Boeing NMA for BA/IAG
Mar 8, 2021, 7:29 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2008
Programs: Confirmed
Posts: 1,091
Boeing NMA for BA/IAG
The Yellowstone project has 3 outputs and we know Y-2 became 787, Y-3 became 777X. The Y1 is expected to be 'NMA' or maybe 797, with about 7200km range.
7200km from LHR would cover Eastern US, most of Canada, the Caribbeans, a large portion of Africa, and the Middle East. It seems to me that this is a good fit for BA to run into secondary US cities, more destinations in Canada and add frequency to leisure destinations in Northern Africa, Turkey and the Middle East, plus occasional flights to Russia. Without the 767 it's not so economical to run services to some of the places, and the narrowbody A321(LR?) would be seen as a regional aircraft. If the NMA has good fuel economy, these markets can provide good recovery cashflow after the pandemic.
From DUB it'll be similar to LHR - shift the circle slightly west. From MAD, 7200km covers GIG. It seems a logical choice for IAG.
7200km from LHR would cover Eastern US, most of Canada, the Caribbeans, a large portion of Africa, and the Middle East. It seems to me that this is a good fit for BA to run into secondary US cities, more destinations in Canada and add frequency to leisure destinations in Northern Africa, Turkey and the Middle East, plus occasional flights to Russia. Without the 767 it's not so economical to run services to some of the places, and the narrowbody A321(LR?) would be seen as a regional aircraft. If the NMA has good fuel economy, these markets can provide good recovery cashflow after the pandemic.
From DUB it'll be similar to LHR - shift the circle slightly west. From MAD, 7200km covers GIG. It seems a logical choice for IAG.
Mar 8, 2021, 7:47 am
#2
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 59K
Posts: 2,301
The Yellowstone project has 3 outputs and we know Y-2 became 787, Y-3 became 777X. The Y1 is expected to be 'NMA' or maybe 797, with about 7200km range.
7200km from LHR would cover Eastern US, most of Canada, the Caribbeans, a large portion of Africa, and the Middle East. It seems to me that this is a good fit for BA to run into secondary US cities, more destinations in Canada and add frequency to leisure destinations in Northern Africa, Turkey and the Middle East, plus occasional flights to Russia. Without the 767 it's not so economical to run services to some of the places, and the narrowbody A321(LR?) would be seen as a regional aircraft. If the NMA has good fuel economy, these markets can provide good recovery cashflow after the pandemic.
From DUB it'll be similar to LHR - shift the circle slightly west. From MAD, 7200km covers GIG. It seems a logical choice for IAG.
7200km from LHR would cover Eastern US, most of Canada, the Caribbeans, a large portion of Africa, and the Middle East. It seems to me that this is a good fit for BA to run into secondary US cities, more destinations in Canada and add frequency to leisure destinations in Northern Africa, Turkey and the Middle East, plus occasional flights to Russia. Without the 767 it's not so economical to run services to some of the places, and the narrowbody A321(LR?) would be seen as a regional aircraft. If the NMA has good fuel economy, these markets can provide good recovery cashflow after the pandemic.
From DUB it'll be similar to LHR - shift the circle slightly west. From MAD, 7200km covers GIG. It seems a logical choice for IAG.
The A321 XLR is well placed for that role, but, I suspect lack of Heathrow capacity will come into play there.
Mar 8, 2021, 10:57 am
#3
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: London. Or a plane.
Programs: "Only" 50,000 TPs until BA GGLfL
Posts: 2,777
Norwegian bequeathed the world 43x 787s that are all going to be offered out at a fraction of build cost to get them out of the hangers they're stored in. Plus all of the aircraft rejected during the Latam/Avianca/Aeromexico bankruptcies. The world is awash with nearly new aircraft being offered at a bigdiscount to what carriers paid for them as recently as 2019: it's going to take a long while for those to be absorbed by the market.
Mar 8, 2021, 12:02 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 12,261
Good thread here BA fleet developments: unconfirmed updates, speculation, and general discussion for speculating on fleet developments
Mar 8, 2021, 12:08 pm
#5
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 7,237
Ah the NMA... the plane that doesn’t exist, has no defined specs and, notably, no one seems to be needing.
Had Boeing’s head honchos actually started working on a new narrowbody instead of baking that badly-executed soufflé called the MAX they’d have a large edge over Airbus and, arguably, a few less deaths on the conscience (assuming they have one, that is).
Had Boeing’s head honchos actually started working on a new narrowbody instead of baking that badly-executed soufflé called the MAX they’d have a large edge over Airbus and, arguably, a few less deaths on the conscience (assuming they have one, that is).
Mar 8, 2021, 1:02 pm
#6
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,061
Boeing has been touting a potential NMA for close to a decade, purely to pacify some particularly vocal (and hitherto loyal) customers who have been pointing out that they will be effectively forced to turn to Airbus because Boeing has ignored their needs for a 757 replacement. Boeing’s argument that they can have a 739 or 788 doesn’t really cut it. But in the meantime, Airbus has designed, built and delivered the A321(X)LR, which can serve the same market perfectly.
Whizzing back to IAG, Boeing would have to have astonishingly good financials to sway them away from the Airbus equivalents - even assuming they did want something of that size in the first place. Don’t forget that IAG has not only one but four sets of pilots and crew who are already fully competent to fly such aircraft, so there would be zero training cost, and close to zero implementation costs. IMO it’s very unlikely that Boeing will be able to do this.
Whizzing back to IAG, Boeing would have to have astonishingly good financials to sway them away from the Airbus equivalents - even assuming they did want something of that size in the first place. Don’t forget that IAG has not only one but four sets of pilots and crew who are already fully competent to fly such aircraft, so there would be zero training cost, and close to zero implementation costs. IMO it’s very unlikely that Boeing will be able to do this.
Mar 8, 2021, 1:18 pm
#7
Join Date: Mar 2020
Programs: British Airways GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond & Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,612
Surely A321LR/XLR for shorter/skinny routes and 787-8 for slightly thicker/longer routes.
re SH aircraft on these routes - BA/IAG just need to solve the J seat dilemma and in my opinion invest in a fixed cabin / decent seats (either WT+ / shell seats)
Yes, I know this creates a new sublet, but unlike the A321 ones - there would be scale here.
Shorthaul / Midhaul and Longhaul Fleets
SH - A320/321
MH - A321LR/XLR / 787-8
LH - anything bigger
re SH aircraft on these routes - BA/IAG just need to solve the J seat dilemma and in my opinion invest in a fixed cabin / decent seats (either WT+ / shell seats)
Yes, I know this creates a new sublet, but unlike the A321 ones - there would be scale here.
Shorthaul / Midhaul and Longhaul Fleets
SH - A320/321
MH - A321LR/XLR / 787-8
LH - anything bigger
