blacksoviet
Topic Author
Posts: 1393
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 1:33 am

With the newest engines, could the 717 be stretched to approach the seating capacity of the MAX-8?

The resulting aircraft could be called the 717 Next Generation. Obviously, the range would have to be increased. Which airlines begged Boeing to increase the range of the 717?

Ironically, Boeing refused to increase the range of the 717 because they didn’t want to kill the 737-600. The 737-600 was dead anyway. They kept the 737-600 going for a few more years at the expense of killing the 717. Does Boeing regret this?

Should Boeing have abandoned the 737 and focused on the 717 and MD-90 platforms?

I am sure the range of the MD-90 could have been increased with an NG model. A stretched 717 variant could have been launched to replace the 73G and an NG model of the MD-90 could have replaced the 738.

The 739, 757, 762, and 763 could all have been replaced by the NMA.

I have not received confirmation that the 717 tooling has been destroyed.
 
User avatar
afterburner
Posts: 1410
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:38 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 2:08 am

No. Resurrecting dead designs is not what Boeing should do.
 
speedbird52
Posts: 912
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 6:32 am

No.
 
User avatar
vhqpa
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:21 pm

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 6:34 am

Lol instead of using the 737 let's use the other 1960s designed platform we have at our disposal. The one with an even narrower cross section!

At that point may as well dust of the blueprints for the 727, might be a bit tricky reengining that one though especially #2. Although someone in the 90s (Dee Howard?) managed to shoehorn a RR Tay into #2.
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
 
KFTG
Posts: 318
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 12:08 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 7:44 am

Just chiming in. No.
 
blacksoviet
Topic Author
Posts: 1393
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 10:36 am

vhqpa wrote:
Lol instead of using the 737 let's use the other 1960s designed platform we have at our disposal. The one with an even narrower cross section!

At that point may as well dust of the blueprints for the 727, might be a bit tricky reengining that one though especially #2. Although someone in the 90s (Dee Howard?) managed to shoehorn a RR Tay into #2.

What is the advantage of shoehorning a Tay in the #2 nacelle? Increased range?
 
KFTG
Posts: 318
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 12:08 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 11:09 am

Next blacksoviet thread: "Why didn't Boeing NEO the 727?"
 
User avatar
vhqpa
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:21 pm

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 12:13 pm

blacksoviet wrote:
vhqpa wrote:
Lol instead of using the 737 let's use the other 1960s designed platform we have at our disposal. The one with an even narrower cross section!

At that point may as well dust of the blueprints for the 727, might be a bit tricky reengining that one though especially #2. Although someone in the 90s (Dee Howard?) managed to shoehorn a RR Tay into #2.

What is the advantage of shoehorning a Tay in the #2 nacelle? Increased range?


Well the obvious advantages were it was a lot more efficient and quieter than the original JT8D engines. I don't know about range, but having more efficient engines it stands to reason it would fly further on any given fuel load.
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4461
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 12:32 pm

UPS did the Tay conversion on the 727; wasn’t terribly successful.

The 717 was already re-engined with a modern RR engine.
Last edited by GalaxyFlyer on Sun Dec 08, 2019 12:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 3488
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 12:33 pm

vhqpa wrote:
At that point may as well dust of the blueprints for the 727, might be a bit tricky reengining that one though especially #2. Although someone in the 90s (Dee Howard?) managed to shoehorn a RR Tay into #2.


Just omit the center engine, make it a 2-engined MD-80 style design. They would actually have been able to put a pair of modern turbofans onto a 727 without all the issues the 737 ran into when trying to cram the LEAP onto the MAX. Should achieve a pretty decent range too.

Stretching it, getting the balance correct and tail strike issues would be a bother though.

Obviously never going to happen, but I love the idea.
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 12:51 pm

Absolutely not. The 717 is a dead design and on its way out everywhere. I'm willing to bet that all 717's will be scrapped (possibly with some going to museums) by 2030 (or 2040 if we're lucky). Might as well try to make a 727 Max 8 and 727 Max 9 with 3 CF34-8C's.
R.I.P.

Pan Am (B 19-10-1927, D 4-12-1991)
TWA (B 1-10-1930, D 1-12-2001)
Douglas (B 22-7-1921, D 23-5-2006)
 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Posts: 466
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 2:07 pm

KFTG wrote:
Next blacksoviet thread: "Why didn't Boeing NEO the 727?"


Or, WesternDC6B - me - will ask about building a DC6 or DC7 with turboprop engines. If they can do it on a Convair, why not a Douglas?

/please, folks. I know the Convair was engineered with the eventual turboprop conversion in mind where the DCs weren’t.
A big heart is commendable. An enlarged heart is a medical condition.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7453
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 2:24 pm

In hindsight, you could make the following argument about 20 years ago but the 717 would never have solved in segment of the market, primarily in the 738/739 150-190 seat capacity and range that led to the decision to for the MAX. The 717, even when stretched at best could be a 150 seat aircraft in most configurations and limited to domestic. Then the A220 would come along now anyways.

- Retain the 717, add the 717-300 variant; add a bit of range and capacity and use that to capture the lower-end of the market up to about 150 seats
- Keep the 737NG cash cow going on 73G/738/739
- Pursue a NSA to cover the 150-200 seat range
 
ExpatVet
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:35 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Sun Dec 08, 2019 7:19 pm

I would think the big issue was commonality. A design that has nothing in common with Boeing family would be inherently more expensive to build and support.
L101, 733/4/5/8, 741/2/3 (never managed 744!), MD 80/2/3/8/90, MD11, DHC8/3/Q4, E170, E195, 757, 77W, 763/4, Travel Air 2000. A300/310, A319/320/321, A333, ATR-72, probably a few others I forget. Passenger, not pilot, alas! BUD based.
 
CowAnon
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:03 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Mon Dec 09, 2019 12:20 am

blacksoviet wrote:
With the newest engines, could the 717 be stretched to approach the seating capacity of the MAX-8?

There were at least 3 proposals from the 1980s:


Should Boeing have abandoned the 737 and focused on the 717 and MD-90 platforms?

I am sure the range of the MD-90 could have been increased with an NG model. A stretched 717 variant could have been launched to replace the 73G and an NG model of the MD-90 could have replaced the 738.

Total abandonment seems out of the question because of Southwest Airlines's 737 love, but maybe Boeing could've improved both product families. If you compare the specs of McDonnell Douglas's MD-92 propfan-powered derivative against the current A320neo, the MD-92 still comes out favorably. Rolls-Royce seemed eager to sell an open rotor engine for the 737NG/320ceo successors, so this would've been a way for Boeing to offer product variety in the narrowbody sector instead of just 737s with the lone option of GE engines. (Or maybe Boeing could've put LEAP or GTF engines on the DC9/MD80/717 frame, though I don't think that would've been very attractive.)

On the negative side, the MD-92 range would've been less than for the 737-8 and the A320NEO, but I think the extra range was unneeded or could be successfully increased with higher MTOW. The A220 specs do look slightly better than the MD-91 propfan version, though. That's where the 717/MD-90's smaller wingspan is problematic. A rewing to increase the span by 3 meters would be required unless the newer generation of propfans closed the gap.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4461
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Mon Dec 09, 2019 1:22 am

asr0dzjq wrote:
Absolutely not. The 717 is a dead design and on its way out everywhere. I'm willing to bet that all 717's will be scrapped (possibly with some going to museums) by 2030 (or 2040 if we're lucky). Might as well try to make a 727 Max 8 and 727 Max 9 with 3 CF34-8C's.


Why do posters think the CF-34 powered B727 would work—entirely wrong design. Thrust numbers alone don’t describe an engine’s characteristics.


GF
 
User avatar
afterburner
Posts: 1410
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:38 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Mon Dec 09, 2019 4:10 am

I wonder whether people who are suggesting resurrection of Boeing old aircraft are inspired by the Hollywood? Hollywood is rebooting old movies and tv series likes Ghostbusters, Superman, Hawaii 5-0, Magnum PI, etc.
 
blacksoviet
Topic Author
Posts: 1393
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Mon Dec 09, 2019 7:08 am

afterburner wrote:
I wonder whether people who are suggesting resurrection of Boeing old aircraft are inspired by the Hollywood? Hollywood is rebooting old movies and tv series likes Ghostbusters, Superman, Hawaii 5-0, Magnum PI, etc.

Clearly launching the 737 MAX was a mistake. The wings are too low to the ground for modern turbofan engines. Boeing knew this but they were desperate to appease Southwest. They took a gamble and ended up paying the price.

The 717 and MD-90 designs do not have ground clearance issues. Launching a DC-9 MAX would have been easier than the 737 MAX and it would have bought Boeing more time to develop a clean-sheet 738 replacement.

Boeing should have told Southwest that the 737 is an obsolete platform. It was designed for turbojets. The 737-100 was an excellent design and was loved by Avianca for many years.
 
rlwynn
Posts: 1424
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:35 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:49 pm

blacksoviet wrote:

Boeing should have told Southwest that the 737 is an obsolete platform. It was designed for turbojets.


No it was not. Why do you say that?
I can drive faster than you
 
aklrno
Posts: 1537
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:10 am

Has anyone considered re-engining the Wright flyer with perhaps a 10 foot fuselage stretch and a canopy over the added seats? Threads like this tend to get kind of absurd.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4461
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:12 am

blacksoviet wrote:
afterburner wrote:
I wonder whether people who are suggesting resurrection of Boeing old aircraft are inspired by the Hollywood? Hollywood is rebooting old movies and tv series likes Ghostbusters, Superman, Hawaii 5-0, Magnum PI, etc.

Clearly launching the 737 MAX was a mistake. The wings are too low to the ground for modern turbofan engines. Boeing knew this but they were desperate to appease Southwest. They took a gamble and ended up paying the price.

The 717 and MD-90 designs do not have ground clearance issues. Launching a DC-9 MAX would have been easier than the 737 MAX and it would have bought Boeing more time to develop a clean-sheet 738 replacement.

Boeing should have told Southwest that the 737 is an obsolete platform. It was designed for turbojets. The 737-100 was an excellent design and was loved by Avianca for many years.


You’re gonna have to offer some solid engineering to back up those ideas. Pylon-mounted engine’s in tail most certainly have clearance problem—the fuselage AND a balance problem.

GF
 
IADCA
Posts: 2039
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:06 am

aklrno wrote:
Has anyone considered re-engining the Wright flyer with perhaps a 10 foot fuselage stretch and a canopy over the added seats? Threads like this tend to get kind of absurd.


Not enough structure to take the stretch. Now a 189-seat DC-3 with LEAP engines...
 
TheWorm123
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2019 8:29 pm

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Wed Dec 11, 2019 1:16 pm

ExpatVet wrote:
I would think the big issue was commonality. A design that has nothing in common with Boeing family would be inherently more expensive to build and support.

Ultimately the same could he argued with the A220 having 0 parts or cockpit commonality with the A320, A330 or A350. However it’s been a lot more successful than I initially thought despite that shortcoming.
752 753 A332
 
User avatar
BartSimpson
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 5:01 pm

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Wed Dec 11, 2019 1:49 pm

aklrno wrote:
Has anyone considered re-engining the Wright flyer with perhaps a 10 foot fuselage stretch and a canopy over the added seats?


That's not going to work. The tooling is gone...
 
asr0dzjq
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:36 am

Re: Should Boeing have increased the range of the 717 instead of developing the MAX?

Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:26 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
You’re gonna have to offer some solid engineering to back up those ideas. Pylon-mounted engine’s in tail most certainly have clearance problem—the fuselage AND a balance problem.

GF

As the MD-90 has shown
R.I.P.

Pan Am (B 19-10-1927, D 4-12-1991)
TWA (B 1-10-1930, D 1-12-2001)
Douglas (B 22-7-1921, D 23-5-2006)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: longhauler, RushmoreAir, wv399 and 147 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