Flying-Tiger
Topic Author
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

B737-200 Re-engineing

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:42 pm

Has there ever been a serious attempt to re-engine the B737-200, e.g. with the BR710/715? There are still quite a few 737-200s out there, a plane which is despite its age still quite popular - and right-sized for many markets. Instead of spending about 25-30 million USD on an Embraer 195, you would probably only need to spend 5-10 million USD on new engines but extend the life of the bird by quite a bit.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

B737-200 Re-engineing

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:47 pm

I seriously doubt the economics of such a conversion would be favorable. It's why no DC-9 reengine programs have taken place: it's too expensive and the airframes don't have enough cycles remaining to amortize the investment.

AA may consider reengining their MD80 fleet, but it is much younger and much larger than the handful of 732 fleets remaining...
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

B737-200 Re-engineing

Thu Jun 30, 2005 4:19 pm

Structural Mods on the B732 are a lot.
It would not be Economically viable option considering the Airframe Age.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
TriStar500
Posts: 4411
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 1999 9:50 pm

B737-200 Re-engineing

Thu Jun 30, 2005 5:04 pm

With the abundance of used 733/735 on the market, it is probably much more attractive to acquire those instead of shelling out some serious dough for a tricky reengining.
Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
 
Bluewave 707
Posts: 2793
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 8:21 am

B737-200 Re-engineing

Thu Jun 30, 2005 5:46 pm

Would be interesting to see BR715s on a 733 or 735 since those airframes are not as old as 732s. It would make it available for ultra-short range & high-frequency routes like Hawaii's inter-island routes that AQ has. The BR715 has proven itself on HA's 712s.
"The best use of your life will be to so live your life, that the use of your life will outlive your life" -- D Severn
 
User avatar
ZSOFN
Posts: 1379
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:20 pm

B737-200 Re-engineing

Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:05 pm

Not really a re-engineering, looks good though!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Julian Whitelaw

 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

B737-200 Re-engineing

Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:49 pm

Any plans of Reengining the B733/4/5s with CFM56-7s
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:05 am

On Tuesday I flew on a 737 of Nationwide Airlines here in South Africa and on the engines it said "Boeing 737 Stage III". Any idea what that might be about?
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
Airplanepics
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 4:12 am

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:21 am

Quoting Andz (Reply 7):
On Tuesday I flew on a 737 of Nationwide Airlines here in South Africa and on the engines it said "Boeing 737 Stage III". Any idea what that might be about?

I believe this is the hush kit system that has been fitted to the engines.
Simon - London-Aviation.com
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1577
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:28 am

Quoting Andz (Reply 7):
On Tuesday I flew on a 737 of Nationwide Airlines here in South Africa and on the engines it said "Boeing 737 Stage III". Any idea what that might be about?

That means the engines have the Nordam or AvAero hush kit installed to allow them to be compliant with ICAO Chapter 36 Stage III noise rules.
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:48 am

There is a hushkit mod available for the 732. Take a look in the database at N767TW and N737TW. Ameristar Air Cargo has these weird birds and we see them at STL from time to time.

Also, if you've ever looked at a 737 of any variety you'll notice there is very little clearance between ground and the bottom of the nacelle. The landing gear on the models with a CFM engine are actually a little longer to get the wing higher (I have to use an extra step on the ladder when fueling these). A wider diameter engine like a BR715 might not be a realistic option as they may have to do other structural changes as Hawk21M mentioned.
DMI
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1577
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:20 am

Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 10):
There is a hushkit mod available for the 732. Take a look in the database at N767TW and N737TW. Ameristar Air Cargo has these weird birds and we see them at STL from time to time.

That hushkit you are looking at is the original Nordam hushkit. It met Stage III, but it increased aircraft drag by ~7%. Nordam went back and redesigned the hush kit using internal mixers and absorbers to meet Stage III, without the drag penalty. AvAero later copied their design. All three of these hush kits also have an inlet guide vane respacing that adds a little length to the forward nacelle.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Fri Jul 01, 2005 1:31 pm

Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 10):
The landing gear on the models with a CFM engine are actually a little longer to get the wing higher (I have to use an extra step on the ladder when fueling these).

Not on the B733/4/5. The Landing gear is the same as for the B731/2s.Hence the CFM56-3s have a flat under surface to improve ground Clearence.
The B736/G/8/9 have a higher MLG.Hence the CFM56-7s have a more rounded Inlet.And the NGs stand higher.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
User avatar
NZ1
Crew
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:11 pm

I've always thought a GE90 powered 732 would make a great plane to fly on. Just think of the climb rate, or descent rate when the thrust tears the wings off.... Smile
--
✈ NZ1 / Mike
Head Forum Moderator
www.airliners.net
www.twitter.com/airliners_net
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11744
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Sat Jul 02, 2005 1:18 am

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Thread starter):
Has there ever been a serious attempt to re-engine the B737-200, e.g. with the BR710/715?

On the 732 the upgrade would be very expensive for several reasons as other have noted.
1. The controls in the cockpit are very custom to the JT-8D's. Quite a bit of rewiring would need to occur to re-engine.
2. One would need to rebuild the wing structure for the 733 pylon. This brings up a weight/balance issue. The 733 engine is moved "forward and up" in order to improve the ground clearance (and aerodynamics). Even then the "flattened nacelle" that others have mentioned is required. Personally, I suspect that the balance issues where key in preventing a 732 and DC-9 re-engine. On airframes such as the 742/743 where the engines are right about at the center of gravity and replacements can fit into the same "envelope," this isn't an issue.

Also note that A and B have dramatically improved their manufacturing efficiencies in the last 5 years. This has shifted the decision point a bit toward new aircraft vs. used due to the lower prices being offered.

Quoting ZSOFN (Reply 5):
Not really a re-engineering, looks good though!

Yes it does and it makes much more economic sense to do winglets than new engines. The cost is less and thus the "breakeven point" is many years closer in.

Quoting NZ1 (Reply 13):
I've always thought a GE90 powered 732 would make a great plane to fly on. Just think of the climb rate, or descent rate when the thrust tears the wings off....

 rotfl  You watched the pod racing in Star Wars episode 1 too many times...  rotfl  Alas, as an engine nut, I approve of a nacelle the same diameter as the passenger compartment. Ok, back to our regularly scheduled tech ops...

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
t's too expensive and the airframes don't have enough cycles remaining to amortize the investment.

As usual an excellent and concise description.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Sat Jul 02, 2005 4:07 am

Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 4):
Would be interesting to see BR715s on a 733 or 735

A BR715 conversion would mean a drop in power.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 12):
Hence the CFM56-3s have a flat under surface to improve ground Clearence.

They also have a cantilevered pylon
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:55 pm

The Only B732 Improvements Available are the "TE Aft flap tilt" & the "Winglets" to Improve Lift.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:07 pm

New engine for 732???? Why a BR715? Shove in a PW6000! LOL

MEL,
If U want to use the 733/5 for high cycle low hours kinda ops, U're better off keeping the 56-3s on them!

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
ZSOFN
Posts: 1379
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:20 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Sun Jul 03, 2005 10:47 pm

Thinking about it, surely a re-engineering of the 732 already exists. It's called a 735  

By the time all the R&D is done & manufacturing capabilities have been established, the costs of the project far outweigh any benefit over just getting hold of second hand -500s or even newer -600s.

Obviously there have been other models to look back on, for instance the KC-135R having CFMs. This may well be a way of keeping these aircraft flying, but in the case of the 737 the 1st generation have had their time. Constantly upgrading older aircraft is a costly procedure. Think about it as though you were running a car. After a certain age, it becomes cheaper to scrap and put money into a newer replacement.

[Edited 2005-07-03 15:51:39]
 
jetstar
Posts: 1366
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 2:16 am

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:50 am

To re-engine an airplane is a very expensive proposition, especially if the airframe manufacturer does not cooperate.

In the past 20 or so years there have only been a few successful re-engine programs. The USAF KC-135’s, and the DC-60’s upgraded to the CFM-56’s and the Lockheed JetStar, Falcon 20 and the Hawker corporate jets to the TFE 731 engines, in all of these cases, the manufacturer cooperated. Lockheed used the design of the upgrade to the 731 engines when they reopened production of the JetStar and called their version the JetStar 2.

With the airframe manufacturer support, the original structural data can be used as a baseline when the engine upgrade is designed. Without this, the upgrade company has to reverse engineer the section of the airframe to get the structural data needed for certification.

One major candidate for a re-engine program is the Gulfstream 2 and 3 business jets, to replace the noisy and gas guzzling Spey engines with newer modern engines. Gulfstream, the manufacturer will not support any program because they feel it would cut into sales of their newer airplanes and also from a product labiality standpoint, by not supporting the upgrade, they have no involvement in any lawsuit that would arise from a incident involving the airplane and its upgraded engines
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:23 am


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Julian Whitelaw
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Zak Economides


Why were the Winglets not Blended type.
It seems they were removed after the lease period.

Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 10):
The landing gear on the models with a CFM engine are actually a little longer to get the wing higher

Only on the NGs.

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 11):
Nordam went back and redesigned the hush kit using internal mixers and absorbers to meet Stage III,

On Ground Stage III compliant Hushkits dont really sound quieter  Smile

Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 17):
If U want to use the 733/5 for high cycle low hours kinda ops, U're better off keeping the 56-3s on them!

Thats educational.
Thanks.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:49 am

Quoting Airplanepics (Reply 8):
I believe this is the hush kit system that has been fitted to the engines.



Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 9):
That means the engines have the Nordam or AvAero hush kit installed to allow them to be compliant with ICAO Chapter 36 Stage III noise rules.

I thought about this but most hush-kits I have see involve an extension at the rear of the engine, while on this aircraft the engines looked identical to those on all other 732s operating here. I realise that the reverser buckets prevent anything being fitted behind the engine so how does one hush-kit a 732?
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1577
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Tue Jul 05, 2005 5:58 am

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16):
The Only B732 Improvements Available are the "TE Aft flap tilt" & the "Winglets" to Improve Lift.

There are no winglets STCed for use on a 737-200. The only performance enhancing STCs are the AvAero and QuietWing flap droops.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 20):
It seems they were removed after the lease period.

It turns out that they were non-flightworthy parts installed for an airshow.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 20):
On Ground Stage III compliant Hushkits dont really sound quieter

Stage III has three noise measurement points: approach, fly-over and departure. Ground noise is not considered.

Quoting Andz (Reply 21):
I thought about this but most hush-kits I have see involve an extension at the rear of the engine, while on this aircraft the engines looked identical to those on all other 732s operating here. I realise that the reverser buckets prevent anything being fitted behind the engine so how does one hush-kit a 732?

The later Nordam and AvAero 737-200 hush kits involve internal mixers and acoustical treatment. Except for the stretch of the forward nacelle due to the inlet guide vane respacing, the nacelles for these hush kits are identical to a baseline 737-200. Only the original Nordam hush kit brought in external air for mixing.
 
User avatar
ZSOFN
Posts: 1379
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:20 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:49 am

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 22):
There are no winglets STCed for use on a 737-200

Was the aircraft in the photo I posted above never flown with the winglets? Were they not certified?
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1577
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:32 pm

Quoting ZSOFN (Reply 23):
Was the aircraft in the photo I posted above never flown with the winglets? Were they not certified?

No, they were never flown and no, they were never certified.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: B737-200 Re-engineing

Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:10 pm

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 24):
Quoting ZSOFN (Reply 23):
Was the aircraft in the photo I posted above never flown with the winglets? Were they not certified?

No, they were never flown and no, they were never certified.

Whats the Story behind the Above "Naturelink" B732 with Winglets.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: akiss20 and 14 guests