The Boeing 797/NMA Is Starting Over "With A Clean Sheet Of Paper"

Quick rundown of Boeing’s future project, the NMA (New Midsize Airplane)

image
(Concept art by theaircurrent.com)

This aircraft will seat around 220-270 passengers, expecting to replace airlines’ Boeing 757 and 767 aircraft.

However, Boeing’s new CEO, Dave Calhoun, says the playing field has changed.

They will now restart the NMA project from scratch, learning from mistakes found on the 737 MAX which will significantly impact the NMA’s future design.

This aircraft should arrive in less than six years:

New aircraft typically take 6-7 years or more to bring to market once a decision is made, though Boeing aims to shorten that in part through digital technology and new business models designed around the NMA.

Dave Calhoun said they must prepare for Chinese competition as they introduce aircraft such as the Comac CR929.

On top of that, Airbus’ launch of the A321XLR over the summer has swayed some airlines into the ordering the aircraft, decreasing the likelihood of those airlines ordering Boeing’s NMA.

Sources: (Second link also includes a bunch of MAX stuff, NMA info is close to the end)

Good luck to Boeing with this project. Will be interesting to see if Boeing will be able to capture the midsize market in a few years with the XLR dominating.

16 Likes

I hope they do it right this time. Boeing can’t afford a single flaw in this aircraft.

5 Likes

Very interesting.

I love Boeing and will stand by them forever. But the truth of it all is that if Boeing screws up again, they’re screwed.

I know they’ll get it right :)

5 Likes

At this point it seems like they can’t afford anything 😂 I really love Boeing but these past few accidents have tattered their reputation. Sad to see the stage in which they’re at right now, I hope they recover. The 777X isn’t going to save them and the 737MAX well…we all know where that’s going. The “797” seems to be their only hope.

Take your darn time!
Boeing needs to get it right and can’t rush it with flaws. Given their horrible situation, this could be a huge part of Boeing’s future as the only market they are doing well in is the LH/ULH market. NMA will give them some grip on the medium haul market which is gonna have A321LRs and neos buzzing around

The most interesting quote in the article to me was this:

Perhaps Boeing may be moving from the Yoke and end up with a linked sidestick solution at some point?

1 Like

Ewwww. Sidesticks are wack.

1 Like

Is it me or does that plane look like a A220 or C Series.

1 Like

Uh, I think that’s just you bud…

Looks like a mini Dreamliner… 😂

3 Likes

The incident with the Max was the engine location in which it would cause the aircraft to pitch in an unwanted way. To that, they installed MCAS which was to “prevent it” from pitching down in which it did. The thing about Boeing is that they never told the FAA or any other airline about MCAS until the 2nd incident with Ethiopian. All Boeing has to do is have a design where the engines are in a good position and wings are good length. That isn’t hard. Good Luck Boeing!

I have to say, with the release of the A321XLR (among others), Boeing is a bit late to the the midsize long-range aircraft party. True, they did have the 737 MAX, but the fatal flaws killed it off. Airbus knew the market and created a plane that performed as it was supposed to. Knowing what your customers want is key in business.

A sidestick doesn’t change how much the pilot has control. The sidestick is to allow a place for pilots to eat food.
Sidestick doesn’t change the control pilots have, it’s just moving the controls to the wrong place,

1 Like

Hopefully they don’t implement the side stick as that feature is iconic to Boeing.

The only reason Airbus implemented the side stick was just to be “different” than Boeing. Just my two cents.

Interesting to know actually… An instructor on the dreamliner who was previously a captain on the A32X family told me the difference in the degrees of automation in both Boeing and Airbus.

He started off by telling me that pilots in an airbus are not referred to as their respective ranks, but are called CM1 and CM2, CM standing for Cockpit Manager. Why this terminology? Because the levels of automation in Airbus are far greater than that of Boeing, but this has serious safety risks as well. For example, in a case where a A32X fails to detect oncoming mountain terrain and the CM pulls up the aircraft to a very pitch to avoid any conflict, the aircraft will automatically pitch down to avoid a stall no matter what input.

There is more trust in the FBW system than in the Pilots even though Airbus pilots are subject to harder training!

Where Boeing is currently lacking is not unknown and while they take great care of their employees, they must step up their game and evolve their onboard tech as times progress. Even as a Boeing lover, I can say without a doubt that Airbus has been more consistent and I hope with the new NMA, Boeing can come out of their shell.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.