Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
B.737-900X  
User currently offlineSturdy From Ireland, joined Nov 2003, 60 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3148 times:

When will the Boeing 737-900X take to the air?

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3121 times:

AFAIK, it hasn't been launched yet.

User currently offlineSturdy From Ireland, joined Nov 2003, 60 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3063 times:

Are Boeing serious about it? I wonder which Airbus a/c will it be in competition with.

User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13507 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3023 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Are Boeing serious about it? I wonder which Airbus a/c will it be in competition with.

Supposedly Boeing is serious, but no mention of it has surfaced for awhile; they've been focusing on the 7E7 project right now.

AS has been in preliminary discussions with Boeing about the 739X, but it's impossible to say how far things have gone at this point.

The proposed -900X would be a direct competitor to the A321.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineAussie747 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3002 times:

I Hear QF is keen to be a launch customer (or so its CEO was back in early 2003). Any other customers if it gets the go ahead.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16245 posts, RR: 56
Reply 5, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2940 times:

Virgin Blue & Alaska are also mentioned as possible launch customers.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2719 times:

My guess, as I've ventured before, is that CFM doesn't have an engine for it just yet.

N


User currently offlineSinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1637 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2550 times:

My guess, as I've ventured before, is that CFM doesn't have an engine for it just yet.

The 737-900's engine "CFM56-7B27" is rated at 27,300lbs.

The "CFM56-5C4" used on the A340-200/300 is rated at 33,900lbs. And the A321's CFM56-5B3/P is rated at 31,300lbs.

The Airbus engines have bigger 1st stage fan disks, but the CFM56 core seems more than able to be up-rated to the 737-900X's needs; somewhere around 29,000lbs.


IMO, the only reason Boeing did not launch the -900 with the all of the -900X upgrades back in 2000 is because of the hope of the 757 line finding more orders. (as we all know that didn't happen)



My Country can beat up your Country....
User currently offlineCanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3389 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2529 times:

All i know is at one point AS and Boeing were talking about a 737-900X, which would compete with the A321 and maybe replace 752 in some cases. I would imagine comparing A321 to 739X would be similar to a A320 vs/ 738 comparison...


CanadianNorth



What could possibly go wrong?
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2407 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Would the 900X be a streched fuslage or become a B737-900ER?. How many more seats would it have? and how far would it be able to fly compared to the A321?

User currently offlineJustplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 718 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2284 times:

The 737-900X would not have a fuselage stretch. It would combine extra fuel capacity for increased range, with increased maximum passenger capability via two additional exit doors, to be located just aft of the wing.


"So many planes; so little time..."
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2072 times:

And winglets! Don't forget blended winglets!

User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1990 times:

It would combine extra fuel capacity for increased range, with increased maximum passenger capability via two additional exit doors, to be located just aft of the wing.

Correct. One thing to add was when I saw a scale drawing of the 900X, the overwing exits were not indicated. Whether this is accurate, I don't know.


User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1803 times:

It will be an option for tour operators...othewise it will be limited to the current 800/900 seating capacity.

In normal two class operation, there is no regulatory necessity for the add'l exits (although for safety it would be a nice...).

The additional doors with accompanying slides weight an additional 750lbs.


User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1556 times:

And I like to add that if the aircraft is launched, it would probably be known as the 737-1000 series. On the outside it would look like an -900, but with two additional overwing exits & winglets. The fuselage, I believe, cannot be stretch any further than what it is now. Regards.


"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1481 times:

While I agree that CFM CAN produce an engine, there's no evidence to suggest that they WILL produce one.

Even if they are to produce one, they still have to have it certified. A year process after the first one flies.

It would need a 33,000 pound variant much like the -5B3 to be competitive with the fuel and cargo uplift.

That bigger first stage fan is a big deal... there's hardly ground clearance for it on the 739. The -7 is also the penultimate of technology from the -5B and -5C. It will not be instantaneous to produce.

N


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing 737-900X, Finally Taking Off? posted Tue Mar 1 2005 09:22:23 by Keesje
737-900X posted Mon Feb 7 2005 17:16:23 by Beeweel15
JAL Interested In 737-900X posted Mon Feb 7 2005 11:57:02 by Atmx2000
Potential Customers For The 737-900X? posted Sun Jan 25 2004 00:46:11 by John
B.737-900X posted Sun Jan 11 2004 00:30:33 by Sturdy
Progress On The Proposed 737-900X? posted Sat Sep 20 2003 22:36:33 by John
The Proposed 737-900x posted Wed Apr 23 2003 02:59:22 by John
AS Launch Customer For The 737-900X? posted Sat Mar 1 2003 08:06:49 by United777
Air India Considering The 737-900X posted Tue Feb 25 2003 06:11:02 by United777
Boeing 737-900X Launch Eminent? posted Mon Feb 24 2003 14:34:08 by Keesje