Coming soon-MoM

I've been following the talk of the new Boeing Middle of Market, 757 replacement for awhile now. Based on a recent conversation, and information found around the net, I've come to the conclusion that we're going to see at least the finalized design a lot sooner than people think.

Boeing has released some pretty hard numbers about passenger capacity and range figures that are too refined to be guesses or figures they're just pie in the skying.

Both the 777 and 747 assembly lines have undergone production cuts that would free up line space for something else to be slotted in. The 747 is down to the last 15-20 aircraft that have firm orders, and was cut down to approximately half an aircraft per month, while the 777 is being slowed to prepare for the 777X family, but those won't start serious building for several years to come.

There have been rumors that have been mostly confirmed that design work was well underway. Comments by Boeing executives have been made that they have a pretty good idea of what the customers want. I had a conversation with someone recently that pretty much confirmed those rumors.

All this seems to be pointing to MoM coming out of the dark much sooner than people think we'll see it. Possibly as early as late this year or early next.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Any guesses as to design philosophy? I can see essentially a narrowbody 787 with souped up LEAP engines to have as much 787/737 MAX parts commonality as possible as an incentive for customers. It seems like a design that they would be able to field as fast as possible, without having to test something totally untried like some of the other designs they've supposedly been discussing.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The sooner the better. I need more maiden flights to attend at Paine. As long as the unions don't muck up it being built in WA.
As much as I'd love to see a new radical design being used I have the feeling it will look a lot like a mini Dreamliner.
Although Boeing has been working with NASA on that new wing design to improve efficiency:

www.nasa.gov...

a reply to: justwanttofly

More than likely they're looking at taking several bits from the 787, including cockpit. Mostly composite fuselage, and possibly geared turbofans if they can scale them up.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm not an aviation buff, but I always enjoy your well-informed posts about it. You give enough information that even a novice like me can appreciate the topic. S&F as usual for this.

a reply to: Zaphod58

That's my completely uneducated guess as well. If the 787 is really the 767 version 2.0, then I'd be shocked if the MoM wasn't basically a 757 2.0, using the 787's cockpit, avionics, and maybe even some parts of the wing and tail assemblies and a composite narrow-body fuselage with new engines, either downsized Trents or big GTFs.

It also has the added benefit of giving Boeing a composite narrow-body fuselage design that they can then adapt back into their 737 replacement, just like how the 707's fuselage was used for the 727 and was then reused as the basis of the 737 and the 757.

I've got a couple very selfish reasons why I'm really interested in how MoM shakes out. The 757 deserves a fitting replacement.

a reply to: Barnalby

What's interesting is that they were talking about trying to use the Max instead of a clean sheet design, while working hard on that clean sheet design. They're pretty far along on the design and engineering phase of things from what I am given to understand.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It almost makes you think that the Max was nothing but a cheap stop-gap to bluff Airbus into doubling down on the A320NEO (which was a much more involved redesign) so that the folks in Toulouse will be caught with their pants down in the small airliner segment when Boeing announces a MoM-derived all-composite 737 replacement with double-digit improvements in fuel economy before 2020.

It also lets Airbus (and poor Bombardier) eat the teething problems of the GTF so that Boeing's Buck Rogers plastic 737 2.0 uses zero unproven technologies and has as smooth and bump-free of a development as the 757 and 767 did.

originally posted by: Barnalby
It also lets Airbus (and poor Bombardier) eat the teething problems of the GTF so that Boeing's Buck Rogers plastic 737 2.0 uses zero unproven technologies and has as smooth and bump-free of a development as the 757 and 767 did.

That's the key right there. The GTF is their best bet going forward for engines, but it's got too many teething problems right now for them to risk it on any new aircraft.