Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:23 am

He lowers his forecast on the A380 from 450 to 350, which if correct, would be below Airbus' own break even point. Curiously, he opines that Airbus might be able to make money on the project....

More interesting to me is his discussion on Boeing being able to leverage the 787 technology into a 737 successor and the risks involved. The largest risk would be killing the current 737 line, as airlines wait for the "latest and greatest". Read all about it here:
http://www.aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:32 am

I know many (myself included) are focusing on the engines as the key to making a realistic 737/A320 replacement, but I wonder if the fatigue-performance of CFRP might be even bigger.

It is claimed that CFRP fuselages will reach a "fatigue floor" at which point they no longer degenerate. Boeing is pushing this to 787 customers as meaning the 787 requires less intensive maintenance overhauls and offers more time between them. This will allow 787 operators to keep their planes longer.

Would this not be a significant advantage to short-haul, high-frequency operators? Would not WN or FR be thrilled to have a "797" that could serve them for six-figures worth of cycles with fewer out-of-service overhaul periods to boot? An airframe that could serve for three or four decades, constantly adding new, more efficient engines thanks to a standard pylon and bleedless systems?

Could Boeing launch Y1 even without the latest and greatest engines by offering a platform that will serve them not only through the next generation of those engines, but the third, fourth, even fifth generations?

[Edited 2006-10-31 18:45:10]
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:44 am

Quoting Lumberton (Thread starter):
The largest risk would be killing the current 737 line, as airlines wait for the "latest and greatest".

Ah, yes. The Osborne Effect. Hype up your next product too much, nobody buys your existing stuff, and the company folds.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Could Boeing launch Y1 even without the latest and greatest engines by offering a platform that will serve them no only through the next generation of those engines, but the third, fourth, even fifth generations?

I think the key here is the interchangable engines. Even if it does take a week or more (as some claim Udvar-Hazy has stated), I think this is less important from the standpoint of being able to switch engine vendors than it is in relation to the ability to upgrade to the next generation of engines. Get to the point where the 787s are fifteen years old and RR/GE/etc make an SFC jump? Voila...mount the new engine on there, flash the computer, and call it a day.

[Edited 2006-10-31 18:45:48]
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:49 am

Looking at the pie chart on that site, Embraer must be pretty pleased. Sure the RJ demand is non-existant, however look at the demand for 81-100 and 101-125, this is the exact market for the E-Jets. Put them together, that's a good chunck of the chart that Boeing and Airbus do not have covered (let's just count the A318 and 736 out of the picture)

The E-Jets tap out at around 118 seats...maybe Embraer will look for one more stretch of the E-195 to get up to the 125-130 seat range.
 
ChiGB1973
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 6:39 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:55 am

Seems to me he spent a day reading A-net and didn't really come up with anything new.

Based on orders, anyone with a lick of sense could come up with the realistic figures for the A-380. While I think it's cool and neat and all that stuff, the market demand for something of that size is not there. Not to mention, the 2 operators of jumbo jets in the U.S. and the demand for the passenger 744 diminishing over the past few years, even with Asian and middle eastern operators.

Not to down the A-380, that's not what this is about, but, market conditions. It does have its very limited niche.

Personally, I think he is wrong about a 737 replacement. I think that will be announced the moment the 787 is flying. How many 737 production lines are there over at Boeing?

M
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:02 am

Quoting Lumberton (Thread starter):
The largest risk would be killing the current 737 line, as airlines wait for the "latest and greatest".

Though times are very different now, this did not happen with the 727 and 757. Despite the 757 being more efficient, quieter and having only a two man crew, the 727Adv sold and delivered very strongly up through 757 first flight, and the F version delivered strongly past 757EIS.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:09 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
Though times are very different now, this did not happen with the 727 and 757. Despite the 757 being more efficient, quieter and having only a two man crew, the 727Adv sold and delivered very strongly up through 757 first flight, and the F version delivered strongly past 757EIS.

And it is likely Boeing would work on "bridging" the 737NG to Y1 production programs just as they did the 744F to 748F, adjusting orders as necessary to ensure that the 737NG line remains "sold-out" until they are ready to switch-over.
 
NoWorries
Posts: 493
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:55 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:30 am

Perhaps another way for Boeing to tackle the issue of canibalizing their own 737 market with a replacement is to split the market and go after the smaller frame first. A number of news outlets reported comments by Randy Baseler regarding a two-plane approach:

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2006-09-18-boeing-737_x.htm
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:00 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 2):
Ah, yes. The Osborne Effect. Hype up your next product too much, nobody buys your existing stuff, and the company folds.

There's a huge difference between an off-the-shelf consumer product and a long-lead contractual order. Boeing has the luxury of locking customers into contracts, Osborne didn't.

I disagree with Boyd here:

1) Boeing typically has at least 12-18 months of 737 production sold-out, with 18-30 months of production booked. Today, you can't get a 737NG before 2008 and many contracts extend into 2012. In addition, Boeing has substantial orders for non-commercial 737 that will keep the line busy through 2015.

2) Boyd states that: "Since the 737 is the manufacturer's current cash cow, even a Wharton MBA could conclude that there's a very real and dangerous minefield that Boeing would need to navigate in bringing out any new-generation 737 platform."

Yes the 737 is extremely valuable to Boeing's cash flow. But when a 737 replacement would be considered in 2012-2015, Boeing will be cranking out 787 at the rate of a narrow-body. That revenue will exceed the 737 line and provide sufficient cash flow for BCA.

In conclusion, Boeing just needs to ride the current 737NG wave and launch the 737RS when it's technologically viable. Of course Boeing doesn't want to kill-off the 737NG any sooner than necessary, but sending customers away is far worse than prematurely replacing a selling product.
 
yvrtoyyz
Posts: 626
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 10:10 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:11 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 2):
Hype up your next product too much, nobody buys your existing stuff, and the company folds.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):

And it is likely Boeing would work on "bridging" the 737NG to Y1 production programs just as they did the 744F to 748F, adjusting orders as necessary to ensure that the 737NG line remains "sold-out" until they are ready to switch-over.

My comment is going to be much too simplified to be reality, but I am curious about it nonetheless.

Assuming Boeing offers the 797/Y1 for an EIS of 2011 and airlines flock to order it now, thus leaving the 737NG with no new orders. The current NG production line will continue to produce airplanes for the next 1.5 - 2 years because of the backlog (and conversions to the 797/Y1) it has for current orders.

In the meantime, between 2009-2011 (assuming the backlog is eliminated by 2009), there will only be very few 737NG orders because of airline's needs to fulfill capacity immediately (similar to the aforementioned 727Adv./757 or the current 767/787 line). Yet, to keep the line going and to avoid completely losing out on 2 years worth of orders from the NG line, could Boeing not offer the NG as interim lift until the 797/Y1 was delivered - similar to what Airbus is doing with the A330 in the A380 debacle?

-YVRtoYYZ
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:25 am

I hope I didn't misunderstand your questions, but I'll give it a try.

Quoting YVRtoYYZ (Reply 9):
The current NG production line will continue to produce airplanes for the next 1.5 - 2 years because of the backlog (and conversions to the 797/Y1) it has for current orders.

Yes, but there's a risk the customers would scramble to convert those orders to the newer aircraft.

Quoting YVRtoYYZ (Reply 9):
Yet, to keep the line going and to avoid completely losing out on 2 years worth of orders from the NG line, could Boeing not offer the NG as interim lift until the 797/Y1 was delivered - similar to what Airbus is doing with the A330 in the A380 debacle?

They could, but on what terms? Would they guarantee resale value, or take them back in trade? The OEM would be loathe to assume ALL the risk.

All considerations aside, if Boeing doesn't build it, Airbus will. Being first here will confirm a tremendous advantage IMO. The mother of all market segments!
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:30 am

Yes, and yes.

And just like with the 757, there will be "side by side" production.

The car industry has this same delimna now that it is so international.

You can't just switch a model over to the replacement worldwide very easily. Puts everyone out of a job for a while, costs money. So they phase it in, delivering the new model to some countries, the old to others. Or the new sedan while the old coupe version is produced for 12 more months.

With the high volume of the 737, you'll have the same thing. A period where the NG is still being built to meet contracts and even as final "top up" orders for carriers who are not in line for 797s for a while. The 797 will be built along side during testing to have a large number available for delivery in a short time.

For example, an airline with no legacy aircraft isn't necessarily going to start adding 797s right away. FL would likely continue to take NGs for a while, postponing the choice of the fleet replacement aircraft (A320NG or 797) until they really HAD to make that choice.

In addition, AA, WN and CO (and maybe DL) will have taken up a huge number of initial 797 slots. Assuming that the 797 also covers the 757 family, these 3 airlines will account for 300+ initial deliveries and many, many options. If DL chooses the 797 to replace the 737classics and MD80s, we are talking another 100+options order. That means that other carriers may not have delivery available until 1-2 years after EIS, if not later. If they already fly the 737NG, why wouldn't they still want a few to replace their oldest planes?

Just like the 757 and the 727, the 797 is not a replacement for the 737NG in the sense that carriers are going to junk their 5 year old NGs for the 797, just like they didn't junk their new 727s for 757s (it took until the 90s to junk the 727s, and the replacement aircraft was more often the 738 and A320).

The 797 is a replacement for 20 year old 757s, 737 Classics, early A320s, MD80s/90s, etc. After 5-10 years of deliveries, THEN you'll see carriers begin to actually replace 737NG and later 320s with the 797 and A320NG.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:38 am

I am no professional aviation analyst, but it seems that the airlines often purchase a certain aircraft for interim capabilities while awaiting the new best thing coming down the road. There is such a steady demand for the 737/320 sized aircraft among the world's airlines, I just can't believe the airlines would suddenly suspend all purchases while they await the 737/320 replacement.

Orders for long term replacement might decrease, but I think we'd continue seeing enough 737 orders to keep Boeing in business and with a profit.

(Jeez, this sounds sort of authoritative. I wonder if one of these analyst companies would hire to state my opinion?)
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 412
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:41 am

Quoting NoWorries (Reply 7):
Perhaps another way for Boeing to tackle the issue of canibalizing their own 737 market with a replacement is to split the market and go after the smaller frame first. A number of news outlets reported comments by Randy Baseler regarding a two-plane approach:

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/fligh...x.htm

The following quote is from above mentioned article:
...
"It could end up being it doesn't make any sense for us being in the 90 or 100-seat market," Baseler said.

But if Boeing goes that way, Baseler said it will have to have two models to also satisfy airlines that want more than 200 seats.
...

What if Boeing went for the 757 market first with a Y1+? I'The plane would not have a direct competitor and hence using state of the art engines instead of the 'next big step up' wouldn't hinder it.

IN addition to thin transatlantic routes, I can just imagine EK ordering 200. Big grin Maybe then they'd even up their A380 order...  Wink

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 10):

All considerations aside, if Boeing doesn't build it, Airbus will. Being first here will confirm a tremendous advantage IMO. The mother of all market segments!

With the right product, definitely. Better not do a Taurus.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:44 am

Quoting NoWorries (Reply 7):
Perhaps another way for Boeing to tackle the issue of canibalizing their own 737 market with a replacement is to split the market and go after the smaller frame first.

It would seem that Boeing would go after the upper end of the market first. Here are some reasons, and I am sure others can come up with more:

- The composite advantage scales porportionately lower as the size of airframe decreases. A composite narrowbody would have a greater performance % advantage over a 757, A321 and 739 than over a 73G or E195, for example.
- International P2P growth.
- Obviously, the 757 will require replacement sooner than the 73G or 738.
- Potential replacement for some aging 762s and A310s.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 8):
In conclusion, Boeing just needs to ride the current 737NG wave and launch the 737RS when it's technologically viable. Of course Boeing doesn't want to kill-off the 737NG any sooner than necessary, but sending customers away is far worse than prematurely replacing a selling product.

Boeing has the luxury of limited competitive pressure to take its time in deciding when to kill the 737NG. As I have mentioned on other threads, the longer than Boeing takes in introducing the 737 replacement, the more that bleeding edge tech can be incorporatated into the design.

Quoting YVRtoYYZ (Reply 9):
Assuming Boeing offers the 797/Y1 for an EIS of 2011 and airlines flock to order it now

There won't be an engine ready for a 2011 EIS.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
Just like the 757 and the 727, the 797 is not a replacement for the 737NG in the sense that carriers are going to junk their 5 year old NGs for the 797

Since most NG flights are not long range and would thus marginally benefit from being replaced by the 797. The other thing to take into account is that there is a real possibility that oil prices could be in the $30-$40/bbl range and that would reduce the cash operating advantage of the 797 on the majority of domestic flights.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
bucky707
Posts: 954
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 2:01 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:47 am

Quoting ChiGB1973 (Reply 4):
Personally, I think he is wrong about a 737 replacement. I think that will be announced the moment the 787 is flying.

I agree. And I think both Delta and AA are waiting in the wings to jump in as launch customers for a 737 follow on.
 
ksupilot
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:27 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:59 am

Quoting Bucky707 (Reply 15):
I agree. And I think both Delta and AA are waiting in the wings to jump in as launch customers for a 737 follow on.

This along may be worth ending the life of the 737. It will go on for a few more years, however, AA and DL are going to replace their large MD-80 fleets and any 737s they have as well. These are two huge orders.
You also have to assume that CO will order the Y1 as well. You have several airlines doing well enough that they could buy replacement aircraft, and airlines like AA and DL that are just getting back on their feet and will be ready soon. Boeing needs to jump on this.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:19 am

I dont think he is wrong at all. What he is saying is that Boeing has got to be careful because Y1 could be so much better that current 737 sales could dry up. Remember that the 757 was dead and the 767 almost dead when the 787 announcement was made. And the last two years have proven that the 737 is far from dead and a current cash cow for Boeing.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:29 am

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 16):
This along may be worth ending the life of the 737.

Not if there isn't a dramatic increase in efficiency...

Airbus NSR Phase 1 results, for example, are believed to have indicated that if all the advanced technology (available and considered mature and sufficiently low-risk for entry into service in 2012) was poured into the aircraft, the best specific fuel consumption reduction would be 4%, the best operating cost reduction 3% and the best emissions reduction would be 5%. The numbers are also said to be within 0.5-1% for all parameters for the initial phases of Boeing’s RS/Y1.

Engines therefore remain the key, as acknowledged by Boeing Commercial Airplanes vice-president sales Scott Carson who says “right now, there is no engine. To build a 737 replacement without a next-generation engine would be a dreadful mistake for us to make.”

The engine technology required to give the “step change”, at least a 15% efficiency gain, to justify a successor is unlikely to emerge until the 2013-15 time horizon.

“Both Boeing and Airbus will need an all-new engine, which the engine manufacturers say will not be ready until 2013-14, so the possible entry into service of such an aircraft could be possible around the middle of the next decade,” he says.

(Source: ATI 2006)


Now add in...

- narrowbody interim improvements such as Airbus' planned "A320 modifications available by 2008 that will offer efficiency gains from a new winglet design, aerodynamic improvements and a revamped cabin interior. Even if a replacement was able to provide 10% greater efficiency than today’s models, the net gain would only be 5% after the modifications.

- "engine manufacturers are working on upgrades aiming at improving intervals between engine overhauls, with CFM International claiming its ‘Tech-Insertion’ package will offer maintenance cost, fuel burn and nitrogen oxides emission reductions, while International Aero Engines is offering ‘V2500Select’ which also claims maintenance and fuel burn savings."

- oil prices going down

- industry consolidation

- economic recession

- etc, etc,

... and thus there is no need to "end the life of the 737" before 2015.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:53 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 2):
The Osborne Effect.

To help combat that, I suspect Boeing will formally announce the project when it is farther along in its development than usual. They'll hide its budget in publicly announced increased development costs of the 787 and 747-8I.  spin 
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:56 am

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 19):
To help combat that, I suspect Boeing will formally announce the project when it is farther along in its development than usual. They'll hide its budget in publicly announced increased development costs of the 787 and 747-8I.

Well, two things would come from that: 1) The shareholders would revolt for not being told the truth. The SEC would probably get involved. 2) Airbus would shit their pants. Imagine if Boeing said "We have this new 737 replacement ready to ship in six months."
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:03 am

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 19):
To help combat that, I suspect Boeing will formally announce the project when it is farther along in its development than usual. They'll hide its budget in publicly announced increased development costs of the 787 and 747-8I.



Quoting N328KF (Reply 20):
Well, two things would come from that: 1) The shareholders would revolt for not being told the truth. The SEC would probably get involved. 2) Airbus would shit their pants.

I admit I don't read all the proxy statements and stuff Boeing sent me when I owned their stock, but do they actually line-item their commercial R&D spend by family and model? Or do they just note "we're spending $X billion this year on research & development, including the 787, 747-8I, and other projects".

If the latter, neither the shareholders nor the SEC have anything to complain about, as Boeing has disclosed the amount of money being spent and they can see how that money affects immediate earnings and could influence future earnings (assuming the monies generate new products to sell).
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:17 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 20):
Airbus would shit their pants. Imagine if Boeing said "We have this new 737 replacement ready to ship in six months."

But, as you know, is an impossibility since the replacement design hinges almost entirely on new engines.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:21 am

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 22):
But, as you know, is an impossibility since the replacement design hinges almost entirely on new engines.

Yet I wonder if it has to. If Boeing can offer the airlines a CFRP Y1 that will last them 100,000 cycles, they may be willing to wait for the engines to come, knowing they can put multiple generations of new engines over the forty-year life of the airframe.

Of course, in such a case, being first would be even more important since, like the 787, you're selling planes that will last perhaps twice as long as the ones you are selling now and can "easily" accept new engines over their life.

Kinda puts a crimp on the future replacement market.  Smile
 
keesje
Posts: 8745
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:31 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
they may be willing to wait for the engines to come, knowing they can put multiple generations of new engines over the forty-year life of the airframe.

Engines can last forever, you just have to replace more & more parts.. Interesting trend in the engine world; to make engines more fuel efficient you can tweak up the temparatures, shortening the time between overhauls..

Aerospace is always a trade-off between conflicting requirements such as weight, costs, efficiency, reliability etc. You can always improve one but..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:36 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
Yet I wonder if it has to.

Absolutley. The composite airframe benefits on their own do not justify the costs. Even now, the cost of a 737 (minus engines) over its lifespan is economically negligible. Much better to wait for new engines and then incorporate latest R&D into airframe design.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
Kinda puts a crimp on the future replacement market.

Yes, that will be a problem at some point!
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:36 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 24):
Engines can last forever, you just have to replace more & more parts.. Interesting trend in the engine world; to make engines more fuel efficient you can tweak up the temparatures, shortening the time between overhauls..

You missed what he was saying:

If I (an airline) could buy a frame today and know that on the same frame I can simple plop in a new engine every 10-15 years that offers better performance, I might order the new frame today (assuming it will last say 40 years).

That's sort of the entire point for Boeing going to bleedless and common pylon. It means engines can be changed for other different models quickly and painlessly (compared to today's aircraft).
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:42 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 24):
Engines can last forever, you just have to replace more & more parts.. Interesting trend in the engine world; to make engines more fuel efficient you can tweak up the temparatures, shortening the time between overhauls..

I liken aircraft engines to those perpetual stews. Some of those been around for 100 years. It's doubtful any of the original matter is left over, but in theory, it's the same pot, continuously cooking.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
dw747400
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:24 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:42 am

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 19):

To help combat that, I suspect Boeing will formally announce the project when it is farther along in its development than usual. They'll hide its budget in publicly announced increased development costs of the 787 and 747-8I.

Besides the ethical issues associated with a publicly traded company doing something like that, it could hurt the product. Boeing needs as much input as possible from airlines when designing a new aircraft. The days of "you buy what we build" are over. A "secret" project would prevent the engineering team from getting this much needed input. Then all Airbus needs to do is listen to the customer and the market is theirs.
CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:54 am

So, where are the engine manufacturers in all of this?
One Nation Under God
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:59 am

Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 28):
Boeing needs as much input as possible from airlines when designing a new aircraft. The days of "you buy what we build" are over. A "secret" project would prevent the engineering team from getting this much needed input.

Of course, if Boeing's sales folks keep chatting with current and former 737 and 757 operators to ask what they'd like changed...  Wink

Seriously, neither the 7E7 nor the A350 just "appeared". We know Boeing is playing with designs like "Kermit" and "Fozzie" that may never see the light of day, yet I am sure those designs are driven at least in some small part by continuing discussions with customers.

So I don't expect Y1 to be sprung onto the airline world close to final config and ready to launch. However, I also don't expect Boeing to gather the heads of the world's 737 and 757 operators to Renton and formally launch the "737/757 Replacement Study Program" by putting a blank sheet of paper in front of each of them and asking those executives to list the Top Ten things they want to see in the plane. The reality will be much like the 7E7, I imagine, with the basic aspects of the plane already defined. But like the 7E7, it will certainly evolve to meet the needs and desires of those carriers.  Smile
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:03 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
The reality will be much like the 7E7, I imagine, with the basic aspects of the plane already defined. But like the 7E7, it will certainly evolve to meet the needs and desires of those carriers.

Many people do not realize that when Boeing unveiled the 7E7 that Boeing had not yet decided on CFRP fuselage and wings.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
supa7E7
Posts: 1360
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:54 am

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 16):
Boeing needs to jump on this.

Don't forget mighty WN.

737 factoid from wikipedia: "...at any GIVEN TIME, there are over 1,250 737s airborne worldwide."

Wow..... that's a lot of fuel airlines are buying...

The B738 weighs 91,000 lbs empty. If Boeing can cut 9,000 off that, it's a big deal... very rough calculation, could save 150,000 gal per year (10 hrs per day, 500gph, 10% savings). Excellent but not a total smash.

The 73G7NG is very efficient already. There is a hard limit to how light and efficient you can make a 737. Boeing already got most of the way there with the NG. Any big dreamy gains in efficiency will have to come from the way we use planes, not the planes themselves.
"Who's to say spaceships aren't fine art?" - Phil Lesh
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:12 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
I know many (myself included) are focusing on the engines as the key to making a realistic 737/A320 replacement, but I wonder if the fatigue-performance of CFRP might be even bigger.

It is claimed that CFRP fuselages will reach a "fatigue floor" at which point they no longer degenerate. Boeing is pushing this to 787 customers as meaning the 787 requires less intensive maintenance overhauls and offers more time between them. This will allow 787 operators to keep their planes longer.

When I worked for Douglas they bought back the fourth ever DC9 from Republic to see how it was holding up. This was shortly after the Aging Aircraft debacle. It had an ungodly number of cycles and hours on it. So they parked it on the ramp and cut it to pieces. It was in fine shape-there was essentially no upper time limit on the airframe.
Douglas did it with metal and conservative design according to the Heinemann Rule.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:20 am

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 13):
What if Boeing went for the 757 market first with a Y1+? I'The plane would not have a direct competitor and hence using state of the art engines instead of the 'next big step up' wouldn't hinder it.

This is my thought as well. The hole in their product is the plane between the 739ER and the 783, and that accounts for 1000 previous sales. Now the 739ER will take some of those, but only because it's all airlines who fly Boeing can choose from.

On the other end, Boeing is not successful in the 110 seat market, and hasn't been for 20 years. Yet Boeing has thrived. Do they want to risk going back there, being all things to all people and pleasing nobody?

It's why I think they will do a JV with someone, possibly Japan, maybe even Bombardier, to build something in that size.

If otherwise autonomous engine makers can form JVs for things like the 737 and the A380, there's no reason why a company who needs a partner (Bombardier, Fuji, Mitsubishi, BAE) can't hook up with a company that wants to limit it's risk while still offering a product (Boeing, Airbus) and do a regional aircraft.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:45 am

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 31):
Many people do not realize that when Boeing unveiled the 7E7 that Boeing had not yet decided on CFRP fuselage and wings.

I worked for Boeing at that time and we planned to use a heavy amount of composites in the Sonic Cruiser program, so when it came time to bring forth the 7E7, composites were going to be a big part of her, even if the decision had not yet been made to build a "continuous" CFRP fuselage.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:39 pm

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 14):
There won't be an engine ready for a 2011 EIS.

Is the delay in engines because the engine companies have not designated them a high priority? Would moving some of the best brains onto the program help in speeding up the development of these new technologies?

When I look at, say, GE not committing to the 350-1000 I wonder about the pressure from Airbus and airlines like WN to move on the -1000 or the RS engines. I believe that the engine companies are going to be under a lot of pressure from heavy single aisle users to focus heavily on that market.

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 14):
The other thing to take into account is that there is a real possibility that oil prices could be in the $30-$40/bbl range and that would reduce the cash operating advantage of the 797 on the majority of domestic flights.

Oil prices could just as well be way over $100. I think the $30 range is optimistic with the uncertain world we live in.

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 19):
They'll hide its budget in publicly announced increased development costs of the 787 and 747-8I.

Boeing doesn't need to - they already have stated that they have a joint 787-Y1 development program and haven't disclosed the distribution of R&D funds between the two planes.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:43 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 36):
Is the delay in engines because the engine companies have not designated them a high priority? Would moving some of the best brains onto the program help in speeding up the development of these new technologies?

The engine companies no doubt consider it important, but much of the fuel savings on the "new-gen" engines come during the cruise phase, so 5000-8000nm cruises allows a lot of saving. It's a lot harder to save double-digit percentages when your cruise is 1500-1800nm or even 500-800nm.  Smile
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:43 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
and that accounts for 1000 previous sales.

Yes, but one has to look at the competitive scenario in which those 1000 sales ocurred.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
Now the 739ER will take some of those, but only because it's all airlines who fly Boeing can choose from.

The 739ER will take most of those.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
It's why I think they will do a JV with someone, possibly Japan, maybe even Bombardier, to build something in that size.

Japan, perhaps... considering the work that they are doing on the 787. BBD, no way.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 36):
Oil prices could just as well be way over $100. I think the $30 range is optimistic with the uncertain world we live in.

You are absoulutely right that they could... but they shouldn't! $30 is not overly optimistic based on fundamentals.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:06 pm

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 25):
The composite airframe benefits on their own do not justify the costs.

I think what you mean is: "The benefits of a CFRP airframe on their own do not justify the development costs of replacing an otherwise fine aluminium airframe." rather than "If one is anyway going to develop a new airframe, the benefits of CFRP do not justify the costs of choosing it over aluminium."

Even Airbus now seem to be concluding that the second interpretation is false. The first interpretation is more true for smaller airframes than for larger airframes. Just pulling numbers out of thin air for illustration, the weight savings of CFRP over aluminium might be about 8% for an A320/B737 size airframe, about 10% for an A350/B777 size airframe, and about 12% for a VLA. Again, don't rely on these numbers for anything as I just made them up. They are only to illustrate that the benefit of using CFRP over aluminium is greater with larger airframes than with smaller airframes.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 27):
I liken aircraft engines to those perpetual stews. Some of those been around for 100 years. It's doubtful any of the original matter is left over, but in theory, it's the same pot, continuously cooking.

Actually, a few of the water molecules will have returned to the stew more than once after passing through the world's oceans and atmospheric humidity. Consider the urine of Jesus of Nazareth. It is now difused throughout the world's oceans and every glass of drinking water contains (depending on the size of the glass) roughly 5000 water molecules that passed through the bladder of Jesus of Nazerath. The same is true for water molecules in wine. The substance of transsubstantiation.  Smile The same is not true for aircraft engine parts, none of the material of which will be recycled and used again in the same engine during its lifetime.
 
jush
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:10 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:57 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Would this not be a significant advantage to short-haul, high-frequency operators? Would not WN or FR be thrilled to have a "797" that could serve them for six-figures worth of cycles with fewer out-of-service overhaul periods to boot? An airframe that could serve for three or four decades, constantly adding new, more efficient engines thanks to a standard pylon and bleedless systems?

Could Boeing launch Y1 even without the latest and greatest engines by offering a platform that will serve them not only through the next generation of those engines, but the third, fourth, even fifth generations?

That sounds thrilling indeed.

Regds
jush
There is one problem with airbus. Though their products are engineering marvels they lack passion, completely.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 12:24 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 39):
Actually, a few of the water molecules will have returned to the stew more than once after passing through the world's oceans and atmospheric humidity. Consider the urine of Jesus of Nazareth. It is now difused throughout the world's oceans and every glass of drinking water contains (depending on the size of the glass) roughly 5000 water molecules that passed through the bladder of Jesus of Nazerath. The same is true for water molecules in wine. The substance of transsubstantiation.   The same is not true for aircraft engine parts, none of the material of which will be recycled and used again in the same engine during its lifetime.

I bet you're a real downer at parties.  Wink
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 12:44 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 33):
Douglas did it with metal and conservative design according to the Heinemann Rule.

And still produced an airframe that was lighter IIRC than either of 737NG or the A32x at equivalent sizes.
 
hamster
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 11:08 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 12:47 am

Do we have any pics or drawings of the 737 replacement?
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 1:06 am

Quoting Hamster (Reply 43):
Do we have any pics or drawings of the 737 replacement?

No, it's too early. I don't believe the cross section has been decided yet.
 
supa7E7
Posts: 1360
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:44 am

Quoting Baroque (Reply 42):
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 33):Douglas did it with metal and conservative design according to the Heinemann Rule.And still produced an airframe that was lighter IIRC than either of 737NG or the A32x at equivalent sizes.

5-abreast offers tremendous weight savings from 110-150 seats vs. the 737 and A320.

The new 737 might by 5-abreast IMO. The 757/767 had different cross sections but a common type. Boeing could do it again for the new plastic 737.
"Who's to say spaceships aren't fine art?" - Phil Lesh
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:55 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 39):
I think what you mean is: "The benefits of a CFRP airframe on their own do not justify the development costs of replacing an otherwise fine aluminium airframe."

Yes. I was responding to a query about the concept of a new 737 airframe without new engines.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 39):
The first interpretation is more true for smaller airframes than for larger airframes.

That is the exact point that I made in an earlier reply...  Smile

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 14):
The composite advantage scales porportionately lower as the size of airframe decreases. A composite narrowbody would have a greater performance % advantage over a 757, A321 and 739 than over a 73G or E195, for example.

And as Stitch alluded to, the mission profile of the 787 vs the 737 allows it to benefit more from the advantages of CFRP.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:07 am

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 45):
5-abreast offers tremendous weight savings from 110-150 seats vs. the 737 and A320.

Is that really correct? The shape which maximizes volume/weight is the sphere. A 6 abreast fuselage seating 110-150 is a nearer approximation to a sphere than a 5 abreast fuselage with the same cabin floor area (CFA). Obviously, a 6 abreast airliner with say 100 sq meters of CFA will have a lot more volume than a 5 abreast airliner with the same CFA because the ceiling will be higher and the underfloor area will be deeper (assuming similarly ovoid shaped cross sections). It may be that the big effect is aerodynamics, rather than weight. A 5 abreast airliner with a 100 sq meter CFA should have less parasitic drag than a 6 abreast airliner with the same CFA because it should have both less frontal area and less wetted area. A 6 abreast airliner also has less CFA wasted on the aisle than a 5 abreast airliner with the same CFA. For a long range airliner, aerodynamics are more important while for a short range airliner, weight is more important. Hmmm. Not so simple.
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:38 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 39):
Actually, a few of the water molecules will have returned to the stew more than once after passing through the world's oceans and atmospheric humidity. Consider the urine of Jesus of Nazareth. It is now difused throughout the world's oceans and every glass of drinking water contains (depending on the size of the glass) roughly 5000 water molecules that passed through the bladder of Jesus of Nazerath. The same is true for water molecules in wine. The substance of transsubstantiation. The same is not true for aircraft engine parts, none of the material of which will be recycled and used again in the same engine during its lifetime.

Far be it from me to take issue with such an elegant thesis-and I know I'll never feel the same about water, even if I choose to drink water exclusively from the Ogallallah Aquifer which is hundreds of thousands of years old but G-d knows what sort of kidneys it was strained through....and it poses interesting questions for the Jews and Muslims of the middle east, doncha know...try getting Ahmaneedashaveabad to get with that program...
where was I? Oh....now I remember.

Garrett had an extensive repair and rework program and I used to hoard scrap parts. Every so often they'd come up with a new rework scheme and I'd trade in my cores for reworked stuff and save the customers a buncha money. Sometimes they repaired stuff that went right back into the engine it came out of, like burner cans and other parts.

One of my engines had taken a sea gull head on and it actually bent one of the first stage impeller blades which is tough when you figure the entire rotor is cut from a solid billet of titanium. I sent that impeller to the factory, they sliced off the damaged section and wended new material on and then profiled and rebalanced it and sent it back to me...quite a piece of work, and I thought it was new parts until I looked at the serial number and saw that the new material was slightly different in color.

So....it does happen that metal is returned from whence it came, although not in the time frame of returning back to ore to be first found and then refined.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Mike Boyd On A380 And 737 Successor

Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:46 am

Quoting Planemaker (Reply 38):
The 739ER will take most of those.

No, I don't see the 739ER replacing most of the 752s flying. Nor the A321. Maybe combined they will replace 1/2.

But the 752 is a bit bigger, and has abilities the others don't have. It's role now is a bit different than it used to be, with Hawaii and Transatlantic flights becoming more common with it.

A replacement should be more capable. It's obvious airlines want a plane in that size for transatlantic and Hawaii ops. The 762ER is too thirsty. The 739ER is limited even now in payload. The 788 will be used, but it's much bigger.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.