It's more or less correct (2015 for A320, 2018 for A320NEO) but sales and production talk constantly. If sales is pursuing a customer as big as AA, they make sure there are slots available to make a batch earlier than the "normal" availability date. If they don't get the sale, they try the next potential customer. If that doesn't work, there will always be someone willing to get their aircraft earlier than scheduled to pick up these empty slots.

With so many planes for AA, not sure there are many slots left however, even with Delta and Southwest looking at ordering "something." Perhaps one, but not both airlines, most likely...

What I don't understand is why, when Boeing launched the 737NG, they didn't opt instead for a 757 shrink + re-wing. The 757 had a newer basic design than the 737-3/4/500. At the time of the NG launch, the 757 appeared to have a good future: the 757-300 development was, as far as I remember, about the same period.

If Boeing had updated/shrunk the 757, would they not be in a better position now? What am I missing? (Just an SLF here).

Just a quick point of order:

United's never quite been married to the Boeing brand. Students of history will remember the minor shock they created when they chose the DC-8 over the B707.

Good grief...they bought what they bought, Air France has Boeings..everybody has everything....

Military aircraft are a different scenario,...should be home-grown, for Europeans as well as us Yanks...'nuff said...:ok::ok:

Never married to be sure, That would be incest. At one time the same company, UAL offed its guppies in favor of the 320. If they start purchasing some heavier Airbus, then we worry.

:D

They ordered some 350s a while back, a split order with some 787s. That heavy enough for you?

I am a worrier. At least the 350 has twelve VS joins. Not so sanguine about resin. When Boeing wastes one in a fire, and demonstrates products of combustion won't kill otherwise happy pax, I'll rest easier.

Oh bearfoil. Now you even worry about separating VS of airplanes which have not been built yet. I guess you would have tried to convince the Wright brothers not to take up flying at all?

No, I am taking note of Airbus worrying, and redesigning the system twice since AA587.

:ok:

I also take note they have not utilised my solution. Don't strengthen the VS, Weaken the Rudder.

You need to go back a bit further into history. United Airlines was originally Boeing Air Transport: United Airlines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually it was a three way split. Pratt & Whitney (hence the holding company still being "United Technologies"), United Airlines (ex-Boeing Air Transport) and Boeing Aircraft. Hamilton Standard (propellers), Sikorsky, and Chance Vought were also in the combine. It was broken up under US anti-trust laws in the early 1930s.

@ Bearfoil,

If you are so afraid to fly on the Bus, then you should be afraid of flying on the 737 too...remember the actuator problem and the USAir crash?

**** happens all the time...at the end of the day, the design problems were amended and those problems did not happen again on both models..

I'd ride in a saddle on the dorsal, if it was bolted down. What makes you think I fear the Bus? It's a beauty. She has some slimy pimps once in a while, but she's a great old broad.

Worry is not Fear.

answer=42 (post 43) -

What I don't understand is why, when Boeing launched the 737NG, they didn't opt instead for a 757 shrink + re-wing. The 757 had a newer basic design than the 737-3/4/500. At the time of the NG launch, the 757 appeared to have a good future: the 757-300 development was, as far as I remember, about the same period.

If Boeing had updated/shrunk the 757, would they not be in a better position now? What am I missing? (Just an SLF here).

*****


Due to cost of re-engineering and Southwest's influence on keeping the changes (no 757 cockpit/nose on NG :{) to a minimum. It was cheaper to update the 737 than it was to shrink the 757.

One of the prettiest snouts in the biz. Probably a good deal quieter also.

More detail on the 1934 breakup of the old United Aircraft may be found on the P&W wiki article.

How much (ball pack (sp?) figures would cost the option to upgrade the engines as the case of the newer generation of 737 vs designing an aircraft from scratch.

And also could the parts of the re-engine 737 could be transfered on the newer aircraft?

Rwy in Sight

As I understand it (hopefully someone can correct me here) :

The A320Neo is a question of substituting engines and bolting on winglets.

The 737Neo is a different matter because the new engine has insufficient clearance as is, so a new longer landing gear is required, which in turn requires fuselage underbelly mods to stow it when retracted, different positioning of bulkheads, etc. Believe there are also significant wing mods required. I understand the engineering required is a whole league different compared to what Airbus need to do, which is doubtless part of the greater evaluation Boeing has to do. I also wonder if the A320Neo will get on the same type certificate, and therefore crew qualification, and whether the Boeing, with much greater changes, can do the same or not.

It's remeniscent of when the DC8-60 series came along, Douglas could do the stretch but the Boeing 707, which was indeed evaluated for the same, proved incapable of a comparable stretch due to its basic design and layout.

A319 (from A320) a most notable exception in all respects.

what is the difference between a shrink e.g B737-600 to a growth e.g a A340-600 or a D8-400 or a B757-300 or B767-400?

Was the F100 a growth of the F70 or was the F70 a shrink of the F100?