Airliners.net

Quote: SEATTLE, May 31, 2006 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] today begins final assembly of the first 737-900ER (Extended Range), the newest member of the world's most successful single-aisle airplane family. The wings and landing gear shown here are being joined to the 737-900ER fuselage in the Boeing manufacturing facility in Renton, Wash. Last-stage assembly and interiors installation will begin once the airplane joins the moving assembly line. The 737 derivative incorporates an extra pair of exit doors, a flat aft-pressure bulkhead and other structural and aerodynamic changes that allow it to carry more passengers and fly farther than the 737-900. The twin-engine jet can carry up to 215 passengers and fly up to 3,200 nautical miles (5,900 km). The 737-900ER, destined for Indonesian-based launch customer Lion Air, will embark on a five-month flight test program later this year.

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2006/q2/060531d_pr.html

I am eager to see how this 737 performs. Will it might be the best performing 737?

What Airlines will order this plane?

Is it out too late to gain a good place in the market? Allot of 757 are getting rather old.

[Edited 2006-05-31 23:24:46]

I was thinking about how this ties in with the 757 production ending as well. I think this could be a great replacement for the 757 since many 757 operaters are also 737 operators-- fleet commonality could be greatly improved.

Good luck to Boeing on this one-- sounds like this plane can open a lot of new doors for airlines.

JBLU

Quoting JBLUA320 (Reply 1): I think this could be a great replacement for the 757 since many 757 operaters are also 737 operators-- fleet commonality could be greatly improved.

Almost 90% of missions flown by the 752 can be flown by the 739ER, while the -900ER has much lower trip cost and simmilar revenue opportunity. That being said, I doubt many airlines (in North America at least) will begin fleet replacement with this new 737 derrivitive.

So why does Boeing choose to release a photograph of the 739ER in which the wing assembly overhead obscures the only visible difference between the 739ER and the 739? How do we know this is really a 739ER?

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 3): How do we know this is really a 739ER?

It's either a B739ER, or its the first B739 with winglets  

I know what you mean though; it would have been nice to see the doors.

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 3): How do we know this is really a 739ER?

 

What clued you off to it, the guys in the tin foil hats??   

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 4): It's either a B739ER, or its the first B739 with winglets

Good point! I hadn't realized that the B739ER was coming with winglets. I see that they are optional.

Launch airline Lion Air Indonesia

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 6): I hadn't realized that the B739ER was coming with winglets. I see that they are optional.

On the 739ER, the winglets are standard feature. They are necessary for the field performance, range, and payload upgrades from the base 737-900, and therefore will not be considered "optional" hardware.

CO still has 2 or 3 737-900s still on order, I think they should convert those plus add some additional orders for the 737-900ER, especially to replace 757-200s which have been put on International Routes.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 9): CO still has 2 or 3 737-900s still on order, I think they should convert those plus add some additional orders for the 737-900ER, especially to replace 757-200s which have been put on International Routes.

Maybe you are right to some extent. But, as someone already pointed out in another thread, having just 2-3 739ERs would be a sort of scheduling problem if CO must put them on some specifical routes because of their better performances in comparison with standard 739s. As a result, no interchange with other 739s would be possible. As far as I can imagine that could be a problem for an airline as big as CO.

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 4): or its the first B739 with winglets

Is there even any 739's with winglets.

Tom.

Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 11): Is there even any 739's with winglets.

  

So far, I haven't seen a single 739 with winglets in any picture.

Quoting VivaGunners (Reply 10): as someone already pointed out in another thread, having just 2-3 739ERs would be a sort of scheduling problem if CO must put them on some specifical routes because of their better performances in comparison with standard 739s. As a result, no interchange with other 739s would be possible. As far as I can imagine that could be a problem for an airline as big as CO.

Which leads me to the question whether the 739-900ER will become the standard 739 model and the 737-900A. I read in another forum that the 739ER was supposed to become the standard 739 model sometime soon.

BTW, does anyone know when the 737-900ER will have its first flight?

Quoting STT757 (Reply 9): CO still has 2 or 3 737-900s still on order, I think they should convert those plus add some additional orders for the 737-900ER, especially to replace 757-200s which have been put on International Routes.

I agree with this possibility. CO already uses the 737-800 on transcontinental routes, and it should be possible for them to add come capacity with the 737-900ER. From my understanding there is no need for an extra F/A for safety.

Quoting VivaGunners (Reply 10): Maybe you are right to some extent. But, as someone already pointed out in another thread, having just 2-3 739ERs would be a sort of scheduling problem if CO must put them on some specifical routes because of their better performances in comparison with standard 739s. As a result, no interchange with other 739s would be possible. As far as I can imagine that could be a problem for an airline as big as CO.

You bring out some good points here VivaGunners. But wouldn't a interchange between the 737-800 and 737-900ER make it usefull in CO fleet even in small numbers? I guess using a 737-900ER should not require more crew, so if there is need for a bigger capacity, they can interchange?

Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 11): Is there even any 739's with winglets. Tom.

Nope

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 2): Almost 90% of missions flown by the 752 can be flown by the 739ER, while the -900ER has much lower trip cost and similar revenue opportunity. That being said, I doubt many airlines (in North America at least) will begin fleet replacement with this new 737 derivative.

I think you might be right about many airlines that would benefit from a replacement doesn't see how they can afford them. By the way, isn't the 757 with U.S majors some of the oldest 757 built?

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 13): Nope

Why haven't any 739's got winglets.

Tom.

Great looking airplane - too bad that it comes so late but most airlines here in Europe already have settled for the A321.
I would have loved to see the 737-900ER with AB. But since Boeing has turned their back on AB and they choose Airbus instead with the A321 about to arrive in a near future the chances for that are very slim.
I could see them with Hapagfly and other TUI airlines though.
Another option would be that KLM would order some. But still the 737-900 and 900ER will be a rare aircraft to see here. Too bad since this long stretched classic Boeing fuselage makes it look like one the best looking Boeing´s ever made the 707-320 or the 727-200.

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter): Is it out too late to gain a good place in the market? Allot of 757 are getting rather old.

It's nothing more than a stop gap between the upcoming generational shift in this size aircraft. In terms of airfield performance for net range, it's crap vs. the 757.

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 13): I think you might be right about many airlines that would benefit from a replacement doesn't see how they can afford them. By the way, isn't the 757 with U.S majors some of the oldest 757 built?

Depends on the airline. AA and UA didn't take delivery of 757 until 1989. CO first took the aircraft in 1994, and US in 1993. NW and DL have some of the oldest, as they took them in 1985 and 1984 respectivly. DL also took some of EA's fleet, which were some of the first off the line.

DL and NW have the oldest, but they are the least likely and least capable of replacing them at the moment, IMO.

Quoting Columba (Reply 15): But since Boeing has turned their back on AB and they choose

Boeing "turned their back" because the terms AB wanted for their RFP didn't make tremendous sense for Boeing. Among other things, the almost immediate delivery slots needed to meet AB's demand would mean forfitting other (potentially more lucrative) needs.

This may have turned out for the best, because Airbus has almost completely sold-out the A320 line capacity, and now isn't in the strongest position to win new orders. Note than in 2006, Boeing is doing very well against the A320.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 17): DL also took some of EA's fleet, which were some of the first off the line.

Pretty sure that was actually US that took EA's first.

Sweet!
Well, thankfully we'll be getting some in India thanks to Spicejet sometime late in 2007! I've already had a few spins on the 737-95R's flown by Jet Airways, trust me, until you fly in them you really don't realise how long they are.

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 13): You bring out some good points here VivaGunners. But wouldn't a interchange between the 737-800 and 737-900ER make it usefull in CO fleet even in small numbers?

Well, I'm pretty sure he's referring to my comments in another thread, so thanks!  

To answer your question... no, it would not be useful to the fleet in small numbers. CO would need a subfleet of up to 20 before it could be scheduled to be on specific routes every day.

Right now, they use the 739 on high density routes like MCO and IAH-LAX, for example, routes they also use the 753 on. The 752 and 738 fill the bill on EWR transcons. Theoretically, a 739ER would work on transcons, but I doubt they will take any. More 738s are more likely.

Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 14): Why haven't any 739's got winglets.

Not certified, IIRC. Winglets must be certified on specific aircraft models, not families, and there isn't a big enough installed base of 739 jets for it to make monetary sense. Same reason you won't see winglets on the 753 any time soon.

Wonder who will be the first US carrier to acquire and send it over the pond.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 2): Almost 90% of missions flown by the 752 can be flown by the 739ER, while the -900ER has much lower trip cost and simmilar revenue opportunity. That being said, I doubt many airlines (in North America at least) will begin fleet replacement with this new 737 derrivitive.

Whats the 10pct that the 739ER cant fly ??

Can the 737-900ER get accross the pond ?? full of pax n fuel ??

If so Im guessing Continental flying EWR-SOU/NQY/EMA/ABZ by 2012 hahahaha  

Quoting Skyexramper (Reply 21): Wonder who will be the first US carrier to acquire and send it over the pond.

Southwest offering low fare flights to Ireland and UK  

Quoting Columba (Reply 23): Southwest offering low fare flights to Ireland and UK

I can't wait. I wonder if that will be a double peanuts flights. Yum!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20): Well, I'm pretty sure he's referring to my comments in another thread, so thanks!

Hehe. Your welcome  

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20): To answer your question... no, it would not be useful to the fleet in small numbers. CO would need a subfleet of up to 20 before it could be scheduled to be on specific routes every day. Right now, they use the 739 on high density routes like MCO and IAH-LAX, for example, routes they also use the 753 on. The 752 and 738 fill the bill on EWR transcons. Theoretically, a 739ER would work on transcons, but I doubt they will take any. More 738s are more likely.

This sounds like what they might end up doing, but the 739ER would look nice in CO livery with their winglets compared to the also beautiful 739.

Quoting BHXDTW (Reply 22): Whats the 10pct that the 739ER cant fly ??

I guess he is referring to the Transatlantic and heavy weight operations.

Well the -900 series could handle just JFK or BOS to DUB or Shannon....
Add another 600 Miles range and you have a perfect 757-200 replacement...

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 2): That being said, I doubt many airlines (in North America at least) will begin fleet replacement with this new 737 derrivitive

Then there must be significant overseas sales opportunities or else why build it?

What is the range of this airplane? Can it be used to cross the pond like a 757?

Thanks for the pictures & article to the original thread starter.

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 26): Well the -900 series could handle just JFK or BOS to DUB or Shannon.... Add another 600 Miles range and you have a perfect 757-200 replacement...

I agree this would have been the optimal solution, but that would probably meant a larger wing to accommodate more fuel and perhaps bigger engines. Of course Boeing could add more fuel tanks, but that way it would probably have very restricted cargo capability.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 27): What is the range of this airplane? Can it be used to cross the pond like a 757?

The range of the 737-900ER is 3200Nm with two Aux. tanks. Like Beacaire said, adding 600Nm more would make it a true 757 replacement. only problem. Where do one store the extra fuel needed?

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 27): Thanks for the pictures & article to the original thread starter.

Thank you for your kind words, DAYflyer

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 27): Then there must be significant overseas sales opportunities or else why build it?

You are right.

This plane is tailor made for Asian secondary markets. 200 1 class pax on routes of 2500nm (real length) or less would suit many Asian airlines well.

One could also imagine the plane is well suited for Japanese domestic routes to smaller airports or for greater frequency between midsized markets.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 29): One could also imagine the plane is well suited for Japanese domestic routes to smaller airports or for greater frequency between midsized markets.

Which makes me wonder why Japan Airlines hasn't converted some of their 738 on order to 739ER. It was stated in their order that they could convert the planes to be 739ER.

215 passengers squeezed inside a 739?

This is an aircraft that is nearly 20 feet shorter than a 757-200, in which 215 pax could barely fit (except on those torturous British charter carriers that managed to pack em in at 29" pitch).

Sounds like hell.

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 18): Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 17): DL also took some of EA's fleet, which were some of the first off the line. Pretty sure that was actually US that took EA's first.

At US, N600AU-609AU were the ex-EA ones. DL never had any since all their 757s are PW powered and EA had RRs. HP also got some of EA's 757s. N907AW, N913AW-915AW were all ex-EA.

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 31): This is an aircraft that is nearly 20 feet shorter than a 757-200, in which 215 pax could barely fit (except on those torturous British charter carriers that managed to pack em in at 29" pitch).

Yes, it is going to be a tight fit. This is the one-class high density configuration with 28in pitch. With a 30in pitch, the one-class capacity is 204 according to Boeing.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 27): Then there must be significant overseas sales opportunities or else why build it?

Because its a very low cost derrivitive. Short of new the pressure bulkhead, nearly all of the structure is derrived from other 737 models.

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 31): 215 passengers squeezed inside a 739?

The -900ER is slightly larger than the standard -900. The rear fuselage has been reengineered to allow an extra seat row or two, depending on seat pitch.

Quoting BHXDTW (Reply 22): Whats the 10pct that the 739ER cant fly ?? Can the 737-900ER get accross the pond ?? full of pax n fuel ??

Nope, the 737-900ER cannot match the 757 at its range envelope, nor match the 757's field and climb performance.

Who has ordered the 737-900ER so far?
Be interesting to see if any charter operators start using it...

Good luck to Boeing, will give the A321 a run now.

cheers