tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post7750983435988908991..comments2024-01-17T13:23:35.896-05:00Comments on aeroturbopower: Doubts about MAXUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-58372664851381195492012-03-30T02:23:59.765-04:002012-03-30T02:23:59.765-04:00O'Leary strike again
"O’Leary said all e...O'Leary strike again<br /><br />"O’Leary said all evidence Ryanair has seen indicates that Boeing’s MAX, “as a product, is rubbish.” The Airbus neo, announced before the Boeing model, “does credibly deliver” a 12 to 14 percent saving on fuel burn, he said, while the C919 is a “glorified” version of the A320 and thus lacks development risk."<br /><br />http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-29/ryanair-could-snap-up-boeing-jets-dropped-by-lion-air-norwegianAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-11740439845682685532012-03-24T07:48:43.336-04:002012-03-24T07:48:43.336-04:00Maybe there is a difference in the perception of &...Maybe there is a difference in the perception of "job humanity" @ ANA vs RYR : with 275 units 738 @ 189 seats averaging, say, 8 airport ground rotations per aircraft/24h involving manhandling (unload/reload) of average, say, 160 pieces of luggage @ 15 kgs, each piece requiring average 4 uplifts to complete the bulkloading, MOL of Ryan Air may proudly boast that his airport Docker teams around on European platforms move by hand a total of 275 x 8 x 160 x 2 x 15 x 4 = forty two thousand metric tonnes, day in/day out ... bonjour les MSD (musculo-skeletal disorders) ! Respectfully, Shinichiro Ito's request could be justified ?Frequent Travellerhttp://www.wix.com/twinaislefeeders/quickrotationnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-61020282689865386832012-03-24T03:44:51.642-04:002012-03-24T03:44:51.642-04:003-4000lbs is correct. http://www.flightglobal.com/...3-4000lbs is correct. http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/istat-2012-lufthansa-alc-vie-to-be-787-10x-launch-customer-369681/Christopher Dye aka Cub J3.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-46259793618560181352012-03-23T08:37:57.602-04:002012-03-23T08:37:57.602-04:00I would rather call it "diverging market dema...I would rather call it "diverging market demands" as I would rule out Ryanair demanding containerised CLS. There are only few airlines really taking advantage of that A320 capability. Especially LCC are mainly interested in short TAT - loading and unloading cargo would distract...aeroturbopowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17686461923667604678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-25057263488689799082012-03-23T07:33:22.396-04:002012-03-23T07:33:22.396-04:00Godfather SUH is not alone bullying B about preppi...Godfather SUH is not alone bullying B about prepping up the MAX to meet new market demands : take f.ex. ANA President and CEO Shinichiro Ito requesting to provide MAX with containerised CLS, again hardly feasible with the original 737 fuselage design ... aren't all these tough-impacting requests for PIPs converging to indicate simply that the MAX's Residual Value is out on thin ice in the long run, echoing SUH's concerns ?Frequent Travellerhttp://www.wix.com/twinaislefeeders/quickrotationnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-47454816480693039092012-03-23T07:11:25.435-04:002012-03-23T07:11:25.435-04:00Chris, Flighglobal reported that Hazy asked for up...Chris, Flighglobal reported that Hazy asked for up to 4000lbs more MTOW, not 4-5 tons. I don't know who is right...4000lbs should be doable without too much changes, I guess, 5 tonnes would certainly be a stretch!<br /><br />I am not really sure about the reasons and motives of SUH to advocate a second engine - maybe he thinks that - beside from the commercial side - a little bit more competition on the technical side would be a benefit?aeroturbopowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17686461923667604678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-36476312371587360572012-03-23T07:02:57.356-04:002012-03-23T07:02:57.356-04:00Hazy may not have the influence he once had. He h...Hazy may not have the influence he once had. He has been out of the business for a while, and no longer runs a huge leasing company. Also, A and B may not be as likely to comply with his "orders" as they once were. I bet today A wishes they had notlet themselves be bullied by Hazy into to dropping the A350 as an improved 330 with new engines(just as B is now doing with the 777X).<br /><br />Also Hazy is just plain wrong. Re the MAX, B has done very well for years with one engine against the A320, and the 737NG's residual values are good. Also, not having two engines is not necessarily going to result in the MAX's being more expensive that the A320 NEO. GE will always find a way to be competitive on price, just as they have with the NG.<br /><br />Hazy was also wrong when he said at ISAT that B needs to add 4-5 tons of weight to the 787-10 to increase its range. The last thing B wants to do is anything that will add to the already high, material risk of delays in their current 787 delivery schedule. Hazy's idea would change the -10 from a simple, inexpensive stretch which can operate on 85-90% of the world's long haul routes and be delivered quickly after the -9 is established, to a much more complex and expensive exercise with more unknown risks and an uncertain delivery date (except for the certainty that it would be a lot later than the -10), merely to get that 10-15 % more long haul range. B has shown that it can resist customer demands when they want; eg. their refusal to shorten the 748 i at Emirates' request.Christopher Dye aka CubJ3noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-39649681253073849622012-03-22T13:02:32.602-04:002012-03-22T13:02:32.602-04:00Now that is an interesting proposition, but for Bo...Now that is an interesting proposition, but for Boeing to do it, a lot has to happens. First, I would think that Pratt, as the geared engine provider would have to come up with a lot of work and money to make it happen. I don not think Boeing would be willing to invest a lot of money on this move.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-82605461538697851212012-03-21T06:50:05.034-04:002012-03-21T06:50:05.034-04:00Fitting a geared turbofan under the wing shall not...Fitting a geared turbofan under the wing shall not be harder than for an ungeared turbofan. Given that the outer diameter of the LPT of a geared turbofan is smaller compared to an ungeared LPT, it could maybe even easier, as the area between the LPT outer diameter and the wing is a constraint. Also a geared turbofan might be shorter as it has fewer stages, so the engine would not have to be hung that far out, saving weight in the pylon and minimizing the torque introduced in the wing.aeroturbopowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17686461923667604678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-10623522833815865692012-03-21T06:27:15.971-04:002012-03-21T06:27:15.971-04:00And what's your thoughts on fitting geared tur...And what's your thoughts on fitting geared turbofan engine into 68.4" (more or less) fan size limit (or sweet spot at least) of B737MAX?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com