Boeing nears Max thrust definition

Status
Not open for further replies.

MolaKule

Staff member
Joined
Jun 5, 2002
Messages
23,974
Location
Iowegia - USA
Quote:
Boeing nears Max thrust definition

By: David Kaminski-Morrow London
01:33 29 May 2012

Source: AWST


Boeing is finalising the wind-tunnel testing which will enable it to determine the thrust requirements and performance of its 737 Max family.

Identifying the thrust demand from the CFM International Leap-1B powerplants will confirm the type's maximum take-off weight and range. Meanwhile, the airframer is dismissing rival Airbus's focus on the Max's smaller fan diameter compared with the A320neo.

"Physics doesn't work in Europe the way it does everywhere else," says Boeing Commercial Airplanes vice-president of marketing Randy Tinseth.

He says both airframers are designing thrust requirements around their largest re-engined aircraft - the A321neo and 737-9 - but says the Airbus twinjet needs 20% more thrust, and this allows the 737 to employ a smaller core and smaller fan.

Tinseth adds that the A320's empty weight per seat is higher than the 737's - by 5-10% across the family range - and the larger A320neo fan will simply add more weight to the aircraft.

"We've worked hard to optimise the performance of the [737 Max]," he says, insisting that weight affects the operating costs in terms of fuel-burn, maintenance and landing charges.

He also believes Airbus is using "seat count games" to suggest its A320 matches the efficiency of the 737-800, and states that assessment of configurations shows the 737 has a higher seat-count and a 7% advantage in terms of fuel burn per seat - a figure, he says, which will rise to 9% with the Max.

Bolding Emphasis mine.
 
Last edited:
Nice!

Though I have to say that the big airbus we were on to Europe was really nice. We had lay flat beds in that thing!
 
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
I worked on the 747 floors for a little over a year. I hated it......

They do tend to bicker a lot. Don't know about the comment though.


I work with the Boeing designers almost everyday and it is not fun either.
 
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
I worked on the 747 floors for a little over a year. I hated it......

They do tend to bicker a lot. Don't know about the comment though.


I work with the Boeing designers almost everyday and it is not fun either.

I AM a Boeing employee.....and no, I am not much fun to work with! Lol.
Being a twenty plus year employee....I am thankful for the money and benefits. I am overpaid really. But it's true in my experience that working with these people has been extremely difficult and a real pain. I've learned much about how low people can go while working here. I've seen enough depressing and unethical employees to fill several lifetimes. On the plus side I've also gotten to know a select few workers that are very fine examples of what a human being should be....but those folks were rare at Boeing. Mostly the company exhibits human nature at it's worst. But it's paid the bills all these years so what can I really say?!
 
I work with both the military and commercial sides of Boeing. The military side seems to be a lot nicer compares to the commercial group. Boeing has great products though as I am currently in the Reserve flying the Apache.
 
It was cool seeing the planes in different stages while employed there.
There were definitely decent people while I worked there. Also some not so nice people......
 
My aunt worked for boeing on composite materials in seattle, she is not very nice either lol. She retired after 25 years
 
Originally Posted By: BrownBox88
My aunt worked for boeing on composite materials in seattle, she is not very nice either lol. She retired after 25 years

If she worked in Seattle on composites, she must have worked at the Developmental Center (9-101 building). They did a lot of military work there including the B-2 Bomber. When I was there I found it interesting. At the time it was a secret project. Tons of folks where there and being a government project, money flowed like water. That is....until the requirement was cut and then half the people were laid off.
 
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: BrownBox88
My aunt worked for boeing on composite materials in seattle, she is not very nice either lol. She retired after 25 years

If she worked in Seattle on composites, she must have worked at the Developmental Center (9-101 building). They did a lot of military work there including the B-2 Bomber. When I was there I found it interesting. At the time it was a secret project. Tons of folks where there and being a government project, money flowed like water. That is....until the requirement was cut and then half the people were laid off.


Not too sure where she exactly worked. She retired at least more than five years ago..
 
The European governments which own Scarebus would like nothing more than to kill Boeing, and then sell us their stuff at inflated prices.
 
Boeing employees are a joy to work when. Have you ever worked with the French? Ask a question and all you get is ohhhh... (followed by sucking air through their teeth sounds.)

Pilots like Boeings!! (A little noisey in the cockpit, but built for pilots!)
 
Even though I work for Boeing I think all the major aircraft manufacturers make some very nice aircraft in general. I'm partial toward many Boeing planes (747, 737, 727, 777, etc) but I do like others and have no trepidation in flying in them. It's the pilots training and the maintenance of the aircraft that concerns me the most. I would dearly like to see Boeings new 737Max kick some serious behind over the coming Airbus A320Neo however. I just wish Boeing would redesign the nose to look more modern like the 787.
 
Quote:
I just wish Boeing would redesign the nose to look more modern like the 787.


Believe me, if it reduced drag and still accomodated the weather radar, they would.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
I just wish Boeing would redesign the nose to look more modern like the 787.


Believe me, if it reduced drag and still accomodated the weather radar, they would.


No they wouldn't. While I was at Raytheon, we offer them several smaller radar options but they do not want to upgrade. Boeing is producing over 35 737 aircrafts per month and pushing toward 45 per month by the end of next year. A change in design would set them back to less 20 ships per month. At a market rate of $25-45 million per aircraft it would be a very costly upgrade.
 
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
I just wish Boeing would redesign the nose to look more modern like the 787.


Believe me, if it reduced drag and still accomodated the weather radar, they would.


No they wouldn't. While I was at Raytheon, we offer them several smaller radar options but they do not want to upgrade. Boeing is producing over 35 737 aircrafts per month and pushing toward 45 per month by the end of next year. A change in design would set them back to less 20 ships per month. At a market rate of $25-45 million per aircraft it would be a very costly upgrade.

I was speaking about just the new 737Max, not any current ones. The aircraft is still in design stage now and making changes to the nose would not slow anything since it's not even in production yet. I'm no aerospace designer or aircraft engineer, but I do think a new nose similar to the 787 would modernize the 737Max and distinguish it instantly as 'new' from the older 737's. Looks sell. The new winglets are an example of modernization that are both functional and unique.
 
Part of the cost reduction is to use as much of the old design as possible because the production lines themselves will be the same. New radar means new FMC software, new hardware, new nose cone, new AEDB, etc. Modifying the production lines will slow down the current delivery rate.

All the airlines care about is fuel burn and a new nose is not really going to help a whole lot.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
Part of the cost reduction is to use as much of the old design as possible because the production lines themselves will be the same. New radar means new FMC software, new hardware, new nose cone, new AEDB, etc. Modifying the production lines will slow down the current delivery rate.

All the airlines care about is fuel burn and a new nose is not really going to help a whole lot.

I hear you. But, the production lines are no more than an assembly process. The new Max will incorporate many differences in design that will necessitate assembly changes regardless. A new nose, if incorporated into the assembly process along with all the other changes that will occur, would not slow production in my opinion. I think the main reason Boeing would not do it has to do with the NEW aircraft sharing as much commonality with the old. Changing the nose would involve a whole new set of parts and repairs for the customer. Still.....I wish they would for the sake of modernity and aesthetics. The savings in fuel would be probably minor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top