Hacker News Reader

Comment by innocenat | Hacker News Reader

> The 737, 777 and 787 combined have eliminated the need for the 747, 757 and 767.

There are huge demand for A321LR precisely because there is a need for 757-like capacity and range. Granted, when 757 was discontinued the demand wasn't there yet.

View on HN

I suppose I can still see a need for a 757 aircraft. My thinking was that our economy now requires so much travel that a 787 could be mostly filled. There are so many variants of the A320/321 that I can't even keep track.

Generally speaking, part of the point to point trend has also been to downsize planes, not only to serve thin markets but to provide higher frequencies so that passengers have choice of when to travel during the day. Plus there's money to be made with premiums on thin markets still, given that the matrix of East Coast - Europe flights is not anywhere close to being full.

It was also why Boeing was, until the MAX debacle and COVID, also scrambling for the NMA, and why the MAX was so large.

The original "long" 737 variant was 30.5m; the 737 MAX 10 is 43.8m long. Many of the problems with the 737 airframe are rooted in this growth, along with it being originally designed as a regional jet with needed compromises (being low to ease airstairs, which caused problems with engines since the first re-engining with the Classic series).

Note that Boeing was trying to sell airlines on a clean-sheet aircraft when Airbus launched the A320neo, and _quickly_ started gaining customers, including those that had been loyal to Boeing for decades. Boeing needed something to counter the A320neo, hence the MAX had to happen—and soon.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com