CanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3405 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2616 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...
Justplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 726 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2371 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.
FlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1643 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
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 81
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1568 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.