|
Boeing looking at stretching The 737-9
It seems Boeing is seriously considering stretching their 737-9 MAX to counter the market being flooded by A321s. Boeing Co. is studying two designs for its so-called Max 10, a potential stretch of its largest 737 aimed at making up ground on Airbus Group SE’s longest single-aisle jet, according to people familiar with the plans. One option Boeing has discussed with airlines and lessors in recent weeks is a simple lengthening of the 737 Max 9 that would offer much of the range and payload of Airbus’s A321neo, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the talks are private. The company is also vetting an alternative, more elaborate revamp that would feature the larger engines developed for the Airbus jet. The more straightforward redesign, which would rely on upgrading engines developed for the Max family, would enter the market by early 2020, while the more complex one wouldn’t begin service until almost two years later. http://www.boeing.com/resources/boei...y-large-02.jpg |
It seems Boeing is seriously considering stretching their 737-9 MAX
It's called a B757. |
Looks like a 757 with new engines and shorter undercarraige. Put the NEO engines on it, lengthen the undercarraige it will look like a 757 with new engines!!
|
Do whatever you want to do to it, but it will never be a match for the capability of a 757.
|
757 has a much larger wing. Personally I think a '737-10' would be a stretch to far.
|
A lot of professional comment on PPrune suggests the existing 739 is a stretch to far and can barely get airborne with a full load at some places and usually requires a longgggg runway for a short haul aircraft.
It is too narrow for the modern world and many parts of it must be same as the 50+ year old original . Yet another stretch is really going to make it a 'Triggers Broom' (for non Brits, thats a ten year old broom thats had five new heads and four new handles) |
I think Boeing can make a 737-10 as capable as they want. It's a trade-off between costs and expected market success.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...psyfqwm0y3.jpg |
Really? 777 type bogie pitch lock required perhaps? Proper doors not them dodgy overwing jobs. In fact forget it.
|
777 type bogie pitch lock required perhaps? |
I think if Boeing really choses to offer a PW1000/LEAP-A sized turbofan it is inevitable they will have to redesign much of the inner 737 wing and central wingbox to make this possible. Then we are likely talking about more than 5 billion investment.
Doing nothing and carrying on with just the -9 for the next 8 years can be just as damaging or worse though. Airbus has been totally pushing Boeing around with the A321 for the last few years. A320 production will be half A321 in the near future, with margins that typically come with mass production and no competition. http://static.seattletimes.com/wp-co...7-1020x528.jpg (Airbus Alabama assembly line) It seems Boeing feels doing nothing is no longer an real option. https://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetal...37-max-family/ |
It would be more promising to build that famous "middle of the market" airplane from scratch and use it as a base layout for the upcoming next single aisle family. Not at Renton but at Charleston.
|
It seems Boeing feels doing nothing, i.e. not making a longer version, is no longer an real option.????
What kind of option is that? |
Another MAX stretch is a new build airplane. New wing and old airframe? Didn't work well on the 747-8.
|
RAT 5,
basically that is saying to each other: all will be fine, no need to panic. Investment risk is high and 3000 737s in the backlog, what can happen? Boeing outproduced Airbus last year! Lesshair, old airframes with new wings worked for the 727, 737, 757, A310, A330, E2, CRJ, 777X hopefully. It seems to me Boeing only should make the investment in a 737-10 when they best the A321LR on capacity & range. Just matching isn't good enough, they're fighting an uphill battle. A great new MoM would take at least 8 years, during which Airbus would have a sales / margin feast. |
Boeing has missed to cover the MAX gap to the A321neo and there are reasons for it. Bigger engines plus longer gear needed, leading to some quite different wing, resulting in very high cost for low gain as the fuselage diameter is still a tad too small for lower deck cargo and Airbus is offering the A321neo now.
This chance has passed. No drama. Time to start the next big thing. |
Keeje...love the big fly on the image!
Aside from that, the prospect of a re-design of the 737 to make room for large diameter motors is moot. The airlines that wanted that were already supplied by Airbus. Boeing builds great aircraft, management decisions have left customers getting 'facials', while AB has been providing 'implants' that are attractive. |
Not a lot of use on a bogey with one row of tyres....... |
737-10 = Mad Max.
|
I know we're talking MoM and shorthaul.
But why don't they bite the bullet and just build a BWB. Enough naffing around with the X-48 already - we all know Bob Liebeck has been right all these years. Yes I know - problems of pressurising non-circular fuselages, customers wanting windows, tendency to pitch up-down, not enough space at the gate, 90 secs to get everyone out etc. etc. I suspect the real reason that the Randy Tinseths of the world aren't fans of a passenger version is that by making one, they'd render most of their current inventory obsolete in one fell stroke. Imagine it - a bleeding great civilian B-2 with a couple of stonking hi-bypass turbo-fans on the back. Give me a few good movies, some nice food and space to stretch out and I'd be on that bad boy for thirteen hours up to LAX sharpish - window or no window. |
I have read that Boeing are lobbying the FAA to allow them to raise the height of the landing gear so they can put geared turbofans on the 737 frame and still keep the 1960s type certificate.
One has to wonder what the point of a type certificate is anymore when the regulator allows so many changes. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.