ElpinDAB
Topic Author
Posts: 442
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 7:00 am

717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:49 am

When McDonnell Douglass designed the 717, did they change the airfoil from the design of the MD80 series? I noticed that the 717 wingspan is shorter than the MD80. It almost seems as if McDonnell Douglass would have been able to compete with the A32X/73X if they had lengthened the wingspan and created stretched versions. Or maybe they should have shrunken the MD90 to add more range? I know that the 717's is basically an uprated version of the BMW-RR engine on the Gulfstream V/G550, but that wouldn't have given the 717 many options for stretches/increases of Takeoff weight, unless McD had chosen to re-engine the plane. But, with the same fuselage design, why wouldn't MdDD have simply introduced shorter versions of the MD90 with more range that would have been able to accomplish a 737-700 or A319 type of transcon? This seems feasible, but they should have introduced it from the start, if they ever had the plans. Did they McDonnell Douglas have plans to make a US transcon (3,000nm range) version shrink of the MD90?

How does the Md90 and 717 wing perform compared to the 737NG/A32X wing? Was it just a re-design of the older DC9/DC9-"Super80" airfoil? Or was it a new, more efficient design? Could McD have created a viable competitor to the A32X/737NG with their 717/MD90 lineup, given the chance?

Obviously, with Boeing being the dominate entity in the Mc+B merger, Boeing opted to optimize it's 737 for the mission, which made economical sense. What would McDonnell Douglas have needed to do to accomplish this with either the MD90 (re-engined and stretched MD80), or the 717?

I have asked many questions because I don't know much about this (specific) topic, but I feel that there is a wealth of information available from this forum! Feel free to answer any/all questions with any thoughts.
 
ElpinDAB
Topic Author
Posts: 442
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 7:00 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:50 am

I'm sorry that the name sounds like a topic of answers, when really this is a topic of questions that I'd like to be answered to fuel more possible discussion...

[Edited 2009-12-10 17:52:36 by elpinDAB]
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:08 am



Quoting ElpinDAB (Thread starter):
When McDonnell Douglass designed the 717, did they change the airfoil from the design of the MD80 series? I noticed that the 717 wingspan is shorter than the MD80

If memory correct, the 717 wing is identical to the DC-9-30 wing that first flew in 1966.
 
nws2002
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:04 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:23 pm

The 717 is more economical for flights within its intended range because it doesn't carry around extra structure that would increase the weight. It was designed as a DC-9 replacement, not as a competitor to a trans-con capable 737NG.
 
TSS
Posts: 2501
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:52 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:20 pm



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2):
If memory correct, the 717 wing is identical to the DC-9-30 wing that first flew in 1966.

I think you are correct, Viscount.
Also, if memory serves me correctly, the longer-span wing used on the MD-80's was the same as the DC-9 wing, only with extensions added at the root to give it greater span.
Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:02 pm

Wow, this is like.... where to begin?

Quoting ElpinDAB (Thread starter):
When McDonnell Douglass designed the 717,

MD did not "design the 717." MD designed the MD95. It was only AFTER Boeing purchased MD, only AFTER Boeing decided to continue offering the MD95 acft and only AFTER Boeing engineers made hundreds of changes that the MD95 became (finally) the Boeing B-717.

Quote:
...did they change the airfoil from the design of the MD80 series?

IIRC, Boeing did NOT change the MD95 airfoil and MD only slightly modified the internal structure of the -30 model DC9 wing to come up with the original MD95 design.

Quote:
It almost seems as if McDonnell Douglass would have been able to compete with the A32X/73X if they had lengthened the wingspan and created stretched versions. Or maybe they should have shrunken the MD90 to add more range?

The MD95 was targeted at short-med range high cycle operations. It's nickname was "Trunkliner" --supposedly denoting lots and lots of short flight operatons. The wing design was optimized for that market. Longer distance operations were supposed to be driven toward MD90 series planes... according to MD's marketing department.

Quote:
I know that the 717's is basically an uprated version of the BMW-RR engine on the Gulfstream V/G550, but that wouldn't have given the 717 many options for stretches/increases of Takeoff weight, unless McD had chosen to re-engine the plane.

One of the FIRST "major system design changes" Boeing did was to dump the VSCF electrical system which was pretty much "tied" to the V2500 engine. Once the electrical system options opened up, the choice of engines became available and Boeing engineers decided upon the BMW-RR. Engine choice was supposedly based upon the best engine to suit the mission requirement --short range high frequency ops.

Quote:
But, with the same fuselage design, why wouldn't MdDD have simply introduced shorter versions of the MD90 with more range that would have been able to accomplish a 737-700 or A319 type of transcon? This seems feasible, but they should have introduced it from the start, if they ever had the plans. Did they McDonnell Douglas have plans to make a US transcon (3,000nm range) version shrink of the MD90?[quote] NO. There were plans to increase fuel capacity on MD90 to meet the US Transcon market... IF such a market opened itself to MD acft (pretty much already taken by B-737/A-320 by that time). [quote]How does the Md90 and 717 wing perform compared to the 737NG/A32X wing? Was it just a re-design of the older DC9/DC9-"Super80" airfoil? Or was it a new, more efficient design?

Previously asked and answered.

Quote:
Could McD have created a viable competitor to the A32X/737NG with their 717/MD90 lineup, given the chance?

Possible, but not likely to be a good business decision as the A320(series) and B737(series) had already saturated that particular airliner market.

Quote:
Obviously, with Boeing being the dominate entity in the Mc+B merger, Boeing opted to optimize it's 737 for the mission, which made economical sense. What would McDonnell Douglas have needed to do to accomplish this with either the MD90 (re-engined and stretched MD80), or the 717?

Not sure what your question is here. MD was trying to find a "niche" in order to sell its planes. History shows MD was unsuccessful at doing so with Airbus & Boeing filling virtually all new airliner orders in the markets they offered. The "niche" MD was after was simply too small to "save" MD.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:59 pm

I'm still wondering: was the 717 certified under the DC-9 type certificate?  Wink
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:04 am



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
One of the FIRST "major system design changes" Boeing did was to dump the VSCF electrical system which was pretty much "tied" to the V2500 engine. Once the electrical system options opened up, the choice of engines became available and Boeing engineers decided upon the BMW-RR. Engine choice was supposedly based upon the best engine to suit the mission requirement --short range high frequency ops.

Surely the MD-95 already had the BMW-RR engine before the Boeing takeover?

Press release about ValuJet's MD-95 order:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-17644285.html
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
User avatar
TZTriStar500
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:17 am



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
MD did not "design the 717." MD designed the MD95. It was only AFTER Boeing purchased MD, only AFTER Boeing decided to continue offering the MD95 acft and only AFTER Boeing engineers made hundreds of changes that the MD95 became (finally) the Boeing B-717.

I take exception to this since the merger time line and how Boeing kept Douglas Products Division separate does not bear this out.

First MDD really did design it since the name change was just that, a name change. The merger occurred on Aug 1, 1997, the MD-95 name change announced Jan. 8, 1998, and the first roll out of the 717-200 on June 10, 1998 so its not possible that "Boeing" engineers made any major changes in that time frame. In addition and to this very day, Boeing has not integrated the divisions in that the Long Beach division, then known as Douglas Products Division retained design responsibility for the aircraft designed and built there and Boeing "North" design philosophy had little to no impact especially in this design. Lastly, the 717 type certificate was issued on Sept. 1, 1999 so any major design changes as alluded to after its June 10, 1998 roll out would have significantly delayed the issuance of its TC which was less than 15 months thereafter.

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
IIRC, Boeing did NOT change the MD95 airfoil and MD only slightly modified the internal structure of the -30 model DC9 wing to come up with the original MD95 design.

Again, Boeing did not do this, MDD chose the airfoil before Boeing even came along.

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
It's nickname was "Trunkliner" --supposedly denoting lots and lots of short flight operatons.

I have not heard the MD-95 referred as this. The MD-90-30T that was built on the Chinese production line was known as the Trunkliner hence the T, but only 2 were built.

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
One of the FIRST "major system design changes" Boeing did was to dump the VSCF electrical system which was pretty much "tied" to the V2500 engine. Once the electrical system options opened up, the choice of engines became available and Boeing engineers decided upon the BMW-RR. Engine choice was supposedly based upon the best engine to suit the mission requirement --short range high frequency ops.

Boeing didn't do this, the BR715 was chosen well before Boeing came along. Yes, there were various wing and engine versions of the MD-95 early on, but all MDD iterations.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 6):
I'm still wondering: was the 717 certified under the DC-9 type certificate?

Yes, it is under TC A6WE.

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...4876886256B1400759D25?OpenDocument
35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Sat Dec 12, 2009 11:29 pm



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
Possible, but not likely to be a good business decision as the A320(series) and B737(series) had already saturated that particular airliner market.

The A320 didn't have huge market penetration when the MD-90 was first offered and the 737NG didn't exist yet. If the McDonnell family hadn't been skittish about investing in commercial airplanes and the MD-90 had gotten the 737NGesque new wing that it deserved and needed--the MD-90 likely would've been somewhat more of a success. Delta alone ordered and optioned 150 of them to begin with. It was the ideal 722 replacement before the 738 existed--and would've had better range with a new, larger wing.

If only...

I recently bought a used copy of "The Sporty Game" by John Newhouse and it opened my eyes as to what really happened when McDonnell bought Douglas and how James McDonnell Sr. did not care for marketing and selling commercial airliners.
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:29 am



Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 7):
Surely the MD-95 already had the BMW-RR engine before the Boeing takeover?

Perhaps, I only stated what Boeing stated in its advertisements to its customers --found multiple copies in AA's SAN operations.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 8):
First MDD really did design it since the name change was just that, a name change.

MDD designed the MD95. Boeing decided to keep the design and "claimed" to have made at least 13 major system design changes to include "new engines, new electrical system and new APU." Who actually decided on BMW/RR engines? I haven't got a clue, but Boeing claimed to have applied "new engines" to the MD95 design prior to its being marketed as the "new B-717." If you have a problem with that, talk to Boeing.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 8):
Again, Boeing did not do this, MDD chose the airfoil before Boeing even came along.

Again, Boeing claimed to have made small changes the "internal structure" of the wing to make it stronger and lighter. Nothing about the shape or overall design. Perhaps a more accurate description would have been to say Boeing "tweeked" the wing design, but I doubt Boeing marketing folks would agree to that.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 8):
I have not heard the MD-95 referred as this. The MD-90-30T that was built on the Chinese production line was known as the Trunkliner hence the T, but only 2 were built.

Correct... to a point. The original "Trunkliner" program produced an aircraft that was too heavy and too long-ranged for the Trunkliner concept. The idea was simplified to a much smaller, lighter and (supposedly) more robust design that became the MD95. "Trunkliner" remained the moniker for the new plane until MD decided it was NOT going to be a (primarily) China-built aircraft. "Trunkliner" was a marketing name MD used in asian markets. Not too good to keep that when you want to sell to... "the world."

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 8):
Boeing didn't do this, the BR715 was chosen well before Boeing came along. Yes, there were various wing and engine versions of the MD-95 early on, but all MDD iterations.

Boeing made the claim that it applied "new engines" to the original MD95. Perhaps it was just a different model engine. I don't know, but that is what Boeing claimed in its advertisement to customers.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 9):
I recently bought a used copy of "The Sporty Game" by John Newhouse and it opened my eyes as to what really happened when McDonnell bought Douglas and how James McDonnell Sr. did not care for marketing and selling commercial airliners.

Did MD "miss" any number of commercial airliner marketing opportunities? Sure. Could they have gotten the MD90 series to be a commercial success? Sure. But MD missed both marketing opportunities and design/build quality issues with the MD90. The question concerned 717 AND MD90 so based upon that timeframe both Boeing (737NG) and Airbus (A320) were well established and adding a third airframe into that market would not have been a good decision --even if MD could have built competitive airframes. Had MD planned the MD90 for transcon capabilities AND MD95 for short-haul markets at the same time (a few years earlier), and had MD attempted to market them (a few years earlier), MD MAY have had an opportunity for success; however, MD's reputation in the commercial airliner market was already hovering just above "zero" so it remains questionable if MD could have ever sold enough plane to remain commercially viable.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:45 am

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 10):
Perhaps, I only stated what Boeing stated in its advertisements to its customers --found multiple copies in AA's SAN operations.

Here's what airliners.net data section has to say

http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=111

Quote:
Initially MDC studied powering the MD-95 with Pratt & Whitney JT8D-218s or Rolls-Royce Tays. In February 1994 however MDC announced it had chosen the new BMW Rolls-Royce (now just Rolls-Royce) BR715 over the JT8D-200 and an engine from the proposed "Project Blue" teaming of General Electric, Snecma, MTU and P&W.

Regardless of what Boeing's marketing may have said at the time of the 717 re-launch, the MD-95 was launched by McD-D with BR715 engines. The same engines, give or take a dash number, that the 717 has.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...126/is_n607_v52/ai_n28685947/pg_2/

http://www.kls2.com/cgi-bin/arcfetch...ers.1995.1703@ohare.chicago.com%3E

[Edited 2009-12-12 21:04:43 by jetlagged]
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
User avatar
TZTriStar500
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:48 pm



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 10):

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 7):
Surely the MD-95 already had the BMW-RR engine before the Boeing takeover?

Perhaps, I only stated what Boeing stated in its advertisements to its customers --found multiple copies in AA's SAN operations.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 8):
First MDD really did design it since the name change was just that, a name change.

MDD designed the MD95. Boeing decided to keep the design and "claimed" to have made at least 13 major system design changes to include "new engines, new electrical system and new APU." Who actually decided on BMW/RR engines? I haven't got a clue, but Boeing claimed to have applied "new engines" to the MD95 design prior to its being marketed as the "new B-717." If you have a problem with that, talk to Boeing.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 8):
Again, Boeing did not do this, MDD chose the airfoil before Boeing even came along.

Again, Boeing claimed to have made small changes the "internal structure" of the wing to make it stronger and lighter. Nothing about the shape or overall design. Perhaps a more accurate description would have been to say Boeing "tweeked" the wing design, but I doubt Boeing marketing folks would agree to that.

I do have a problem with it because it certainly takes liberty with the time lines. I take much of what is in marketing brochures with a grain of salt. A huge factor here in my opinion is almost right after the merger, Boeing made a huge effort to immediately bury the McDD name altogether and started referring to every McDD product as Boeing; Boeing MD-80, Boeing MD-11, even out of production aircraft I saw referred to as Boeing DC-10, Boeing DC-9 and I even saw a Boeing DC-3 for heaven's sake. Now that is a helluva stretch to assume all McDD history as your own and perhaps when the marketing brochures say that 'Boeing" made these changes, it really refers to McDD as they wish to acknowledge the product now as their own rather than a former competitor's.

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 10):
Correct... to a point. The original "Trunkliner" program produced an aircraft that was too heavy and too long-ranged for the Trunkliner concept. The idea was simplified to a much smaller, lighter and (supposedly) more robust design that became the MD95. "Trunkliner" remained the moniker for the new plane until MD decided it was NOT going to be a (primarily) China-built aircraft. "Trunkliner" was a marketing name MD used in asian markets. Not too good to keep that when you want to sell to... "the world."

I do not even understand this explanation at all as it makes no sense and I have never heard it anywhere. The Trunkliner was never associated with the MD-95 and only used to market the special Chinese built MD-90-30T. From where did you read or hear this?
35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:34 pm



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 10):
The question concerned 717 AND MD90 so based upon that timeframe both Boeing (737NG) and Airbus (A320) were well established and adding a third airframe into that market would not have been a good decision --even if MD could have built competitive airframes.

Ah, I misunderstood the point about both the MD-90 AND the 717. You're certainly right about the timing. What might have been...
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:19 am



Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 12):
A huge factor here in my opinion is almost right after the merger, Boeing made a huge effort to immediately bury the McDD name altogether and started referring to every McDD product as Boeing; Boeing MD-80, Boeing MD-11, even out of production aircraft I saw referred to as Boeing DC-10, Boeing DC-9 and I even saw a Boeing DC-3 for heaven's sake.

Boeing and MD *agreed* to operate under the Boeing name as part of the merger. It's not like a bunch of Boeing managers ran around "stealing" marketing material from legacy-MD products. The merged company was called Boeing, hence all products built and supported by the merged entity are referred to as Boeing products.

Tom.
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:31 am



Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 12):
From where did you read or hear this?

In Boeing's advertising and customer relations publications.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
User avatar
TZTriStar500
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 1:33 am

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD Team

Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:18 am



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 14):
Boeing and MD *agreed* to operate under the Boeing name as part of the merger. It's not like a bunch of Boeing managers ran around "stealing" marketing material from legacy-MD products. The merged company was called Boeing, hence all products built and supported by the merged entity are referred to as Boeing products.

I never said anything was "stolen" as Boeing was the purchaser and I think its reasonable to rename the MD-11 and MD-80 as Boeing aircraft since they were still in production at the time. However, it is re-writing history to call any Douglas product from the DC-2 to the 10 as a Boeing especially since the Type Certificate and aircraft data plate states otherwise, marketing material notwithstanding.
35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 1980
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: 717 Stretch/MD90 Shrink: Airfoils And The McD

Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:43 pm



Quoting ElpinDAB (Thread starter):
Did they McDonnell Douglas have plans to make a US transcon (3,000nm range) version shrink of the MD90?

Yes, it was dubbed the MD-90-50. Although range was 2785 nm. but should have been more than capable.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/jetliner/md90/

Never left the "think tank" room unfortunately. I personally would have loved to see this bird with blended winglets.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rbretas, SCAT15F, Woodreau and 20 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos