737 max... what now?

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by natas
I haven't flown since 2012. But, I would say a small number for sure. I usually did, just because I always liked reading that stuff, but I'm not everyone. You make a good point.



I do as well but I never counted on it. When I was flying transpacific I can remember the times the assigned 747-400 was changed last minute to a A343. The difference was about three hours longer in the air as the 343 is a slower plane compared to the 747-400. So a 12 hour flight turned into a 15 hours or more journey.

Now it's mainly Dreamliners as both the 747 and 343 have or are being retired.

 

[john_pifer]

Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by natas
Originally Posted by Exhaustgases
I figured it out. Since Boeing got to self certify the Max 8's, I'm going to self certify as well, its only fair. I'm now an airframe mechanic, fully self certified.



I am a self certified armchair airline pilot with 5000 hours experience.


I don't know how Boeing can convince people--passengers to fly on the 737 max again. That it is safe. This is a perception problem. And, I really don't see how they will be able to overcome that--this image-- and keep the same plane. Maybe make a bunch of changes and call it a 797 or something.


What percentage of passengers actually look at the aircraft type when they are booking tickets?


Yeah. Not many. I often ask people I know who fly, what aircraft it was, when they take a trip. They almost never know.

Those who read this section are the exception, as most of us are interested in aviation.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by john_pifer
Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by natas
Originally Posted by Exhaustgases
I figured it out. Since Boeing got to self certify the Max 8's, I'm going to self certify as well, its only fair. I'm now an airframe mechanic, fully self certified.



I am a self certified armchair airline pilot with 5000 hours experience.


I don't know how Boeing can convince people--passengers to fly on the 737 max again. That it is safe. This is a perception problem. And, I really don't see how they will be able to overcome that--this image-- and keep the same plane. Maybe make a bunch of changes and call it a 797 or something.


What percentage of passengers actually look at the aircraft type when they are booking tickets?


Yeah. Not many. I often ask people I know who fly, what aircraft it was, when they take a trip. They almost never know.

Those who read this section are the exception, as most of us are interested in aviation.


Yep!
Most people have no idea and really don't care.
They're more concerned with the bottom line including bag charges.
I try to book trips involving types we haven't flown or types that are disappearing from service, but my wife couldn't care less.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by Or
Originally Posted by fdcg27

Glad that the board is finally showing some spine and that this can be a fresh start for Boeing with both the MAX and other programs going forward.


That is not what is happening at all. He is just being tossed under the bus and "business as usual" is going forward. Look at the resume of his replacement.

It's identical. It's a GE finance guy (the same guys who ruined NBC, recall) with a different haircut, same un-qualified person to be in charge of such a critical engineering entity. TBH, this was all predicted years ago by industry insiders, particularly at PPRUNE. The bean-counters were going to screw it up badly and kill a lot of people. And they clearly haven't learned.

Ever since MD did the "reverse take-over" and massacred Boeing management, substituted their DC-focused Gov't pork, lobbying, and bean-counting management top-down - it was inevitable. Such a slow-motion train-wreck (air crash?) to watch, but it's here and there's no sincere effort at correcting it, just waiting out the public attention span and then continuing on. Until the next time...


Hope you're wrong.
You may recall that in the early bet the company years of the jet age, Boeing was headed by a lawyer who made all the right decisions.
The MD route would lead to an end to Boeing's commercial business as it did for MD.
Douglas was once a leading producer. Douglas piston commercial transports made a joke of those offered by Boeing as did those from Lockheed.
Douglas retired from the new design field with the DC-10 and Lockheed with the L-1011.
Could Boeing enter the dead end of developments of existing types with nothing new offered or planned?
That would be the end of BCA.

 

[4WD]

Perhaps Boeing needs a high tech/composite construction + PurePower thrusted replacement in 3 lengths/ranges … even if it takes borrowing money … Might be time to announce the 737 phase out plans …

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by 4WD
Perhaps Boeing needs a high tech/composite construction + PurePower thrusted replacement in 3 lengths/ranges … even if it takes borrowing money … Might be time to announce the 737 phase out plans …





Sarcasm or did I miss something?

 

[4WD]

No … the B797 is still planned as a twin aisle mid size … right?
would leave the 737 as the old school single aisle with fancy wing tips … but struggling with space for large OD fans …

 

[PimTac]

I was thinking of the Dreamliner but that's not in the same class as the 737.

 

[4WD]

They know how to leap 737/320 with or without LEAP … I'm saying NEO plus Dreamliner technology in a smaller package good for decades forward …

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by 4WD
They know how to leap 737/320 with or without LEAP … I'm saying NEO plus Dreamliner technology in a smaller package good for decades forward …




If they aren't working on this now then they really have missed the boat.

If they had gone this route instead of doing the Max, who knows what might have happened? Mitsubishi and Subaru would love the extra business.

 

[E365]

Originally Posted by 4WD
Perhaps Boeing needs a high tech/composite construction + PurePower thrusted replacement in 3 lengths/ranges … even if it takes borrowing money … Might be time to announce the 737 phase out plans …


Bingo. Passengers prefer the A320 over the 737 (larger cabin diameter). Pilots also prefer the A320 over 737.

They could make a composite 737 replacement that has a better cabin that the 737 or A320, and is LIGHTER and more efficient than both.

The weight is a huge factor. The 757-200 barely holds more passenger than the 737-900 and 737 Max 10, but it's massively heavier and significantly less efficient. Which is why the stretched 737s stayed and the 757 died. Cheaper, lighter and more efficient.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by E365
Originally Posted by 4WD
Perhaps Boeing needs a high tech/composite construction + PurePower thrusted replacement in 3 lengths/ranges … even if it takes borrowing money … Might be time to announce the 737 phase out plans …


Bingo. Passengers prefer the A320 over the 737 (larger cabin diameter). Pilots also prefer the A320 over 737.

They could make a composite 737 replacement that has a better cabin that the 737 or A320, and is LIGHTER and more efficient than both.

The weight is a huge factor. The 757-200 barely holds more passenger than the 737-900 and 737 Max 10, but it's massively heavier and significantly less efficient. Which is why the stretched 737s stayed and the 757 died. Cheaper, lighter and more efficient.


Airlines buy aircraft based upon overall operating economics, not pilot preference.
Passengers select flights based upon departure and arrival times as well as fares, not aircraft type.
The 757 weighs more than the less capable Airbus and Boeing single aisles on current offer simply because it offers more useful load and thus has higher structural weight. It can also depart from shorter runways with a full cabin and enough fuel to travel a great distance.
The 757 was designed as an all purpose airliner more capable than the 737 in an age of cheaper fuel and that so many remain in service fourteen years after the last delivery is a testament to the operating utility of the type.
Not my favorite airliner to board and deplane, but that's true of every long single aisle.

 

[4WD]

And other technical issues like which air mile accounts !

 

[CT8]

I am still wondering about the cost of this debacle. This is such a loss from the corporations to the employed making a living working the fleet. Yesterday I talked to a farmer setting up a few hundred acres to grow hops it has at least a month of extreme labor equipment and material . He explained it to me and I wished him a good cash flow ...he offered me a job ! I believe that people making money makes other people money.

 

[JustN89]

The total cost for Boeing hasn't even hit full throttle yet. Once the MAX is airworthy and operating again, the airlines that operate them are going to seek compensation for what was lost. I know my company is, whether it's cash or credit towards parts/maintenance going forward.

 

[4WD]

Probably provide a few 800NG's plus cash ?

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by CT8
I am still wondering about the cost of this debacle. This is such a loss from the corporations to the employed making a living working the fleet. Yesterday I talked to a farmer setting up a few hundred acres to grow hops it has at least a month of extreme labor equipment and material . He explained it to me and I wished him a good cash flow ...he offered me a job ! I believe that people making money makes other people money.

Do not worry. Boeing cannot loose that much money as Air Force will promptly order enough C17's.

 

[jimbrewer]

Originally Posted by Cujet
It's good to consider the fact that the Max crashes happened with foreign crews. In a recent test, no American crews crashed when given the fault in the sim, while various foreign ones did.

The difference between a non event and a fatal crash is often a very minor one. I'd guess that had the crashes not occurred, Boeing and the FAA would have, in time, revised the system to a normal level of functionality through normal product improvement channels. The Max is very likely to be a fine airplane once it emerges from this debacle. The level of scrutiny is massive and the resulting product will be well understood.

Originally Posted by Cujet
It's good to consider the fact that the Max crashes happened with foreign crews. In a recent test, no American crews crashed when given the fault in the sim, while various foreign ones did.

The difference between a non event and a fatal crash is often a very minor one. I'd guess that had the crashes not occurred, Boeing and the FAA would have, in time, revised the system to a normal level of functionality through normal product improvement channels. The Max is very likely to be a fine airplane once it emerges from this debacle. The level of scrutiny is massive and the resulting product will be well understood.


In that case I'll pass on flying in one.

 

[JustN89]

Originally Posted by 4WD
Probably provide a few 800NG's plus cash ?

Unlikely, due to the fact that the last NG was delivered this month and production has since stopped. Credits towards parts/maintenance is the most likely compensation for the airlines, with discounted A/C pricing coming in second and cash compensation being the least likely (although airlines will fight for this one the most- it helps the bottom line immediately).

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by CT8
I am still wondering about the cost of this debacle. This is such a loss from the corporations to the employed making a living working the fleet. Yesterday I talked to a farmer setting up a few hundred acres to grow hops it has at least a month of extreme labor equipment and material . He explained it to me and I wished him a good cash flow ...he offered me a job ! I believe that people making money makes other people money.

Do not worry. Boeing cannot loose that much money as Air Force will promptly order enough C17's.


Please knock off the political commentary in this thread.

The final C-17 was delivered over four years ago.

Production, and production capacity, of that airplane has ended.