The fat lady has sung: American Airlines buys Airbus and Boeing
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlightOBN
Indeed! The plane has been stretched to maximum with the 737NG...with a few tweaks here and there...the 737RE is like getting the design into Extra Time...but the investment is massive. The answer is so rushed that the Board of directors has not approved the 737RE...they were lucky enough that American Airlines committed to the program to get it going...let's see if they think this sale is enough to approve it...
Seems that Boeing did not put enough attention to CFM with the Leap X and PW GTF to move on...Airbus always suspected that Boeing was not going to do another airplane until the 2020-2022 timeframe... the NEO is the result of that...and caught Boeing pants down....
Indeed! The plane has been stretched to maximum with the 737NG...with a few tweaks here and there...the 737RE is like getting the design into Extra Time...but the investment is massive. The answer is so rushed that the Board of directors has not approved the 737RE...they were lucky enough that American Airlines committed to the program to get it going...let's see if they think this sale is enough to approve it...
Seems that Boeing did not put enough attention to CFM with the Leap X and PW GTF to move on...Airbus always suspected that Boeing was not going to do another airplane until the 2020-2022 timeframe... the NEO is the result of that...and caught Boeing pants down....
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lomapaseo,
Unfortunately that is the problem for both manufacturers...the challenge now is for the next Single Aisle Airplane...if they want a profitable program, they need at least 60 planes a month 80 to 90 would be excellent. If you read the news...Boeing and Airbus are studying to get the production lines to 40-45 planes a month for next year...NEO is pushing that to 50-55 in the 2015 time frame....this would give the suppliers enough time to adjust their production lines...and cope with the demand...
Unfortunately that is the problem for both manufacturers...the challenge now is for the next Single Aisle Airplane...if they want a profitable program, they need at least 60 planes a month 80 to 90 would be excellent. If you read the news...Boeing and Airbus are studying to get the production lines to 40-45 planes a month for next year...NEO is pushing that to 50-55 in the 2015 time frame....this would give the suppliers enough time to adjust their production lines...and cope with the demand...
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the significant amount of re-engineering on the 737, for a relatively short lifespan, I would suspect the 737RE to be a loss for Boeing.
They had resisted this to-date for a reason....
just as the tanker deal was a last ditch effort to win at all costs, losing already a $billion on the first 4 aircraft...
this RE appears much the same deal.
786??
They had resisted this to-date for a reason....
just as the tanker deal was a last ditch effort to win at all costs, losing already a $billion on the first 4 aircraft...
this RE appears much the same deal.
How is the 786 coming along?
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing 737 Re-engining
Your quote: The cost for the NEO upgrades on the A32x family rounds $1.5 billion...on the 737NG it's going to be a lot more expensive, they have to raise the LG, redesign the wing box, strength the wing box and wings, new pylon.
From Flightglobal: CFM's original timeline called for engine certification in 2016 and EIS with a replacement for the Boeing 737 or A320 in the 2018-2020 period. Boeing now talks about a 2020 replacement at the earliest, and Airbus now sets the date at 2024.
The new LEAP-X schedule makes it possible for Boeing to develop a "737RE" with an EIS around 2015-16, about the same time an A320RE might be available (see separate story).
Boeing has been cool to the prospect of re-engining the 737 because the Pratt & Whitney P1000G GTF diameter is too big. Boeing also has an exclusive supplier contract with CFM to power the 737, making selecting PW problematic in any case.
But with the news that CFM can meet a 2014 target date for a Comac test flight program and a 2016 EIS, this opens the door for a 737RE. The LEAP-X engine diameter is very close to the CFM56 now on the 737.
The new LEAP-X schedule makes it possible for Boeing to develop a "737RE" with an EIS around 2015-16, about the same time an A320RE might be available (see separate story).
Boeing has been cool to the prospect of re-engining the 737 because the Pratt & Whitney P1000G GTF diameter is too big. Boeing also has an exclusive supplier contract with CFM to power the 737, making selecting PW problematic in any case.
But with the news that CFM can meet a 2014 target date for a Comac test flight program and a 2016 EIS, this opens the door for a 737RE. The LEAP-X engine diameter is very close to the CFM56 now on the 737.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bearfoil,
The 787-6...never heard of that?! The 787-3 has been shelved for a few years until Boeing gets all the gremlins eliminated with the 787-8.. then the 787-9 will come up for certification..
The Dreamliner program in fact is the basis for the next single aisle airplane..it would be all composite...passenger/cargo load similar to the 757 and fuselage factor would be pretty similar.. The A321 NEO can do it for a bit less in cargo and passenger..transcon and TATL. The studies right now are checking if it's viable to do a Single Aisle with a 4-3 seating arrangement...meaning a fuselage a few inches wide. or 3-3 arrangement with a fuselage a bit longer..the economics would be superior due to new engine programs from RR, the GTF would be like in revision 2-3 and the CFM well, let's see how they can cope with the core temperature first...I guess that they will use a huge amount of ceramics inside the Leap-X to accomplish what they have promised in the new engine..
Regards
The 787-6...never heard of that?! The 787-3 has been shelved for a few years until Boeing gets all the gremlins eliminated with the 787-8.. then the 787-9 will come up for certification..
The Dreamliner program in fact is the basis for the next single aisle airplane..it would be all composite...passenger/cargo load similar to the 757 and fuselage factor would be pretty similar.. The A321 NEO can do it for a bit less in cargo and passenger..transcon and TATL. The studies right now are checking if it's viable to do a Single Aisle with a 4-3 seating arrangement...meaning a fuselage a few inches wide. or 3-3 arrangement with a fuselage a bit longer..the economics would be superior due to new engine programs from RR, the GTF would be like in revision 2-3 and the CFM well, let's see how they can cope with the core temperature first...I guess that they will use a huge amount of ceramics inside the Leap-X to accomplish what they have promised in the new engine..
Regards
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbine D,
No, I'm not... if you check the specs of the Leap X and the CFM 56-7..the bypass ratio on the Leap X is going to be higher that the old engine..meaning a higher fan diameter...+ new engine casing and nacelle
If Boeing installs the Leap X as it is right now...it would hit the nacelle on the ground...Airbus on the other hand...the nacelle/engine casing for the Leap X would give a few inches of ground clearance..
No, I'm not... if you check the specs of the Leap X and the CFM 56-7..the bypass ratio on the Leap X is going to be higher that the old engine..meaning a higher fan diameter...+ new engine casing and nacelle
If Boeing installs the Leap X as it is right now...it would hit the nacelle on the ground...Airbus on the other hand...the nacelle/engine casing for the Leap X would give a few inches of ground clearance..
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlightOBN,
Indeed, you are right! Airbus made the NEO as a gap closer and the cycle starts again..Boeing is going to do another airplane, then they will improve it while Airbus comes with something new...so on so on
A bunch of Boeing customers are putting pressure to get a new Airplane...Boeing cannot take the risk right now with 2 programs and several delays....and bleeding cash on others...(tanker)
Indeed, you are right! Airbus made the NEO as a gap closer and the cycle starts again..Boeing is going to do another airplane, then they will improve it while Airbus comes with something new...so on so on
A bunch of Boeing customers are putting pressure to get a new Airplane...Boeing cannot take the risk right now with 2 programs and several delays....and bleeding cash on others...(tanker)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mingocr83,
The LEAP engine is a completely new engine starting with the core. If the core is smaller, including intake area and the fan is the same diameter as the present CFM56-7, the by-pass ratio becomes larger, right? Trust me, it will not be dragging on the ground...
The LEAP engine is a completely new engine starting with the core. If the core is smaller, including intake area and the fan is the same diameter as the present CFM56-7, the by-pass ratio becomes larger, right? Trust me, it will not be dragging on the ground...
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TD,
I agree with you...but Boeing has said that if they want the Leap X they may need to raise the landing gear and use a new pylon also change the wingbox and wing...as FlightOBN stated the wing has to be larger...
Believe or not..the Leap engine is going to be a bit heavier than the old CFM...
I agree with you...but Boeing has said that if they want the Leap X they may need to raise the landing gear and use a new pylon also change the wingbox and wing...as FlightOBN stated the wing has to be larger...
Believe or not..the Leap engine is going to be a bit heavier than the old CFM...
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if any of the original tooling is still in use.
So, according to the article in Flight Boeing will achieve the nacelle clearance for the new engines by merely 'jacking up the nosewheel'
Why not just put a little wheel under the tail ....
Why not just put a little wheel under the tail ....
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Here today, elsewhere tomorrow
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fat lady is very loud
Looking at the details is interesting...
-Firm order for 130 A320s + 130 A320NEOs.
-Not-quite-firm-yet order for 97 737NGs (100 = 3 previous options already exercised + 97 announced for this order).
-Promise to be the first to look at 100 737NG New Evolution (that's what the press releases call it) whenever there's something to look at.
-100 options for Boeing.
-365 options for Airbus.
That is one loud fat lady.
-Firm order for 130 A320s + 130 A320NEOs.
-Not-quite-firm-yet order for 97 737NGs (100 = 3 previous options already exercised + 97 announced for this order).
-Promise to be the first to look at 100 737NG New Evolution (that's what the press releases call it) whenever there's something to look at.
-100 options for Boeing.
-365 options for Airbus.
That is one loud fat lady.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Whitehill, Hampshire, U.K.
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CargoOne - you are surprised AA could order so many current A320s. Maybe they include ones scheduled originally for the recently cancelled Dubai Capital order?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meering
I'm not that much into this business so I'm not following it closely, what I said is just what I've been told in TLS a couple of month ago. 320 backlog is aprox 4 years now if you want it straight from manufacturer. Surely some leasing companies are holding slots for speculative deals but then again most of them having no problems to place aircraft with airlines.
I'm not that much into this business so I'm not following it closely, what I said is just what I've been told in TLS a couple of month ago. 320 backlog is aprox 4 years now if you want it straight from manufacturer. Surely some leasing companies are holding slots for speculative deals but then again most of them having no problems to place aircraft with airlines.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle NI
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Boeing needed to raise the landing gear height with the NE will they still be able to use a common type rating?
I don't think it will happen, the fuselage is too old and the gains of a new build will allow a leap frog over the neo, in the short term I doubt that Boeing will be too worried such is the world wide demand for narrow body aircraft out to 2020.
I don't think it will happen, the fuselage is too old and the gains of a new build will allow a leap frog over the neo, in the short term I doubt that Boeing will be too worried such is the world wide demand for narrow body aircraft out to 2020.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Seattle Times (if you want to believe them) has a good read with background information about how the deal came along:
Business & Technology | Boeing scrambles to avoid losing American Airlines deal to Airbus | Seattle Times Newspaper
Apart from the business side, I wonder how AA will manage their new fleet structure, both with respect to routes and crews. Quite an amount of training, simulator rides and type ratings necessary to make it all work, not to speak about maintenance, spares and cabin crews.
Business & Technology | Boeing scrambles to avoid losing American Airlines deal to Airbus | Seattle Times Newspaper
Apart from the business side, I wonder how AA will manage their new fleet structure, both with respect to routes and crews. Quite an amount of training, simulator rides and type ratings necessary to make it all work, not to speak about maintenance, spares and cabin crews.