Quiet Airliners of the Future?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:00:15 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in ::


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 03:58:03 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in ::

As long as there is a demand for air travel, there will be someone to
supply it. I guess I'm missing some implied point.

You need to read the news a little more often Larry.

I was hoping you might enlighten me.

Again here are a couple of questions for you:



On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 21:58:24 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in ::

The way the airlines are running their businesses now days I suspect we
will
be seeing quite a large number of "quiet airliners" in much less that 20
years.

How are airlines running their businesses now days?

Based on the number that are out of busines or currently in severe financial
trouble (word is Delta will soon be filing for chapter 11 protection) I
would have to say the majority have not developed a very good business
model.

I would have to agree. These air carriers are a product of the period
when our government regulated them. Perhaps it's time for them to get
more competitive, or failing their ability to successfully transition,
they should fail. That way they could shrug off their debt and
crippling employment contracts, and start afresh.

The trend toward quieter aircraft is welcome by all. Helos are
substantially quieter than they were in the '70s, and today's airliner
compared with 4-engined B-707s of that era are too.

Of course getting somewhere in them might be a challenge.

What makes you say that, the extent to which security measures will
have escalated by the time these aircraft are in production? Or are
you concerned by the necessary tradeoff between reducing dB and
performance?

My concern is many airliners will be sitting out in the desert somewhere
which I guess is one way of reducing noise.

I would guess that much of the inefficient airline fleet would not be
competitive in tomorrow's airline industry, and should be relegated to
the junkyards. How else will tomorrows airlines be able to be
competitive?

You've got to break eggs to make omelets.

I have little doubt that airliners of the future will be quieter and
more fuel efficient. Change is inevitable.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message I would guess that much of the
inefficient airline fleet would not be
competitive in tomorrow's airline industry, and should be relegated to
the junkyards. How else will tomorrows airlines be able to be
competitive?

Here's a question. Will replacing a $3mil medium by-pass jet with a $28mil
high bypass jet save money? Lower mortgage apyment of lower fuel bill, which
is better?

D. (answer to follow)

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 02:46:39 GMT, "Capt.Doug"
wrote in ::

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message I would guess that much of the
inefficient airline fleet would not be
competitive in tomorrow's airline industry, and should be relegated to
the junkyards. How else will tomorrows airlines be able to be
competitive?

Here's a question. Will replacing a $3mil medium by-pass jet with a $28mil
high bypass jet save money? Lower mortgage apyment of lower fuel bill, which
is better?

D. (answer to follow)


I suppose Boeing would have the answer to that question. I doubt
they'd be considering producing the aircraft if air carriers were not
going to operate it.

In article ,
"Capt.Doug" wrote:

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message I would guess that much of the
inefficient airline fleet would not be
competitive in tomorrow's airline industry, and should be relegated to
the junkyards. How else will tomorrows airlines be able to be
competitive?

Here's a question. Will replacing a $3mil medium by-pass jet with a $28mil
high bypass jet save money? Lower mortgage apyment of lower fuel bill, which
is better?

Depends, "How long do you plan on keeping it?"
What is the depreciation schedule?

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message ...
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message I would guess that much of the
inefficient airline fleet would not be
competitive in tomorrow's airline industry, and should be relegated to
the junkyards. How else will tomorrows airlines be able to be
competitive?

Here's a question. Will replacing a $3mil medium by-pass jet with a $28mil
high bypass jet save money? Lower mortgage apyment of lower fuel bill, which
is better?

D. (answer to follow)



Doesn't everyone lease the planes (or powerplants) these days, or at least have some sort of power by the hour
performance based logistics maintenance program these days?

" Blueskies" wrote in message Doesn't everyone lease the planes (or
powerplants) these days, or at least have some sort of power by the hour
performance based logistics maintenance program these days?

In most jet airlines, fuel is 50% of the cost. One year ago, jet-A was
around $1.26/gal for my employer. Now it is just under $2.00/gal (not
considering hedges). Replacing an MD-80 with a B-737NG or an A-320 results
in 30% fuel savings. Even with the higher lease payments, my employer saves
$200,000.00 per airplane replaced in the first year.

It's a Catch-22 for the legacy carriers who are stuck paying high fuel costs
because they don't have the cash to update their fleet. They don't have the
cash to update because they have high fuel costs. Of the discount carriers
ringing up a profit, how many are flying high bypass engines and how many
are flying medium bypass engines? Everytime I see a Northwest DC-9, I wonder
how long before they file for bancruptcy (question recently answered- longer
than I expected).

Why did Boeing discontinue the B757? I'm not sure, but I do know that the
A-321 hauls nearly as many passengers and yet the A-321 has a MGTOW that is
60,000 pounds lower. It takes a lot of fuel to haul around an extra 60,000
pounds. What will the new B-787 weigh? Why did Airbus feel threatened enough
to counter with the launch of the A-350 program? It's about saving fuel.

As for leasing, there are many ways to structure a lease. Many times, large
shareholders will own an aircraft (though the paper trail may be long and
convoluted) and lease it to the airline, often at a sweetheart rate. With
this method, the shareholder makes money on it's investment in the airline
even if the airline doesn't make money.

Power by the hour contracts are available for both old and new engine
series. The difference is that the newer engine models have fewer
life-limited component times resulting in less down time. The same thing
applies to other components. Brake overhauls can be contracted for old and
new planes. The difference is that the old style steel brakes have more down
time, and man-hours required for replacing, than the new style carbon
brakes. Contract or not, someone has to pay the difference.

D.