Boeing studies idea of two planes to replace 737

Reuters ^ | September 13, 2006 | John Crawley

[ConservativeStatement]

WASHINGTON, Sept 13 (Reuters) - Boeing Co. (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) is weighing options for replacing its best-selling 737 and one scenario might include separate aircraft for two markets, the company's senior marketing official said on Wednesday.

The 737 family covers the 110- to 200-seat range and is the most popular commercial plane ever with more than 5,000 produced in nearly four decades. There have been several 737 upgrades, including a major overhaul in the early 1990s.

With airlines seeking variety in seating capacity and more fuel and operating efficiency, Boeing is studying how to meet expectations and continue to offer a workhorse for the short- and medium-haul market.

A decision is nearly two years off and production several years away but one option under study, said Boeing marketing vice president Randy Baseler, is dipping into the under 100-seat market dominated by regional jets and satisfying customers who want more than 200 seats at the same time.

Boeing currently does not manufacture a regional jet, a market dominated by Canada's Bombardier Inc (BBDb.TO: Quote, Profile, Research) and Brazil's Embraer SA (EMBR3.SA: Quote, Profile, Research). Boeing would also compete with any changes by Europe's Airbus (EAD.DE: Quote, Profile, Research), which now makes the A320 to compete with the 737.

[phantomworker]

How about scaling down the BBJ?

[Turbopilot]

The BBJ is already a 737, with the wings of the larger -800 on the smaller -700 fuselage for increased range, and of course a luxury interior.

[Fred Hayek]

Slightly off topic, but is the 737 design also being considered for an MPA (maritime patrol, P-3 type mission)?

[COEXERJ145]

Yes

[Fast Ed97]

As a frequent flyer..I wish Boeing would find a similar replacement for the MD-80. Cool looking planes...plus the seat configuration gives you less of a chance getting one of those horrid middle seats on the 737.

It's also a shame there is not more 717's being produced. Much rather fly in one of those than an RJ. I am sure Northwest would replace their DC-9's.

[phantomworker]

It's also a shame there is not more 717's being produced.

The 717 line in Long Beach was shut down in 2006.

[ConservativeStatement]

To my knowledge, no there isn't; however, this article may be of interest:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/207500_boeingeu12.html

[ASOC]

The DC-3 still flys in Alaska - I love sitting outside and watching the air traffic over the city. Nothing beats the growl of a pair of 1,000 Wright Cyclones as a DC-3 departs for the bush.

Anchorage, air crossroads of the world, cool place to live if you like to watch airplanes.

[Fast Ed97]

Do they have something to replace the 717 in the works?

[Paleo Conservative]

Slightly off topic, but is the 737 design also being considered for an MPA (maritime patrol, P-3 type mission)?

It's an ER version of the 737-800 and it has raked wing tips rather than winglets. It would be interesting if Boeing were to offer a version of it as a BBJ or airliner. It could probably serve even thinner transatlantic routes than the 757-200.

Click on the picture

[phantomworker]

It would be interesting if Boeing were to offer a version of it as a BBJ or airliner.

It's not trivial to modify a commercial aircraft for weapons employment.

[Paleo Conservative]

It's not trivial to modify a commercial aircraft for weapons employment.

But it might be somewhat easier to modify a military varient for use as an airliner. After all the 707 was based on the military KC-135 tanker.

[phantomworker]

Not sure which came first, the chicken or the egg. The 707 or the C-135 family.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/transport-m/c135/

[Paleo Conservative]

Not sure which came first, the chicken or the egg. The 707 or the C-135 family.

The C-135. Boeing knew the flight characteristics of the B-47's and B-52's they built for the USAF and knew that the existing KC-97's would not be adequate to refuel the strategic bombing fleet. The KC-135 fuselage diameter was set after the air force requested a larger fuselage than the Dash-80 demonstrator that had been used to test docking without any fuel transfers. Boeing had intended to offer the same plane to the civilian market using all the same tooling, but Douglas got orders for its DC-8's by making its fuselage a few inches wider and able to handle 6-abreast seating. Boeing made the decision to build a new fuselage cross-section just one inch wider than the DC-8's for the civilian 707.

[appeal2]

Simple matter. A plastic 737 will be cheaper to operate and maintain and more comfortable to passengers. Combine it the new engines being developed and you will have 737's flying to Europe, further lessening dependency on the outdate spoke hub system. In addition, the 737 interior is very cramped. The A320 is wider and much more comfortable.

[bellevuesbest]

Real program. Notice the armament. It's a 737 with an attitude!

[bellevuesbest]

I'd say it's a safe bet that the 737 replacement (single aisle) will have a wider fuselage.

[PAR35]

I wonder if they'll next work on a competitor to the CRJ?

They are involved in the RRJ program.

[Paleo Conservative]

I'd say it's a safe bet that the 737 replacement (single aisle) will have a wider fuselage.

And they will be able to carry LD-3 containers in the belly.

[RayChuang88]

I think the reason why Boeing is looking at two succesors to the 737 is the fact it appears Pratt & Whitney may have finally successfully developed the so-called geared-drive turbofan, which offers substantial fuel savings over conventional high-bypass turbofans. We could see Boeing offer a new, smaller 100-125 seat airliner with a really radical design (with the geared-drive turbofans mounted on the back of the fuselage for noise-abatement reasons) that will also offer good short-field landing/takeoff ability; such a plane would not only sell well in the USA but also be especially popular in Asia and Africa, where airports with shorter runways are far more common.