commercial law. Through its own fault, Boeing is currently doing pretty much everything wrong that can be done wrong. Airbus, on the other hand, has a virtually clean slate. They are currently doing everything right and are riding the wave of success. Airbus just has to be careful not to get too caught up in its success and fall into the same carelessness and mistakes as its US competitor. But we can be optimistic. Also due to the considerably better organisation of the entire company. Salutations des Caraïbes françaises...
Dream on . To bring Boeing back to a propper working culture will take decades . To remove the damages in production is a difficult , expensive process . It will only be successful with complete new leadership that values qualiti as the most importand target .
I worked for Boeing from 8/88 to 8/93. Got laid off. I never considered going back because of the direction I saw the company going even back then. Also Embraer makes an excellent product and I am always happy to hear about Airbus and Embraer taking market share from Boeing...
Its economical for the airlines but the flight crew is going to hate it. Imagine a 10 hour flight with no crew rest area. Your in the main cabin with the passengers and the on duty cabin crew but your off duty and tired. All you hear is ppl talking, babies crying and your trying to get a couple winks in before your start your shift time
@@SFledz .. Every Airline brings their own seat configuration... And... the crew is not important, they need no sleeping cabins, same as the passengers. Every Crew should be able to work less then 12h.
I saw the A321XLR in an air show a few months ago and I gotta say it really impressed me, sleek design, really really quiet engine and so on… Boeings done for 😂
I have a friend who retired from Boeing as Design Engineer. He said they have at least 2 revolutionary designs, practically doable, but management nixed it to keep milking the 737. Oh, management was repeatedly earned MAX was a bad idea too.
They said the 787 opened up new direct connections due to its long range and economics, eating away from hub traffic. It certainly helped driving down load factors and killing the already marginal business case for the A380. Next candidate to feel the pain (now multiplied by the A321XLR) will be the 777X program. Its no coincidence Airbus found not enough interest when shopping around concepts for a further stretch of the A350-1000. The ME3 ordered the 777X in huge numbers, but for all other airlines the A350-1000 is the max size they're currently willing to order.
Lower fuel burn, more efficiency, lower emissions: Let's safe the planet! 😊 At the same time: Long haul flights on discount, enjoy our world before it's too late, the devil may care! 😈
I don't believe that this plane is going to be any less comfortable than a cramped 10-abreast 777, but the main point is that directness beats comfort 9 out of 10 times. When I tell people that I chose to fly long haul via Paris with Air France instead of taking the direct Lufthansa flight for the same price because I find Air France way more comfortable, people are most of the times stunned and tell me that for them to choose a connecting flight over a direct one, the price would have to be significantly lower. I really don't understand the aversion that people have against connecting flights but the fact of the matter is that an airline offering point-to-point connections to Berlin, Hamburg, Lyon, Milan, Brussels and other similarly important cities that are at the moment underserved by long haul flights will gain significant market share because passengers are willing to accept higher prices and less comfort for a direct flight.
Seeing as the 797 is at least a decade away from entering service, Boeing will have to produce something significantly better than the 321xlr. Airlines won't wait 10 years on a promise.
The problem at Boeing consists of many factors. 1. If you place the board 5,000 km away from the workers, you are looking for problems. A good boss is on the work floor half of the time. 2. If you keep modifying an aircraft like the 737, which originally dates from 1967, to the point where it is no longer aerodynamically viable, you are looking for problems. 3. Why did people treat the 737 this way? Just to please the shareholders. Because designing a new aircraft costs a lot of money. And people preferred to see more profit Meanwhile, behind their own backs, Boeing is being passed over by Airbus, which does produce top designs And so those eager shareholders are simply shooting in their own foot. 4. They cut that wonderful company into dozens of pieces in order to make as much profit as possible, and then lost the overview themselves. And then this, the compensation paid by Boeing to the families of the victims, does not even come from Boeing's pocket but from the pocket of Boeing's insurance company. That is shameless because their mismanagement does not cost them a cent
Boeing primarily continued the 737 because the certification of the pilots for the plane didn't have to be renewed. E.g. if you are a pilot on a B737, you just can't simply fly e.g. a A320, you need first a certification for that. And that's where it did go wrong with 737 max. Officially you don't need a new certification as it's still a 737, but too much changes in the electronics and engines where made so in reality you do fly a different plane. And pilots where not trained for that nor was anything mentioned of that in the manual of the plane.
Shareholders don't have to care about the company, it's all about the right time to sell and invest into another one. Today's profits are way more important than tomorrow's.
The A321LR/XLR is a problem for Boeing . The B737 product is stuck in a rut with little room for comparable development . Boeing should have been at the drawing board 10 years ago with a B737 replacement .
They had one, the B757. New engines possible because plenty of rooms under the wings, and A321XLR wouldn't even exist. But Boeing management saw short term, killed the B757, and pushed the B737 to the max and eventually the crash
@@CaptainDangeax The point you're missing is that the 757 is too big for many 737 routes, hence it wouldn't work as a replacement. And the 757 and 737 are different type ratings, unlike the A321XLR and A320.
And the problem just became a lot bigger...ladies & gents...the a321xlr achieved certification and entry to service is expected towards the of the summer...
Before Boeing can think about launching a new aircraft model they need to seriously focus on their internal quality control problems. Airbus is the crear winner here for many years to come.
fully agree - as a viewer, you don't get any additional information from watching the video - it might as well be an audio file. Definitely room for improvement!
He probably means the shot of the airbus beluga when you were talking about larger planes. Because the airbus beluga is not for passengers is it. I would call that a random piece of footage
This A321XLR will be very hard for Boeing to do something in order compete with Airbus. The 737 has now a very bad image and Boeing the same. Results of their terrible administration and lack of plans like Airbus did. A replacement for the 757 was obvious but they have prefered. not to see that. The industry now is under Airbus rules...
I wonder if its performance is as good as the 757? Could it be used at airports with shorter runways for long distance flights? An example, Chicago Midway MDW?
lets not forget about runway performance, I have flown both A321NEO and the MAX 9. Well the MAX flys like a brick and the NEO flys like a wide body and can takeoff and land on runways the MAX can only dream about using with a full load.
@@gvflyer4079 i disagree, it is all down to legroom and seat comfort. I do not see it makes any difference how many aisles a plane has regarding comfort.
@@simonbarber2098 seat comfort matters for sure. But there are less aisle seats available. Less room to stand up for a few minutes on a long haul flight to stretch. Fewer lavs to use. Also, these 320’s fly at .78 to .80 vs the A350 or 787 fly at .85. That matters on long haul. The 350 and 787 have better pressurization (lower cabin altitude) which is less fatigue. And the larger airplanes are generally better in minor turbulence which gives a smoother ride to be able to sleep. It all matters on long haul. Not just the seat.
@@gvflyer4079You are forgetting the most important point. The A321XLR improves the options of flying point to point. I would prefer the option of flying direct any day of the week.
@@gvflyer4079 thats true but for me you can still get up on a single aisle althought it is less convenient. For me just going to the lavatory is enough I do not need additional walk rounds. I guess we all have different tastes and desires when we travel, does not make either of us wrong. With this aircraft you have the choice to travel long haul single aisle, if you do not like that stick to a wide body option.
Yes, but that's nothing new. A lot of airplanes have one of their fuel tanks in the centre wing box - the piece of the complete wing structure that is connecting the two wings together. That centre wing box is in turn connected to the lower part of the fuselage, with a part of the cabin above it. Since it is essentially a hollow box, its inerior space can be used for eg retracted landing gear - and a fuel tank. Any passenger sitting "at the wings" (above the centre wing box) is sitting on top of a fuel tank.
@@k9killer221 well, some undeserving kids start a new channel, upload some popular video with a green screen, and get millions of views right off the bat, and that's why i said what i did
Just restart the 757 program again, Boeing. Your company has suffered such a devastating brain drain in engineering talent that your 797 or NMA project will be at least a decade away.
That would not really be a viable solution. The 757 facilities are gone for more than 10 years, hence a completely new industrial chain would be built, which is a very expensive undertaking. Additionally, whatever the updated 757 would look like, a new type certificate would required, with functions and regulatory requirements that have been issued/added since the type certificate of the 757 was issued. Due to that an updated 757 development is likely not much less expensive than developing a new aircraft from scratch.
@@MattBlue The 797 should be a modern successor of the 737 and 757 together. Boeing urgently needs a new single-aisle plane as their cash cow, instead of still producing the nose section of the 707 as it is done in the 737.
@@mairhart As I stated, Boeing needs a newly designed narrow-body plane. One could replace both the 737 and the 757. But it would be odd to build the 757 again, as the production lines no longer exist and would require significant facelifting.
Yea, but as a passenger it's just not as comfortable being crammed into slimmer, one aisle planes for longer haul trips. It's bad enough as on shorter routes as it is. Everybody celebrating this new technology without taking passenger comfort into consideration. For airlines, it's all about the money. They couldn't care less about the level of service they provide (most of the time. There are exceptions).
I've flown on 757s across the Atlantic, both ways, multiple times. It's not awful, but not great. Just like big-boy planes, in economy it does not matter how big the plane is, what matters is how the airline configures its planes. 28" pitch and narrow seats mean misery whether a 321XLR or A380.
You can still just choose an airline operating widebodies. Or you can have a stopover in Greenland if you hate long flights. Nuuk's new international airport is set to open in November.
Boeing suffers from the usual American problem, short termism, we want results NOW, not next year, NOW, cut corners and get results NOW, what about safety? What's safety got to do with it?
I certainly will not fly boeing mostly on their carry on when the aircraft came out of the sky. but they do not warrant passengers for their greed and poor workmanship so just tell them to fk off.
You may have amnesia, the world remembered when the B787 sent the first A350 back to the drawing board,to come up with what they have now. Boeing will be back with a new airplane,in the near future. The future belongs to Boeing with the new airplane to replace A321s.
Talk about repeat yourself! You really need to pay more attention of how many times you repeat the same thing! And also grammar aircraft is for single and plural there is no S on the end of aircraft it’s bad enough listening to Americans calling aeroplanes!!! Airplanes! and some British people are starting to call them that instead of aeroplanes, otherwise not a bad video. Could’ve at least saved three minutes on your video if you didn’t repeat.
shh.... it's all just to sell air craft and make money. for both of them. Efficient and new aircraft at that but in the end it is for profits as is to be expected
![Дон ДОН, Алаудинов и СБЕЖАВШИЕ из под Курска ахматовцы 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dEfCf5IK26Q/mqdefault.jpg)
Boeing must kick themselves every time they wake up in the morning because they never did a re-engined, upgraded 757. Everybody loves that plane. And it was exactly the right size and range to take on stretched A320s like the A321.
The 757 was too heavy, built as a downsized 767. Boeing needed to reduce the fuselage and wing weight as well as make the engines more efficient.
@@mairhart actually the 757 was over powered not overweight.
@@simonbarber2098 The 757 was much longer and 50,000 pounds (GW) heavier than the 737. Its airframe was considerably more expensive. And its passenger capacity was too high. As such, it was expensive and inefficient for the short-range market of the 737. The length of the 757 also made boarding and deplaning much longer than on the 737: Too many passengers with baggage sharing one congested aisle. That is why the then-expected replacement, the New Midrange Aircraft, was a shorter and wider jet with twin aisles, so it could carry the same number of passengers while boarding and deplaning more quickly.
"Everybody loves that plane" = a dream; nobody orders that plane = the reality. (2003: 5 orders; then Boeing ended this program).
@@thomasw7919 Everybody loves it until you give them the bill.
The fact this video is 7:57 minutes long is just so ironic 😂
It's 7:56 for me.
😂😂😂😂
Same...@@ats-3693
This is 5 sentences of content stretched to an 8min ad.
I wouldn't be surprised if it was an AI video
Boeing got into trouble the moment Airbus developped the A320NEO. That caused boeing to develop the 737 MAX, and end up in the mess they're in. Airbus is once again showing the future of air travel, leaving Boeing for dust.
Hilarious.
Boeing's main problem is called Boeing
..called Boeing management
@@user-gz5ro9rr6f you have to add the stakeholders too
@@user-gz5ro9rr6f aka MD
MD managment overtake boeing thats the problem
I love that Airbus has refreshed all of their planes bar one, with NEO engines, such a game changer and will always favour customers more
The biggest problem Boeing has is Boeing itself. The business model itself needs to be scrutinised, business practices that teeter on the edge of "criminal". Merciless profit maximisation through excessive outsourcing at the expense of safety and reduction and neglect of controlling. Reason: First and foremost competitive pressure from the professionally organised efficiency of Airbus...well...and now also from China, which is striving to stir up the Asian and African markets with its new model and almost uncontrollable state subsidies.
The Airbus A 321XLR is a huge slap in the face for Boeing and its badly damaged image. If the traditionally Boeing-affine US airlines now migrate to Airbus because of this, things will look grim for the former primus. Well, unless the US government intervenes with drastic subsidies, which would, however, be problematic under international commercial law.
Through its own fault, Boeing is currently doing pretty much everything wrong that can be done wrong. Airbus, on the other hand, has a virtually clean slate. They are currently doing everything right and are riding the wave of success. Airbus just has to be careful not to get too caught up in its success and fall into the same carelessness and mistakes as its US competitor. But we can be optimistic. Also due to the considerably better organisation of the entire company.
Salutations des Caraïbes françaises...
Really well said!
@@user-qe5xd9fv9v lovely, knowledgeable comment my friend
Dream on . To bring Boeing back to a propper working culture will take decades .
To remove the damages in production is a difficult , expensive process . It will only be successful with complete new leadership that values qualiti as the most importand target .
Bingo
Boeing is in trouble due to the fact that Airbus is literally changing the game.
Plus an Airbus speciality:
All bolts are in place.
I worked for Boeing from 8/88 to 8/93.
Got laid off.
I never considered going back because of the direction I saw the company going even back then.
Also Embraer makes an excellent product and I am always happy to hear about Airbus and Embraer taking market share from Boeing...
THIS CHANNEL IS WAY TOO UNDERRATED!!!! Keep up the amazing work, better than many other vids I've about my second favorite aircraft, the A321.
Thank you, Im glad you enjoyed it.
Damn, this is really underrated. Nice video 🙏
Its economical for the airlines but the flight crew is going to hate it. Imagine a 10 hour flight with no crew rest area. Your in the main cabin with the passengers and the on duty cabin crew but your off duty and tired. All you hear is ppl talking, babies crying and your trying to get a couple winks in before your start your shift time
Terrible for the customer too. A 10 hour flight on those seats sounds like hell.
@@SFledz .. Every Airline brings their own seat configuration... And... the crew is not important, they need no sleeping cabins, same as the passengers. Every Crew should be able to work less then 12h.
@@SFledz I flew Dublin-NYC in an A321NEO, which is like 6-7 hours and that was plenty comfortable. I wouldn't mind an even longer flight on an A321
I saw the A321XLR in an air show a few months ago and I gotta say it really impressed me, sleek design, really really quiet engine and so on… Boeings done for 😂
797? Nah they still got the work on 777x to do, hopefully they can deliver the 1st 777x within 10 years. Truely project of the decade
Boeing is a problem for boeing. Seriously, I’m so proud to be a French and European citizen. Proud of our wonderful plane industry! :)
I'll still take the bet on Boeing over Airbus.
I have a friend who retired from Boeing as Design Engineer. He said they have at least 2 revolutionary designs, practically doable, but management nixed it to keep milking the 737. Oh, management was repeatedly earned MAX was a bad idea too.
"....but with Boeing you never know what's going to happen". Famous last words.
Maybe Boeing should employ Airbus as business consultants😂
They said the 787 opened up new direct connections due to its long range and economics, eating away from hub traffic. It certainly helped driving down load factors and killing the already marginal business case for the A380. Next candidate to feel the pain (now multiplied by the A321XLR) will be the 777X program. Its no coincidence Airbus found not enough interest when shopping around concepts for a further stretch of the A350-1000. The ME3 ordered the 777X in huge numbers, but for all other airlines the A350-1000 is the max size they're currently willing to order.
Lower fuel burn, more efficiency, lower emissions: Let's safe the planet! 😊
At the same time: Long haul flights on discount, enjoy our world before it's too late, the devil may care! 😈
I don't believe that this plane is going to be any less comfortable than a cramped 10-abreast 777, but the main point is that directness beats comfort 9 out of 10 times. When I tell people that I chose to fly long haul via Paris with Air France instead of taking the direct Lufthansa flight for the same price because I find Air France way more comfortable, people are most of the times stunned and tell me that for them to choose a connecting flight over a direct one, the price would have to be significantly lower. I really don't understand the aversion that people have against connecting flights but the fact of the matter is that an airline offering point-to-point connections to Berlin, Hamburg, Lyon, Milan, Brussels and other similarly important cities that are at the moment underserved by long haul flights will gain significant market share because passengers are willing to accept higher prices and less comfort for a direct flight.
Great vid man. Looking forward for new videos. Can u cover the 777X ?
Seeing as the 797 is at least a decade away from entering service, Boeing will have to produce something significantly better than the 321xlr. Airlines won't wait 10 years on a promise.
Can we appreciate that this A321 video’s length is 7:57
Lol thought i was the only one who noticed it xd
The problem at Boeing consists of many factors.
1. If you place the board 5,000 km away from the workers, you are looking for problems. A good boss is on the work floor half of the time.
2. If you keep modifying an aircraft like the 737, which originally dates from 1967, to the point where it is no longer aerodynamically viable, you are looking for problems.
3. Why did people treat the 737 this way? Just to please the shareholders. Because designing a new aircraft costs a lot of money. And people preferred to see more profit
Meanwhile, behind their own backs, Boeing is being passed over by Airbus, which does produce top designs
And so those eager shareholders are simply shooting in their own foot.
4. They cut that wonderful company into dozens of pieces in order to make as much profit as possible, and then lost the overview themselves.
And then this, the compensation paid by Boeing to the families of the victims, does not even come from Boeing's pocket but from the pocket of Boeing's insurance company. That is shameless because their mismanagement does not cost them a cent
Boeing primarily continued the 737 because the certification of the pilots for the plane didn't have to be renewed. E.g. if you are a pilot on a B737, you just can't simply fly e.g. a A320, you need first a certification for that. And that's where it did go wrong with 737 max. Officially you don't need a new certification as it's still a 737, but too much changes in the electronics and engines where made so in reality you do fly a different plane. And pilots where not trained for that nor was anything mentioned of that in the manual of the plane.
Shareholders don't have to care about the company, it's all about the right time to sell and invest into another one. Today's profits are way more important than tomorrow's.
The A321LR/XLR is a problem for Boeing . The B737 product is stuck in a rut with little room for comparable development . Boeing should have been at the drawing board 10 years ago with a B737 replacement .
They had one, the B757. New engines possible because plenty of rooms under the wings, and A321XLR wouldn't even exist. But Boeing management saw short term, killed the B757, and pushed the B737 to the max and eventually the crash
@@CaptainDangeax The point you're missing is that the 757 is too big for many 737 routes, hence it wouldn't work as a replacement. And the 757 and 737 are different type ratings, unlike the A321XLR and A320.
@@cainneachdaugherty7172 both plane B737 and B757 share the nose, the cockpit, and all the fuselage except the length. What are you talking about?
i am a hughmongous van of big aircrafts! i loved this video !!
Ok, but are you also a fan of big aircraft?
The A321neo/lr are proving the efficiency and viability of long distance single aisle. Written on a JetBlue A321 lr half way across the Atlantic.
And the problem just became a lot bigger...ladies & gents...the a321xlr achieved certification and entry to service is expected towards the of the summer...
The video is good quality and very informative.
Underrated channel❤️
I appreciate that!
Before Boeing can think about launching a new aircraft model they need to seriously focus on their internal quality control problems. Airbus is the crear winner here for many years to come.
It’s definely time for airbus to take over
looks great but longer routes, potentially more passengers and limited toilets (given the 2 class configuration).....? yikes
Boeing's main problem isn't Airbus. Boeing's main problem is Boeing.
Hopefully, this time Boeing will not repeat the same mistake.
Eh, it is Boeing, right? Guess they will do nothing at all.
Boeing does not need Airbus anymore to create problems for them. They have done a great job themselves, thank you very much.
What is with the random footage?
What random footage?
fully agree - as a viewer, you don't get any additional information from watching the video - it might as well be an audio file. Definitely room for improvement!
He probably means the shot of the airbus beluga when you were talking about larger planes. Because the airbus beluga is not for passengers is it. I would call that a random piece of footage
@@Aviaat1 lots... the video clips do not match the commentary and there is footage of planes that have nothing to do with the narative... random.
Why the heck is Boeing's CEO still holding his position?
A problem for boeing yes. They have taken their loyal airline customers for granted. Become sloppy, greedy and arrogant
Boeing is kicking itself because the doors on A321 XLR are not moving out when they are not supposed to do it.
This A321XLR will be very hard for Boeing to do something in order compete with Airbus. The 737 has now a very bad image and Boeing the same. Results of their terrible administration and lack of plans like Airbus did. A replacement for the 757 was obvious but they have prefered. not to see that. The industry now is under Airbus rules...
Boeing made a mistake scraping the 757 machinery. That would have been a far better MAX aircraft.
I wonder if its performance is as good as the 757? Could it be used at airports with shorter runways for long distance flights? An example, Chicago Midway MDW?
if you mean performance in terms of power then no, if you mean performance in terms of efficiency then it is better
Airbus should design new bigger wing for A321 fuselage to make it more longer range to 10000km
You make really nice video
This man got 24 subs🤨 how
Wait for Boeing 737 Max Pro 😂😂
lets not forget about runway performance, I have flown both A321NEO and the MAX 9. Well the MAX flys like a brick and the NEO flys like a wide body and can takeoff and land on runways the MAX can only dream about using with a full load.
Can this aircraft fly from SFO to Fiji ?
Great circle route being 4742 NM, it is just outside the maximum range of 4700 NM.
Boeing prefers their accountants and investors over their engineers.
given the times that boeing is going through, everything is a problem !!!
Right 😂, what do you think is their biggest problem right now?
Airbus !!!!!
AND, the doors do NOT fall off.
The problem with this is it'll be a lot less comfortable for long hall, less room to walk around when needed, less lavatories , smaller seats etc
There will be free sleeping pills for all passengers
How do you only have 200 subscribers?
Right?! 😅
Why does American English pluralise words that are already a plural as well as singular?
Boeing desperately needs the 797. But the 737 Max disaster ruined that opportunity.
Being in a narrow body for 8 to 10 hour flights will really suck.
@@gvflyer4079 i disagree, it is all down to legroom and seat comfort. I do not see it makes any difference how many aisles a plane has regarding comfort.
@@simonbarber2098 seat comfort matters for sure. But there are less aisle seats available. Less room to stand up for a few minutes on a long haul flight to stretch. Fewer lavs to use.
Also, these 320’s fly at .78 to .80 vs the A350 or 787 fly at .85. That matters on long haul. The 350 and 787 have better pressurization (lower cabin altitude) which is less fatigue. And the larger airplanes are generally better in minor turbulence which gives a smoother ride to be able to sleep.
It all matters on long haul. Not just the seat.
@@gvflyer4079You are forgetting the most important point. The A321XLR improves the options of flying point to point. I would prefer the option of flying direct any day of the week.
@@gvflyer4079 thats true but for me you can still get up on a single aisle althought it is less convenient. For me just going to the lavatory is enough I do not need additional walk rounds. I guess we all have different tastes and desires when we travel, does not make either of us wrong. With this aircraft you have the choice to travel long haul single aisle, if you do not like that stick to a wide body option.
@@The_Red_Squirrel This is a good point. The 787 opened up that market a lot and now the 321XLR will do more for point to point.
I saw this plane on flightradar but like actually THAT PLANE
RIP 757
Boeing pivoted from developing planes to developing profits. No room for expensive R&D and certification of a new plane there.
Does this mean that some passengers will be sitting on top of a fuel tank?
Yes, but that's nothing new. A lot of airplanes have one of their fuel tanks in the centre wing box - the piece of the complete wing structure that is connecting the two wings together. That centre wing box is in turn connected to the lower part of the fuselage, with a part of the cabin above it. Since it is essentially a hollow box, its inerior space can be used for eg retracted landing gear - and a fuel tank. Any passenger sitting "at the wings" (above the centre wing box) is sitting on top of a fuel tank.
WHY ONLY 100 VIEWS BRUH ALGORITHM WHY
It's a brand new channel.
@@k9killer221 well, some undeserving kids start a new channel, upload some popular video with a green screen, and get millions of views right off the bat, and that's why i said what i did
Also, vid suggestion.. I'd love a detailed video about airbus/boeing alternatives such as the MC-21 or COMAC...
Sure, cheap shitty planes that nobody besides Aeroflot and assorted CCP-managed Chinese carriers might maybe possibly buy. Some day.
Just restart the 757 program again, Boeing. Your company has suffered such a devastating brain drain in engineering talent that your 797 or NMA project will be at least a decade away.
That would not really be a viable solution. The 757 facilities are gone for more than 10 years, hence a completely new industrial chain would be built, which is a very expensive undertaking. Additionally, whatever the updated 757 would look like, a new type certificate would required, with functions and regulatory requirements that have been issued/added since the type certificate of the 757 was issued. Due to that an updated 757 development is likely not much less expensive than developing a new aircraft from scratch.
@@MattBlue The 797 should be a modern successor of the 737 and 757 together. Boeing urgently needs a new single-aisle plane as their cash cow, instead of still producing the nose section of the 707 as it is done in the 737.
The 757 was far too heavy and inefficient by today’s standards. It needed a total redesign, not just new engines.
@@mairhart As I stated, Boeing needs a newly designed narrow-body plane. One could replace both the 737 and the 757. But it would be odd to build the 757 again, as the production lines no longer exist and would require significant facelifting.
Gave up after the 3rd "later in this video" mention - I mean the video is under 8 minutes long 🤦
Thats bs, there isn't even 3 times thats said and even so we still discussed what was talked about...
i hope commercial aviation isn't mostly only gonna be a321xlr
And the Boeing 777X had an in-service entry date of 2021.
Too early to conclude!
Nice vid!
Thanks!
Ha! Pick the right seating people? Single isle on long flights, not great for the people near the never ending queue for the toilets.
The bigest problem for boeing is boeing, and the 737 max.
It's a very big problem for Boeing Airbus has it all together far safer aircraft 😊😊😊😊
I'm no. 475 subscriber. Buckle in landies and gents
Thank you for subscribing! 🙏
yep
Wow this is the best aircraft of airbus imo, but maybe the upcoming boeing 797 will beat it?
Boeing will NEVER produce a competing aircraft. Just more hot air.
Why passengers will choose boat instead of luxury airliner for long trip?is there a funny clown on it?
Route is not rout. Route is pronounced like ‘root’
They're both correct...
And english altogether is a mess so the rout root route thing doesn't matter.
Yea, but as a passenger it's just not as comfortable being crammed into slimmer, one aisle planes for longer haul trips. It's bad enough as on shorter routes as it is. Everybody celebrating this new technology without taking passenger comfort into consideration. For airlines, it's all about the money. They couldn't care less about the level of service they provide (most of the time. There are exceptions).
I've flown on 757s across the Atlantic, both ways, multiple times. It's not awful, but not great. Just like big-boy planes, in economy it does not matter how big the plane is, what matters is how the airline configures its planes. 28" pitch and narrow seats mean misery whether a 321XLR or A380.
You can still just choose an airline operating widebodies. Or you can have a stopover in Greenland if you hate long flights. Nuuk's new international airport is set to open in November.
Boeing is no longer a rival to Airbus. 🎉
Boeing suffers from the usual American problem, short termism, we want results NOW, not next year, NOW, cut corners and get results NOW, what about safety? What's safety got to do with it?
I certainly will not fly boeing mostly on their carry on when the aircraft came out of the sky. but they do not warrant passengers for their greed and poor workmanship so just tell them to fk off.
Airbus is top of the table Boeing on the other hand 😂😂😂😂 that what happens when Boeing gets to big for their boots
You may have amnesia, the world remembered when the B787 sent the first A350 back to the drawing board,to come up with what they have now. Boeing will be back with a new airplane,in the near future. The future belongs to Boeing with the new airplane to replace A321s.
I don't have amnesia btw, just kidney stones. And you are biased towards Boeing. But we'll see what happens.
Let's hope Boeing doesn't end up crashing into the ground again like they did with their last attempt to replace A320s, 321s etc...
4.7 nautical miles huh.... Pretty sure that decimal place should be a comma
I never understood why they stopped the 757. Boeings stupidity.
Very few orders at the time, that's the main answer.
Because it's too big to replace the 737 on many routes.
To fly FATHER"?? who´s FATHER ??? maybe further (FEEAATHER)
I ain’t going in a Boeing
Rip B757
Boeing is losing the plot imho
boeing boeing gone
To get even greater increased range has anyone ever thought of in-flight refuelling?
Boeing’s main problem is Boeing!
Lmao, but what about Boeings DEI, lol such a dumb argument
So the only reason it’s better is that it has a bigger gas tank???
Talk about repeat yourself! You really need to pay more attention of how many times you repeat the same thing! And also grammar aircraft is for single and plural there is no S on the end of aircraft it’s bad enough listening to Americans calling aeroplanes!!! Airplanes! and some British people are starting to call them that instead of aeroplanes, otherwise not a bad video. Could’ve at least saved three minutes on your video if you didn’t repeat.
How does lower carbon emissions help when it boosts air travel?
shh.... it's all just to sell air craft and make money. for both of them. Efficient and new aircraft at that but in the end it is for profits as is to be expected