>>1159799The Boeing 727 did poorly outside of the US. Tough competition from BAC, Aerospaciale and de Havilland all make the B727 far less appealing. The 727 didn't sell as well as the 737 and is only one example of Boeing's troubled history of unpopular and inadequete aircraft.
The Boeing 727, Jurassic series 737 and the first decade of the 757 all show how incapable Boeing was, and still is in making an aircraft which is useful.
The B757 only realised its potential after ETOPS became widespread and the aircraft filled the aircraft filled MoM niches. The 727 went for a trijet format, for no suitable reason other than the low bypass engines of the era.
The B737's low bypass caused design choices which resulted in 737 Classics needing a terrible engine cowling and more complicated setup, and they didn't even fix that for the NG. Now we have the MAX coming, Boeing finally decides that raising the landing gear is the solution to fixing their design flaw from the 1960s.
That's my issue with Boeing. With the main exception of the B747-400s, they have useful service lives of maybe 10 years, and then they're no longer efficient, or they're already rendered obsolete by the modern technologies of a competitor. Take a look at Airbus, their aircraft are far more long lived, and original A320s are still in service and will probably see service for years to come. Airbus also has another advantage, the retrofitting of older A320s with new parts, new technologies and improvements. Original A320s are compatible with new Airbus Sharklets and Airbus HUD systems, whereas the B737 Classics don't even have the glass cockpits.
Boeing are stuck in the past, and continue to prove this with their designs. The B787 was their first truly modern airliner, but it sacrifices too many reliable and redundant systems for new electronics which are far more susceptable to electrical failure.
It will be a matter of time, but with the A320neo, A330neo and A350 XWB, Boeing is out of date.
