Yesterday came the news that Delta Air Lines will purchase 100 B737-900ER to begin the replacement cycle of it's narrowbody fleet. Until there is an official press release from the airline, it is rumours, but let us assume that the information is accurate.
Scott Hamilton is certain that Delta will have conversion rights to switch to the reengined version (the B737-9 as it stands now). If true, this little detail could hurt Boeing
Showing posts with label B737RE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label B737RE. Show all posts
8/23/2011
8/18/2011
A320 vs. B737-800 Fuel Burn
There is the never-ending "war of words" between Airbus and Boeing of which aircraft is the more fuel efficient one, and, since the launch of the A320neo, if the A320neo would be more fuel efficient and if yes, by what margin. Further complicating, Boeing meanwhile claims, that it's yet-to-be-named reengined B737 would have the same advantage in terms of fuel efficiency as the current generations of these two narrowbodies have. And as even Boeing does not seem to know how the exact configuration of the reengined B737 looks like, this claim seems (at least) a little bit premature.
As I tried to lay out in an earlier posting, much depends on what you want to compare: fuel burn per trip of fuel burn per passenger.
The official documents provided by the manufacturers
As I tried to lay out in an earlier posting, much depends on what you want to compare: fuel burn per trip of fuel burn per passenger.
The official documents provided by the manufacturers
8/08/2011
B737RE Early Fuel Burn Analysis
Scott Hamilton picked up a few interesting details from the Boeing Quarterly Earnings Call regarding the B737RE. The most important question regarding this program remains the fan diameter. It looks like it will settle around 66 inches, so that Boeing can go forward without touching the nose gear.
But what does that mean for fuel efficiency?
But what does that mean for fuel efficiency?
7/22/2011
B737RE Fan Diameter
The efficiency (SFC) of the LEAP engine for the B737RE (I call it the LEAP-2B as I think it needs a different, aka smaller core) very much depends on the fan diameter, as with a larger fan you can have a higher bypass ratio, enabling a smaller Fan Pressure Ratio (FPR), which translates in a higher propulsive efficiency.
For now there are four fan sizes in discussion, reportedly ranging from 63" to 70". The lower end represents
For now there are four fan sizes in discussion, reportedly ranging from 63" to 70". The lower end represents
7/20/2011
B737RE!
So we have another reengining programme! American Airlines just announced to purchase up to 300 B737 aircraft (as well as up to 625(!) A320neo). The more inportant detail of this message is that 100 (+60 options) of the B737NG's will be powered by the LEAP-X, unofficially launching the reengining program of the B737NG, as this needs confirmation by the Boeing board.
What does that tell us?
What does that tell us?
7/19/2011
Boeing B737 whatever...???
I pledged to not write another part of the "...successor" story, so I named it differently. Scott Hamilton once again broke the news: Boeing is now leaning towards reengining. If that would really happen, this would be what John Leahy always expected (and so did I).
If we recap all what has been said before it becomes clear, why a reengining would be the best possible action for Boeing. Of course, a new airplane could be better by about 10% in operating costs, but at what cost and risk for Boeing? Just look at another story published yesterday by Scott Hamilton about the latest round in B787 delivery delays! It will take a few years for Boeing to get in a position where they earn some money with the B787. And with the refined A350-1000 Boeing might now feel the pressure to do something with the B777 earlier than planned before. The Y3(B777 successor) was currently planned around 2025, but with the A350-1000 arriving in 2017/2018, that could move to somewhere around 2020. That moves the Y1 (B737 successor) to the second half of the 2020's - and meanwhile, say in 2017 a reengined B737 could appear. Capital requirements for that, if true what Hamilton writes, should be in the same $1-1.5bn range as the A320neo program - probably a little less than Airbus's costs, as we can assume that we will only see one engine on the B737RE - a LEAP-2B, how I would call it for now: with a smaller, scaled down core, a fan with the maximum possible diameter to fit under the wing without nose gear extension.
The technical risk is minimal, compared to the risk of a new airplane a la B787. Additionally, Boeing will see if the LEAP engine will work as anticipated when entering service on the A320neo.
If we recap all what has been said before it becomes clear, why a reengining would be the best possible action for Boeing. Of course, a new airplane could be better by about 10% in operating costs, but at what cost and risk for Boeing? Just look at another story published yesterday by Scott Hamilton about the latest round in B787 delivery delays! It will take a few years for Boeing to get in a position where they earn some money with the B787. And with the refined A350-1000 Boeing might now feel the pressure to do something with the B777 earlier than planned before. The Y3(B777 successor) was currently planned around 2025, but with the A350-1000 arriving in 2017/2018, that could move to somewhere around 2020. That moves the Y1 (B737 successor) to the second half of the 2020's - and meanwhile, say in 2017 a reengined B737 could appear. Capital requirements for that, if true what Hamilton writes, should be in the same $1-1.5bn range as the A320neo program - probably a little less than Airbus's costs, as we can assume that we will only see one engine on the B737RE - a LEAP-2B, how I would call it for now: with a smaller, scaled down core, a fan with the maximum possible diameter to fit under the wing without nose gear extension.
The technical risk is minimal, compared to the risk of a new airplane a la B787. Additionally, Boeing will see if the LEAP engine will work as anticipated when entering service on the A320neo.
4/12/2011
No new Boeing airplane in sight...?
Scott Hamilton has it here: chances that we will seen and hear an announcement from Boeing for a new airplane, call it 737RS, call it 797, are getting slim. Buckingham Research now says that they do not expect an announcement from Boeing for a new airplane at the Paris Air Show. An approval to offer would not come before the end of 2012/ early 2013.
As I argued earlier, there is no real technical case for a new aircraft in the 2020 timeframe. And if there is no technical case, there is no business case. No business man will spend $10-15 billion without getting a decent return, if he can get the same return by spending $1-1.5 billion, as Airbus does it.
I don't want to say that Boeing now will do the 737RE - but in my eyes it would do much more sense. And this is one if the rare occasions I agree with Richard Aboulafia, who just today at the Aero Club in Wichita said that Boeing should quickly go forward with the reengining.
If they do not move quickly, there is a real danger that long-time Boeing customers are moving to Airbus.
A problem with reengining for Boeing could be the emerging signs that the CFM LEAP-X could be a little bit behind schedule. At least there is no customer for the LEAP-X on the A320NEO yet. As EIS for the NEO is 4.5 years away, some airlines (as well as ILFC) seem to be confident enough to order the GTF, but not the LEAP-X. They could also wait another year or even two and decide then about the engine - means ordering one engine now that they are sure that the other is not ready in time? Leahy last week said that the LEAP-X would be available by about 9 months, but no more than 12 months after the GTF. As EIS of the NEO was moved forward by 6 months at the same time, that means that the LEAP-X would have been 3-6 months later than the GTF per original schedule. Three to six months should not really be the deciding factor when ordering an aircraft that is used for twenty years and longer. So there could be something more behind all that...
As I argued earlier, there is no real technical case for a new aircraft in the 2020 timeframe. And if there is no technical case, there is no business case. No business man will spend $10-15 billion without getting a decent return, if he can get the same return by spending $1-1.5 billion, as Airbus does it.
I don't want to say that Boeing now will do the 737RE - but in my eyes it would do much more sense. And this is one if the rare occasions I agree with Richard Aboulafia, who just today at the Aero Club in Wichita said that Boeing should quickly go forward with the reengining.
If they do not move quickly, there is a real danger that long-time Boeing customers are moving to Airbus.
A problem with reengining for Boeing could be the emerging signs that the CFM LEAP-X could be a little bit behind schedule. At least there is no customer for the LEAP-X on the A320NEO yet. As EIS for the NEO is 4.5 years away, some airlines (as well as ILFC) seem to be confident enough to order the GTF, but not the LEAP-X. They could also wait another year or even two and decide then about the engine - means ordering one engine now that they are sure that the other is not ready in time? Leahy last week said that the LEAP-X would be available by about 9 months, but no more than 12 months after the GTF. As EIS of the NEO was moved forward by 6 months at the same time, that means that the LEAP-X would have been 3-6 months later than the GTF per original schedule. Three to six months should not really be the deciding factor when ordering an aircraft that is used for twenty years and longer. So there could be something more behind all that...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)