BoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 15576 times:
An article from the Times (UK). Boeing is in talks with customers to ascertain what they want in a 737 replacement and confirms that it will be a composite fuselage. The rumored 2-fuselage approach is still very much alive:
Quote: The 737 is on its ninth variation, but, at heart, is more than 40 years old. It is also under pressure from Airbus’s newer A320, and Boeing has decided that the 737 needs an overhaul.
The Times understands that two early prototypes have been drawn up: a wider, twin-aisle version and a shorter, single-aisle jet. These have been dubbed Fat Boy and Little Boy.
There remains a big market for smaller city-hopper flights and Boeing is unlikely to leave this to Airbus or Bombardier and Embraer, which have traditionally built sub100 seat aircraft. A second, shorter 737 with up to 150 seats could therefore be launched to fill this gap.
Doug McVitie, of Arran Aero-space, said of the 737: “Airlines love this plane and Boeing has to keep that interest.”
NAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9080 posts, RR: 37 Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 15538 times:
In business terms Boeing are in such an INCREDIBLY strong position. Positive cash flow assured for years, all-composite fuselage technology close to being proven out, every existing and 'under-development' model selling well, R & D resources soon to be freed up as the 787 moves into the assembly/testing stage.......
Even if they could solve the 'political interference' problem tomorrow, what on EARTH can Airbus do from here?
[Edited 2007-03-12 05:02:37]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
WestJetYQQ From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2986 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 15499 times:
I can't wait for this program to reach the production stage! It would be great to see Boeing advance another step ahead of it's competitors. This will give Boeing a strong edge against Airbus, who would be stupid to try to advance their 150-200 seat products, in the state that they are in.
Will This Aircraft look anything like the 737 has in the past, and up till now, or will it be completely revamped?
Will You Try to Change Things? Use the Power that you have, the Power of a Million new Ideas.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 15414 times:
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 1): Even if they could solve the 'political interference' problem tomorrow, what on EARTH can Airbus do from here?
I'm still hesitant to the idea of two fuselage diameters, but I will admit that a two-family approach to replacing the 737NG would put a tremendous burden on Airbus. They either scrap the A320 and follow Boeing or they risk being cornered into a substantially smaller piece of the market. I see NO way around that much...
If the 777 and 787 were the one-two punch, this sort of 737NG replacement could be punches three, four, five, and six.
Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 2): Will This Aircraft look anything like the 737 has in the past, and up till now, or will it be completely revamped?
If Boeing proceeds with the two-family replacement, the 737 heritage will almost certainly be abandoned.
Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter): An article from the Times (UK). Boeing is in talks with customers to ascertain what they want in a 737 replacement and confirms that it will be a composite fuselage. The rumored 2-fuselage approach is still very much alive:
The temp of news emerging about the 737 replacement, while still limited in detail, would suggest that Boeing is actively engaged in pre-launch studies and evaluations. I will place my hot-sports opinion now: no later than 2014, Southwest Airlines will be operating a new-generation of short-haul aircraft.
JayinKitsap From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 765 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 15239 times:
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 4): I'm still hesitant to the idea of two fuselage diameters, but I will admit that a two-family approach to replacing the 737NG would put a tremendous burden on Airbus. They either scrap the A320 and follow Boeing or they risk being cornered into a substantially smaller piece of the market. I see NO way around that much...
I could see a 2 fuse / 2 or 3 wing setup with common cockpit, APU, etc being a formidable seller. The 5 across small diameter fuse could cover the 120-170 pax range, with the smallest wing for short range, the middle wing for long range, and the large wing for very long range. The larger diameter (6 abreast and wider aisle) would use the middle and large wing to cover the 150 - 220 range of the current 737-800, 900 and 757 models.
The first model launched would be the one that WN wants. However, EIS for the full range of models would be over like 6 years. I could see also that the initial model overlay may be such that the 737 could remain in production if say the new models straddle the 737-700 or -800
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11951 posts, RR: 37 Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 15175 times:
Since Bombardier have a lot of experience in the field of short haul, small airliners, wouldn't it make sense for Boeing and Bombardier to work together on Bombardier's new C-series aircraft? This seems to be around the size of Boeing's proposed "little boy" model.
I'm sure that mutual co-operation could make this a very successful aircraft, with Boeing providing a cockpit design which would give the type commonality with existing (and planned) Boeing models.
(In any case, do Boeing and Bombardier not have some relationship; I thought Boeing had bought de Havilland Canada a few years ago; I don't follow Canadian aviation that closely, so I'm not clear how Bombardier came into the picture. I always associate them with Dublin buses!)
Silentbob From Vatican City, joined Aug 2006, 1639 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 15126 times:
Quoting Kaitak (Reply 6): (In any case, do Boeing and Bombardier not have some relationship; I thought Boeing had bought de Havilland Canada a few years ago; I don't follow Canadian aviation that closely, so I'm not clear how Bombardier came into the picture. I always associate them with Dublin buses!)
Grantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 429 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 15020 times:
So 18 months from now Boeing is openly promoting the new B797 family. The B787 is in service and Boeing has resources freed up to devote to what will arguably be its most important offering for the next two decades or so. Airlines start lining up to buy this new aircraft - and B737 and A320 sales go soft as the world's airlines move on to new technology. What is Airbus to do - suggest reengining the A320? They will still have 5 years worth of A350XWB development to digest - adding one or two more projects would seem unrealistic. Why does it already seem that the A350 fiasco is going to repeat itself? Airbus seems to be playing the airliner game like my brother plays chess - thinking only of the current move.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3130 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 14982 times:
One might note it took 4 years 1 month for boeing to go from a board decision to do the 737NG, to delivering the first 737NG to WN.
I'm expecting the 737RS to arrive no later than 2012 for WN, and as such will soundly beat the A350 program on EIS. More importantly given the lack of info on just what the A320E really entails and gives the customers... The 737RS might just match or beat it on being officially announced.
HAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2466 posts, RR: 53 Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 14865 times:
I think some of you may be missing the point. Boeing has two different ideas going around - the twin aisle and the single aisle - but I doubt they would go ahead and make both at the same time. They are just two different ideas circulating to see which one the airlines like best. My money would be on the twin aisle in shorter and longer versions to cover most of the segments already covered by the current 737. But with a new fuselage diameter, new length, new engines, and new systems and avionics, it won't be a new 737, but rather a new plane to fill the 737's (large) niche.
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
Par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, RR: 8 Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 14810 times:
Based on past history - 737-6 and A-318 - I don't think a single width fuse would be very efficient, could they use the same wings? If one a/c is shorter, would not a seperate wing set be more efficient, than a larger wing essentially "downsized" for a shorter a/c? Probably better to have two seperate a/c as masters in their own domain rather than a jack of all trades, one fuse width for 2x2x2 seating - fat and "longer" and another smaller "shorter" 2x2 with wings optimized for each, could the same engine work for both?
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3130 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 14803 times:
Quoting HAL (Reply 13): I think some of you may be missing the point. Boeing has two different ideas going around - the twin aisle and the single aisle
Boeings problem is that WN will want a 149 seat at 32-33" pitch single class arrangement, as will most of the other current 737-800 customers. They will also want it to go as far into the gap between the current 737 and 787, so it would not surprise me if they push it as far as 249 seats in a reasonable pitch. That alone is a huge huge range to cover. However there is the sub 737-800 market, which is where a second frame at 5 abreast comes in. replaces all the people who only have a 737-700 because the 737-600 is retarded, and the MD-80/DC-9 has as of yet no real replacement. So its not a case of they are thinking of one or the other, but how big should the big one be, and if they should make a DC-9/MD-80 replacement with some commonality to it
BrianDromey From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3807 posts, RR: 10 Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 14562 times:
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 15): Boeings problem is that WN will want a 149 seat at 32-33" pitch single class arrangement, as will most of the other current 737-800 customers.
Just a small point, WN operate the 737-700, not the -800. The -800 fits 189 at the max. Im not sure many operators operate teh 737-700 because the 736 is a "retarded" aircraft. The market that boeing would be targeting with the five abrest would be sub-700, not sub -800.
Two wings and two diameters could really make sense, Boeing will have seen the success that Embraer is having on the 70-100 seat market with its E-Jets. What is also quite clear is that as that a single platform will not be able to repace the DC-9 AND the 757 in one go. Just a few short years ago the 757 would not have needed a successor, beacuse the 737-900ER would have done just fine, but with the move of 757s to trans cons and t/a routes the 757 WILL need replacement.
Maybe two wings might just do the trick?
Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3130 posts, RR: 4 Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 14494 times:
Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 17): Just a small point, WN operate the 737-700, not the -800. The -800 fits 189 at the max. Im not sure many operators operate teh 737-700 because the 736 is a "retarded" aircraft. The market that boeing would be targeting with the five abrest would be sub-700, not sub -800.
I'm very sure WN will be going for a larger aircraft than the 737-700 with the 737RS. 149Y gives them the same crew requirements, but 12 more paying seats. Lower trip costs than their current 737's mean the up size does NOT hurt them when loads are low like some of the routes. More over WN will have 737-300, 500, and 700 for a long while to come, so Its not like they won't have a couple decades to phase out the older and smaller planes. Though I bet the 500's leave ASAP along with the oldest of the 300's.
The fact that many if not most who operate both the 737-700 and 737-800 opt for only the 800 in later orders is telling where the 737 is best sized at.
Dougbr2006 From Brazil, joined Oct 2006, 382 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 14485 times:
Two different fuselages isn't that going to make development more costly and complex. The one tube fuselage seems to work with most aircraft designs why change or are there in reality going to offer two clearly different aircraft like 7x7 and 7y7.
yes, you can offer two different aircraft that however have massive commonality. The major structures may be different, but sharing engine family, APU's, interior fittings, cockpits, and other major hardware makes it far cheaper to design, build, and operate the two compared to two completely different aircraft.
Think 757/767, but pushed even farther for commonality from just type rating to actual parts content
Dougbr2006 From Brazil, joined Oct 2006, 382 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 14422 times:
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 21): yes, you can offer two different aircraft that however have massive commonality.
Is there a danger here of Boeing creating a new category of jet between thw regionals and the 150-170 market, could we see more piloting issues here. Where would the little boy fit lets call the new cat "remain" regional/main then the pilots can decide to move or "remain" where they are. ooops now we have a terminorogy problem, HOUSTON, HOUSTON!
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6256 posts, RR: 39 Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 14219 times:
Quoting Axio (Reply 16): I'm not sure naming aircraft after atomic bombs is the greatest marketing strategy out there....
They might just be figuring on blowing the competition away.
Actually, when you consider that the 787 is larger than the 767 this leaves 3 models to be replaced; the 737, 757, and 767. I can easily see how they would do better with 2 diameters to cover this range.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
25 LH452: I recently read that Boeing had postponed the planned introduction of the 737RS to 2015/16. This puts a Boeing intro at about the same time as Airbus.
26 XT6Wagon: no there was some wild speculation about the timing, but boeing said 'when the engines are ready' and GE shortly after said definitely by 2012. The G
27 ATCGOD: Which is why I thought for sure they'd postpone the A350. It's a short term fix with long term consequences just to be "competitive". They should hav
28 Tangowhisky: It seems plausible. Do you have the source of this statement?
29 FriendlySkies: This sounds like a new 757/767 project, perhaps with even more commonality. Boeing would have an almost unbeatable line up with a narrowbody with 100-
30 SEPilot: Yes, I think they would. It would be kind of weird to have two different widths share the ame designation.
31 KSUpilot: This could be a good approach for Boeing. The smaller model would be quite similar to the An-148 (a very nice aircraft that could be a hit if it were
32 AirFrnt: Don't assume that Airbus is out by any stretch of the imagination. Political interference has a benefit, it opens up the coffers of the governments i
33 Tangowhisky: Good point. Add to the list CO and possibly DL who have older 737s. Across the pond, LH needs to replace its 737 Classics and A300s. BA will eventual
34 DAYflyer: Especially with JAPANESE customers like JAL, ANA, etc... Yes, they will retire these first and place an order of 100 or so to cover it.
35 1337Delta764: Actually, DL has retired their older 737s, the 737-200s and 737-300s. However, Delta will be looking towards a replacement for their MD-88s, MD-90s,
36 KSUpilot: And further down the road, AirTran will want to replace their 717 and 737 fleet. Fat Boy and Little Boy will work perfectly for them.
37 Kbdude: Is it possible for BOEING to EIS the 737RS by say... 2013? can we speculate possiblities? Program anouncement? late 2008? Industrial launch? Mid 2009
38 Stitch: Probably. But will sufficient advances be on hand to make it worth EISing it that early?
39 DfwRevolution: That would require a board decision in the next twelve months, which seems highly unlikely unless Boeing reveals the 737RS program in the next few mo
40 Kbdude: I agree. Engines hold the key to EIS. . However, just imagine the pressure that would put on BOEING's NB competitors to match a similar EIS or fear l
41 Areopagus: Maybe they would get some positive attention if they took the anti-nuclear route and called it the "No Bikini Atoll".
42 Tangowhisky: I believe that many 737 Classic (backlog) orders were converted to NGs when the NGs were launched. The same could be done here. In fact, I would not
43 Silentbob: Or pander to pop culture and call them fat bastard and mini-me
44 Planemaker: No, the CSeries will be "old tech" compared to the 737 replacement. And BBD is an integrator... just like Boeing - so they compete, not complement ea
45 JAAlbert: I agree. Airbus will do what ever it takes to stay in the game. The 320 is Airbus' bread and butter and has a huge following of avid fans. Many of th
46 Silentbob: Thanks for the clarification, I was not aware the OPG's role.
47 Atmx2000: Well, it could be problematic if Boeing is working with Japanese suppliers like on the 787, but it should be said that there is no large Japanese mar
48 DfwRevolution: I did? I think you have me confused with someone else.
49 BoomBoom: Looks like a Can they match the technology of a monolithic composite fuselage barrel, instead of sticking composite panels on an aluminum frame? They
50 Osiris30: I think that was me arguing with DFW... and I wouldn't say 'drying up'... more like vaporized LOL. But that's not to say that Boeing hasn't possibly