Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing 737-1000  
User currently offlineACdreamliner From UK - Scotland, joined May 2005, 519 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8733 times:

Hi all,

i was just wondering to myself about the possibility of the 737-1K. An even smaller 736NG, but perhaps with a new wing? Being targeted at NW (DC-9 Replacement) along with any other 737 operator who wants to operate a regional service. Basically the same size as the -100, so fitting really it would be the -1000.

just throwing it out there, what your thoughts? I mean, i understand the 736's problem is weight, but it is also too big for regional carriers. So a new wing, and communality might give it the edge?

Size ref i'm going off:
S1= 737-100 & Possible 737-1K
S2= 737-200, 737-500 & 737-600
S3= 737-300 & 737-700
S4= 737-400 & 737-800
S5= 737-900 & 737-900X


Where are you going?
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8705 times:

The CASM would be too high, that's one of the reasons that very few airlines have taken interest in the 600.

User currently offlineACdreamliner From UK - Scotland, joined May 2005, 519 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8686 times:

thats what i'm saying, if they could get the weight, thus fuel burn down, could it be viable?


Where are you going?
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8679 times:

There is no way that Boeing would shrink the B737-600 an further or Airbus would shrink the A318. As DLKAPA pointed out, CASM would be too high. The wings would be excessive, the frontal area would be excessive, etc. There would be no way to make such a plane economical. An EMB195 would eat its lunch.

User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8668 times:

And, there is little interest by mainline carriers in aircraft in the 100 seat range - that market is more and more being covered by aircraft like the E190 and CRJ900 which sometimes are flown by regional airlines at lower costs.

Its unlikely that we will see any further variants of the current 737NG family....in time, Boeing will launch a new smaller aircraft which incorporates all of the new features of the 787 family. The new smaller aircraft series will cover the 130-200 seat single aisle category (ie, everything from the 73G to 752) and most anticipate that 4 variants will be offered plus there will be variations in the wings of the different models.


User currently offlineACdreamliner From UK - Scotland, joined May 2005, 519 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8641 times:

thanks for the replys. yeah, the 170 family are great aircraft. i hear when AC ordered the 175, SG (JetsGo) knew it was only a matter of time before closure (source: SG revenue employee)


Where are you going?
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1609 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 8424 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Shrinks (as opposed to stretches) have never produced economical airliners. The aircraft ends up carrying around a lot of weight it really doesn't need. For example, the 737NG wing is sized for the GW of the -700, so the -600 is flying with a wing that is larger than it needs to be. I have a presentation from an engineer at American Airlines about the poor economics of 737-500.

For this reason, you will never see a 737NG smaller than the -600.

On the other hand, shouldn't the new 737-900ER really be the 737-1000?


User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 8351 times:

I think any new plane that comes to market, to "cover" the 737 for the next generation will be dubbed the "797." Then the question is...what next??  Smile


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineVatveng From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 968 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7013 times:

Quoting 7E72004 (Reply 7):
I think any new plane that comes to market, to "cover" the 737 for the next generation will be dubbed the "797." Then the question is...what next?? Smile

7107? (seven-ten-seven)



Visited VA,NC,PA,SC,FL,GA,OH,AL,TX,TN,CO,CA,UT,NV,NM,IN,KY,MD,MO,CT,MA,NH,ME.
User currently onlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3590 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 6786 times:

I guess the only shrink that ever was a success was the A319, and maybe the 737-500. The MD87 sold OK, but it wasn't a big succes either. The 747SP failed, it seems that a A380-700 isn't even considered anymore, a 757-100 was never built, and the A340-200 was a failure as well.

So somehow the A319 is an excemption from the rule that shrinks are unsuccesful.


User currently offlineCschleic From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1248 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4939 times:

I recall reading a Boeing engineer once saying the 737 can't be stretched any further because of fuselage length vs. length of the landing gear, and potential tail strikes. The size/design of the plane prohibits longer gear, so the fuselage is at its limit with the -900. A similar issue existed with the 707, vs. the DC-8 which was able to be stretched. Of course, a -1000 could involve different wing, etc. Kind of interesting...with the 737NG, it has grown to the capacity and range of the 707 of long ago.

Come to think of it, was the 720 a success?


User currently offlineThorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4469 times:

Quoting 7E72004 (Reply 7):
I think any new plane that comes to market, to "cover" the 737 for the next generation will be dubbed the "797." Then the question is...what next??

My bet is "Boeing 808", a BWB ship somewhere between 747Adv and A380 in capacity.


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 737-1000 Series posted Thu Jun 21 2001 09:23:01 by BLACK BOX
Boeing 737-1000 posted Fri Jan 14 2000 01:56:25 by USAirways A330
KLM To Buy Six Boeing 737 posted Mon Nov 13 2006 19:44:56 by AeroPiggot
Boeing 737-900ER And Lion Airlines posted Tue Oct 31 2006 16:45:47 by W3ndytj4n
Boeing 737-800 Vs Dehavilland Q400 posted Tue Oct 10 2006 10:50:50 by Cumulus
Boeing 737-300 Question posted Thu Sep 21 2006 02:37:21 by Adam727
Boeing 737 NG -Different Engine Air Entry? posted Wed Sep 20 2006 12:28:48 by Tolosy
Info Wanted For Transavia/Sun Country Boeing 737 posted Thu Sep 7 2006 18:02:21 by KL5147
Lion Air Order 30 More Boeing 737-900ER posted Mon Jul 17 2006 13:04:53 by PanAm_DC10
50th Boeing 737 For GOL! posted Wed Jun 28 2006 02:58:30 by Thering