Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
beeweel15
Topic Author
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 12:59 am

737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:16 am

I just read an article in the SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER that Boeing is in talks with Japan Airlines on a strech version of the 737-900 which can carry 220 passengers. Now why is it they cancelled the 757 and now they are offering to strech the 737 again to hold as many passengers as the 757.

Here is a link to the article
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/210939_boeingjal07.html

Could some one please explain what is going on in Boeing their sales and marketing people and folks at the top seem to be sleeping at the wheel

 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:21 am

The maximum of 220 is in a one class configuration.

The 737-900 today can't carry any more than 189 (like the 738) because of exit configuration.

The 737-900X will still be the same size as a 737-900, but feature a strengthened wing and engines and an improved exit layout.

This will catch the plane up to the A321 in terms of capacity and capability.

N
 
swacle
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:41 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:21 am

BeeWee,

The -900X is the same frame as the -900 but adds two emergency exit doors allowing the capacity to increase as a result.

DC
Aircraft Flown: SF3 DH8 DH4 328 ERJ CRJ CR7 CR9 E70 E75 D9S M80 712 72S 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 752 318 319 32
 
A350
Posts: 1076
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:40 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:31 am

It is NOT a stretch, it's simply a modified version of the 737-900.

Rember that the 737-900 can seat 189 pax, as the shorter 737-800, because of the limited number of exits and doors. The 737-900X will have more doors/emergency exits and therefore be allowed to accomodate more passengers and have some other minor modifications. I hope they'll go for it!

Read the article exactly:

The 737-900X is essentially the same plane as the 737-900...

Several changes are planned to boost the range and capacity. Of those, the most significant is adding two emergency exit doors just behind the wings.
...
the seating capacity of a commercial jetliner is determined by the number of exits and passenger doors ...

The 737-900 ... 8.5 feet longer than the 737-800 ... same wing, engines and maximum takeoff weight.

... 737-900 is bigger than the 737-800 ... same number of passenger doors and exit hatches


@Crew, I hope this is not to much copyrighted material cited  Wink/being sarcastic

A350
 
Cactus739
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 6:41 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:42 am

You can't fix stupid.... - Ron White
 
leelaw
Posts: 4517
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 2:18 am

Wasn't this development preordained when they axed the 757? Boeing just needed a launch customer and now they've probably got one. However, why is the 900X going to take 30 months to get to market? I thought Boeing was in the process revolutionizing the design to delivery cycle? This isn't any better than they did with 753 (wasn't that 27 months).
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 2:23 am

Boeing just needed a launch customer and now they've probably got one.

And it's very likely that is's JAL

http://www.jal.co.jp/en/press/2005/020402/020402.html

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:01 am

The -900X is also expected to have similar range to the -800, so it can do US transcons like SEA-MIA (the ones AS had trouble with with the -900) without restriction. Also, isn't the change in config to put in a third fullsized door set?
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5969
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:02 am

I bet AS will be a -900X customer. Any takers?
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:08 am

I bet AS will be a -900X customer. Any takers?

I'll be surprised if this is the case, given that they turned their -900 orders (or options?) to -800s. I wonder whether Boeing might offer to retrofit the current -900s with some of the improvements they will introduce to the -900X to, at least, increase its range.

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:12 am

>I'll be surprised if this is the case, given that they turned their -900 orders (or options?) to -800s. I wonder whether Boeing might offer to retrofit the current -900s with some of the improvements they will introduce to the -900X to, at least, increase its range.<

They turned the left over -900s into -800s because they needed a plane to fly MIA/MCO-SEA unrestricted right away, not to wait to get another one certified. I would assume they could get winglets on the -900 when Boeing certifies the -900X, but a wing change or exit change would be so expensive that they would likely just order new planes
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
FriendlySkies
Posts: 3540
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:57 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:19 am

So, if the -900 can only carry the same number of pax as the -800, has a worse range, and is more expensive, why didn't Boeing just make the -900X in the first place?  Confused
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:23 am

>So, if the -900 can only carry the same number of pax as the -800, has a worse range, and is more expensive, why didn't Boeing just make the -900X in the first place?<

In a 2 class config, the -900 can carry about 10-15 more pax than the -800. The max Y capacity is the same. Since they have the same wing the -900 is heavier and really does not carry much more fuel, it has shorter range.
The Reason Boeing did not make the -900X in the first place was because it would have required more engineering that would have likely led to delays that may have sent KL shopping elsewhere and further hurt the plane's cause. The -900 has always been a stop gap for a better airplane.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:26 am

So, if the -900 can only carry the same number of pax as the -800, has a worse range, and is more expensive, why didn't Boeing just make the -900X in the first place?

No -800 and -900 with First class actually carries 189 passangers (correct me if this is wrong!!!). The -900 was a way to add more First class seats (I think). And the reason they did the half-hearted job of just stretching the plane a bit without adding new doors to it (a la A321) was most likely done on economic grounds. Maybe, they were trying to ensure that it doesn't compete with the B757. Now that the mighty B757 is dead, it's time to try to fill the gap with the -900X. But, I'm with you. Boeing should have got their act together and have done the job properly in the first place.

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
airlineaddict
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:37 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:25 am

I can definitely see Continental ordering the -900X and reconfirguring all remaining 757-200s for international service.
 
nucsh
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 12:29 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:43 am

A 737-900X would look flippin' sweet with an added door behind the wing like the A321. Thats the one thing I absolutely adore about the A321 too, is its length and the doors... And now Boeing might be doing the same thing!
If landing is about "kissing" the ground, you just about raped it.
 
DC10GUY
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 5:52 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:47 am

I know, I know, its rumor BUT !!! I heard sometime ago that Boeing has offered a 737-900X freighter to Fedex for a 727-200 replacement.
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9305
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:49 am

I know, I know, its rumor BUT !!! I heard sometime ago that Boeing has offered a 737-900X freighter to Fedex for a 727-200 replacement.

Disclaimer aside... seems odd that Fedex would look at the 737NG variant with the lowest payload density. The -800ERX, or -700 (which already has a freigher configuration!) seems more logical....
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:50 am

>I heard sometime ago that Boeing has offered a 737-900X freighter to Fedex for a 727-200 replacement.<

May have been true, but FX seems to want to use older 733s and 734s to do that job. They were all set to take a bunch of 733s off of US when US realized that they could not afford more A319/A320s and had to back out and they were set to take some 733s from WN when WN realized they could not get 73Gs from Boeing fast enough and went looking for ones of their own
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
N801NW
Posts: 558
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:56 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:13 am

I do not want to be too OT, but can someone enlighten me about the differences between a 737NG (700) and a 738? I know the 700 seats fewer pax but does it have a longer range as well.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:21 am

>I do not want to be too OT, but can someone enlighten me about the differences between a 737NG (700) and a 738? I know the 700 seats fewer pax but does it have a longer range as well.<

The 73G (-700) and 738 (-800) are both part of the 737NG family. The 73G holds 40 fewer passengers but does have longer range and a shorter take off run. It also has lower trip costs, while the 738 has the lower seat-mile
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8535
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:26 am

What's the point? Just get one of these:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts.html

Maybe Boeing could offer a short range version...

PPVRA
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9305
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:30 am

I do not want to be too OT, but can someone enlighten me about the differences between a 737NG (700) and a 738? I know the 700 seats fewer pax but does it have a longer range as well.

Here are some references-

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737family/flash.html

What's the point? Just get one of these:

If Fedex are looking for a direct 727 replacement, somehow I don't think the 787-8 will be considered for long. Also consider that Boeing does not yet offer a freighter variant, and the soonest delivery slots are available is around 2009-2010....

Maybe Boeing could offer a short range version...

Like.... the 787-3 maybe? Still a no, the 737-C (which already exist) is a better alternative for 727 replacement.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
FlyHoss
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:31 am

N801NW,
All of the currently in production 737s are referred to as 737NGs; the NG stands for New Generation. Therefore, the 737-600, -700, -800 and -900 would be considered NGs. To be more specific about which NG you are referring to, most folks chose to refer to 738 for a 737-800 for just one example. References to the 73G are for the 737-700 since the abbreviation 737 (i.e. 73-7) were (already) used for earlier versions.
A little bit louder now, a lil bit louder now...
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8535
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:36 am

Dfw,

The -3 has 70 pax more than the -8...ok, one is in 2 class config and the other is in 3, but still... a short 787 would be better than stretching a 739 IMO.

Cheers,

PPVRA
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9305
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:44 am

but still... a short 787 would be better than stretching a 739 IMO.

The 737-900X isn't a stretch... it's just an extra pair of exit doors  Confused

As for a 787 shrink, I disagree with your opinion. This would basically be a 762-sized aircraft, which wouldn't exaclty electrify the market...
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
CORULEZ05
Posts: 1250
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 10:39 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:48 am

I personally dislike Boeing's decision to retired the 757....that is my favorite aircraft and always will be. However, I think its a good idea to improve the 739 and make it closer in capacity to the 757......Honestly, I would keep an eye out for Southwest....they could benefit from the capacity and range of this new 739 model...especially in their cross-country, high density routes.........
Fly jetBlue today!!!!!!!
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:55 am

>Honestly, I would keep an eye out for Southwest....they could benefit from the capacity and range of this new 739 model...especially in their cross-country, high density routes.........<

If they did not take 738s from ATA that could be cheaply had, why on earth would they take an even bigger plane?
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
CORULEZ05
Posts: 1250
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 10:39 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:01 pm

I don't know....call them and ask.........1-800-435-9792......

P.S.
It was just a thought, I didnt know they rejected ATA's 738
Fly jetBlue today!!!!!!!
 
MD11LuxuryLinr
Posts: 1311
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:34 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:47 pm

~"I didnt know they rejected ATA's 738"~

It could be because if they have anything bigger than a 733/73G, they would need more than their current number of FAs on each jet to compensate for the higher capacity.

Just another thought..
Caution wake turbulence, you are following a heavy jet.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9305
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:48 pm

If they did not take 738s from ATA that could be cheaply had, why on earth would they take an even bigger plane?

They have not yet had the opportunity to take TZ's 738, and Gary Kelly indicated that they would indeed bid on them.

However, I think its a good idea to improve the 739 and make it closer in capacity to the 757......

It's more like closer to the 738's range, it will hardly have the 3,900 nm performance of the 752

I didnt know they rejected ATA's 738

They havn't.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:54 pm

>I didnt know they rejected ATA's 738

They havn't.<

Forget an E? According to the resident WN experts, the 738s are out of favor with them right now
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
NW7E7
Posts: 480
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 11:43 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:24 pm

Wouldn't Boeing have to jack up the landing gear? There would certainly be tail strikes if the ground clearance stays the same? I imagine it looking like a cross between a 737 and a 757.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26574
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 1:26 pm

>Wouldn't Boeing have to jack up the landing gear? There would certainly be tail strikes if the ground clearance stays the same? I imagine it looking like a cross between a 737 and a 757.<

No, it already exists. The 739 has been flying without tailstrike concerns for several years now. This is just a change to the exits, wing and fuel capacity/weights, not a fuselage stretch
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
Tiger119
Posts: 1622
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 1:52 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:31 pm

"I bet AS will be a -900X customer. Any takers?

I'll be surprised if this is the case, given that they turned their -900 orders (or options?) to -800s. I wonder whether Boeing might offer to retrofit the current -900s with some of the improvements they will introduce to the -900X to, at least, increase its range.
"


- AS still has them on their website though:

http://www.alaskaair.com/www2/company/Fleet/Fleet.asp

"I personally dislike Boeing's decision to retired the 757...."

- I totally agree, had a flight on a 752 and another flight on a 753 this past weekend and loved the flights.
Flying is the second greatest thrill known to mankind, landing is the first!
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14017
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:38 pm

but still... a short 787 would be better than stretching a 739 IMO.

but why ?

it is twice as expensive, burns more fuel, has a huge unused cargo hold & would fly around half empty most of the times..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
vunz
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2001 3:51 pm

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:48 pm

I don't get it, the 739 is bigger, has a shorter range and seats as many passengers as the 738. Why did KL buy it? Not that they need the extra space for their non-existant first class passengers.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14017
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:24 pm

KLM 739's used to have a business class 5 abreast with extra legroom.. additional lavatories/ galleys etc.. We fly the -8/-900 on longer stretches to MEA, then you can use the extra space.

so the 189 was never a limit..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
robcol99
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:59 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 9:13 pm

739X, a larger and a longer range version of will definitely help 737 sales in my opinion.

SAS and Turkish chose to buy A321s although they have large 737 fleets.
Mainly because 739 didnt have the extra space and didnot fly as far as the 738 did.


 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: 737-900X

Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:00 pm

Tiger,

- AS still has them on their website though:

I actually meant that they had turned their remaining orders to -800 for reasons mentioned by someone else above. I didn't say they replaced all their -900 with -800. In fact, I did fly on a -900 last December...

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: 737-900X

Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:34 am

Why the 900 vs the 757? Simple. Although the 757 has great operating economics, it cost $21 Million more than a 737-900 to buy. I don't know why, but that is the price listed at Boeing's web site.

I'm sure that had something to do with it. In addition, if you dont need the range that the 757 has, but just need the seats, reliability and economic peformance, you go with the 737-900.
One Nation Under God
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 737-900X

Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:53 am

What's the point? Just get one of these:

"One of these" seats 300 passengers, weighs twice as much, costs over twice as much.

Why would they get one of those? The planes are totally incomparable.

The -3 has 70 pax more than the -8...ok, one is in 2 class config and the other is in 3, but still... a short 787 would be better than stretching a 739 IMO.

First, the planes are exactly the same size. The difference is in seating.

Second, nobody's talked about stretching a 739.

Third, nobody wants a short widebody for the 200 person domestic operations. They've made that very, very clear throughout the years.


Disclaimer aside... seems odd that Fedex would look at the 737NG variant with the lowest payload density.


Doesn't seem odd to me. FX needs the volume, not the weight. Cubes, not pounds.

Fedex frequently cubes out their planes long before they get anywhere near structural capacity. I think a 737-900X is the perfect plane for their ops.

Honestly, I would keep an eye out for Southwest....they could benefit from the capacity and range of this new 739 model...especially in their cross-country, high density routes.........

If WN needed to add capacity on cross-country routes, they probably would step to the 738 first, rather than a 739 with a 220 seat capacity.

I imagine it looking like a cross between a 737 and a 757.

I don't want to be mean, but have you read any of the rest of the thread?

Stay with us. It really makes things better for everyone.

Although the 757 has great operating economics, it cost $21 Million more than a 737-900 to buy.

The thing is, the 757's operating economics really weren't that great. If you had 180 passengers on a 757 from ATL-MCO and 180 passengers on a 739 ATL-MCO, the 739 would destroy it in terms of total operating costs.

The place where the 757 shines is routes beyond the capability of the 737, like transatlantic, or 180 passengers from BOS-SFO.

N

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