All I have to say is, nice job by the tie down crew! Still attached to the rail cars...
Boeing 737 spawning problems
- Thread starter boundarylayer
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: andrewg
I work for Boeing. The fuselage sections pull right up next to the 737 factory in Renton, Washington where they are moved into the factory for final assembly.
I'll bet some schedules will need to be adjusted quickly. This will no doubt cause a few delays for waiting airline customers.
OTOH, give the current NG production rate, any delay from the loss of three units might not even be noticed.
Also, are these assemblies really junk?
If they're just bare fuselages dunked in fresh water and haven't been badly dented up, they might fly yet.
I work for Boeing. The fuselage sections pull right up next to the 737 factory in Renton, Washington where they are moved into the factory for final assembly.
I'll bet some schedules will need to be adjusted quickly. This will no doubt cause a few delays for waiting airline customers.
OTOH, give the current NG production rate, any delay from the loss of three units might not even be noticed.
Also, are these assemblies really junk?
If they're just bare fuselages dunked in fresh water and haven't been badly dented up, they might fly yet.
In related news, Captain Sullenberger was seen fleeing the scene, and heard saying "Dang birds again!!"
I would imagine these fuselage sections will be scrapped. I can't imagine Boeing actually going through the extremely complicated and expensive task of inspecting each entire fuselage from end to end. Maybe insurance wise it would be best to just write them off. The liability issues that could arise down the road if one of these sections was involved in an air accident (regardless of cause) would be enough to make any attorney salivate.
Tumbling down a steep hillside in a violent crash can cause cracks. I know, surprising.
Originally Posted By: quint
Originally Posted By: tom slick
You'll have to check planefax to make sure unscrupulous dealers aren't trying to sell off "flood planes."
It happens. This plane....
...became this plane a few years later.....
She was cut up and scrapped right on the tarmac a few months after I had started working for ABX.
Sometimes distressed planes end up in third world countries. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/13/us-drugs-security-aviation-idUSTRE60C3E820100113
Originally Posted By: tom slick
You'll have to check planefax to make sure unscrupulous dealers aren't trying to sell off "flood planes."
It happens. This plane....
...became this plane a few years later.....
She was cut up and scrapped right on the tarmac a few months after I had started working for ABX.
Sometimes distressed planes end up in third world countries. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/13/us-drugs-security-aviation-idUSTRE60C3E820100113
Just found out yesterday at work (Boeing) that the massive amount of parts already in place on the Renton assembly line for those wrecked 737's are going to be removed from the line and stored in my building about 50 feet from my work area.
Originally Posted By: route66mike
Tumbling down a steep hillside in a violent crash can cause cracks. I know, surprising.
Wouldn't likely cause cracks.
Cracks are typically the result of fatigue failure associated with long use and the vulnerable points on this type have been well understood for many years and inspection intervals are established accordingly.
More likely dents or mechanical damage.
One fuse shows a nice gash just forward of the spar carry-through section in its upper lobe, although still secured to the car carrying it.
The other two, also secured to their rail cars, look pretty good and totally useable.
I'm sure that the resident Boeing guy in this thread is right, though, and all three of these might have been airliners will end up as scrap.
Kind of sad that these guys would have had a 20+ year airline career and will now just end up as scrap alloy.
Tumbling down a steep hillside in a violent crash can cause cracks. I know, surprising.
Wouldn't likely cause cracks.
Cracks are typically the result of fatigue failure associated with long use and the vulnerable points on this type have been well understood for many years and inspection intervals are established accordingly.
More likely dents or mechanical damage.
One fuse shows a nice gash just forward of the spar carry-through section in its upper lobe, although still secured to the car carrying it.
The other two, also secured to their rail cars, look pretty good and totally useable.
I'm sure that the resident Boeing guy in this thread is right, though, and all three of these might have been airliners will end up as scrap.
Kind of sad that these guys would have had a 20+ year airline career and will now just end up as scrap alloy.
MolaKule
Staff member
From the picture, I would think the fuselage in the center could be used in cargo service as it does not appear to have any major dents or cracks.
Of course, only the Boeing person upon close inspection at the scene or back at the hangar could access the damage if there is any. I am sure Boeing is in close contact with an FAA DER on this issue.
It could be that none are salvageable only to the extent that putting any damaged (no matter how small) fuselage back into service would carry high litigation risks.
BTW, when I worked for Boeing Commercial in Wichita, I was on the NG design team.
Of course, only the Boeing person upon close inspection at the scene or back at the hangar could access the damage if there is any. I am sure Boeing is in close contact with an FAA DER on this issue.
It could be that none are salvageable only to the extent that putting any damaged (no matter how small) fuselage back into service would carry high litigation risks.
BTW, when I worked for Boeing Commercial in Wichita, I was on the NG design team.
Last edited:
Cargo service?
Has there ever been a new-build 737F of any generation?
Didn't know that you were part of the NG design team.
Great team job updating this design that was old even then with new wings and a new tail.
I've flown in every model other than the -100.
That the 737 remains competitive enough with the single aisle Airbus that airlines select between the two based mainly on delivery dates is a tribute to the orginal 'sixties designers.
Has there ever been a new-build 737F of any generation?
Didn't know that you were part of the NG design team.
Great team job updating this design that was old even then with new wings and a new tail.
I've flown in every model other than the -100.
That the 737 remains competitive enough with the single aisle Airbus that airlines select between the two based mainly on delivery dates is a tribute to the orginal 'sixties designers.
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Cargo service?
Has there ever been a new-build 737F of any generation?...
No, but this could be the first?
We made sure we had a proper design for the rudder hydraulics and controller this time after a few inverted flight problems on previous -XXX models.
Cargo service?
Has there ever been a new-build 737F of any generation?...
No, but this could be the first?
We made sure we had a proper design for the rudder hydraulics and controller this time after a few inverted flight problems on previous -XXX models.
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted By: boundarylayer
In related news, Captain Sullenberger was seen fleeing the scene, and heard saying "Dang birds again!!"
"Look at the size of them Chickens!"
In related news, Captain Sullenberger was seen fleeing the scene, and heard saying "Dang birds again!!"
"Look at the size of them Chickens!"
Apparently each section weighs 20 tons and they are on a 50 ton railroad car. Boeing is still in the process of assessing the damages of the three fuselages.
Spirit in Wichita ships 42 of these to Renton, Wa. per month. Because of this accident causing a slight delay in production as well as when the Spirit plant was hit with a tornado back in 2012, some are asking Boeing if they are considering a second 737 fuselage plant to minimize production delays.
Spirit in Wichita ships 42 of these to Renton, Wa. per month. Because of this accident causing a slight delay in production as well as when the Spirit plant was hit with a tornado back in 2012, some are asking Boeing if they are considering a second 737 fuselage plant to minimize production delays.
Yep....42 per month. Two 737's each work day. 500 per year.
By 2017 the rate will be 47 per month. That's a 50% increase over 2010 production rate. At that time the 737 MAX will be in production.
By 2017 the rate will be 47 per month. That's a 50% increase over 2010 production rate. At that time the 737 MAX will be in production.
Do you know off hand how many single aisle deliveries those guys in Toulouse are now making?
Also, what's the breakdown for Boeing in the three current lengths?
The -700 seems to have fallen into disfavor.
My impression is that the -800 leads in current deliveries, but a lot of -900s seem to be showing up in fleets as well.
Flew on my first -900 in March and it was like any other 737, just more rows of seats.
Not nearly as many as either length 757, though, so not nearly as slow to board or deplane.
Also, what's the breakdown for Boeing in the three current lengths?
The -700 seems to have fallen into disfavor.
My impression is that the -800 leads in current deliveries, but a lot of -900s seem to be showing up in fleets as well.
Flew on my first -900 in March and it was like any other 737, just more rows of seats.
Not nearly as many as either length 757, though, so not nearly as slow to board or deplane.
Airbus is at 42 I think. By 2016 the goal is 46 per month of the A320 family.
As for Boeing the -800 is the most popular, followed closely by the -900ER (the-900 is discontinued). Seating for the -800 is 162 in two class config; 189 if one seating class. The -900ER is 180/210.
The 737MAX is the big question and how if does against the new NEO. I would guess the breakdown numbers won't change much.
As for Boeing the -800 is the most popular, followed closely by the -900ER (the-900 is discontinued). Seating for the -800 is 162 in two class config; 189 if one seating class. The -900ER is 180/210.
The 737MAX is the big question and how if does against the new NEO. I would guess the breakdown numbers won't change much.
I expect that the MAX will do just fine against the NEO.
Airlines seem to view these planes as being pretty interchangeable and orders seem more based upon availability and maybe commonality than any differences in operating costs.
I would guess that the A321 NEO will sell in greater numbers than the 737-900 MAX but that the -800 MAX will outsell the A320 NEO. The A319 and the -700 will likely fade away.
This leaves a large gap between the smallest A and B single aisle types and the largest regional aircraft.
We'll know in 2020 or so how this all plays out.
Airlines seem to view these planes as being pretty interchangeable and orders seem more based upon availability and maybe commonality than any differences in operating costs.
I would guess that the A321 NEO will sell in greater numbers than the 737-900 MAX but that the -800 MAX will outsell the A320 NEO. The A319 and the -700 will likely fade away.
This leaves a large gap between the smallest A and B single aisle types and the largest regional aircraft.
We'll know in 2020 or so how this all plays out.
I did hear that Boeing is possibly looking into a revamped 757 type aircraft. Apparently a gap exists between the largest 737 and the smallest twin aisle. For some reason the 787 series isn't it.
Who knows except to say that both Airbus and Boeing intend on doing what it takes to please the airlines and make a profit.
Who knows except to say that both Airbus and Boeing intend on doing what it takes to please the airlines and make a profit.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
JDW said:
- Status
Similar threads
