Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:08 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
seahawk wrote:
No, 10% better than the A321 is unlikely. The A321NEO is simply a very efficient plane, with engines fitting it nearly perfectly and with it just using all reserves left in the design, which makes it very efficient. A widebody can not beat this by 10%, especially not with engines only 1 generation newer. What a widebody can do is coming out slightly ahead in the long version and significantly more capable in the short version.


It's not as if the A321neo is some "magnum opus" for aircraft design. It's a 30 year old design with 30 year old technology and wings that are not even close to being optimal. The only thing being up to date about it are the engines.


No it is not, but with the new engines it is still a very efficient frame. And even the wing is not that bad with the new sharklets and all tiny modifications over the years. A lot of parts have changed over the years and many assemblies are already 3D printed of are moving towards it. When you look at the latest assembly line in Hamburg even the production line is state of the art.

The 797 on the other hand is supposed to by a 7 abreast widebody, that layout alone is less efficient than the single aisle when it comes the usage of available floor space. You also need a complex fuselage design or have a significantly larger fuselage diameter and even with latest production methods it still is a challenge to come close in OEW per seat to the simple A320 fuselage. And if we look at the engines 5% better specific fuel burn would be quite an achievement compared to a 2025 A320 engine, even more so if it is just a scaled up LEAP. And then all of this needs to be done without making this widebody much more expensive to produce.

If one believes a 10% improvement over the A321NEO is possible with a wide body, the 737MAX would have been the worst decision ever made by Boeing, because a NSA for 2025 should the be able to beat the A321 by 12-15% and would beat the 737-10 by an even larger margin. If they can do this, one would have to wonder why they did the MAX. So I believe they can not do it.
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:32 pm

Ok, so how about this:

Focus the first phase of the NSA as a smaller replacement of the 737 with less range. Largest variant would be 737-800 size. Do this phase of NSA together with Embraer.

Advantages of this strategy:

- You hit Airbus hardest were it is most vulnerable: the A220 (and it’s low scale, low efficiency production).
- Airbus can’t directly react with A320 variants or production volume (because it Is at a different capability bracket).
- Production architecture state of the art not matched by either A220 or A320.
- With composite wings, additive manufacturing and limited size and range you can keep MTOW low enough to get efficient wings within the 36m gate limit without needing folding wings.
- Low MTOW will also make it brutally efficient on the shorter ranges which is by far the majority of NB flights (it will grow in range with technology over time).
- Operation cost per pax will be extremely low (fuel, maintenance, cabin crew) on the 737-8 sized variant (far more than -10% compared to a 320NEO). LCC’s will love ‘m.
- You can keep the line of the 737 running for a while producing 9 and 10’s.
- Latter part of MAX backlog can shift to NSA phase 1 or to the MAX 9/10.
- Embraer can help out with resources
- Fit’s nicely above the E2.

For phase 2 of NSA you can use the fuselage diameter, cockpit and many systems for a higher MTOW variant, with more capacity and range. This variant will get a much higher MTOW, with wings clearly extending past the 36m limit, new MLG, etc.


NSA phase 1:

Fuselage: 6-abreast (around A320 width)
Wingspan: 36m

Single class: 150
MTOW: 68t
Range: 3.200Nm

Single class: 174
MTOW: 70t
Range: 3.000Nm

Single class: 198
MTOW: 72t
Range: 2.800Nm
Innovation is seeing opportunity before obstacle.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23908
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:40 pm

seahawk wrote:
No it is not, but with the new engines it is still a very efficient frame. And even the wing is not that bad with the new sharklets and all tiny modifications over the years. A lot of parts have changed over the years and many assemblies are already 3D printed of are moving towards it. When you look at the latest assembly line in Hamburg even the production line is state of the art.

Very similar statements can be made for MAX. Very efficient for its targeted missions, newer wing than A320, new winglet/simitar design, optimized rear fuselage, very efficient moving production lines, etc.

If one believes a 10% improvement over the A321NEO is possible with a wide body, the 737MAX would have been the worst decision ever made by Boeing, because a NSA for 2025 should the be able to beat the A321 by 12-15% and would beat the 737-10 by an even larger margin. If they can do this, one would have to wonder why they did the MAX. So I believe they can not do it.

NSA for 2025 won't just need to beat A321NEO but will have to be able to compete/beat early 2030s A32x replacement or it will be a huge waste of money.

MAX was done because in 2011 Boeing felt they could not build a modern CFRP narrow body at the production rates needed to be keep customers satisfied.

Things will change in the next decade after NMA proves out improved manufacturing tech in time for launch of NSA later in the decade.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
bgm
Posts: 2430
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:08 pm

Revelation wrote:
Very similar statements can be made for MAX. Very efficient for its targeted missions, newer wing than A320, new winglet/simitar design, optimized rear fuselage, very efficient moving production lines, etc.


Not very 'efficient' with its 1960s JT8D-era clearances which was the catalyst for the complete shitshow that we see today. The newer wing isn't much use when it's sitting in a car park, is it?

Image
If you hate wearing a mask, you’re really going to hate using a ventilator.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:18 pm

Taxi645 wrote:
Ok, so how about this:

Focus the first phase of the NSA as a smaller replacement of the 737 with less range. Largest variant would be 737-800 size. Do this phase of NSA together with Embraer.

Advantages of this strategy:

- You hit Airbus hardest were it is most vulnerable: the A220 (and it’s low scale, low efficiency production).
- Airbus can’t directly react with A320 variants or production volume (because it Is at a different capability bracket).
- Production architecture state of the art not matched by either A220 or A320.
- With composite wings, additive manufacturing and limited size and range you can keep MTOW low enough to get efficient wings within the 36m gate limit without needing folding wings.
- Low MTOW will also make it brutally efficient on the shorter ranges which is by far the majority of NB flights (it will grow in range with technology over time).
- Operation cost per pax will be extremely low (fuel, maintenance, cabin crew) on the 737-8 sized variant (far more than -10% compared to a 320NEO). LCC’s will love ‘m.
- You can keep the line of the 737 running for a while producing 9 and 10’s.
- Latter part of MAX backlog can shift to NSA phase 1 or to the MAX 9/10.
- Embraer can help out with resources
- Fit’s nicely above the E2.

For phase 2 of NSA you can use the fuselage diameter, cockpit and many systems for a higher MTOW variant, with more capacity and range. This variant will get a much higher MTOW, with wings clearly extending past the 36m limit, new MLG, etc.


NSA phase 1:

Fuselage: 6-abreast (around A320 width)
Wingspan: 36m

Single class: 150
MTOW: 68t
Range: 3.200Nm

Single class: 174
MTOW: 70t
Range: 3.000Nm

Single class: 198
MTOW: 72t
Range: 2.800Nm

Seems like a great plan to me. I take it this is a metal fuselage. Boeing will hem and haw, metal or carbon fuselage, what's the business case, what do customers want, some of them want more capability, etc. Instead of following the compass of logical design to success. It kind of makes a mockery of the field of design when they crowd source it.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13831
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:23 pm

I think we should leave behind some popular assumptions:
:splat: The MAX backlog is solid,
:splat: Boeing sells thousands of additional MAX aircraft filling slots up to 2030,
:splat: Airbus won't launch A220-500 /A320Plus
:splat: People and airlines forget the MAX drama easily
:splat: a twin aisle doing 300 passengers 5000NM can beat the A321 1000NM also.

I think the situation changed. Airline patience & financial reserves are limitted. Likely Boeing has to change it's strategy.

Taxi645, not a bad idea.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
DenverTed
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:39 pm

bgm wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Very similar statements can be made for MAX. Very efficient for its targeted missions, newer wing than A320, new winglet/simitar design, optimized rear fuselage, very efficient moving production lines, etc.


Not very 'efficient' with its 1960s JT8D-era clearances which was the catalyst for the complete shitshow that we see today. The newer wing isn't much use when it's sitting in a car park, is it?

Image

Is that MaxterPark 1, or MaxterPark 2?
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1968
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:10 pm

seahawk wrote:
No, 10% better than the A321 is unlikely. The A321NEO is simply a very efficient plane, with engines fitting it nearly perfectly and with it just using all reserves left in the design, which makes it very efficient. A widebody can not beat this by 10%, especially not with engines only 1 generation newer. What a widebody can do is coming out slightly ahead in the long version and significantly more capable in the short version.

It would be easy to beat the A321 by 10% with a cleansheet today.

For example putting a straight wing of equal span on the 737 and flying 20% slower will easily save 30+% fuel. There is your 10% improvement per mile.

Trading speed for fuel efficiency is basic physics and is the easiest way to get efficiency gains. Having the 797 covering the A321 on the longer flights allows the NSA to be optimised to dominate on the shorter flights.

The Boeing truss wing design appears to have less than half of the wing sweep of a 737. It also solves the issue with ground clearance. In the truss wing articles Boeing were talking about how technology has allowed wings to hit the same cruising speed with less wing sweep. So the speed hit of the truss wing might only be 10% for a 20+% gain in fuel burn which maintains the 10% improvement.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23908
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:05 am

bgm wrote:
Not very 'efficient' with its 1960s JT8D-era clearances which was the catalyst for the complete shitshow that we see today.

Nonsense, if MCAS was implemented correctly there would be no shitshow, and we see A321neo with its tall heavy landing gear is needing changes to deal with pitch problems for the same reason, lift generated by large nacelles at high angles of attack.

bgm wrote:
The newer wing isn't much use when it's sitting in a car park, is it?

Nope, but that doesn't change the fact that it's very efficient when it flies, and has other benefits such as ability to tank a lot more fuel than the competitor's older wing.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:12 am

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
No it is not, but with the new engines it is still a very efficient frame. And even the wing is not that bad with the new sharklets and all tiny modifications over the years. A lot of parts have changed over the years and many assemblies are already 3D printed of are moving towards it. When you look at the latest assembly line in Hamburg even the production line is state of the art.

Very similar statements can be made for MAX. Very efficient for its targeted missions, newer wing than A320, new winglet/simitar design, optimized rear fuselage, very efficient moving production lines, etc..


Sure they can be made for the MAX. The 737-8 is the Boeing equivalent to the A321. It is the most rounded version with the new engines and the benchmark in its class. Interestingly both came to the conclusion that a new narrowbody is not worth the effort. I still doubt that will have changed by 2025, at least for a replacement of similar capabilities. And to be honest I do not believe that new materials in the fuselage matter a lot. In that class a new plane might still use metal but with newer alloys. With you could also introduce to your existing frame, if it promises an advantage big enough.

A successor will probably trade speed for efficiency and have less range. If they want to make the CO2 reduction they need more than another tube with wings and newer engines. The whole design parameters need to be adjusted.

that is why I think the NMA is hugely important as it will take on the medium range routes with higher speeds, opening the ground for a slower flying NSA that can bring the efficiency gains over the 737/A320 that are needed.
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:28 am

DenverTed wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
Ok, so how about this:

Focus the first phase of the NSA as a smaller replacement of the 737 with less range. Largest variant would be 737-800 size. Do this phase of NSA together with Embraer.

Advantages of this strategy:

- You hit Airbus hardest were it is most vulnerable: the A220 (and it’s low scale, low efficiency production).
- Airbus can’t directly react with A320 variants or production volume (because it Is at a different capability bracket).
- Production architecture state of the art not matched by either A220 or A320.
- With composite wings, additive manufacturing and limited size and range you can keep MTOW low enough to get efficient wings within the 36m gate limit without needing folding wings.
- Low MTOW will also make it brutally efficient on the shorter ranges which is by far the majority of NB flights (it will grow in range with technology over time).
- Operation cost per pax will be extremely low (fuel, maintenance, cabin crew) on the 737-8 sized variant (far more than -10% compared to a 320NEO). LCC’s will love ‘m.
- You can keep the line of the 737 running for a while producing 9 and 10’s.
- Latter part of MAX backlog can shift to NSA phase 1 or to the MAX 9/10.
- Embraer can help out with resources
- Fit’s nicely above the E2.

For phase 2 of NSA you can use the fuselage diameter, cockpit and many systems for a higher MTOW variant, with more capacity and range. This variant will get a much higher MTOW, with wings clearly extending past the 36m limit, new MLG, etc.


NSA phase 1:

Fuselage: 6-abreast (around A320 width)
Wingspan: 36m

Single class: 150
MTOW: 68t
Range: 3.200Nm

Single class: 174
MTOW: 70t
Range: 3.000Nm

Single class: 198
MTOW: 72t
Range: 2.800Nm


Seems like a great plan to me. I take it this is a metal fuselage.


Metal or composite is too complex a trade study for me to answer. Which ever works best over the life time of the NSA program. WIngs and wingbox would probably be composite though. Perhaps the smallest version wouldn't work at 6-abreast, than just leave that.

I could see GE AND RR provide engines. RR engines could then be used on the A220 as well, so RR would be quite keen.
Last edited by Taxi645 on Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Innovation is seeing opportunity before obstacle.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 664
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:42 am

Revelation wrote:
bgm wrote:
Not very 'efficient' with its 1960s JT8D-era clearances which was the catalyst for the complete shitshow that we see today.

Nonsense, if MCAS was implemented correctly there would be no shitshow, and we see A321neo with its tall heavy landing gear is needing changes to deal with pitch problems for the same reason, lift generated by large nacelles at high angles of attack.



That is not the reason the A321neo has a "pitch problem" because then the A320neo would have it too. It is due to a software problem in the ELAC and only occurs on A321neo with certain ELAC and software versions and not in all A321neo aircraft. (Source: https://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/EASA_AD_2019_0171.pdf/AD_2019-0171_1, and additional info in german: https://www.aero.de/news-32107/Airbus-ueberarbeitet-Flugsteuerung-der-A321neo.html)

EDIT: Here the source and the actual problem in detail: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/flight-control-refinement-to-fix-a321neo-pitch-up-is-459793/

The problem occurs during a go around with aft CoG.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13831
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:04 am

Taxi645 wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
Ok, so how about this:

Focus the first phase of the NSA as a smaller replacement of the 737 with less range. Largest variant would be 737-800 size. Do this phase of NSA together with Embraer.

Advantages of this strategy:

- You hit Airbus hardest were it is most vulnerable: the A220 (and it’s low scale, low efficiency production).
- Airbus can’t directly react with A320 variants or production volume (because it Is at a different capability bracket).
- Production architecture state of the art not matched by either A220 or A320.
- With composite wings, additive manufacturing and limited size and range you can keep MTOW low enough to get efficient wings within the 36m gate limit without needing folding wings.
- Low MTOW will also make it brutally efficient on the shorter ranges which is by far the majority of NB flights (it will grow in range with technology over time).
- Operation cost per pax will be extremely low (fuel, maintenance, cabin crew) on the 737-8 sized variant (far more than -10% compared to a 320NEO). LCC’s will love ‘m.
- You can keep the line of the 737 running for a while producing 9 and 10’s.
- Latter part of MAX backlog can shift to NSA phase 1 or to the MAX 9/10.
- Embraer can help out with resources
- Fit’s nicely above the E2.

For phase 2 of NSA you can use the fuselage diameter, cockpit and many systems for a higher MTOW variant, with more capacity and range. This variant will get a much higher MTOW, with wings clearly extending past the 36m limit, new MLG, etc.


NSA phase 1:

Fuselage: 6-abreast (around A320 width)
Wingspan: 36m

Single class: 150
MTOW: 68t
Range: 3.200Nm

Single class: 174
MTOW: 70t
Range: 3.000Nm

Single class: 198
MTOW: 72t
Range: 2.800Nm


Seems like a great plan to me. I take it this is a metal fuselage.


Metal or composite is too complex a trade study for me to answer. Which ever works best over the life time of the NSA program. WIngs and wingbox would probably be composite though. Perhaps the smallest version wouldn't work at 6-abreast, than just leave that.

I could see GE AND RR provide engines. RR engines could then be used on the A220 as well, so RR would be quite keen.


I made a lean & mean Boeing design with Henry Lam, long before the CSeries.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
InsideMan
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:49 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:10 am

Taxi645 wrote:

- Production architecture state of the art not matched by either A220 or A320.



huh? :spit:

what's your basis for such a bold statement?

Not that it is the case today, but it would be even less so in 5-7 years when any such aircraft you dream of would be ready to ramp up at the earliest....
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:09 am

keesje wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
DenverTed wrote:

Seems like a great plan to me. I take it this is a metal fuselage.


Metal or composite is too complex a trade study for me to answer. Which ever works best over the life time of the NSA program. WIngs and wingbox would probably be composite though. Perhaps the smallest version wouldn't work at 6-abreast, than just leave that.

I could see GE AND RR provide engines. RR engines could then be used on the A220 as well, so RR would be quite keen.


I made a lean & mean Boeing design with Henry Lam, long before the CSeries.

Image


Looks good! 5 -abreast? Wing sweep will probably be a liitle less.



InsideMan wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:

- Production architecture state of the art not matched by either A220 or A320.



huh? :spit:

what's your basis for such a bold statement?

Not that it is the case today, but it would be even less so in 5-7 years when any such aircraft you dream of would be ready to ramp up at the earliest....


There is only so much production optimization you economically do within the scope of an existing design.

If Boeing puts it collective intellectual and financial resources behind designing an as sleek as possible production architecture for it's NSA, it would highly unlikely Airbus would be able to match that with it's legacy designs once it has ramped up.

Sure it would have other areas to compensate with to be competitive, but that's another topic.
Innovation is seeing opportunity before obstacle.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2682
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:22 am

Revelation wrote:
.. we see A321neo with its tall heavy landing gear is needing changes to deal with pitch problems for the same reason, lift generated by large nacelles at high angles of attack.


Before making a blatantly incorrect statement, in a vain attempt of deflection, perhaps you should have educated yourself a bit first. Or perhaps you did, but chose to spin a completely incorrect story to make yourself feel less bad about the carpark bound fiasco that's the Max.
Signature. You just read one.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4110
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:41 am

Revelation wrote:
bgm wrote:
Not very 'efficient' with its 1960s JT8D-era clearances which was the catalyst for the complete shitshow that we see today.

Nonsense, if MCAS was implemented correctly there would be no shitshow, and we see A321neo with its tall heavy landing gear is needing changes to deal with pitch problems for the same reason, lift generated by large nacelles at high angles of attack.


Ironically, the 1960s JT8D-era 737s (Jurassics and Classics, not sure about NG) do not meet the very regulation for which MCAS was designed. Yet, some folks can't get it out of their head that this is a grandfathering problem. It is not. MCAS was designed (poorly, albeit) to meet a fairly recent FAR, which did not exist back then. Thus, any talk about grandfathring of 1960-era clearances could therefore not be considered as factually correct.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4214
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:47 am

B777LRF wrote:
Revelation wrote:
.. we see A321neo with its tall heavy landing gear is needing changes to deal with pitch problems for the same reason, lift generated by large nacelles at high angles of attack.


Before making a blatantly incorrect statement, in a vain attempt of deflection, perhaps you should have educated yourself a bit first. Or perhaps you did, but chose to spin a completely incorrect story to make yourself feel less bad about the carpark bound fiasco that's the Max.


:checkmark:

Not an issue on FBW aircraft. Similar questions have been raised on this forum about the 787s ability to take larger engines, the result is the same. FBW solves it, the computer seamlessly compensates. Flight International had a flight test article on the A330neo a while back, and on that flight they were also tweaking the rotation values in the software of the A330-800. Fixing the issue they found on the A321neo will be no different.
I am willing to bet that the development with bigger and bigger fans will give the clean-sheet 737 replacement the same issue, which will be eliminated through FBW too.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23908
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:20 pm

B777LRF wrote:
Revelation wrote:
.. we see A321neo with its tall heavy landing gear is needing changes to deal with pitch problems for the same reason, lift generated by large nacelles at high angles of attack.

Before making a blatantly incorrect statement, in a vain attempt of deflection, perhaps you should have educated yourself a bit first. Or perhaps you did, but chose to spin a completely incorrect story to make yourself feel less bad about the carpark bound fiasco that's the Max.

Thank you for your concern about my feelings, but I was just pointing out how MAX's grounding is not relevant to a discussion about MAX's efficiency, or perhaps you missed that in your zeal to have a go at me and your zeal to defend bgm's childish post?

VSMUT wrote:
Not an issue on FBW aircraft. Similar questions have been raised on this forum about the 787s ability to take larger engines, the result is the same. FBW solves it, the computer seamlessly compensates. Flight International had a flight test article on the A330neo a while back, and on that flight they were also tweaking the rotation values in the software of the A330-800. Fixing the issue they found on the A321neo will be no different.
I am willing to bet that the development with bigger and bigger fans will give the clean-sheet 737 replacement the same issue, which will be eliminated through FBW too.

The point is that there are issues caused by nacelle lift at high angles of attack, and of course it's easier to address them on a full FBW design, but the fact that there's an AD on A321neo shows that problems are not unique to MAX.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 664
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:46 pm

Revelation wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
Revelation wrote:
.. we see A321neo with its tall heavy landing gear is needing changes to deal with pitch problems for the same reason, lift generated by large nacelles at high angles of attack.

Before making a blatantly incorrect statement, in a vain attempt of deflection, perhaps you should have educated yourself a bit first. Or perhaps you did, but chose to spin a completely incorrect story to make yourself feel less bad about the carpark bound fiasco that's the Max.

Thank you for your concern about my feelings, but I was just pointing out how MAX's grounding is not relevant to a discussion about MAX's efficiency, or perhaps you missed that in your zeal to have a go at me and your zeal to defend bgm's childish post?

VSMUT wrote:
Not an issue on FBW aircraft. Similar questions have been raised on this forum about the 787s ability to take larger engines, the result is the same. FBW solves it, the computer seamlessly compensates. Flight International had a flight test article on the A330neo a while back, and on that flight they were also tweaking the rotation values in the software of the A330-800. Fixing the issue they found on the A321neo will be no different.
I am willing to bet that the development with bigger and bigger fans will give the clean-sheet 737 replacement the same issue, which will be eliminated through FBW too.

The point is that there are issues caused by nacelle lift at high angles of attack, and of course it's easier to address them on a full FBW design, but the fact that there's an AD on A321neo shows that problems are not unique to MAX.


I just quote myself here:

That is not the reason the A321neo has a "pitch problem" because then the A320neo would have it too. It is due to a software problem in the ELAC and only occurs on A321neo with certain ELAC and software versions and not in all A321neo aircraft. (Source: https://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/EASA_AD_ ... 019-0171_1, and additional info in german: https://www.aero.de/news-32107/Airbus-u ... 21neo.html)

EDIT: Here the source and the actual problem in detail: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... is-459793/

The problem occurs during a go around with aft CoG.


Nothing to do with nacelle lift or re-engine or anything. So no the AD regarding the 321Neo has nothing in common to the issue of the MAX.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23908
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:13 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
Nothing to do with nacelle lift or re-engine or anything. So no the AD regarding the 321Neo has nothing in common to the issue of the MAX.

Thanks for the updated info, stuff I had not seen before.

I will note that Bjorn at Leeham has also greatly revised his article at https://leehamnews.com/2019/07/19/bjorn ... -up-issue/ based on new info he was given by Airbus after the initial article was published.

This tells us a lot more about the nature of the A321neo AD.

It also still tells us:

Like the 737 MAX, the A319/320/321neos are affected by the mounting of larger engines with their larger nacelles ahead of the center of gravity, Figure 1. It follows the aerodynamic rule: any surface projecting an aerodynamic horizontal surface ahead of the Center of Gravity (CG) contributes to a Pitch-up moment and any surface projecting an aerodynamic horizontal surface behind the CG contributes to a Pitch-down moment.


And:

As for the MAX, the larger nacelles for the A321neo are placed further up relative to the wing (Figure 2) but no further forward. The nacelles are larger than the 737 nacelles, however, so the pitch up moment from the engines in isolation can be similar. As the engines sit lower on the wing their combined effect with the rest of the aircraft and its wing is not the same as the 737 MAX.

So my point that both aircraft have had to deal with more pitch up due to larger nacelles is true. They aren't the same amount of lift nor do they have the same tools to deal with the difference, but the effect is there for both. The "shitshow" comes from Boeing botching their attempt to deal with the effect, but the effect itself was inevitable.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4214
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:20 pm

Revelation wrote:
The point is that there are issues caused by nacelle lift at high angles of attack, and of course it's easier to address them on a full FBW design, but the fact that there's an AD on A321neo shows that problems are not unique to MAX.


I have seen AD's for the most ridiculously insignificant things, like something to do with the cup-holders in the cockpit. They get issued constantly over the most minor issues, and I have seen them issued on a monthly basis to an aircraft type that was over 30 years old and long since out of production. That an AD was issued does not say anything about the severity of the issue. It's like NOTAMs.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10261
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:22 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
Nothing to do with nacelle lift or re-engine or anything. So no the AD regarding the 321Neo has nothing in common to the issue of the MAX.

So the problem exist on the current A321CEO?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10261
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:25 pm

Revelation wrote:
So my point that both aircraft have had to deal with more pitch up due to larger nacelles is true. They aren't the same amount of lift nor do they have the same tools to deal with the difference, but the effect is there for both. The "shitshow" comes from Boeing botching their attempt to deal with the effect, but the effect itself was inevitable.

My takeaway is that regardless of the 1960 low ground clearance or the 1980's high ground clearance, the pitch issues could care less.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 664
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:25 pm

Revelation wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
Nothing to do with nacelle lift or re-engine or anything. So no the AD regarding the 321Neo has nothing in common to the issue of the MAX.

Thanks for the updated info, stuff I had not seen before.

I will note that Bjorn at Leeham has also greatly revised his article at https://leehamnews.com/2019/07/19/bjorn ... -up-issue/ based on new info he was given by Airbus after the initial article was published.

This tells us a lot more about the nature of the A321neo AD.

It also still tells us:

Like the 737 MAX, the A319/320/321neos are affected by the mounting of larger engines with their larger nacelles ahead of the center of gravity, Figure 1. It follows the aerodynamic rule: any surface projecting an aerodynamic horizontal surface ahead of the Center of Gravity (CG) contributes to a Pitch-up moment and any surface projecting an aerodynamic horizontal surface behind the CG contributes to a Pitch-down moment.


And:

As for the MAX, the larger nacelles for the A321neo are placed further up relative to the wing (Figure 2) but no further forward. The nacelles are larger than the 737 nacelles, however, so the pitch up moment from the engines in isolation can be similar. As the engines sit lower on the wing their combined effect with the rest of the aircraft and its wing is not the same as the 737 MAX.

So my point that both aircraft have had to deal with more pitch up due to larger nacelles is true. They aren't the same amount of lift nor do they have the same tools to deal with the difference, but the effect is there for both. The "shitshow" comes from Boeing botching their attempt to deal with the effect, but the effect itself was inevitable.



That of course is true, on the NEOs the nacelle also generates lift and changes the flight characteristics. Airbus just was able to control that on their aircraft (as far as we know). That they found a new error in the ELAC must have a different origin.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 664
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:26 pm

par13del wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
Nothing to do with nacelle lift or re-engine or anything. So no the AD regarding the 321Neo has nothing in common to the issue of the MAX.

So the problem exist on the current A321CEO?


No as the NEO has a different ELAC and software than the CEO.
 
User avatar
bgm
Posts: 2430
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:57 pm

B777LRF wrote:
Before making a blatantly incorrect statement, in a vain attempt of deflection, perhaps you should have educated yourself a bit first. Or perhaps you did, but chose to spin a completely incorrect story to make yourself feel less bad about the carpark bound fiasco that's the Max.


Thank you.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who can see right through Revelation's agenda-peddling posts. He has consistently tried to throw mud at the A320neo series by attempting to link the 2 very separate issues. Trying to equate the MCAS clusterf**k to an issue with an aft-CG loaded aircraft potentially affecting the handling characteristics oh short final of the A321neo (which can be fixed easily as it's FBW). Really? :sarcastic:

Fluidflow provided links which explain the issue. Anyone who reads those articles will that the A321neo issue is not linked to the MAX.

par13del wrote:
My takeaway is that regardless of the 1960 low ground clearance or the 1980's high ground clearance, the pitch issues could care less.


COULDN'T care less. Why do Americans always get this wrong? By saying could care less, you're saying the opposite of what you mean.

Anyway...

Regarding the low clearances, the issue is that Boeing had to move the Leap 1-B much further forward, and up higher to make it fit within the original 1960s frame. This is what caused the issues requiring MCAS. The A320 series did not need to do this, so the different handling characteristics would be less severe (and adjusted using the FBW system that the 737 doesn't have).
If you hate wearing a mask, you’re really going to hate using a ventilator.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23908
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:05 pm

keesje wrote:
I think we should leave behind some popular assumptions:
:splat: The MAX backlog is solid,
:splat: Boeing sells thousands of additional MAX aircraft filling slots up to 2030,
:splat: Airbus won't launch A220-500 /A320Plus
:splat: People and airlines forget the MAX drama easily
:splat: a twin aisle doing 300 passengers 5000NM can beat the A321 1000NM also.

I think the situation changed. Airline patience & financial reserves are limitted. Likely Boeing has to change it's strategy.

Meanwhile, Southwest CEO Gary Kelly is quoted as saying:

“We’ve made no secret that we have fleet modernization as one of our key strategic initiatives,” Kelly said in an interview Thursday. “That means more Max, less -700s. If there’s an opportunity to pick up more Maxes, we’d certainly look at that very, very carefully.”

Ref: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... d-buy-more

Also, BA signing a LOI for 200 MAXes supports the notion that airlines believe people will forget the MAX drama easily and the backlog will continue to grow.

But hey, you're entitled to your opinion.

Mine is that in a year's time the MAX tragedy will be a distant memory and people will be clicking on the cheapest airline seat they can find and WN will order more MAXes.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
ewt340
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Mon Jul 29, 2019 2:31 pm

With dues respect, if the new NSA is ONLY 10% more efficient than A321neo, then they might not built it at all.

Presumably this NSA would be the same price or more expensive than the MAX. Airbus could easily offered extremely discounted A321neo for way cheaper prices and Airlines would swarm in on those instead of buying the NSA.

Few years after that, Airbus would launched their own A320's replacement with WAY MORE fuel savings compared to the NEO and the NSA. This timeline wouldn't work nicely for Boeing.

Unlike wide-body aircraft, Airlines would prefer cheaper narrow-body rather than efficient narrow-body IF the fuel savings isn't that big. Because if the older aircraft are still efficient and cost $10 million cheaper, then Airlines wouldn't even bother with the NSA.

UNLESS Boeing could get at least minimum of 15%-20% fuel savings compared to NEO not the CEO. Airlines wouldn't really waste money on NSA.
 
User avatar
Momo1435
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Mon Jul 29, 2019 2:49 pm

ewt340 wrote:
With dues respect, if the new NSA is ONLY 10% more efficient than A321neo, then they might not built it at all.

Presumably this NSA would be the same price or more expensive than the MAX. Airbus could easily offered extremely discounted A321neo for way cheaper prices and Airlines would swarm in on those instead of buying the NSA.

Few years after that, Airbus would launched their own A320's replacement with WAY MORE fuel savings compared to the NEO and the NSA. This timeline wouldn't work nicely for Boeing.

Unlike wide-body aircraft, Airlines would prefer cheaper narrow-body rather than efficient narrow-body IF the fuel savings isn't that big. Because if the older aircraft are still efficient and cost $10 million cheaper, then Airlines wouldn't even bother with the NSA.

UNLESS Boeing could get at least minimum of 15%-20% fuel savings compared to NEO not the CEO. Airlines wouldn't really waste money on NSA.

Why would the Airbus new offering suddenly be WAY MORE efficient with fuel then a Boeing NSA that would only come a couple years earlier?

Other then that it's pretty accurate what you say, that's why reducing (early) production costs will be a key factor for Boeing in this project if they decide to do a NSA.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:52 am

Momo1435 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
With dues respect, if the new NSA is ONLY 10% more efficient than A321neo, then they might not built it at all.

Presumably this NSA would be the same price or more expensive than the MAX. Airbus could easily offered extremely discounted A321neo for way cheaper prices and Airlines would swarm in on those instead of buying the NSA.

Few years after that, Airbus would launched their own A320's replacement with WAY MORE fuel savings compared to the NEO and the NSA. This timeline wouldn't work nicely for Boeing.

Unlike wide-body aircraft, Airlines would prefer cheaper narrow-body rather than efficient narrow-body IF the fuel savings isn't that big. Because if the older aircraft are still efficient and cost $10 million cheaper, then Airlines wouldn't even bother with the NSA.

UNLESS Boeing could get at least minimum of 15%-20% fuel savings compared to NEO not the CEO. Airlines wouldn't really waste money on NSA.

Why would the Airbus new offering suddenly be WAY MORE efficient with fuel then a Boeing NSA that would only come a couple years earlier?

Other then that it's pretty accurate what you say, that's why reducing (early) production costs will be a key factor for Boeing in this project if they decide to do a NSA.


Well we are assuming Airbus would hold off their own replacement for couple years until new technology breakthrough as long as possible. So maybe 5 years +.

Whatever technological advancement Boeing come up with their NSA. Airbus would use that, and add more to the mix possibly including newer engines, maybe hybrid technology.

If I'm Airbus management, I would heavily discounted A320neo and A321neo when NSA arrived to the point where the fuel savings and cost reduction on NSA would be too damn expensive.

And then when Boeing launched NSA, Airbus would probably secretly working on replacement on their own. And since they have more time than Boeing for couple years by producing tons of cheap NEOs to counter and slows down NSA. They would be able to accumulate more technological advancement than Boeing to their new aircraft.

Now, hopefully Airbus would come up with at least 20% or more fuel savings for their own replacement and launch their own replacement, years after Boeing launched their own NSA.
By this stage Boeing would probably able to offer the NSA at cheaper prices compared to the earlier years when it launched. But the fuel efficiency of NEOs replacement would be better than NSA and commonality with NEOs would entice airlines to go with Airbus newer replacement rather than going with Boeing NSA.

But only if Airbus plays it cards right.
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:20 am

ewt340 wrote:
If I'm Airbus management, I would heavily discounted A320neo and A321neo when NSA arrived to the point where the fuel savings and cost reduction on NSA would be too damn expensive.


Hence the above suggestion to tackle the less capable part of the narrowbody market first. That way you're compsting more with the lower scale A220 first and Airbus can't respond with their A320 and A321 as effectively.

Once production is mature and you feel comfortable that you won't be leapfrogged on the technology front launch the higher MTOW variant.
Innovation is seeing opportunity before obstacle.
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 4696
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:33 pm

I honestly don't think we will see this plane until 2020. Boeing just seems to keep failing at every turn. They have done nothing to win the public over yet! That will be the hardest part for the airlines. Talk to anyone not on this board everyone knows the MAX issues even people who don't watch the news or fly. This isn't going to be a quick win to get the public back.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13831
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 2:35 pm

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:
I honestly don't think we will see this plane until 2020. Boeing just seems to keep failing at every turn. They have done nothing to win the public over yet! That will be the hardest part for the airlines. Talk to anyone not on this board everyone knows the MAX issues even people who don't watch the news or fly. This isn't going to be a quick win to get the public back.


That would make it more likely Boeing is looking at a 2 track strategy. Getting the 737 back in the air and creating a new better option for airlines.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
bob75013
Posts: 953
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 3:18 pm

Looks very much like Boeing does not have a 737 replacement on the table this summer

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... yptr=yahoo
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23908
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:06 pm

ewt340 wrote:
Momo1435 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
With dues respect, if the new NSA is ONLY 10% more efficient than A321neo, then they might not built it at all.

Presumably this NSA would be the same price or more expensive than the MAX. Airbus could easily offered extremely discounted A321neo for way cheaper prices and Airlines would swarm in on those instead of buying the NSA.

Few years after that, Airbus would launched their own A320's replacement with WAY MORE fuel savings compared to the NEO and the NSA. This timeline wouldn't work nicely for Boeing.

Unlike wide-body aircraft, Airlines would prefer cheaper narrow-body rather than efficient narrow-body IF the fuel savings isn't that big. Because if the older aircraft are still efficient and cost $10 million cheaper, then Airlines wouldn't even bother with the NSA.

UNLESS Boeing could get at least minimum of 15%-20% fuel savings compared to NEO not the CEO. Airlines wouldn't really waste money on NSA.

Why would the Airbus new offering suddenly be WAY MORE efficient with fuel then a Boeing NSA that would only come a couple years earlier?

Other then that it's pretty accurate what you say, that's why reducing (early) production costs will be a key factor for Boeing in this project if they decide to do a NSA.


Well we are assuming Airbus would hold off their own replacement for couple years until new technology breakthrough as long as possible. So maybe 5 years +.

Whatever technological advancement Boeing come up with their NSA. Airbus would use that, and add more to the mix possibly including newer engines, maybe hybrid technology.

If I'm Airbus management, I would heavily discounted A320neo and A321neo when NSA arrived to the point where the fuel savings and cost reduction on NSA would be too damn expensive.

And then when Boeing launched NSA, Airbus would probably secretly working on replacement on their own. And since they have more time than Boeing for couple years by producing tons of cheap NEOs to counter and slows down NSA. They would be able to accumulate more technological advancement than Boeing to their new aircraft.

Now, hopefully Airbus would come up with at least 20% or more fuel savings for their own replacement and launch their own replacement, years after Boeing launched their own NSA.
By this stage Boeing would probably able to offer the NSA at cheaper prices compared to the earlier years when it launched. But the fuel efficiency of NEOs replacement would be better than NSA and commonality with NEOs would entice airlines to go with Airbus newer replacement rather than going with Boeing NSA.

But only if Airbus plays it cards right.

These thoughts are all over the map.

Airbus is going to sell lots of cheap planes to undermine the NMA even though their production lines are all filled till past the expected EIS of NMA?

Airbus is going to spend heavily enough in R&D to have better tech than NMA and spend enough to increase A32x production volume to undermine NMA all while selling cheaply too?

All this to get half of what many here project to be a niche market opportunity?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:26 pm

Revelation wrote:
Very similar statements can be made for MAX. Very efficient for its targeted missions, newer wing than A320, new winglet/simitar design, optimized rear fuselage, very efficient moving production lines, etc.

With what Airbus has been able to do to the A321 though they’re making the 737 look a lot like a suboptimal compromise of a design. Remember newer doesn’t mean better, much of the 737’s wing is suboptimal with the engine blocking part of the front, unusual angles and shapes that aren’t used on newer wings, and tiny flaps that aren’t very effective. The 737 very is efficient at a few things and is very efficient at being dirt cheap to build so they can sell them for very cheap, but it’s also been very efficient at doing some bad things too.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T PA-28-180

2 ears for spatial hearing, 2 eyes for depth perception, 2 ears for balance... How did Boeing think 1 sensor was good enough?!
 
mikejepp
Posts: 219
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 11:47 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:27 pm

Is there any chance that Boeing could buy out another "new" design available and make it into their new single aisle aircraft? One would think that would be much cheaper than a cleansheet design.

For example, could the E195E2 get a new fuselage to be 6 across? Or even partner to license build the C919 or MC21 in the US with all western parts?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23908
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:37 pm

mikejepp wrote:
Is there any chance that Boeing could buy out another "new" design available and make it into their new single aisle aircraft? One would think that would be much cheaper than a cleansheet design.

For example, could the E195E2 get a new fuselage to be 6 across? Or even partner to license build the C919 or MC21 in the US with all western parts?

You have to look at this from a business point of view.

Boeing and its partners made huge investments that have generated a backlog of 5,000 737s and a lot of loyal customers who have signed contracts for their delivery.

It should be obvious that Boeing has to use Plans A, B, C, ... Z to preserve as much of the value of that backlog as possible.

Transitioning away from 737 would hugely diminish the value of that backlog and would anger its investors, customers, and partners.

Transitioning to something else would take a number of years whereas 737 is expected to be back in service in a number of months.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
ewt340
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:51 pm

bob75013 wrote:
Looks very much like Boeing does not have a 737 replacement on the table this summer

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... yptr=yahoo


To be fair, they wouldn't have any plans except for max in the next 2 years.
 
bob75013
Posts: 953
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:05 pm

ewt340 wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
Looks very much like Boeing does not have a 737 replacement on the table this summer

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... yptr=yahoo


To be fair, they wouldn't have any plans except for max in the next 2 years.



Then again, Boeing wouldn't be talking about spending $132,000,000 to increae MAX production if it had any plan in the next 1-7 years to kill the model.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:10 pm

bob75013 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
Looks very much like Boeing does not have a 737 replacement on the table this summer

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... yptr=yahoo


To be fair, they wouldn't have any plans except for max in the next 2 years.



Then again, Boeing wouldn't be talking about spending $132,000,000 to increae MAX production if it had any plan in the next 1-7 years to kill the model.


Probably because once the dust settle, they would sell the MAX at bottom rock prices and many airlines gonna order 100 of them each like IAG did.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1278
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:07 pm

What NSA program would make sense on a rushed basis? To rush it into service it would need at least 20 percent better economics than the MAX/NEO (yes, they are essentially the same for the 8max 320NEO). That requires TML’s that just don’t exist today, unless/until the NMA is certificated first (ovoid fuse with 1.5 gen advanced engines).

Ideally, the engines move to the back, as that would also let the gear be lower and easier access to everything. In any case, there’s no new engine in this class that is even close to being ready for a new program to get into the air before 2025.
 
bob75013
Posts: 953
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:46 pm

ewt340 wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:

To be fair, they wouldn't have any plans except for max in the next 2 years.



Then again, Boeing wouldn't be talking about spending $132,000,000 to increae MAX production if it had any plan in the next 1-7 years to kill the model.


Probably because once the dust settle, they would sell the MAX at bottom rock prices and many airlines gonna order 100 of them each like IAG did.


You can dream, but with 5000+ MAX orders on the books, and Airbus basically sold out on NEOs for the next 7 years, that ain't gonna happen.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Aug 03, 2019 4:29 pm

bob75013 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
bob75013 wrote:


Then again, Boeing wouldn't be talking about spending $132,000,000 to increae MAX production if it had any plan in the next 1-7 years to kill the model.


Probably because once the dust settle, they would sell the MAX at bottom rock prices and many airlines gonna order 100 of them each like IAG did.


You can dream, but with 5000+ MAX orders on the books, and Airbus basically sold out on NEOs for the next 7 years, that ain't gonna happen.


It should be if they want to maintain market share and keep up with the lost time.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1743
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Aug 03, 2019 8:18 pm

keesje wrote:
I think we should leave behind some popular assumptions:
:splat: The MAX backlog is solid,
:splat: Boeing sells thousands of additional MAX aircraft filling slots up to 2030,
:splat: Airbus won't launch A220-500 /A320Plus
:splat: People and airlines forget the MAX drama easily
:splat: a twin aisle doing 300 passengers 5000NM can beat the A321 1000NM also.

I think the situation changed. Airline patience & financial reserves are limitted. Likely Boeing has to change it's strategy.

Taxi645, not a bad idea.


Why is that?
 
talonone
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 10:32 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sat Aug 03, 2019 8:49 pm

So, Airbus has the backlog sold 7 years from now one; Boeing the same to, and we dream to see a new airframe from 2020?
Maybe like from 2023 or 2025.
Not to forget in what "shithole" is at this time B with the 737 problems, and 787 accounting!
They function as a Pobeda Russian watch!
The space and human stupidity are endless. Maybe the space is not... but the human stupidity for sure!
 
ewt340
Posts: 1235
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:08 am

airzona11 wrote:
keesje wrote:
I think we should leave behind some popular assumptions:
:splat: The MAX backlog is solid,
:splat: Boeing sells thousands of additional MAX aircraft filling slots up to 2030,
:splat: Airbus won't launch A220-500 /A320Plus
:splat: People and airlines forget the MAX drama easily
:splat: a twin aisle doing 300 passengers 5000NM can beat the A321 1000NM also.

I think the situation changed. Airline patience & financial reserves are limitted. Likely Boeing has to change it's strategy.

Taxi645, not a bad idea.


Why is that?


Well A220-500 and A320neoPlus sounds enticing but A220 production line hasn't mature to the point where they could produce the aircraft fast enough. A220-500 would kill A320neo.

Airbus would milk the sh*t out of A320neo until nobody wants it no more and then replace it with A220-500 in the future to combat Boeing NSA at lower range of the product.

The only thing I would contested about keesje's comment is the situation with MAX. Nobody gonna forget that one. Because unlike B787, there is high profile accidents with the MAX and the fact that the problem with the MAX are way worse than B787 back in the day with their battery.

Also B797 would definetly give A321XLR run for its money. But it wouldn't beat A321XLR prices and commonality.
 
JibberJim
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:33 pm

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:34 am

texl1649 wrote:
Ideally, the engines move to the back, as that would also let the gear be lower and easier access to everything. In any case, there’s no new engine in this class that is even close to being ready for a new program to get into the air before 2025.


How do you put engines at the back and manage to prevent uncontained failure of one of the engines not taking out the other?
 
texl1649
Posts: 1278
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Boeing 737 replacement, back on the table in summer 2019?

Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:05 pm

The 727 and DC9 seemed to be able to be certificated as such.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

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