Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Fourth Generation 737 To Offer IAE And CFM Engines  
User currently offlineJet-lagged From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 874 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 8489 times:

From here:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/b...mid401266?source=This%20is%20Money

"it is understood that Boeing engineers planning a new-generation 737, which could come into service between 2012 and 2014, believe airlines prefer a choice of two engine types."

This doesn't seem to be only 900X. Does this mean the 737NNG is gelling?


Cheers!

40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 8470 times:

Why not just build a 757ADV/NG as well as a 737NNG?  Confused

I know that Boeing are making the 787 to replace the 767/757 but why not make a 757ADV?

Rob!


User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4575 posts, RR: 41
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 8333 times:

Quoting B742 (Reply 1):
Why not just build a 757ADV/NG as well as a 737NNG?

Because there wouldn't be any point. The 757 market will be split into two aircraft - the largest 737 or 737 relacement at one end, and the short range 787 at the other. The 757 succeeded because there was no other aircraft that could fill this gap, at least not until the mid 1990s with the advent of the A321. Now there is the A321, plus the 737-900X and the 787-3.

Boeing has made it quite clear that it wants to rationalise the number of families on offer. Five years ago, they offered 6 families (717, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777) now they are moving to 4 or maybe even 3 if they conclude that the high capcity market will be better served by 777 type aircraft than by 747 type aircraft. Resurrecting the 757 into this mix would run counter to the KISS principle - why have 3 separate types when 2 can do the job perfectly well?

On the topic of engines, this makes good sense from a sales point of view - it will make the 4th generation 737 more attractive to airlines looking to replace IAE-engined A32x family aircraft a decade from now. Airbus have demonstrated that an aircraft in this size category can have a choice of engines, so this seems like a wise move to me.

V/F

[Edited 2005-06-12 15:53:38]


"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlineKFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3303 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 8302 times:

Quoting Jet-lagged (Thread starter):
This doesn't seem to be only 900X. Does this mean the 737NNG is gelling?

IIRC from previous discussions, Boeing's replacement for the 737 would probably be something along the lines of a scaled-down 787. I presume Boeing would finally switch to a true EICAS, and do away with the system annunciator light panel that was left in place for 1/2/3/4/500 commonality but left the NG slightly behind the times from the start.

New name? I nominate 737-NG²



"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 19
Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 8290 times:

Thanks VirginFlyer!

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 3):
New name? I nominate 737-NG²

I like it Big grin

Any idea on when the proposed 737NNG or 737-NG² Wink or 737ADV would be entered into service?

When does the 900X plan to enter service, if Boeing decide to build it?

Rob!


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 984 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 8163 times:

Quoting Jet-lagged (Thread starter):
"it is understood that Boeing engineers planning a new-generation 737, which could come into service between 2012 and 2014, believe airlines prefer a choice of two engine types."

This doesn't seem to be only 900X. Does this mean the 737NNG is gelling?

It's been obvious for quite some time that a next-generation narrowbody would be pitched by Boeing for the 2010-2015 timeline, the writing has literally been on the wall:

1. Virtually all 737NG contracts include options that teriminate in 2012, including those signed 5 years ago and 5 months ago.

2. The "Yellowstone" plan for a completly new Boeing product line includes three products: Y1 (100-200 seats), Y2 (200-300 seats), and Y3 (300-450 seats). We know that the 787 is Y2, that's coming along, so naturally Boeing will move to Y1 or Y3.

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 3):
New name? I nominate 737-NG²

The name being tossed around is 737-Enhanced or 737-E

Quoting B742 (Reply 1):
Why not just build a 757ADV/NG as well as a 737NNG?

The market for a direct 757 replacement doesn't justify a stand-alone product. Since composite manufacturing could potentially allow a single aircraft family to cover everything from 90-220 seats, why bother with an orphan product? Fleet rationalization is the future.

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 2):
On the topic of engines, this makes good sense from a sales point of view - it will make the 4th generation 737 more attractive to airlines looking to replace IAE-engined A32x family aircraft a decade from now.

Let's make one thing clear: any engine that goes on the 737-E will be nothing like the IAE V2500/CFM56-5 and CFM56-7 flying on the A320 and 737NG. That means no CFM56-9, etc, etc.

The A320 and 737NG replacements will demand (and get) all-new engines, not modernized variants of today's engines. The GEnx is loosly based upon the Ge90, but has radical differences in technology and application. Likewise, IAE and CFM replacements will have only slight semblance to current engines.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 984 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 8122 times:

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 2):
Airbus have demonstrated that an aircraft in this size category can have a choice of engines, so this seems like a wise move to me.

Boeing also one-uped them in that engines can now be swapped on a common pylon, likewise a smart move considering the nature of the narrowbody market: aircraft will switch hands.

The decision to offer just the CFM56-7 for the 737NG (which is not exclusivity BTW) was made to help resale values. If an engine type can be swapped in one business day, there is little holding Boeing back from offering multiple engine types.


User currently offlineNDSchu777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 419 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 7962 times:

My understanding is that the Y1 will be a new airplane built from scratch not just a 737 derivative.

The article posted above has been read into way too deeply. It talks about the likely possibility of having two engine manufactures on Y1 but it never specified that CFM and IAE will be those. The airplane is still in very early stages of development and it might be a few years before we hear anything for certain.

It does sound like the new engines will be quite a leap forward in the 100-200 pax market. Can't wait to see what the engine manufacturers will end up offering for the Y1 down the road.

Nick


User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5272 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks ago) and read 7850 times:

It seems to me that the 737 replacement ought to be a completely new airplane, rather that an enhanced 737.

First, as terrific as the 737 has been, it's been around since the mid-60s. At some point, Boeing needs to start with a fresh sheet of paper. I think Boeing could come up with a better airplane (i.e., lower maintenance and fuel costs) by designing a new airplane, rather than updating a very good, but older airplane.

Second, the knock on the 737 is that its cabin has a smaller diameter than the A320 series, which means narrower seats in the coach cabin. Even if Boeing could figure out how to make the 737 fuselage from composites, it would make sense to come up with a plane with a fuselage that has similar dimensions to the A320's cross section and seat widths. Also, by making the fuselage cross-section larger, the cargo volume would also increase.

Third, with a new plane, Boeing could make the cockpit more similar to the 777 or 787. A pilot friend of mine has mentioned that some of the panels on the 737NG are similar to the 737 Classics. With a more up-to-date cockpit with a layout similar to the 787 or 777, this would certainly have a positive effect on training costs.


User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks ago) and read 7690 times:

Any volunteers to photoshop a 737NG and put IAE engines on it?

User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4109 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks ago) and read 7644 times:

Quoting FLY2HMO:
Any volunteers to photoshop a 737NG and put IAE engines on it?

There's no way the nacelles would look the same, the 737 nacelles are specifically designed to allow enough ground clearance...


User currently offlineTrident2e From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7542 times:

Quoting Jet-lagged (Thread starter):
it is understood that Boeing engineers planning a new-generation 737, which could come into service between 2012 and 2014, believe airlines prefer a choice of two engine types

...and it's taken them 40 years to come to that conclusion?


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7491 times:

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 2):
Because there wouldn't be any point. The 757 market will be split into two aircraft - the largest 737 or 737 relacement at one end, and the short range 787 at the other. The 757 succeeded because there was no other aircraft that could fill this gap, at least not until the mid 1990s with the advent of the A321. Now there is the A321, plus the 737-900X and the 787-3.



Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):
2. The "Yellowstone" plan for a completly new Boeing product line includes three products: Y1 (100-200 seats), Y2 (200-300 seats), and Y3 (300-450 seats). We know that the 787 is Y2, that's coming along, so naturally Boeing will move to Y1 or Y3.

Will something fill the gap between the 737NNG and the 787-3/8 in a 2 class format? The latter is 280 pax in a 2 class format, while Y1 is up to 200 presumably in 2 class format. Will there be 762 or 753 replacement to fill the gap, and which family will provide it?



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7370 times:

good point. but the size not likely 100-200, but 120-230. I would think they must have 2 wing designs for this to work. 1 holding the lower rated engines for the 120 and 150 pax, and 1 larger one with the higher rated engines for the 170, 200, and 230 pax versions. (The 230 pax version would only be an internal design unless Boeing determined there was a real market for it, but being a single aisle plane of that size would likely mean to me that it would have limited appeal. But B would be stupid not to design for it this time around.)

Y3, a 777/747 replacement is a long way off. 2016 at earliest?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineFly_yhm From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 1681 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7335 times:

SO would it be called the 737-1000 that would be sweet


Where will you spend eternity? He,s more real then you think!!!!!
User currently offline707lvr From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 585 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7151 times:

Does anyone else feel that the Y1 or 737-with-more-initials should instead be the 797?

User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 7085 times:

calling it 737 serves a purpose we don´t know, but has probably something to do with marketing.

User currently offlineJohnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 7065 times:

you guys should check the current issue of Flight International magazine. It's got a very interesting article on this topic and comes with picture of what a 787-style 737 could look like (which, in fact, would be an all-new design).

rgds
daniel



If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
User currently offlineToxtethogrady From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1347 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 7060 times:

What's Boeing doing about the 70-110 seat market?

User currently offlinePanAm330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2687 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6992 times:

Quoting Fly_yhm (Reply 14):
SO would it be called the 737-1000 that would be sweet

If they even kept the 737 nameplate, which IMO would be a stupid move. An all-new aircraft shouldn't keep the same old nameplate, or it will look like it was just 'revised.' Not like an entirely new aircraft. That is, if they design it to have zero commonality with current 737 models. That said, I like the 737 nameplate- it's a classic. Also, I'd imagine that if Boeing kept the name around, it would be B737-100E, or something along those lines.


User currently offlineBrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6887 times:

Quoting Toxtethogrady (Reply 18):
What's Boeing doing about the 70-110 seat market?

Leaving it to Embraer and Bombardier?



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineMD80Nut From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 958 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6553 times:

Ckfred beat me to it. Any new narrow body by Boeing should take advantage of the 787 composite technology and have a fuselage at least as wide if not wider than the A320's. I like the A320's extra width, especially when an airline takes advantage of it and gives you an extra inch of seat width, like US Airways for example.

Giving airlines an engine choice is also wise. That has worked well for the A320 family too.

Maybe they can call it the 797 or the 737-1000 series.

Cheers, Ralph



Fly Douglas Jets DC-8 / DC-9 / DC-10 / MD80 / MD11 / MD90 / 717
User currently offlineLarspl From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6130 times:

they have to drop the 737 name..

many people don't know the difference between a 737-200 and a 737-800. they only see 737. i know a few people who think they flew a 30 year old 737 instead of the just deliverd -700 they were on.

a new name. marketing wise.. thats the best!



facebook.com/ddaclassicairlines
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26601 posts, RR: 75
Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 6019 times:

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 3):
IIRC from previous discussions, Boeing's replacement for the 737 would probably be something along the lines of a scaled-down 787. I presume Boeing would finally switch to a true EICAS, and do away with the system annunciator light panel that was left in place for 1/2/3/4/500 commonality but left the NG slightly behind the times from the start.

Not that it really matters, given that in many ways that matter, the 737NG is the most advanced aircraft in its category

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):
Quoting B742 (Reply 1):
Why not just build a 757ADV/NG as well as a 737NNG?

The market for a direct 757 replacement doesn't justify a stand-alone product. Since composite manufacturing could potentially allow a single aircraft family to cover everything from 90-220 seats, why bother with an orphan product? Fleet rationalization is the future.

The top end of the 737-E line is not only likely to cover the 220 seat range, but it is also very likely to have 757-200 or better range, meaning that it will cover both size and range. Takeoff performance will likely not be as good, unless they plan on using a 40,000 pound engine

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):
The A320 and 737NG replacements will demand (and get) all-new engines, not modernized variants of today's engines. The GEnx is loosly based upon the Ge90, but has radical differences in technology and application. Likewise, IAE and CFM replacements will have only slight semblance to current engines

While the GEnx may loosly be based on the GE90, it is a much more compact and efficient engine. After all, the GEnx is smaller than the Trent 1000 while the GE90 dwarfs the Trent 800. Any replacement for the CFM56 and the IAE V2000/2500 will incorporate the same technology as the GEnx/Trent 1000 and will be a much different engine. Also, the new engines will likely be bleedless, which will take a significant redesign anyway

Quoting Trident2e (Reply 11):
Quoting Jet-lagged (Thread starter):
it is understood that Boeing engineers planning a new-generation 737, which could come into service between 2012 and 2014, believe airlines prefer a choice of two engine types

...and it's taken them 40 years to come to that conclusion?

I guess it is still not enough that the aircraft we are talking about here is BY FAR the best selling jet powered commercial transport ever.

Quoting Toxtethogrady (Reply 18):
What's Boeing doing about the 70-110 seat market?

They are actually rather strong investors in the RRJ, which will likely have their support in any entry into the US market. Boeing's scale, much like that at Airbus, suits making larger aircraft and leaving their involvement in 70-90 seat jets as investment and engineering partners



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineKennyK From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5875 times:

I read a press report during Farnborough Airshow last year that the next generation engines being considered for narrow-bodies for service from 2012-2015 would have an even higher bypass-ration than current engines and thus a larger fan size. The main problem brought up was that the ground clearance for both the 737 and even A320 was too little and that the engines would only suit new aircraft.

Is that so or are more modest derivatives of current engines being considered?


25 N1120A : That would create a problem, though it could be helped with the use of a cantilevered pylon like GE uses to get the GE90 on its 747
26 DfwRevolution : The CFM56-3 and CFM56-7 require cantilevered pylons to fit on the 737 wing, hence the Boeing patent. Well duh... but you have to call a product somet
27 Ken777 : I find it hard to believe that the lessons learned on the 787 are not rapidly moving to a 737E design team. I thinking everything from wind tunnel tes
28 Yyz717 : The new Boeing narrowbody should ideally be offered in 4-5 sizes/lengths/capacities covering the 735 to 753 capacity range.
29 Vatveng : Let's make sure it flies first. It undoubtedly will, but isn't it a bit premature to be talking about "lessons learned" on a plane that doesn't even
30 Pilotdude09 : would this aircraft be the last in the boeing series? or do you think they can get one more 7_7 in?
31 Post contains images Lightsaber : Huh? Pratt realized that they needed to get on the 737 and Boeing quite firmly told them that CFM has an exclusive until 2008. I have no reference...
32 N1120A : Well, thank you Rev, I did not know that. Then again, at least they did not simply lash the thing to the wing on the NG like they did with the 737Cla
33 KL911 : That would be a killer for the 2nd hand market, if Southwest, Ryanair etc etc all dump their 737's at the same time... KL911
34 PlanesNTrains : Southwest isn't SQ. They won't just dump hundreds of planes for the 737E - more likely will be a gradual retirement as they reach their golden years,
35 KennyK : I don't see Southwest or Ryanair dumping old jets, quite the opposite, both airlines seem quite happy to keep old aircraft. Ryanair still has 732s and
36 StickShaker : ...but it is also very likely to have 757-200 or better range, meaning that it will cover both size and range ... We might see the phrase "757 capaci
37 Planemaker : Paris Air Show News Monday June 13, 2005 CFMI launches engine technology development program CFM International the day before the start of the Paris
38 AirWillie6475 : What happened to the 3rd generation 737?
39 Dan2002 : 1st gen, 737-100/200 2nd gen, 3/4/500 3rd gen, 6/7/8/900 -Dan
40 DarkBlue : A bit off topic, but I found this comment in the article interesting: "There could be further good news for Rolls-Royce next month after Platt confirm
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...
Singapore Airlines To Offer SMS And Chatrooms posted Wed Apr 24 2002 19:18:20 by Singapore_Air
Shock Announcement - 737 With CFM Engines posted Tue Jun 20 2006 22:58:07 by Kiwiandrew
SmartWings To Offer Free Meal And Drink posted Fri Apr 28 2006 23:16:18 by Checo77
Monarch To Offer More Routes And Flights At BHX posted Thu Sep 22 2005 22:53:28 by BCAL
Airlines/Apple Up To Offer Ipod Integration posted Tue Nov 14 2006 15:15:22 by FlyingDoctorWu
Is It Possible For Boeing To Offer B777-300F? posted Thu Oct 12 2006 04:02:56 by AirCanada014
B767 How To Tell PW Vs GE Engines? posted Mon Oct 9 2006 20:14:52 by Ned Kelly
NZ To Offer CHC-AKL-CHC Shuttle Flights posted Fri Sep 29 2006 13:45:56 by NZ1
What Was The First Airline To Offer A Website? posted Wed Sep 27 2006 06:29:36 by Joffie
Next-Generation 737-900ER Takes Maiden Flight posted Tue Sep 5 2006 20:26:07 by Leelaw