bzn20 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 (edited) Modify the 757-100/200 to suit . Stick the MAX 8 engines on it shorten the fuselage as I said ,to suit . Apart from going backwards , what are the problems ? Bit high ? That's where the MAX 8 started . too low . Edited December 17, 2019 by bzn20 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSG0 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 (edited) According to this video(no idea as per accuracy) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dg3Azd9dGYc The Leap-1 engines on the MAX version gave the following: 1) Quieter 2) 14% more fuel efficient than the older engines. 3) Range increase by 600 miles to 4,100 miles. So, customers contracted for the above and wanted that fuel savings coupled with the range increase. Sure I guess that they can go back to the NG, but, I do not think that they will be too happy. Is Boeing going to a take deduction from the price of the NG jet (that was supposed to be a MAX) to cover what amounts to 14% per flight for the operational lifespan of each NG airplane in each airline? Edited December 18, 2019 by NoSG0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rickoshea52 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 8 hours ago, bzn20 said: Modify the 757-100/200 to suit . Stick the MAX 8 engines on it shorten the fuselage as I said ,to suit . Apart from going backwards , what are the problems ? Bit high ? That's where the MAX 8 started . too low . It’s a great idea but are the tools for the B757 still in existence and serviceable, even they are is there enough to support the production rate required? I’m not sure that the tools for the B757 landing gears are still about and there certainly isn’t the capacity right now at Boeing’s LG vendor that originally supplied them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Trouble with the 757 idea is that the wings would need a redesign too. Correct me if I’m wrong (ha!) but didn’t the later models of the 737 have a totally new design wing? Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzn20 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, Rickoshea52 said: tools for the B757 Tooling is a minor thing in the scheme of things . The Tooling Drawings will be in the 757 drawing bank . It's never going to happen ,I was just thinking out loud . The 757 production did finish early for the bigger 737's being built ,EG 737-800 . I remember looking at a new Happag Lloyd with TUI titles 737-800 when I was working on the ramp at Stuttgart 1999 thinking it was 757 size in terms of fuse length ….. Then I ended up working on a new Condor 757-300 … How long was that ? Airliners are tuned to fine limits on range/payload , Airbus 318,319 320 etc. and the multitude of 737 variations to fit in to tight operating variations . The 757 could be done in the same way , long range ,short fuse , long fuse , short range and fit these NEo and Leap 1 engines . I take it these engines are "stretchable" performance wise to take account of heavier airframes or reduced for lighter types . 5 hours ago, Max Headroom said: totally new design wing As far as I know they did , certainly weren't 737-100/-200 wings . Whatever happens Boeing still need to compete with NEo , the airlines need one of the two types on offer . Orders for them are staggering . they dwarf all other airliner sales . You can put all the 1st and 2nd generation jets together and MAX and NEo beat them all in sales / orders , not including previous 737s and Airbus 318-321. Edited December 18, 2019 by bzn20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrain Safe Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Basically the Max is dead. Once the small suppliers are stopping production, they can't keep paying people to sit around. Boeing aren't going to pay them for stuff that they don't want,. The small suppliers go bust or move onto other projects. then the medium suppliers start to fall away and so on. The 757 is a beautiful aircraft. but too big to fill the hole. So we come to a clean sheet build. This is what Boeing should have done the first time. But they ware fixated on no crew training and making it as cheap as possible, which is why some really dumb decisions were made. I fear that the 777x could go the same way unless they stop and think. I mean folding wingtips in a rally busy airport. Enough room to taxy past and then the wing suddenly gets longer! real problem waiting to happen. So it's mainly the military stuff that keeps them going otherwise they are down the tube as a company. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Airbus has A320 family production lines in France, Germany and China, (they have a plant in the USA too but am not sure what they build there), so in theory they have capacity. As far as I am aware, Boeing only has the one production line for the 737. Boeing really have no choice but to start again from scratch and in more than one factory. Don’t they now own Embraer? Trevor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stever219 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Max Headroom said: Airbus has A320 family production lines in France, Germany and China, (they have a plant in the USA too but am not sure what they build there), so in theory they have capacity. As far as I am aware, Boeing only has the one production line for the 737. Boeing really have no choice but to start again from scratch and in more than one factory. Don’t they now own Embraer? Trevor I think the Airbus site in Mobile Alabama is a final assembly line for single-aisle family jets, but I don’t know (but wouldn’t be surprised) that it’s started on neo jets yet. Similarly I’m not sure if there’s an A220 (ex-Bombardier) line there yet, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Bradley Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 https://airbusalabama.com/ https://airbusalabama.com/frequently-asked-questions-faq/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzn20 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) 23 hours ago, Terrain Safe said: I mean folding wingtips This is back to the future . They offered folding wing tips before the 1st 777 was built . Nothing ever came of it . I agree with you ,that's going to fun with a longer wing all of a sudden . Swept wing growth when turning is the next problem . Your second point about clean sheet build is going to put them so far behind the NEo . Will their most loyal customers hang around when they can save more money today instead of 4-5 years time ? Could be more . Probably not . That's if they started right now . Do you think they are already looking at a new plane ? Edited December 19, 2019 by bzn20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumbum Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 Bought time for the 808, 818 and 828 to appear!---John 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzn20 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Johnv said: 808 What happened to the 820-020B ? Some sounds for the drawing office to work by ….. A trip to Cosford to see BoB AKA VC10 808 (XR808 , my avatar ) . See if they can improve that piece of class … Never lost a VC10 through structural or any other engineering failure , non system . Edited December 19, 2019 by bzn20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Poultney Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 On 19/12/2019 at 18:45, Johnv said: Bought time for the 808, 818 and 828 to appear!---John I'd like to see the naming convention of 27x7 like the never built 2707. They of course could just go with 7107, 7117, 7127, etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 Well I see they have kicked the boss out now. This is what happens when you let bean counters run the business. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 1 hour ago, bentwaters81tfw said: Well I see they have kicked the boss out now. This is what happens when you let bean counters run the business. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-50893490 Trevor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSG0 Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 (edited) I thought that these two posts were interesting: Good job Transport Canada. Test that plane to bits. https://www.pprune.org/10645246-post127.html I agree with this post. https://www.pprune.org/10646263-post12.html Will there be a real change at BA with proper engineering taking priority? Honestly I think DM being fired/resigning is just window dressing. Edited December 23, 2019 by NoSG0 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrain Safe Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 5 hours ago, bentwaters81tfw said: Well I see they have kicked the boss out now. This is what happens when you let bean counters run the business. Actually he was an engineer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, Terrain Safe said: Actually he was an engineer. Makes no odds, Reading the reports and the history, it's the bean counters that hold sway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzn20 Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 On 12/23/2019 at 9:21 PM, bentwaters81tfw said: it's the bean counters that hold sway Yes and that's a danger . Safety ,safety is the word , there isn't another word. Comet 1 fell in to it another way , race to be first , wrong engines to get it up quicker , light weight skin , Redux bonding and look what happened there . Square windows were not square by definition but was used a reason to lead the blind up an alley . We didn't know they said . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 On 12/23/2019 at 11:14 AM, NoSG0 said: I thought that these two posts were interesting: Good job Transport Canada. Test that plane to bits. https://www.pprune.org/10645246-post127.html I agree with this post. https://www.pprune.org/10646263-post12.html Will there be a real change at BA with proper engineering taking priority? Honestly I think DM being fired/resigning is just window dressing. From what I know, transport Canada is one of the strictest out there, hopefully they do something right here. There's a saying with pilots here, if you crash, make sure you're dead, or the paperwork will kill you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 (edited) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_Y8JBTkqLY The Boeing CEO was just fired. Interesting some news outlets say he resigned. Now I think some are changing the video titles. Merry christmas from Boeing, have a nice day. Edited December 25, 2019 by busnproplinerfan 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 On 24/12/2019 at 22:44, bzn20 said: Yes and that's a danger . Safety ,safety is the word , there isn't another word. Comet 1 fell in to it another way , race to be first , wrong engines to get it up quicker , light weight skin , Redux bonding and look what happened there . Square windows were not square by definition but was used a reason to lead the blind up an alley . We didn't know they said . To be fair to de Havilland and the Comet, little was known about metal fatigue and stress at the time. ISTR reading that it was the ‘square’ Windows that were the root cause of the decompression. ‘They’ really did not ‘know’ . The ‘safety’ arrangements at the time were very, very different to those we see today, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busnproplinerfan Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 The Comet might have been the equivilent of the space shuttle back then. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzn20 Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 (edited) On 12/27/2019 at 8:12 AM, Jonny said: ISTR reading that it was the ‘square’ Windows You know there was a cover up ? The Redux bonding on all the aperture's Doublers were coming un stuck on the production line . They were using 22 SWG for the skin . Not sure if you've done basic workshops phase but here goes .. To countersink 22 SWG you can only dimple ,not use countersinking cutters , the heads are deeper than 22 SWG (Standard Wire Gauge) . The fitter who found the problem ( He was interviewed on camera for a Comet disaster Doc and was a light bulb moment ) He got The Inspector and he told him the fit Countersunk rivets , he told him he'd have to dimple ,that meant the fitted skin and doubler , I can't do that ,must be one at a time . Inspector got DO involved as you would and they told him to cut countersinks for rivets . That meant the skin and doubler was now reduced through countersinking . The heads are not holding enough meat that's left . Right ..that's basic riveting here , basic , so what were they doing ? I was 16 and a few weeks old doing this . They had under powered DH Ghost jets so the Comet was lightened using 22 SWG , design was for Redux bonding(adhesive) and no rivets . Not enough strength in the airframe due to material removal fitting Csk rivets . So those "square" windows with radiused corners ,not square then ,the ADF apertures ,same problem , rivet head not holding the skin … All because they wanted to be the first in jet airline service . Comet 4 had 19 SWG ( thicker) and different material spec for skinning BTW . Edited December 28, 2019 by bzn20 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tomohawk Kid Posted December 28, 2019 Share Posted December 28, 2019 On 23/12/2019 at 23:35, bentwaters81tfw said: Well I see they have kicked the boss out now. This is what happens when you let bean counters run the business. At that level of seniority you are paid for what you are responsible for, not for what you do, nothing to do with 'bean counters'. As a rule of thumb engineers don't always make good managers/bosses. I worked as an engineer all my working life and you always build/design to cost, its incredibly naive to think otherwise. If Boeing/Airbus don't, they won't be in business very long and thats no good for anybody. Running the risk of a huge generalistion, the nub of the issue with the 737 was the FAA were to cosy with Boeing. Tommo. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now