eaa3
Topic Author
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:49 am

737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 3:54 pm

Flightglobal has an interesting article today. Apparently the B737MAX will be twice as expensive to develop as the A320NEO. This is pretty interesting. Apparently moving the engines a little bit higher on the wings to get proper ground clearance for larger engines is difficult and very expensive. In addition raising the nose gear is going to cost something. I however did not realize that the difference in what needed to be done was so great.

It also brings into question the decision to update the B737 as opposed to building a new plane from scratch, although I´m sure Boeing did the math.

I´m hoping that both Boeing and Airbus will experience a bit of "Mission creep" because I´m sure there are lots of improvements that can be made to the 80´s era designs. Hopefully keeping their delivery dates though.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...to-be-twice-a320neo-report-367314/

[Edited 2012-01-25 07:59:20]
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 4:39 pm

Quoting eaa3 (Thread starter):
It also brings into question the decision to update the B737 as opposed to building a new plane from scratch, although I´m sure Boeing did the math.

Money was not the reason Boeing shelved the NSA in favor of the MAX. It was Time to Market issues.

Customers were ready to order 1000 MAXs if Boeing could get the plane to market before 2020. They evidently were not ready to order 1000 NSAs if Boeing could only get the plane to market after 2020.
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:15 pm

Even with that factored in , the Market share would more then make enough ROI for them if they get it right....As mentioned the Problem with the NSA had nothing to do with cost , but TIME...An interim between the NG and NSA that can sell 1-2 thousand is going to be more then profitable...
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2340
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:35 pm

From what I can tell, this article is all supposition and "calculation", no definate numbers from Boeing. How reliable is it? And should the thread title not contain the word "Possibly"?
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:50 pm

Quoting eaa3 (Thread starter):

I´m hoping that both Boeing and Airbus will experience a bit of "Mission creep" because I´m sure there are lots of improvements that can be made to the 80´s era designs. Hopefully keeping their delivery dates though.

Boeing already has that going on as the article mentions fly by wire spoilers and a relofted tailcone. Those can be considered mission creep or general improvements timed to the delivery of the MAX.

Both Boeing and Airbus continuously improve their airplanes. I have read numbers that a new build 737NG is 7% more efficient than the original. I have also read that the A320 once sharklets are installed will be 9% more efficient than original. It takes a lot of money to do that over time.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:56 pm

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 5):
Boeing already has that going on as the article mentions fly by wire spoilers and a relofted tailcone. Those can be considered mission creep or general improvements timed to the delivery of the MAX.

The tailcone might be as much about production costs as it is about operating costs. If they can reduce parts count and labor costs in assembly, they might be able to pull out a huge pile of money. Even small savings here are huge when you start talking about 1000+ frames.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 4972
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:21 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Money was not the reason Boeing shelved the NSA in favor of the MAX. It was Time to Market issues.

I have said all along that while Boeing could re-engine the 737, they would spend a lot more to get less gain than would Airbus. That was why I was hoping they would go for the NSA; but it seems clear that they decided that they could not do it on a schedule that the airlines would accept. Perhaps if the 787 hadn't blown its schedule so badly they might have, but I'm quite sure that the customers at this point are figuring that if Boeing promises delivery of an all-new airplane in 2021, say, that they might possibly see it in 2024. No airline can live with uncertainty like that with their bread-and-butter airplane. While the MAX project also poses a timeline risk, it is much less than a new aircraft would be.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
chiad
Posts: 1001
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 4:24 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:59 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 4):
From what I can tell, this article is all supposition and "calculation", no definate numbers from Boeing. How reliable is it? And should the thread title not contain the word "Possibly"?

Well. Since these programs are but in their earlier stages we can assume that Boeing DON'T, nor Airbus, know what they will cost. But an estimated budget clearly has been made based upon what Boeing, and Airbus, think it will cost.
So it is with the report behind this article. And based upon what tasks Boeing choose/needs to do with the MAX, compared to Airbus with the NEO, it's calculated that the cost will be double.
Maybe it will be less, maybe more.
Who knows for sure? I think more. Twice as much? Possible!
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4991
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Wed Jan 25, 2012 7:03 pm

It's an analyst report. In the end, slightly more useful than a ouija board, but only slightly.

I also find the report's estimates of fuel burn interesting... currently a 4-5% advantage for the 737NG, and near parity between the MAX and neo? Even if the comparison is based only on 738MAX vs. A320neo, that's still more optimistic for the MAX than other sources.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5645
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:12 am

Investing this much money in a 60's era design is nuts !
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:18 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 9):
Investing this much money in a 60's era design is nuts!

You could have argued the same two decades ago with the 737NG.

The RoI on that ended up being pretty good.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5645
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:20 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):

You could have argued the same two decades ago with the 737NG.

Two decades ago the 60's were a hell of a lot closer !
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 2:57 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 11):

Physics hasn't changed a lot in the past few decades....and more importantly, neither has demand. You build what will sell...the MAX sells.
What the...?
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:52 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 9):

Investing this much money in a 60's era design is nuts !

but investing the same money in a 70's era design is the best decision the industry has ever seen!!!!

lol.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5645
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:34 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 12):

Physics hasn't changed a lot in the past few decades....and more importantly, neither has demand. You build what will sell...the MAX sells.

Its a shame Boeing has allowed this design's natural progression, evolution and development to be held back and artificially constrained by Southwest.


If it were not for them it would have a completely new nose section and an up to date Cockpit.



Instead we have a cramped, noisy little cockpit with old fashioned manual trim wheels whizzing around, a very poorly designed overhead including a pressurisation panel that is prone to mismanagement contributing to at least one fatal accident, an electrical panel that requires you to place generators on manually (even the DC9 did this automatically)


An Autoland system that is not fully redundant, having no roll out capability, thus not being cleared for the lowest of visibility approaches and systems that are not really up to ETOPS requirements forcing operators in a 'band aid' solution to leave the APU running on these sectors.



It is an antiquated, obsolete platform that cannot be updated adequately to put it on a par with todays modern Aircraft.


Boeing has made a big mistake here.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
Vctony
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 1999 10:51 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:41 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 14):
It is an antiquated, obsolete platform that cannot be updated adequately to put it on a par with todays modern Aircraft.


Boeing has made a big mistake here.

Two words:

"It sells."
 
Max Q
Posts: 5645
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:43 am

Quoting vctony (Reply 15):

Two words:

"It sells."

And a better Aircraft could sell a lot better (nine words)
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:45 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 14):
Its a shame Boeing has allowed this design's natural progression, evolution and development to be held back and artificially constrained by Southwest.

Southwest is some 10% of the current 737MAX Order/Commitment Book. Heck, SK darn near matched them with the order they placed today.

Clearly, what Southwest likes is what many, many Boeing 737 operators like.

The only mistake was not launching the MAX in 2010 instead of 2011.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5645
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:56 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):

Clearly, what Southwest likes is what many, many Boeing 737 operators lik

That's because the other operators have had no choice. Boeing have allowed Southwest to veto any changes or upgrades to the cockpit design.


Sw specifically insisted on the overhead staying the same on the NG, it could easily have been upgraded to 75/67 or even 777 standard.


Similarly SW insisted on the antiquated 'round dials on glass' efis display which completely eliminates the use of the lower display and, perversely preserves displays a 'steam guage' cockpit layout in a 777 age.

Again, deliberately holding back technological advances for one customer.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
BlatantEcho
Posts: 1818
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2000 10:11 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 5:03 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 14):

And yet they sell thousands of them and airlines operating make millions.

Horses for course, you could always start your own airframe manufacturer and build a more sophisticated one if you wish
They're not handing trophies out today
 
astuteman
Posts: 6347
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 5:12 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 6):
I have said all along that while Boeing could re-engine the 737, they would spend a lot more to get less gain than would Airbus. That was why I was hoping they would go for the NSA; but it seems clear that they decided that they could not do it on a schedule that the airlines would accept.

Even if the MAX IS going to cost twice as much as the NEO to develop, I'm pretty sure that both of those numbers will be in the trivial range compared to launching an all-new aircraft.

Double a small number can still be another small number....

I'm guessing the NEO to be around $2Bn to develop

Rgds
 
barney captain
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:09 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 18):
Similarly SW insisted on the antiquated 'round dials on glass' efis display which completely eliminates the use of the lower display and, perversely preserves displays a 'steam guage' cockpit layout in a 777 age.

Which was a customer specific option, had no bearing on design, can be converted with a software update - and oh yea, is a display layout we no longer use (we converted the the PFD/ND display a few years ago). But interestingly, many operators still use the 'sic pack' configuration.

While your opinion of SWA's influence on the NG's design is certainly flattering (   ) it is largely urban myth. Did SWA contribute to customer surveys for the NG? Of course. Did Boeing ask for our input? Sure. But if you honestly think that Boeing disregarded what the buyers of the OTHER 4500 NG airframes wanted to satisfy the desires of SWA and their 350 orders - well that simply fails the financial logic test.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 5494
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:20 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 16):
Quoting vctony (Reply 15):

Two words:

"It sells."

And a better Aircraft could sell a lot better (nine words)

Too bad the going rate is about $1 Billion per word.  
Quoting Barney Captain (Reply 21):
But if you honestly think that Boeing disregarded what the buyers of the OTHER 4500 NG airframes wanted to satisfy the desires of SWA and their 350 orders - well that simply fails the financial logic test.

Pretty much!

-Dave
-Dave
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:35 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 16):
And a better Aircraft could sell a lot better (nine words)

By your definition the A320 is hugely "better" and should sell a lot better...but it doesn't. They're nearly dead on 50/50.

Boeing (and Airbus) are building what customers obviously want to buy. This can be tremendously annoying to pilots and engineers alike but, in the world of competition, that's the only definition of "better" that actually matters.

Tom.
 
flightsimer
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:11 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 14):
It is an antiquated, obsolete platform that cannot be updated adequately to put it on a par with todays modern Aircraft.

And what modern aircraft would u be speaking of?
Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
 
Max Q
Posts: 5645
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:11 am

Quoting Barney Captain (Reply 21):

Which was a customer specific option, had no bearing on design, can be converted with a software update - and oh yea, is a display layout we no longer use (we converted the the PFD/ND display a few years ago). But interestingly, many operators still use the 'sic pack' configuration.

Point made, it was still a remarkably poor use of the available technology at the time.

Quoting Barney Captain (Reply 21):

While your opinion of SWA's influence on the NG's design is certainly flattering ( ) it is largely urban myth. Did SWA contribute to customer surveys for the NG? Of course. Did Boeing ask for our input? Sure. But if you honestly think that Boeing disregarded what the buyers of the OTHER 4500 NG airframes wanted to satisfy the desires of SWA and their 350 orders - well that simply fails the financial logic test.

It is hardly flattery, or urban myth. Fact is, SW was the launch customer for the NG with the -700 series and as such had enormous influence and priority in decisions on it's design and yes, the majority of operators would far have preferred a more advanced cockpit but simply had no choice other than to accept what 'SW wanted'


That was certainly the case at CAL.



Fact is, SW historically has been very reluctant to embrace advances in technology, how many years, for example did you operate your NG's, Barney without using VNAV and the Autothrottles disabled ?

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 23):

By your definition the A320 is hugely "better" and should sell a lot better...but it doesn't. They're nearly dead on 50/50

Hardly, I am no fan of the Airbus, it is, however a design that lends itself easily to significant technological upgrades and advances in technology. It should be it is a much younger design.


[quote=tdscanuck,reply=23]
Boeing (and Airbus) are building what customers obviously want to buy. This can be tremendously annoying to pilots and engineers alike but, in the world of competition, that's the only definition of "better" that actually matters.[/quote



That is what vision is all about, these 'Max' airframes will look obsolete very soon due to Boeings lack of it and their perceived need to Kow Tow to Southwest Airlines in the most significant of it's design features.]
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 5494
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:20 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 25):
That is what vision is all about, these 'Max' airframes will look obsolete very soon due to Boeings lack of it and their perceived need to Kow Tow to Southwest Airlines in the most significant of it's design features.]

Bummer. Well, I think you'll be really pissed when WN launches the all-new 737 SUPERMAX-9 in 2025.

I guess I miss the big deal about it. There is room for more than one aircraft in the marketplace, and if the 737 works for some carriers, fine. Where I work, we could spend a lot more money on newer technology and equipment, but we kinda like working a little bit harder and having a lot more money in the bank. To each their own, I guess.

-Dave
-Dave
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:26 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Customers were ready to order 1000 MAXs if Boeing could get the plane to market before 2020. They evidently were not ready to order 1000 NSAs if Boeing could only get the plane to market after 2020.

What other options would they have had? Airbus could not have ramped up the A320 production that much (especially for a short period of time before the NSA would come out), so the airlines looking for a narrowbody plane would not have had that much choice (I'm assuming Comac would still not have had thousands of orders if Boeing did not do the MAX). Additionally, what makes you think that if NSA was launched 2010 or 2011, Boeing could not have gotten it to the market before 2020? It's not like Boeing could not have sold any NGs for 10 years and they have a healthy backlog already now, even if they had decided to bring NSA out 2018-2020.

Quoting garpd (Reply 3):
From what I can tell, this article is all supposition and "calculation", no definate numbers from Boeing. How reliable is it? And should the thread title not contain the word "Possibly"?

What else could it be than an estimation at this point of time? Do you have any better estimates?
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:30 am

Quoting Barney Captain (Reply 21):
While your opinion of SWA's influence on the NG's design is certainly flattering ( ) it is largely urban myth. Did SWA contribute to customer surveys for the NG?

What about SWAs influence on MAX's design?

Southwest's launch customer status will guide MAX development:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...will-guide-max-development-365961/
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:37 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 16):
And a better Aircraft could sell a lot better (nine words)

Actually, we have proof that this is not correct...For over a year, Boeing pushed like hell to get customers for their NSA, and not one airline publicly came out in favour of what Boeing was offering...not one.

Not only did it not sell more...it didn't sell at all.

Sure, lots of airlines made noises about wanting an all new airliner but when push came to shove, they wouldn't back Boeing.

Boeing tried to sell it and couldn't. No airline maker is going to commit the billions while, at the same time, allowing the competition to scoop all of their current customers and hoping beyond hope, that all those customers that went over to the other side would come back.

Nobody has that kind of cash to commit without customers. That kind of crazy...er...stuff, would never get by the board, even if the executive decided to try it.

So no, going all new was not the right decision by any benchmark. They did the smart thing which is make what the customers will buy and don't make what they won't buy.

You can't say they didn't try, though. Once can easily google dozens of statements from Boeing execs saying their priority is to go all new, (while hedging their bets by keeping the upgrade option alive). Turns out, Boeing was serious, and their customers weren't...at least they weren't willing to wait.

So Boeing tried it your way and got shot down...so they are doing it the way that sells.
What the...?
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1460
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:41 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 23):
By your definition the A320 is hugely "better" and should sell a lot better

The A320 is from ergonomic, cockpit concept and systems hugely better then the 737NG. However the bigger cabin and size doesn't it make lighter and thats what matters in fuel efficiency.

Besides due to the huge 737 classic fleets in US they would rather buy a 737-NG/MAX then introducing new types.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 14):
Instead we have a cramped, noisy little cockpit with old fashioned manual trim wheels whizzing around, a very poorly designed overhead including a pressurisation panel that is prone to mismanagement contributing to at least one fatal accident, an electrical panel that requires you to place generators on manually (even the DC9 did this automatically)

IMO if Boeing would have decided in favor of a cleansheet design, they would have had in relation a similar order record like the 787. The world is in need of new, ultra fuel efficient planes better then A320NEO and 737MAX.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:45 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 29):
Not only did it not sell more...it didn't sell at all.

Seriously, I don't expect that you or Boeing could imagine a situation where NSA, a narrowbody that is the most efficient plane in its class, would EIS without hundreds or even thousands of orders - no matter if they could not sell any right now (10 years before EIS?).
 
barney captain
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:47 am

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 24):
Fact is, SW historically has been very reluctant to embrace advances in technology, how many years, for example did you operate your NG's, Barney without using VNAV and the Autothrottles disabled ?

Way, way, WAY too long. That has all changed. We are finally up to industry standard (AFAIK) with full use of AT's, AB's, VNAV and .1 RNAV curving RNP approaches to basically CAT 1 mins. It ain't yer daddy's SWA anymore  

The old guard has left the building and we are up and ready for NextGen ATC. Now who knows when THAT will get implemented.

Interestingly, one of the stated byproducts of our flight ops update was to make us more "marketable" to other manufacturers (like AB). By using more industry standard PFD/ND displays and "full up" automation, we were able (by GK's own admission) to court other suitors and imo, exert pressure on Boeing to make a decision on the MAX.

The tail is now wagging the dog.

The MAX is cool, but personally, I would have LOVED a bigger cockpit.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 5494
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:19 am

Quoting autothrust (Reply 30):
IMO if Boeing would have decided in favor of a cleansheet design, they would have had in relation a similar order record like the 787. The world is in need of new, ultra fuel efficient planes better then A320NEO and 737MAX.

Well, obviously there was not enough people banging on their door to convince them then. What's more, why spend $10 Biliion for hundreds or even thousands of orders when you can spend $2-$4 Billion for hundreds or even thousands of orders?

It just seems like we've hashed through this ad nauseum and so maybe it's hitting me wrong today.  

-Dave
-Dave
 
Rara
Posts: 2296
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:20 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 29):
Boeing tried to sell it and couldn't. No airline maker is going to commit the billions while, at the same time, allowing the competition to scoop all of their current customers and hoping beyond hope, that all those customers that went over to the other side would come back.

Exactly - that's why you can't rely on airlines to be your driving force in what is essentially a prisoner's dilemma for them. Boeing should have gone ahead, let Airbus steal the show for the moment, and then come back with a design so superior that it'd make the A320 obsolete. That requires nerves, and they seem to be in short supply at Boeing after the 787 mess.

With the MAX, Boeing exchanges long-term advantages for short-term gains. With the older 737 design somewhat disadvantaged against the A320, that's going to turn into a liability for Boeing at some point.
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:29 am

Quoting flyingAY (Reply 31):

It doesn't matter what I think or Boeing thinks...it's what the customers thought that made the difference. They were not wiling to wait a decade to get their all new narrow body aircraft. Customers specifically said that they can't wait until 2020 to get their first, more efficient, replacement aircraft.

As well, Boeing has enough on it's plate to prevent them from doing the upgrade, eis 2017, while, at the same time, working on an all new plane, eis, (by their estimate), 2020/2021. They probably have the cash but they don't nearly have the manpower.

The fact is there weren't hundreds or thousands of orders for the proposed NSA...there were zero. They had a simple choice to make...re-engine and get orders for later this decade...or go NSA, with zero orders for it and get few NG orders at best for delivery later this decade.

Besides, what you envision is actually being offered for eis 2014...the CSeries...and they have sold about 130 of them...but BBD is in a different position...orders for their current offerings are slow and they have no choice but to build something new, or get out of commercial aviation. Boeing had a choice Bombardier didn't have...and they chose to follow the money...like any smart business would do.
What the...?
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3797
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:49 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 29):
Actually, we have proof that this is not correct...For over a year, Boeing pushed like hell to get customers for their NSA, and not one airline publicly came out in favour of what Boeing was offering...not one.

Not only did it not sell more...it didn't sell at all.

Sure, lots of airlines made noises about wanting an all new airliner but when push came to shove, they wouldn't back Boeing.


Very true. And in the end the launch of the MAX did protect Boeings customer base, and by viewing the numbers it is doing so in a highly successful manner.  .

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 23):
By your definition the A320 is hugely "better" and should sell a lot better...but it doesn't. They're nearly dead on 50/50.

Boeing (and Airbus) are building what customers obviously want to buy. This can be tremendously annoying to pilots and engineers alike but, in the world of competition, that's the only definition of "better" that actually matters.



So true. The offerings are quite close to each other, and not one is clearly superior to the other. Different mission profiles will favor the one or the other, but it might not be worth the while to buy specific versions of the planes for that. However. AA and Norwegian bought both the NEO and the MAX. They could use the planes exactly there where the efficiency of them is at its best.  .

Quoting astuteman (Reply 20):
Even if the MAX IS going to cost twice as much as the NEO to develop, I'm pretty sure that both of those numbers will be in the trivial range compared to launching an all-new aircraft.


It for sure will well be worth the efforts for both OEM's. So far there are no indications that the MAX is being received with scepticism by the customers. It sells about as fast as the NEO, so Boeing did the right thing. As John Leahy already predicted.  .
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2340
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:04 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 16):
And a better Aircraft could sell a lot better (nine words)

I've said it once before, I'll say it again:

I'm glad you're not in the driving seat at Boeing, as you'd drive them into the ground with your completely incorrect grasp of the industry.

Boeing tried to sell an all new plane, they got no interest, not so much as a nibble.
Then, they announce the MAX and low and behold they're bringing in the orders.

Are you saying the airlines have it wrong and you are right?
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
eaa3
Topic Author
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:49 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:05 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 29):
Actually, we have proof that this is not correct...For over a year, Boeing pushed like hell to get customers for their NSA, and not one airline publicly came out in favour of what Boeing was offering...not one.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 33):
Well, obviously there was not enough people banging on their door to convince them then. What's more, why spend $10 Biliion for hundreds or even thousands of orders when you can spend $2-$4 Billion for hundreds or even thousands of orders?

Boeing should have done a new plane. In the short term they would have to accept that Airbus would have the upper hand. However if Boeing were able to make the case that the NSA were so revolutionary that the A320NEO couldn´t compete then it wouldn´t be long before Boeing had the upper hand. And if there´s one thing Boeing is good at then that´s hype. I mean look at the B787 hype. It would also change Airbus´s case for an updated A320 because they would know that within perhaps 5 years of introduction their design would be less efficent and could not compete. IMO Airbus would also have had to develop a new plane.
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2340
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:13 am

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 38):
Boeing should have done a new plane.

With no orders and no interest and not enough of an advance in technology to even justify the expense?

Figures published time and time again showed that an NSA would not have enough efficiency gains to warrant it's development, let alone interest airlines in buying it.
This is why BOTH Airbus and Boeing have gone for the re-hash route. And guess what, they're selling.




The arrogance of some on this forum amazes me. In the face of clear evidence that both manufacturers and going the right way about their business, there is always some armchair CEO on here who thinks they know better.
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:44 am

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 38):

Let's say it cost 10 billion to build the nsa, and realistically, it wouldn't arrive before 2021. That's 5 years of sales, almost exclusively to the NEO, since it would up against the NG. That means even more airlines with Airbus fleets and Boeing would have to win them back, (whenever they finally got around to their next purchase cycle), fighting the commonality curse.

Also, how would Boeing build this NEO killer? Everybody knows, (Boeing, Airbus, the engine makers....everybody), knows that most of the efficiency gains come from the engine...not the airframe, so realistically, Boeing won't get 15% gains over the NEO, since airbus would no doubt continue to upgrade their engines. They can also, perhaps, make the plane lighter using al-li or some other lighter material coming down the pike.

And here's something you don't hear much of...how much income Boeing misses out on by not building the MAX.

Realistically, there is no Boeing that would blow the NEO out of the water and make up for 5 years of virtually no sales which would cost them, (going by 300 fewer deliveries per year and 30 mil per aircraft over 5 years) 45 billion dollars in lost revenue...so they actually would have to make up, not a mere 10 billion...but 55 billion dollars by going with the NSA instead of the MAX.

It could be as much as doublt that since Boeing is planning to produce as many as 60 737's per month by the time the NEO enters service. That would boost the lost revenue to upwards of 100 billion dollars.

That's why they went with MAX.
What the...?
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1460
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:55 am

Quoting garpd (Reply 39):
With no orders and no interest and not enough of an advance in technology to even justify the expense?

Wrong, there was interest and not from a unimportant person : Boeing should develop new family to succeed 737 - Udvar-Hazy
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-to-succeed-737-udvar-hazy-354435/

Overall the MAX is probably the easiest and less risky solution and a good option for airlines.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2340
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:58 am

Quoting autothrust (Reply 41):
Wrong, there was interest and not from a unimportant person : Boeing should develop new family to succeed 737 - Udvar-Hazy

Yet still, the MAX is selling.
Clearly it's what 737 operators want.

SUH has been wrong or off mark before.
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:01 am

Quoting autothrust (Reply 41):

Lots of potential buyers expressed interest...but none of them were willing to commit to the NSA. I believe if Boeing could have garnered even one significant order, maybe a hundred or so planes, they would have pulled the trigger on it.

With nobody willing to order it outright, and you know they through every option they could think of at AA, they had no choice but to go with the MAX.
What the...?
 
travelhound
Posts: 1185
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:05 am

Quoting garpd (Reply 39):

Sponsor Message:

JL from Airbus has already stated Airbus got a " get out of jail free card" when Boeing announced the MAX.

There us more to aircraft economics than just engine and materials technology. Optimization of these items is the key and realistically if the majors want to maxamise the benefits of technology new airframes are the go. As others have stated creating a business case for an NSA is another argument altogether.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 40):

That's a catastrophic analysis if I've ever seen one.

I don't think Boeing would have lost that many sales and I would think there would have been many 737 airlines willing to wait for an NSA. The real benefits of a new aircraft would be sales and deliveries post entry into service. You would think Boeing would command additional sales at a premium for such an aircraft.
 
parapente
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:21 am

The competition between these 2 aircraft maufacturers and indeed between the 3 engine manufacturers (not to mention 'outsiders' like the 919) has resulted with 2 superlative aircraft. I mean really superlative. The economies are (to me) staggering. They both give the (shorthaul) flying public 2 really good highly cost effective (low poluting and quieter) aircraft.

You cannot put a sheet of paper between the 2 really. Oh one will be better for 'X' load range config and another for 'Y'. But both are phenominal aircraft.Real workhorses that have to put up with incredible 'punishment' daily.

Of course both manufacturers have gone for 'safe' development.Indeed as well pointed out this is because the users-the airlines demand just that. They have thousands of pilots trained to fly such aircraft and do not wish to go through expensive change for minimal benefit.Oh of course 737 pilots would like more cocpit space. Sorry tough - have to get over it.

Note. Not heard a whisper from Ryan air recently.They cannot be foolish enough to ignore the 'Max' (and one thing they are not is stupid).They too will be very closely involved in the cofig of the 'max' I bet my breakfast on it.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE:

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:24 am

Quoting travelhound (Reply 44):

Well...they would have lost AA, for one...except for an NG topup order. That analysis isn't even the worst case scenario...but look at how many orders the NEO won against the NG...Maybe...and it's a big maybe, Boeing would have maintained 25% market share.

With Airbus producing 60 aircraft per month, that means Boeing is doing 15...once the NEO hits the streets. So lets go through these numbers...again very rough, but conceptually very valid.

That's 45 per month fewer aircraft being delivered than their planned 60 per month. At I'm guessing it's higher but say 30 million per plane over 5 years...what does that work out to? This is revenue Boeing would never see and woiuld have to make up, all while spending another 10 billion to build the NSA without any launch customer.

Of course it catestrophic...it's what happens when you let the other guy win for a few years in the aerospace industry.

I have no idea what the real numbers are but I'm guessing they're higher than I've calculated. The loss of income would have been at least 3 to 5 times higher than than the cost of the NSA....lost revenue the new plane would have to make up to really break even.

Maybe my numbers are out to lunch but nobody has tried to work out their potential lost revenue, at least that I've seen, and this lost revenue is totally valid when calculating the value of the MAX option.

Perhaps someone else can come up with a more accurate formula.

[Edited 2012-01-26 03:30:38]
What the...?
 
User avatar
Ncfc99
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:42 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:30 am

Quoting garpd (Reply 37):
Boeing tried to sell an all new plane, they got no interest, not so much as a nibble.
Then, they announce the MAX and low and behold they're bringing in the orders.

How do you know they had no intrest? The first I knew about anything being decided at Boeing was when AA anounced the order in the summer. Some 320oeo, 320neo, 737ng and Boeing's new single aisle plane. Before that, as far as I know, no public anouncment had been made to go clean sheet design or re-engine.

Quoting garpd (Reply 37):
Are you saying the airlines have it wrong and you are right?

The airlines can only buy what is offered and available. If a clean sheet plane was being done by about 2020, do you think it wouldn't be ordered? The airlines would buy 737NG's and 320's in the meantime. As noted above, Airbus couldn't satisfy the demand so the 737 would still sell until the new airplane was available.

Quoting garpd (Reply 39):
Figures published time and time again showed that an NSA would not have enough efficiency gains to warrant it's development, let alone interest airlines in buying it.

Surely technology has advanced enough to make a new narrowbody 15-20% more effeicient than a 737 or 320. Putting a new engine on the 737 will apparently account for 7% cash operating improvment and 10-12% better fuel burn. Thats half he battle right there, surely putting that engine onto a airframe designed and optimised for it should get it to 15-20%. How much more do the airlines want?
 
travelhound
Posts: 1185
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:41 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 46):


I did my own analysis on this about 9 months ago. It took into account assumptions about product life cycles and yields / returns. Hopefully I will get on the computer tomorrow so I can post a quick synopsis.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 737 Max Development Cost To Be Twice A320NEO

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:46 am

Quoting travelhound (Reply 48):

Excellent...thanks.
What the...?