The Aviation Thread [Contains Lots of Awesome Pictures]

MrChips

Active Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
492
Location
Calgary, AB Canada
Car(s)
2002 BMW 330Ci, 1973 BMW 2002tii (in pieces)
Yeah... Boeing pretty much shit the bed on this one. They should've known how many airlines are going to have to replace their aging fleet (read: AMR Super 80s) and offered NOTHING to compete with the A320neo. They're taking a beating now...
I disagree. While it does seem like Boeing was dithering over the future of the 737, I suspect quite a bit of it was intentional; there seems to have never been any serious intention on their part to build a clean-sheet aircraft to replace the 737 (at least, in the short term), while re-re-engining (lol) the 737 gives them a product that is a near-exact match for the A320neo economically (as both the A320 and 737NG are/were), while at the same time allowing Boeing a respite from big, high-risk engineering projects (that have gone wrong for them of late). Also, it allows them to devote resources to the rumoured 777NG program. The delay was, IMO, an effort to cause havoc not at Airbus, but at their upstart competition; the Bombardier CSeries in particular has suffered badly (and potentially irreversibly) as a result of Boeing's "indecision". Don't kid yourselves; the 737RE (or whatever this aircraft is going to be called) is going to be able to match Airbus blow-for-blow over the next 15-20 years.

Also, AMR's CEO, Gerry Arpey, alluded to the fact that not only might AMR not be the first operator of the 737RE, they might not even be the first company to come to any kind of an agreement with Boeing to order 737REs. Boeing reports their orders much more conservatively than Airbus does; Airbus likes to report MoUs as orders, and seems to be happy to leak all kinds of information as to who they're talking to and how many they're talking about. Boeing, on the other hand, doesn't report orders until they have a final agreement and money in hand.
 
Last edited:

flyinhawaiian

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
1,784
Location
New York
Car(s)
Mazdaspeed Protege
Very true, but lets also be real - Boeing isn't going to commit to ANYTHING in that size jet, until its approved by Southwest :p
 

MrChips

Active Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
492
Location
Calgary, AB Canada
Car(s)
2002 BMW 330Ci, 1973 BMW 2002tii (in pieces)
Very true, but lets also be real - Boeing isn't going to commit to ANYTHING in that size jet, until its approved by Southwest :p
I think Boeing would be foolish to hinge their decision on the 737 replacement on Southwest's demands alone. After all, 500 aircraft pales in comparison to the 25,000+ narrowbody aircraft expected to be ordered in the next 20 years.
 

Mercedes5CLR

Active Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2003
Messages
296
Location
Lewisville, TX
Car(s)
2014 Ford Taurus
I was going to say I haven't heard any Neo production in the States.. News to me if they were. The EADS program was an alternative but, they lost to the boeing on the x-tanker project and haven't heard anything more from that team.
 

narf

Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
DONOR
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,168
Location
Kiel/Wherever, Germany
Car(s)
'19 BMW M240i
I was going to say I haven't heard any Neo production in the States.. News to me if they were. The EADS program was an alternative but, they lost to the boeing on the x-tanker project and haven't heard anything more from that team.
Traditionally/politically Airbus plants are distributed amongst the countries that own Airbus, that's mostly Germany, France, Ukania, and Spain. China managed to trade large orders for a final assembly line over there, maybe the US will try to follow China's lead in that. There still are several years to go until all the ordered/optioned planes will be built.
 

flyinhawaiian

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
1,784
Location
New York
Car(s)
Mazdaspeed Protege
I think Boeing would be foolish to hinge their decision on the 737 replacement on Southwest's demands alone. After all, 500 aircraft pales in comparison to the 25,000+ narrowbody aircraft expected to be ordered in the next 20 years.
True, but I really can't see AAL being a launch customer, not since WN owns or operates more 737s more than any other operator in the world. If you don't think Boeing has already catered directly to Southwest, look at the development of the 737NG and how its fit directly (almost too directly) into their business model and flight plan. That single order ALONE could set Boeing's books straight for a year, and I feel many of the LCCs looking to replace their fleet look to WN as to how they're going to react...
 

nsx_23

Forum Addict
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
7,709
I wonder how much of the promised fuel-savings will 320neos actually see - big assumption by airbus that the engines will actually deliver the 15% figure. 3.5% for airframe improvements (e.g. sharklets) sounds pretty close to what Boeing managed to trim from the 737 (correct me if I'm wrong here - I've had a, um, generous amount of alcohol).
 
Last edited:

MrChips

Active Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
492
Location
Calgary, AB Canada
Car(s)
2002 BMW 330Ci, 1973 BMW 2002tii (in pieces)
I wonder how much of the promised fuel-savings will 320neos actually see - big assumption by airbus that the engines will actually deliver the 15% figure. 3.5% for airframe improvements (e.g. sharklets) sounds pretty close to what Boeing managed to trim from the 737 (correct me if I'm wrong here - I've had a, um, generous amount of alcohol).
It is hard to quantify fuel savings on an aircraft without specifying the mission. On long flights, the winglets on a 737 can save up to 5% compared to a non-winglet equipped aircraft. In short flights, however, the winglets can actually increase fuel consumption and reduce payload (remember, they add to the empty weight of the aircraft). The answer to your question about how much savings winglets provide? It depends on how you fly your aircraft.

As for these new engines, early tests seem to indicate that they will be within a percent of their efficiency targets. But as with winglets, this isn't the full story. While both Pratt and CFM are both predicting 10% reductions in fuel burn, maintenance costs on these new engines are expected to climb between 15 and 20 percent, compared to their predecessors. Also, it remains to be seen if Pratt's geared turbofan will be able to match the reliability marks set by the previous generation of engines.

Overall, I think both Boeing and Airbus are being a bit too optimistic about their performance targets; neither aircraft will realise their expectations...at least, not right out of the box. I suspect it will take a couple of performance improvement plans (PIPs) to get there.
 

nsx_23

Forum Addict
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
7,709
As for these new engines, early tests seem to indicate that they will be within a percent of their efficiency targets. But as with winglets, this isn't the full story. While both Pratt and CFM are both predicting 10% reductions in fuel burn, maintenance costs on these new engines are expected to climb between 15 and 20 percent, compared to their predecessors. Also, it remains to be seen if Pratt's geared turbofan will be able to match the reliability marks set by the previous generation of engines.
And not to mention the added cost of selecting one of the new engines. As with any new aviation technology, it'd probably take some updates to bring the GTF up to expected performance.

Continuing the 320neo and 737 discussion:

Flightglobal said:
Alaska shows interest in re-engined 737

Alaska Airlines is interested in Boeing's recently-announced re-engined 737 offering, though the carrier has yet to make any decisions about the type's future in its fleet.

"We are very much in favour of lower fuel burn, and if Boeing can do this sooner rather than later, that's a good a thing", said Bill Ayer, CEO of Alaska parent Alaska Air Group during the company's second quarter earnings call.

"We just learned about this, really, yesterday, like everybody else," said Brandon Pederson, company CFO.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Jim Albaugh said 20 July that he planned to recommend re-engining the 737 to the Boeing board of directors in August, with a formal authority to offer expected in the fourth quarter.

"We're all in favour of saving money on our fuel bill, but in terms of how that affects our orderbook, our fleet, our capex, it's just too early to tell," Pederson added.

Initial estimates of the fuel burn improvement have spanned from 10-12% and as high as 15% depending on the final configuration that is selected.



Ayer also said "we will be very interested to learn more about this airplane and we look forward to taking delivery of some, if everything looks right in terms of the cost and the fuel burn and so forth".

Boeing expects to firm the configuration of the new variant within three to four weeks as it concludes deliberations about the fan size of the CFM International Leap-X engine that will exclusively power the new aircraft, which is slated for an entry into service sometime mid-decade.

"We have a fleet plan and an orderbook with Boeing right now that we're happy with in terms of numbers of airplanes and timing of airplanes, and I think the idea would be that this new airplane would just slot into that whenever it's available", he continued.

According to a filing with US regulators, Alaska said it is scheduled to take delivery of six 737-800s in 2012, three in 2013, one in 2014, and two in 2015.

It will also take delivery of six and seven 737-900ERs in 2013 and 2014, respectively. Alaska added the 737-900ER to its orderbook this past January.

The company also said in the filing that it has options for 42 more 737s.

Alaska exclusively operates the Boeing 737 in its fleet, operating the -400, -700, -800, and -900 variants.
Completely unrelated:







 
Last edited:

Whappeh

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Messages
2,657
Location
Seattle, WA
Car(s)
05 Nissan Xterra 4x4
The F7F gives me a giant boner. I'd love to see one fly one day (Considering there is only 1 airworthy example left in the world, I don't see it happening anytime soon :(). Find it crazy they thought it would be a functional carrier based aircraft.

Edit: Wow, there are 6 air worthy examples, and a few more being restored! Awesome!
 
Last edited:

Chaos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,448
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Car(s)
'94 Acura Integra, '08 Infiniti G37 (Again)
Airacobra! The mid engined sports car of the sky. Except it ended up like the Jag XJ220, getting hit by stupid decisions and losing most of it's power.
 

MidEngine4Life

Active Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
232
Location
Vancouver, WA
Car(s)
2013 Ford Focus ST
The F7F gives me a giant boner. I'd love to see one fly one day (Considering there is only 1 airworthy example left in the world, I don't see it happening anytime soon :(). Find it crazy they thought it would be a functional carrier based aircraft.

Edit: Wow, there are 6 air worthy examples, and a few more being restored! Awesome!
When I to the reno air races last year (undoubtedly where that shot was taken) there were two there.

Here is my photo of one...


and video...


Airacobra! The mid engined sports car of the sky. Except it ended up like the Jag XJ220, getting hit by stupid decisions and losing most of it's power.
How many of those actually saw combat?
 
Last edited:
Top