Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Much More Evolved Will The 737 Become?  
User currently offlineC5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15263 times:

If I am correct, the 737 is the only aircraft model to go through all numbered series, i.e. -100-900, so how much more evolved will it become? Will there be a 737-1000, -1100, -1200, etc.? Or will it stop at the -900 series? If they try to advance it more through the years, will they make any design changes, such as size?


"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
93 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30569 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15283 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I expect Boeing will continue to improve the existing models, but will launch an all new family to replace it rather than a 737-1xxx.

User currently offlineCVG747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 15222 times:

They'll keep building it as long as demand for the current airframe remains strong. Airbus is doing the same thing with the A320 family.

User currently offlineThenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2382 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 15125 times:

Airbus and Boeing have spent so much money on the A380 and the 787 that they have no more money left to develop a successor to the A320/B737, at least not for the next decade. They will continue to improve the existing models as mentioned above, and sell them as long as they can.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2009-10-26 11:48:00 by thenoflyzone]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 15092 times:

Boeing has said they won't introduce a 737 replacement for some time. Perhaps the answer to your question can be found in what Boeing did previously.

The -300, -400, and -500 became the -600, -700, and -800. The -900 is a modified -800?

What are the differences between, say, the -500 and -800? Wing, tail, engines, avionics, interior???
Will Boeing likely make similar changes for the current lineup "requiring" new dash names? For example, if they change the landing gear height and wing to accommodate a more efficient engine, the planes can't hardly be called the same thing.

Possible solution - employ some MDD nostalgia and call them 737 Super's so that a -500 with a new wing/engine/gear would become a Super500, a -600 would become a Super600, and so on. They then could add on letters as needed - 737-Super 500B, etc.

I dunno - I thought they should have attached the "Super" name to the 748 - Super 747 or 747 Super 8 or whatever.


User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2691 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 14979 times:



Quoting CVG747 (Reply 2):
They'll keep building it as long as demand for the current airframe remains strong. Airbus is doing the same thing with the A320 family.

Except that the A320 is still producing the first generation of it's type. Given that only 21 or so A320-100s were produced and not for very long, it seems like the A320-200 is more of an improved A320-100 rather than a new generation...

I would guess that when Boeing does come out with a replacement for the 737, it will be a different airplane with a new number; maybe the 797 if it isn't used by the Y3 replacement... I am also guessing by that time, the significant advances made in and subsequent lessons learned during the 787 program will be utlitized for the 737 replacement.


User currently offlineL1011 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1670 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 14797 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Why don't they use a lettering system like Douglas did on their propliners, DC-6A, DC-6B, DC-7B, DC-7C? If they used 737A, 737B, 737C, etc, they could get a lot more mileage out of the 737 designation.

Bob Bradley
Richmond, VA



Fly Eastern's Golden Falcon DC-7B
User currently offlineRikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1624 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14651 times:



Quoting C5LOAD (Thread starter):
If they try to advance it more through the years, will they make any design changes, such as size?

Remember that the basic upper lobe of all narrow bodied Boeing aircraft remained the same:

707, 727, 737, 757

The lower lobes were different between models, to accomodate different cargo missions. The 757 cockpit area was redesigned to duplicate the 767, giving one type rating for both aircraft.

I was actually surprised that Boeing did not use the 757 cockpit on the NG 737's, giving pilots the larger windows, and eliminating the "eyebrows" (Boeing eventually removed them, and offers plugs for older models).



AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 14518 times:



Quoting Rikkus67 (Reply 7):
I was actually surprised that Boeing did not use the 757 cockpit on the NG 737's, giving pilots the larger windows, and eliminating the "eyebrows" (Boeing eventually removed them, and offers plugs for older models).

Indeed - would be nice to see the 737 use the 757 nose - I've thought that for a long, long time. Boeing also needs to jack the 737 up off the ground a bit to give it more clearance for new engines.

Or give it a boost engine like the Trident.  Wink


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6832 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 14424 times:

The 737 will persist until some technology is developed that cannot be adapted to it that would result in significantly better performance. This could be an engine that won't fit, or it could be that CFRP proves to have enough maintenance advantages (it is doubtful that it would offer significant weight advantages for that size airframe) that the airlines clamor for it. Other than something like that there is really no reason to replace it. Upgrade it, certainly, but replace it only when it becomes imperative. The same applies to the A320.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 14395 times:



Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 3):
Airbus and Boeing have spent so much money on the A380 and the 787 that they have no more money left to develop a successor to the A320/B737, at least not for the next decade.

Airbus has enough money to develop the A350...they're clearly getting cash from somewhere.

Quoting Khobar (Reply 4):

What are the differences between, say, the -500 and -800? Wing, tail, engines, avionics, interior???

Yes, plus landing gear, APU, and many of the fuselage structures and alloys.

Quoting Rikkus67 (Reply 7):
I was actually surprised that Boeing did not use the 757 cockpit on the NG 737's

The 737NG was launched by Southwest. They didn't have 757's, they had 737CL's. They could have given a hoot about 757 commonality.

Tom.


User currently offlineJimbobjoe From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 653 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 14198 times:



Quoting United787 (Reply 5):
it seems like the A320-200 is more of an improved A320-100 rather than a new generation...

It is my understanding that Airbus does a lot of incremental updates to the A320 (and the rest of the Airbus line) but doesn't necessarily change the number.


User currently offlineKukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 13653 times:

So does Boeing. Wasn't it only recently that Boeing launched a new cabin for the 737? But if they did something drastic to the 737 such as re-engining it with a GTF, they would surely want to advertise the change with new designations of some kind.


Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2726 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 13431 times:



Quoting C5LOAD (Thread starter):
Will there be a 737-1000, -1100, -1200, etc

It seems more possible than ever before that there will be a new round of updates to the 737 series. Might we see a 737-10, 737-11 and 737-12 or 737-7, 737-8 and 737-9?

Quoting C5LOAD (Thread starter):
so how much more evolved will it become?

It depends. They can fit new engines, and it seems more and more likely that this will be the scenario going forward. They could redesign the wings. Perhaps a wing design with different wing root plugs for the larger design, so that there will be a longer span for the largest 737 members. This has been done to the CRJ-700/900 compared to the CRJ-100/200. Maybe going with a CRFP wingdesign? Boeing could redesign the cockpit area to make it more like the 787 cockpit with a 757 nose. They could offer a CRFP wingbox, and perhaps fly by wire. All these changes though would cost a lot of money so I am not sure how far they will tweak the existing design. If the 737 could match the seat width of the E-jets it would have to increase the fuselage width from the current 3,5M to 4,11 meters. That would require a complete redesign



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 12683 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Rikkus67 (Reply 7):
I was actually surprised that Boeing did not use the 757 cockpit on the NG 737's, giving pilots the larger windows, and eliminating the "eyebrows" (Boeing eventually removed them, and offers plugs for older models).

Also, the front and rear galleys are bigger on the 757, so that would have been an asset on the 737NG too.

I hope the 737-900ER picks up more orders, it's a nice plane with lots of potential, me thinks...



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineCO38 From Norway, joined May 2009, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 11985 times:



Quoting Khobar (Reply 4):
Possible solution - employ some MDD nostalgia and call them 737 Super's so that a -500 with a new wing/engine/gear would become a Super500, a -600 would become a Super600, and so on. They then could add on letters as needed - 737-Super 500B, etc

Or they could name it 737-Super Duper 500  Big grin


User currently onlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1542 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 11553 times:

So how much headroom is left in the current NG design to add improvements without breaking the bank? I ask because i Get the impression from some previous discussions that Boeing is at the point where going any further will require a significant investment and only net a few percentage points of improvement, unless they do significant mods to the wing and add new engines and such.

User currently offlineOdwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 4 days ago) and read 10343 times:

There were a few modifications made to the 739ER which could have some application for 73G & 738 aircraft:

>Enhancements to the leading and trailing edge flap systems
>A flat rear pressure bulkhead (would either the G or 8 benefit from the additional space?)

I don't think any of the other work done for the 9ER has any application for the G or 8.

Next major incremental mod (if that phrase makes sense?) would be a re-engine... which might also translate into signifcant landing gear, wing box and wing changes..... CFMI has moved up it's time table for Leap56 enhancements to the CFM56-7B...targeting a 10-15% reduction in fuel burn. It will be interesting to see what those changes will do to weight, diameter, etc.... and how they will effect 737 installs. Could be an easier implementation than GTF.

(Would a Leap56 powered 737 be compelling compared to a GTF powered A32X...possibly if adopting leap56 for 737 means substantially lower development costs for Boeing with translate into lower procurement costs for the airline.)

However, with that said..... do you really need to spin off totally new model numbers just becuase you are using an enhanced or different powerplant with the associated modifications necessary to support it?

Could you have instead?

737-700LR (the 700ER exists)
737-800LR (i know i skipped the 800ER designation)
737-900LR (would assume a re-engine would give more range than the 900ER).

(I guess you could have a 600LR too...but would anyone order?...no.)

Even though all of these would have longer range...you'd probably want to trade that for increased efficiency, payload or passengers.

The new Boeing Sky interior (which mimics elements of the 787 interior) will soon be available for the NG aircraft......so no need to visit the interior appointments anytime soon. But, I'm wondering...do the sidewalls of the Sky interior that is being developed for the 737 use a thinner insulation that might make it possible to have slightly wider seats (i know it would be marginal...but still)?

Don't know how a Southwest or RyanAir would react to Sky only interiors for a proposed LR mod. I know that Southwest has been conducting tests with lighter seat fabrics....if those tests prove it's something worth doing....they could become part of the new Sky interior that would support the overall goal of reduced weight/fuel burn of a proposed LR mod.

Boeing may give us one more go around with the current 737 before introducing an all new model. Probably want some time with the 787 to determine if it's technology scales well to smaller, lighter size aircraft with higher cycles flying shorter distances.



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlineOdwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 4 days ago) and read 10334 times:

of course....Boeing and CFM are jointly committed to improving fuel burn (through engine modifications 1% and plane modifications 1%) by another 2% by 2011.

you also have carbon brakes available now and have seen a few applications which also save weight.

all of these small incremental improvements make for a moving target....much more difficult to achieve one big 'step change' improvement of 10-15%.

airliners will take any improvements they can get.....the challenge is at what cost to Boeing to implement them or at what cost to Boeing if Airbus implements them instead.



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlineOdwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10311 times:

In 2007 we saw application of Tech56....by CFM for 737 (but I can't find which airlines received those engine modifications). Interesting to see if these tech inserts resulted in a true 2-4% fuel burn improvement. Same Tech56 modifications were scheduled for A320 earlier this year (though I haven't heard which Airbus customer received those).

Last year, CFM stated that its Leap56 preformance gains (10-15%) are compared to the latest CFM56 Tech Insertion configurations. So, interesting.....the Leap56 claims are in relation to the 'moving target'.

If Tech56 is show to improve fuel burn by 4%, then Leap56 (if applied to existing CFM56-7B) would really be a leap if it saw an additional 10-15% above that. (though it's worth noting that Tech56 improvements were being developed as early as 2000).

Intersting. Anyone following the Tech56 implementations? Any rumors on direction Leap56 is taking (modifying CFM56-7B or new powerplant altogether) for narrowbodies? Google is only turning up old press releases and commentary.



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2694 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10275 times:

Boeing already made some tests with a future Continental B 737 and a modified engine nacelle in August 2009 as can be seen in this picture: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...56_7BEcrop-thumb-560x396-45214.jpg
Full article: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...oeing-flies-cfm56-7b-evolutio.html

Best regards
N14AZ

[Edited 2009-10-28 00:59:15]

User currently offlineOdwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10128 times:

thanks N14AZ.

those articles refer to engine, nacelle, gear fairing modifications underway for the 2011 improvements of 1=1 = 2%. in reality.....the 7BE (CFM56-7B Evolution) engine was not actually installed on the Continental 9ER in that photo....only nacelle and fairings.

I am more interested in who received the Tech56 (technical insert mods) back in 2007. another way to pose the question..does a 738 delivered in 2008,2009 have a fuel burn 2-4% lower than one delivered in 2006, 2007?

Or are all of this modifications slated for 2011 really just the Tech56 mods finally coming on board...with an actual realization of just 2% total.....and not the 2-4% that was hoped for in 2001-2007?



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6120 posts, RR: 34
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10009 times:

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 13):
with a 757 nose

The cost to design in a 757 nose is just not worth it... it doesn't provide any economic benefit.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 16):
So how much headroom is left in the current NG design to add improvements without breaking the bank?

That really is the one and only question that matters... though I hope that there is still quite a bit.

Quoting Odwyerpw (Reply 17):
Probably want some time with the 787 to determine if it's technology scales well to smaller

About the only 787 "technology" that would "scale" (be cost effective) to the current 737 is the avionics. There are much fewer black boxes because of the integrated architecture, yet there is more redundancy and the system weighs less (the weight savings on the 787 were in the order of 2000 lbs).

This is new on Flight Global...

Narrow margins: Airbus and Boeing face pressure with the A320 and 737

"Boeing chief executive Jim McNerney has said he believes a re-engined narrowbody is viable in the near term and that a derivative re-engined 737 would cost in the range of 20-30% of a full development programme.

As a result, he says, "the re-engine case is stronger than I anticipated it would be, which doesn't mean that's what we'll decide". CFM has indicated it could accelerate the Leap X schedule - set for certification in 2016 - should it be selected to power China's new C919 airliner, which would open the door for Boeing to consider the engine for any 737 upgrade."


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ressure-with-the-a320-and-737.html

[Edited 2009-10-28 11:43:03 by planemaker]


Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineBhill From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 952 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9922 times:

It will become....sentient....


Carpe Pices
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 9736 times:



Quoting Odwyerpw (Reply 21):
I am more interested in who received the Tech56 (technical insert mods) back in 2007.

Everybody. It wasn't an option, they did a full production line cutover.

Tom.


25 PGNCS : Talk to the people at the NG launch customer, Southwest. They cared about commonality with their other 737's, not with the 757. Many other airlines a
26 XT6Wagon : WN already doesn't like how tight the "entryway" is on the 737. Expect a replacement to use more floor space here for that reason alone.
27 PGNCS : Fair enough, and good point. My point was that an "asset" is only an asset if it's useful to the specific customer. A larger galley may or may not be
28 OyKIE : It would make for a larger Galley. Not sure how many airplanes that would benefit from this, since there are almost no catering. Nope, it may not be.
29 Odwyerpw : tdscanuck, Thanks for the info on Tech56. Have any customers shared what real performance increases or fuel consumption decreases they've realized pos
30 Planemaker : Good question, and I don't think that there is a clear answer, nor will there be one for a few years. There are too many pieces to this puzzle and th
31 Odwyerpw : Looking further on the Engine front: RR/PW/MTU released an upgrade to it's IAE V2500 called Select One in late 2008. Target was a decrease in fuel con
32 DocLightning : I think the set of changes to the 737RS are going to be so big that it won't be a 737. 1) I have read several pilots' opinions here who hate the cockp
33 XT6Wagon : Perhaps you are unaware that the 737 is perfectly capable of hauling freight. WN is very high in the chart for cargo carried by a passenger airline i
34 Stitch : And when you put an LD3 into an A320, you give up some of the volume of the hold as opposed to bulk-loading it (like the 737) due to the LD3 not filli
35 YVRLTN : The 737NG caters for so many different markets. Legacy carriers on trunk routes including coast to coast in the US and short hops in Europe, full eco
36 Tdscanuck : Not that I'm aware of, but I'm not in a position to see that data anymore. Yes, they do, but since they seem to have a stable 50/50 market share, doe
37 Huxrules : Don't worry- some executive will figure out how to get 737's across the Atlantic (like the 757). They will call it the 737-1000ER. It will be known by
38 Stitch : The 737-700ER can handle that mission today.
39 Planemaker : For the step change in efficiency that both the airlines and Boeing are seeking at a minimum (+20%), a BWB of some type seems to be, at this time, th
40 Slider : Doc- that's twice in one week we've agreed! Double-shrink the 787. Finally use the fold-up wing option. It's simple what the next-next Gen 737 has to
41 YVRLTN : Thanks Planemaker. And I agree, R&D wont even commence in earnest again until the 787 & 748 is up and running in full swing production. But the point
42 ODwyerPW : Leap56, even if it's just an evolution of the CFM-56E, will probably be as state of the art of as GENx (which burrowed heavily from GE-90). If Leap56
43 Bmacleod : Well development of Y1 (the 737 replacement) can't be that far off so I really don't see how more evolved the 737 can get....[Edited 2009-10-31 11:07:
44 DocLightning : And the 757 has the exact same fuselage as the 737 so why is the 75 OK for TATL flights, but the 73 isn't?
45 Planemaker : Both Boeing and Airbus have categorically stated that they do not see a replacement before 2020 at the earliest. In fact, Airbus has said 2022. So it
46 Manfredj : I've always been perplexed because neither Boeing or Airbus realize the obvious....the first one to offer an all new 320/737 replacement will be the b
47 Planemaker : It is quite simple... as has been published throughout the aviation media, both A and B hsve stated that they cannot build an NB with the requisite 2
48 PITingres : The "obvious" here is very likely not the case, anyway. The first one to blink will be setting a firm target, and all the second one has to do is bea
49 Post contains links Planemaker : I agree if there is more than several years difference in EIS. If it is only a couple of years I don't think that it will make that much of differenc
50 DocLightning : Not that simple. Analysts have said that BCA doesn't have the money right now to start another R&D program. Airbus may not, either, after the A380 de
51 Tdscanuck : Picked with what? The airlines have all said they want ~15-20% improvement over current generation, and both A&B have said they can't deliver that wi
52 XT6Wagon : Boeing has the money. What they don't have is the *OTHER* resources needed. The idea for a 2015 737RS was that the resources would come off the 787 p
53 Planemaker : However, it is not about the money, it is about technology, as Tdscanuck has posted...
54 FrmrCAPCADET : And the major flyers of the 320 and 737 are very aware of current technology. Were several of them to say it was time to do a new build AND they were
55 Odwyerpw : has anyone seen any drawings, mockups of what a 73G, 738 or 739ER would look like with taller landing gear to accomodate engines with larger fan diame
56 ODwyerPW : learned something new today. Boeing actually produced a 737-800ERX which is a derivative for military applications like the Poseideon P-8 maritime pat
57 Areopagus : Back when Boeing developed the 757, they said that its nose produced less drag and less noise than the traditional 707 nose. So there would be some e
58 Tdscanuck : Can commercial carriers order it? It looks like they developed that frame especially for the P-8 program. Tom.
59 Post contains links ADent : They thought about use of the winglets, but ice was a concern for the heavy icing conditions the P-8 will likely see. The raked wingtips are deiced t
60 Odwyerpw : Tom, yes my sentence was very poorly worded. I meant to say that the 800ERX mods had no commercial application becuase they were done purely for a sin
61 Tdscanuck : Really? They don't deice the raked tips on a 777...are you sure they do on a P-8? Tom.
62 Post contains images Planemaker : I would be interested to see where Boeing said that the 757 nose produced less drag, as it is counter-intuitive to virtually all current designs late
63 Tdscanuck : The 757 nose looks like it does because they shoe-horned the 767 flight deck onto the 757 fuselage. The flow went from the 767 to the 757, not the ot
64 Planemaker : Yes, that is quite obviously so, and I attached the pics so that one can quite easily see that. The point that I was really making was that even with
65 Khobar : How so? Compare A320 and 757 noses - they are very similar. Does that say anything about the aerodynamics of the Airbus design? Airbus certainly had
66 Slider : It's not about either for Boeing, candidly. It's about leadership and program management, which they seem to be horrendous in as of late. They need t
67 ODwyerPW : Pretty sure they can handle the re-engine of a 737 that would reach maturation in 2015. Even with their "horrendous leadership and program management"
68 Tdscanuck : Good technology + poor program management = failure Good technology + great program management = success Bad technology + great program management =
69 Planemaker : No they are not... there is no mistaking the 757 nose as it is the 767's cockpit shoe horned onto Boeing's NB fuselage. There is a significant differ
70 Post contains links and images Khobar : And that has what to do with anything? You make it sound like there is some sort of "adapter" used in the graft where none exists. It's a clean fit.
71 Planemaker : The 767 cockpit was indeed, to use your term, "grafted" onto the the Boeing NB fuselege. The 767 is almost 45% W-I-D-E-R than than the 757. In other
72 Slider : Well, I think we might just be agreeing loudly here, but I disagree about the technology not being there. It’s there, it’s just that Boeing was f
73 EA772LR : Well I know that keeping the 737's gear short, they are able to keep a relatively light, and simple landing gear system (especially for the MLG). I wo
74 Post contains links ODwyerPW : This article just re-iterates that Boeing will produce the current from of the 737 well into the 2020s. http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/south_king/ren/new
75 Post contains links ODwyerPW : The following are excerpts from an article outlining the Boeing target of a 2 percent reduction in fuel consumption by 2011, through a combination of
76 ODwyerPW : The wing used on the 737 is described as a fairly modest highly swept supercritical wing. With nominal speeds of .78 - .80, is there anything that can
77 ODwyerPW : There is a parallel thread that cites WHY the 737 will be continue to be produced into the 2020's. simply stated...the ongoing evolution (sic...contin
78 Rheinwaldner : I am not sure about that. This "target" is a bit strange. Of course airlines want 15-20%. Airlines also want 30-50%. What airlines want is not releva
79 XT6Wagon : I think we should make it clear... If boeing or Airbus could write a check today for 6-10B and recieve a new narrowbody design ready for flight testin
80 Parapente : I think the future of the 737 is clear. The final interior changes have been made.The size /range is now fixed. The engine supplier is fixed Cfm Cfm h
81 ODwyerPW : Parapente, quite agree with much of what you wrote. couple of questions... the new CFM core that is in full development mode....are these modified CFM
82 Planemaker : Yet, courtesy of ATW Daily News... "The geared turbofan has been selected for the Mitsubishi Regional Jet (PW1217G) and Bombardier's CSeries (PW1524G
83 Flyingcat : To theorize how long a design can last one need only look at the DC8. From its earlier incarnation ferrying frozen Galactic Confederacy citizens to Te
84 WNCrew : While not a HUGE deal, keep in mind Boeing has stated this interior is optional, NOT standard like the updated A320 series interior upgrades.
85 Odwyerpw : thanks planemaker, i always thought ATW Daily News was a subscription only website.... anyway, a little looking revealed this from May 2009, courtesy
86 ODwyerPW : regarding the evolution of the 737. Do you just move ahead with improvements to the 73G, 738 & 739ER. is there any benefit to proving any of the techn
87 Parapente : Re above ATW daily news. EIS 2018? Umm. If they are looking to replace the aircraft by 2024 latest it only gives the new engine 6 years on the wing.Is
88 Par13del : Well Airbus did not appear overnight, and somehow they have grown to roughly 50/50 with Boeing, unless you are saying that market conditions and prod
89 Rheinwaldner : Airbus became big when their NB product for one decade was clearly the leading product on the market. From mid eighties to mid nineties any NB acquis
90 Parapente : The only change I can think off since the mid nineties was a non Boeing company inventing blended winglets.Boeing (having rejected the idea when these
91 Stitch : I'm skeptical on the viability of open rotors. They're loud and they're heavy (in terms of structural support, airframe armoring and cabin noise abate
92 Parapente : re Stitch above. You may well be absolutly right.If you are then it makes good sense "running the new engine in" on the old aircraft platform.It also
93 Stitch : As Lightsaber has explained it, Rolls-Royce's cruise performance suffers from their High Pressure Turbine designs and the fact that they only have on
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...
How Much More Does Delta Plan To Cut posted Thu Jul 16 2009 13:05:41 by KarlB737
How Much Traffic Increase For The Olympics? posted Sun Feb 1 2009 18:27:55 by ZBBYLW
How Much Have Airlines Invaded The World? (Maps) posted Sat Jan 7 2006 10:50:04 by KLM685
Delta Flight 558 How Much More Money Can They Lose posted Sat Jan 29 2005 09:40:15 by UPS Pilot
How Much More Does It Really Cost? posted Tue Nov 11 2003 02:44:03 by AirxLiban
How Much Do We Miss The L1011? posted Sat Jul 26 2003 05:00:56 by Usairwys757
How Much More Profitable Are O&D Flights? posted Wed Feb 26 2003 08:41:18 by Ryefly
How Much Market Research Do The Airlines Do? posted Sun Apr 7 2002 21:00:12 by Mcdougald
How Much Will AA Cut On The West Coast? posted Fri Jun 19 2009 15:48:20 by SANFan
How Much Longer Will The A330 Line Stay Open? posted Fri Feb 29 2008 15:20:39 by Irishpower
Delta Flight 558 How Much More Money Can They Lose posted Sat Jan 29 2005 09:40:15 by UPS Pilot
How Much More Does It Really Cost? posted Tue Nov 11 2003 02:44:03 by AirxLiban
How Much Do We Miss The L1011? posted Sat Jul 26 2003 05:00:56 by Usairwys757
How Much More Profitable Are O&D Flights? posted Wed Feb 26 2003 08:41:18 by Ryefly
How Much Market Research Do The Airlines Do? posted Sun Apr 7 2002 21:00:12 by Mcdougald
How Much Will AA Cut On The West Coast? posted Fri Jun 19 2009 15:48:20 by SANFan
How Much Longer Will The A330 Line Stay Open? posted Fri Feb 29 2008 15:20:39 by Irishpower