Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Twin Aisle Replacement Analysis For B737/757/767  
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6183 times:

I have recently come across threads about Thompson seats with staggered seating. In theory, these seats would convert a 7-abreast B767 to 8-abreast Y with staggered seating. Likewise, 8-abreast A332 could become 9-abreast Y. It is my understanding that Delta is converting some of its 767s to 8-abreast staggered with Thompson seats.

If the staggered seats turn out to be acceptable, and become the norm, then Boeing could design its 737 replacement as a twin aisle 7-abreast with staggered seating. I will use B739ER as the base model to carry out the financial case for such a replacement.

Note below cabin dimensions for the 739ER and the 739RS(twin aisle, CFRP, new engines):
739ER 739RS
Fuselage Length 138.16 feet
Cabin Width 11.58 feet 14 feet
No. of single class seats 215 245

The 739RS would only need 14 feet in cabin width to accomodate two aisles with 2-3-2 staggered seating. I hope Keesje will come up with graphics to illustrate this point. The fuselage length of the replacement will remain the same.

Note below a summary of estimated technical specifications for 739ER and 739RS.
OEW 98,495 112,000
MTOW 187,700 204,000
MZFW 149,300 169,000
MSP 50,805 57,000 (Max. Structural Payload)
Range 3,200 3,500 (Max. Design Range in nm)
Wing size 117 ft.(w/winglets) 125 feet
The 739RS can carry its max. payload to 2,900 nm.

For a 2,000 nm mission,
737ER burns 3,877 gallons of fuel, carries 5,655 lbs. cargo, GSM .0090
739RS burns 3,314 gallons of fuel, carries 5,550 lbs. cargo, GSM .0068

739RS saves about $2,200 in fuel costs.
739RS may earn $4,200(30Y seats X 70% LF X $200) more in seat revenue.

The net advantage to 739RS is about $6,400 per trip--about $7 million annually.

If my estimates are fairly accurate, then a twin aisle with two different wings could be utilised to replace both 737/757 and 767 series. The smaller 125 feet wide wing would be on the 738/739/752 replacement, and the larger 160-170 feet wing would be on the 767 replacement.

For the series with the smaller wing, the shortest fuselage length would be 130 feet(current B738 length), and the longest would be 155 feet(current B752 length). The single class seat count would range from 195 to 260, and the range would be around 2,800-3,500 nm.

For the series with the larger wing, the shortest fuselage length would be at 160 feet and the longest would be at 200 feet, providing replacements for 762/763/764. The single class seat count will range from 280 to 400, and the range would be around 5,800-6,800 nm.

Looking forward to your comments/feedback.

5 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLarshjort From Denmark, joined Dec 2007, 1356 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 6148 times:

What about a 175 feet ~320 seat single class version with the small wing, Would it be possible as a A300-600 replacement? Or would it lack range?

/Lars



139, 306, 319, 320, 321, 332, 34A, AN2, AT4, AT5, AT7, 733, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 146, AR1, BH2, CN1, CR2, DH1, DH3, DH4
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9382 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6083 times:



Quoting Larshjort (Reply 1):
What about a 175 feet ~320 seat single class version with the small wing, Would it be possible as a A300-600 replacement? Or would it lack range?

Isn't that exactly what the 787-3 is trying to do and not selling terribly well at doing either?



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3652 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5611 times:



Quoting LAXDESI (Thread starter):
Boeing could design its 737 replacement as a twin aisle 7-abreast with staggered seating.

That's not a feasible solution unless the fuselage cross section diameter becomes at least as large as that of the 767. Because adding one seat per row, means adding one aisle and one seat. You go from a 3-3 layout to a 2-3-2 layout. But if you really want to keep the same cross section as that of the 737, 757 or even the A320, this idea would not work out.

In the case of the 767, you would only add one seat and no additional aisle. 8 seat per row on a 767, that's still realizable because it simply goes from a 2-3-2 layout to a 2-4-2 layout (I believe Britannia from the UK used to do that), you still have the two aisles and you still have every non aisle seat one seat away from an aisle. However, the only negative point about this idea is passengers will feel less comfortable because the seats would be slightly smaller in width.

Ben Soriano



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24109 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5587 times:



Quoting American 767 (Reply 3):
In the case of the 767, you would only add one seat and no additional aisle. 8 seat per row on a 767, that's still realizable because it simply goes from a 2-3-2 layout to a 2-4-2 layout (I believe Britannia from the UK used to do that),

Yes they did. Very cramped and uncomfortable seating.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Savvas Petoussis
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Karim SARR



User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5515 times:



Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Twin Aisle Replacement Analysis For B737/757/767
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airlines That Used 757/767 Common Type Rating posted Mon May 19 2008 16:59:05 by KELPkid
Question For B737 MX People posted Mon Aug 27 2007 14:57:37 by Dougloid
757 V 767 Cockpit Identification posted Mon Mar 19 2007 15:24:12 by Zarniwoop
757 / 767 Speedbrake Safety? posted Thu Apr 13 2006 02:02:14 by Joffie
757/767 APU Switch Start Question posted Sat Mar 11 2006 00:37:16 by Taguilo
757/767 Disintegration Point posted Thu Feb 23 2006 17:55:10 by IFEMaster
757/767 Flat Panels posted Fri Dec 2 2005 04:10:17 by Brons2
Why No LD2 For Acft Beside 767? posted Sat Sep 3 2005 22:14:07 by A342
757/767 Type Rateing posted Thu Nov 11 2004 22:06:30 by NWA
Boeing 757/767 Trip Cost? posted Fri Jul 23 2004 17:30:16 by DfwRevolution

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format