HighFlyer9790 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1236 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 12866 times:
Alan Mulally, head of boeing, annouced that 737s will soon be made of composite plastics, similar to the 787 material.
"All 737 planes will be made from non-metal materials, or composites, said president Alan Mulally. "
HighFlyer9790 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1236 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 12769 times:
RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 12596 times:
Quoting Art (Reply 4): Might the word "technology" be referring to engines?
That was my point, other sources including engine OEMS, have said before that the technology for a next generation narrowbody engine was a decade away. Despite this, there have been multiple threads on here about a 737 replacement by 2009 or so.
These comments put paid to the quick replacement some have suggested will happen.
Highflyer9790 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1236 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 12519 times:
Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 3): If the market accept the "Narrow Dreamliner" like the 787, so Airbus will face hard times as they are now looking what to do on their A350 project.
The 787 market is very strong and it has, IMO, sucked up most anything the A350 needs to build on. the A350 is encountering many problems, as noted in other forums, so it will be hard for the A350 to find a market niche and be profitable as well. the 787 is most likely one of the most flexible airplanes ever, in terms of routes, while saving operating costs to the airlines.
Quoting Art (Reply 4): Might the word "technology" be referring to engines?
"Technology" may be reffering to anything from engines to materials to instruments in a redesigned cockpit perhaps. the engines may be comproble to the 787s, only on a smaller scale.
As far as a design goes, do you think the 737 fusalge will be redesgned at all? i think we may be looking at an improved 737 line with something like the 800 and 900ERX...
highflyer
[Edited 2006-07-16 22:18:12]
Professional people mover. A to B. CL-65 Type; CFI/CFII/MEI/AGI/IGI
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7525 posts, RR: 5 Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 12364 times:
Until Mulally mentioned 2016 I was caught by surprise with the article.
Basically it's a conservative statement that holds no surprises. Might generate an irritating question or two at the Airbus press event, but that's it.
On the engine OEM side I find it hard to believe that those companies are telling the major 737 users to wait 10 years before getting some major relief on fuel costs. That might have worked when oil was $40, but it won't be well received by the airlines with today's fuel costs.
I think companies like GE are looking at their investment options, like investing to support the 370 or Y1. GE, and the competition, have to select where they are going to invest in R&D and, quite frankly, Y1 looks like a better opportunity right now than the 370. SOme large 370 orders may change that, but airlines like WN are going to be pushing them hard for Y1.
If the price of fuel does not drop significantly over the next 6 -12 months I would expect the 2016 EIS date to be dramatically changed as the engine companies put a heavy focus on Y1 and the 320 replacement.
RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 12295 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 7): On the engine OEM side I find it hard to believe that those companies are telling the major 737 users to wait 10 years before getting some major relief on fuel costs.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 7): If the price of fuel does not drop significantly over the next 6 -12 months I would expect the 2016 EIS date to be dramatically changed as the engine companies put a heavy focus on Y1 and the 320 replacement.
The engine OEMS cant work miracles, and as we have seen from RR recently musing a 3 spool engine, they are looking at totally new concepts for narrow bodies and have already put a lot of R&D into the market.
Despite demands from Airbus, Boeing and the airlines, if the engine OEMS have already said 'next decade', theyve said it for a reason and that reason isnt going to suddenly become easy to bypass just because some wish it was.
Mham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3015 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 12179 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 7): Basically it's a conservative statement that holds no surprises. Might generate an irritating question or two at the Airbus press event, but that's it.
They're not going to show their hand. Remember there is a large subterfuge game going on.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12069 times:
Quoting HighFlyer9790 (Thread starter): ...from non-metal materials, or composites, said president Alan Mulally. "
Composites are just a make up of different materials, just the vast majority of investment is going into oil-based plastic materials. Composites can be made up of metals too, hasn't he heard of weaved silicon and titanium? To who's benefit is this misinformation? If generalzation is for people's convenience, I don't give a crap.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4449 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12010 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 8): if the engine OEMS have already said 'next decade', theyve said it for a reason and that reason isnt going to suddenly become easy to bypass just because some wish it was.
Might that reason be they wanted to learn more of what the airframers have in their pipelines, or earn some more from their previous investments before plunking down bigtime on yet another venture? Recent events do not build up much boldness on the part of the engine OEMs.
HighFlyer9790 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1236 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11760 times:
Quoting Mham001 (Reply 10): They're not going to show their hand. Remember there is a large subterfuge game going on.
Very true. During the nose to nose race with Airbus (boeing is actually ahead i think) don't think boeing is going to tell everyone their plans for the next decade. they are very focused on the 787 right now, so i think the development of the next 737 will be after the 787 is in service anyway....
highflyer
Professional people mover. A to B. CL-65 Type; CFI/CFII/MEI/AGI/IGI
United787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2352 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 10440 times:
Aither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 795 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10264 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 12): Composites are just a make up of different materials, just the vast majority of investment is going into oil-based plastic materials. Composites can be made up of metals too, hasn't he heard of weaved silicon and titanium? To who's benefit is this misinformation? If generalzation is for people's convenience, I don't give a crap.
I'm always thinking the same when people talk about composites. Current fuselages ARE already composites.
Grantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 429 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10107 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 8): Despite demands from Airbus, Boeing and the airlines, if the engine OEMS have already said 'next decade', theyve said it for a reason and that reason isnt going to suddenly become easy to bypass just because some wish it was.
Remember that necessity is the mother of invention. I really don't see how airlines are going to be able to survive a decade with the current technologies and with oil prices going the way they are.
Manni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 23 Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9569 times:
Quoting Highflyer9790 (Reply 6): The 787 market is very strong and it has, IMO, sucked up most anything the A350 needs to build on
Dont fool yourself. While Boeing has sold a great amount of 787's, there's still a market potential of another 3000 aircraft in this class over the next 20 years, additionally Airbus could capture a huge share in the next class up with the A350-1000.
Quoting Highflyer9790 (Reply 6): the A350 is encountering many problems, as noted in other forums, so it will be hard for the A350 to find a market niche and be profitable as well.
Has encountered many problems. To counter this, Airbus has reportedly decided to invest double the amount of money on a new aircraft.
Quoting Highflyer9790 (Reply 6): the 787 is most likely one of the most flexible airplanes ever, in terms of routes, while saving operating costs to the airlines.
This could change today, depending on what Airbus has up their sleeve. One aircraft to counter both the 787 and 777 sounds a very flexible aircraft indeed, and all this at only half the production cost of the 777 and 787 combined.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 7): Until Mulally mentioned 2016 I was caught by surprise with the article.
Basically it's a conservative statement that holds no surprises.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9219 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 5): Despite this, there have been multiple threads on here about a 737 replacement by 2009 or so.
It's been anticipated that Boeing would launch a new 737 replacement in 2008 or 2009. If Boeing is now targeting 2015, then this means a launch of 2010 or 2011. That's a slide of one or two years tops.
I'd still say that if push came to shove, Boeing and engine OEM could deliver by 2014 or maybe even late 2013 if absolutely necessary.
ContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1436 posts, RR: 50 Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9134 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 12): Composites are just a make up of different materials, just the vast majority of investment is going into oil-based plastic materials. Composites can be made up of metals too, hasn't he heard of weaved silicon and titanium? To who's benefit is this misinformation? If generalzation is for people's convenience, I don't give a crap.
I'm sure you don't give a crap, but it's obvious you haven't worked around/for many executives. When you do, you'll figure out two things:
(1) Of COURSE he hasn't heard of a silicon titanium weave. He has far more to worry about than offending an engineering student.
(2) His job is every bit as detailed as yours, and at this point, his expertise in his chosen field probably cleanly outstrips your skill in your chosen field. Be assured that were he to spend time studying various composite materials, he would be diverting time and effort away from his very important and valuable job.
I'm sure he doesn't give a crap about the trivial matters over which you are offended. Those of us who have engineering degrees, and whose jobs require very detailed thought, tend to assume that executives don't study enough, etc. That's simply untrue. In fact, I've found the good executive is generally more studious than the average person, even engineers. Having taught technology to adults for the past six years, I've developed a VERY dim view of the average adult's capabilities with regard to learning and thinking. I know quite a few executives, and they are waaaay smarter/studious than the average technologist in my classes.
Mulally's job is not to educate the public about titanium silicon weaves. It's not to make students feel good. It's to ensure that Boeing's strategic direction is good, that it turns a profit, and that it's stockholders are happy. He must ensure that the 737 replacement sells thousands of copies, profitably. That's a terribly difficult job.
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
Ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4683 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7866 times:
If you look across airline fleets around the world, there will be a lot of narrowbodies that will need to be replaced over the course of the next 10 to 12 years, including all 737s from the -200 to the -800 series, the MD-80 and MD-90, the DC-9 (NW), the A319 and A320, and the 757-200.
Boeing has to decide if one aircraft, albeit in several different series, can replace all of these aircraft. If not, then Boeing has to decide if it should skip the 100-seat varient (737-200, 737-500, and DC-9-10) or the 185-seat varient (757-200).
It could very well be that Boeing's technology issue is trying to design and build from a common platform several different aircraft that can fly 100 people on routes of 200nm to 1300nm, as well as 180 people on routes up to 3000nm in length, all give airlines good operating economies across the range of models.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 22, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7290 times:
Quoting Manni (Reply 20): This could change today, depending on what Airbus has up their sleeve. One aircraft to counter both the 787 and 777 sounds a very flexible aircraft indeed, and all this at only half the production cost of the 777 and 787 combined.
we'll see what "combo" the A350 competes on..is it also going to be the -300ER? Airbus has already said they aren't going to compete with part of the 787 program..
I think this has to do with their philosophy that planes in general are going to be larger in the future (hence the development of the A380)
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7123 times:
Quoting Aither (Reply 17): I'm always thinking the same when people talk about composites. Current fuselages ARE already composites.
Per se, kind of like mixing milk and water, but I appreciate your intelligence and anyone who has felt similarly.
The impression I am getting from you is that it is okay to mislead as long as most people do not notice. As if PR statements are written for readers who have a passing interest in the subject. Being an aviation forum with regular arguments on composites, it would help if someone with the leadership and respect of Mulally to not mislead. I'm not ignorant to the ways of business; my point is that people pick up on images rather than definitions. But images are restricted to a form of expectation, i.e. do what works.
FWIW, I'm not into what people think are composite materials. Since the plastic type cannot sustain higher Mach numbers without severe deformation, it would cost MORE to develop a new composite - killing any such project...and you think I give a damn?
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
25 HZ747300: Will there be a passenger 747-8XX order at the airshow? That's what I want to know.
26 RAPCON: Why not go composite with the 777 series??
27 RichardPrice: Because the entire production line is setup for traditional build.
28 RAPCON: How boring!! End result is still the same old cramped fuselage. Yaaaawn!!!!
29 DAYflyer: This was my first thought. I seriously doubt he is going to tell his competition what he is doing and when, and that far in advance. I still think we
30 2H4: "Plastic type"? What are you talking about? Even when broadly specifying a certain category of "composite materials", it's impossible to define (or e
31 Cloudyapple: Or more to the point - no composite bleedless all singing all dancing 737 replacement until 2015 earliest - so that a.netters can discuss this again
32 Mrocktor: It won't. The science of aerodynamics has moved on in the last 50 years. This is an interesting tidbit that went mostly unnoticed: 10% of the narrowb
33 CM767: I agree with this, lets think about it, how many times we have discussed here the measures taken by airlines to save weight? from AC bare metal 767 t
34 Pygmalion: Not anymore. the 777 is on a moving, flexible line.
35 Tangowhisky: Boeing will inject the 787 technology to its future narrow body and wide body aircraft, but for now it is trying to manage its competition and loyal
36 Columba: Sadly I think you are right but I am still hoping that they can make a modern version of the old Boeing nose. It would be too bad if all aircraft hav
37 HighFlyer9790: Absolutely. the new 737 and 787 should be able to fill that gap, or at least thats what boeing hopes. I dont see boeing focusing on a 100 pax plane,
38 ContnlEliteCMH: I will dispel any "impressions" by speaking my mind overtly: Your assessment that this is "misleading" shows your skewed viewpoint on the topic. Nobo
39 ContnlEliteCMH: I've had a little thought banging around in my vacuous noggin'. If the aircraft market functions well with a duopoly, and our friends on the east sid
40 HighFlyer9790: they don't. at least i dont think so. the smallest they would maybe consider is 737-700 size? it sounds like boeing is considering only the 700-900 v
41 HighFlyer9790: It seems as though this is the most aerodynamic nose boeing could come up with for the 787, so im figuering the 737 will follow in those tracks...
42 Lehpron: Your words are generalizations. Example: Concorde and the Space Shuttle have Aluminum airframes, if their replacements are candidates for CFRP constr
43 Pygmalion: Its obvious that you dont give a damn... you are so wrong its laughable. "Plastic can not sustain higher mach numbers??? " You mean like the plastic
44 Columba: Yeah, I have seen artist impression of it, looks like Fairchild-Dornier 728 or E-Jet. Not bad granted but missing the classic look of the 737 !!
45 HAWK21M: Interesting. So the SRM would vary too regds MEL
46 VirginFlyer: Given that Mach 0.8-0.85 seems to be the economic sweet spot in terms of efficiency versus speed, I don't think this is really relevant to transport
47 Baroque: Am I the only one who finds this thread a bit strange? Presumably there is some actuality between a plane "real soon now" and one in about ten years.
48 Tangowhisky: Baroque, I enjoyed reading your comment and you are a true strategic thinker. Let's see, Boeing keeps on saying we will not launch a 737 replacement
50 Lehpron: B-2 and F-117 are subsonic, they do not pass M0.9, ever. The B-1a was a Mach 2 plane, but for the modern B-1b to maintain stealth it has a max of 986
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1236 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11230 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Feb 2005, 2971 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6835 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4449 posts, 
From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 795 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
