ACTUALITE Aéronautique

ACTUALITE Aéronautique : Suivi et commentaire de l\'actualité aéronautique


Boeing 737MAX

Partagez

Invité
Invité

Boeing 737MAX

Message par Invité le Mar 28 Avr 2009 - 19:15

Boeing annonce une évolution de son 737 :

. utilisation du CFM56-7B ce qui devrait apporter un gain de consommation de 1 %
. petits changements aérodymaniques mineurs qui devraient apporter un gain complémentaire de 1 %les

Ces modifications seraient livrables à partir de la mi-2011. Les modifications sur le moteur apporteraient des économies de maintenance de l'ordre de 4 à 12 %.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2009/04/breaking-boeing-launches-737-s.html

Invité
Invité

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Invité le Mer 29 Avr 2009 - 0:49

Boeing annonce aussi un nouvel intérieur du 737 avec un nouveau dessin des coffres à bagage et un nouvel éclairage (on change les ampoules moins souvent !!!!!).

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/167503.asp#extended

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Mer 29 Avr 2009 - 10:10

Merci Jeannot !

Invité
Invité

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Invité le Jeu 7 Mai 2009 - 17:10

Diminution de production

Boeing 737 production rates could shrink to as low as 21 aircraft a month in 2010, say its US suppliers
Boeing pourrait diminuer la production de 737 à 21 exemplaires par mois en 2010. Cette annonce fait le pendant avec celle d'Airbus.
GKN Aerospace chief executive Marcus Bryson, who returned from a tour of US customers last week, says Boeing suppliers are "starting to talk in terms" of dramatic output cuts.
Les fournisseurs commencent à être inquiets. Il reste à espérer que la crise sera termminée d'ici là et que les compagnies voudront alors très vite de nouveaux avions.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/05/07/326169/737-output-may-plunge-to-21-a-month-in-2010.html

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Sam 31 Oct 2009 - 21:38

Bonsoir à tous

Un article qui fait le rappel de la position de Boeing sur le 737 vis à vis de la concurrence

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/10/27/333973/narrow-margins-airbus-and-boeing-face-pressure-with-the-a320-and-737.html


Narrow margins: Airbus and Boeing face pressure with the A320 and 737
By Max Kingsley-Jones

Although pressure has been mounting on Airbus and Boeing to move forward with their plans for single-aisle replacement designs, the rivals have been more concerned with developing their current programmes.

This is no surprise, given that between them, they have an order backlog for around 4,500 narrowbodies, split roughly 50/50, which at current rates will keep production running until 2015. But a new rival from Bombardier, the Pratt & Whitney PW1000G GTF-powered CSeries small airliner, is threatening the bottom end of the two established single-aisle families.

Boeing - in conjunction with CFM International - has upped the ante this year, rolling out a wide-ranging 737 upgrade package to boost performance and cabin comfort. Airbus, meanwhile, continues to make incremental improvements to the A320 family, addressing weight reductions and operating weight increases amid ongoing studies of a winglet programme.

Airbus is evaluating a re-engined A320 which could look something like this

Both programmes have reached important milestones this year, with Boeing delivering the 6,000th 737 (a 737-800 for Norwegian Air Shuttle, which was also the 2,868th 737 NG delivered), and Airbus handing over its 4,000th A320 family aircraft - an A319 for TAM. During the third quarter, Boeing also quietly shipped its 3,000th Next Generation 737.

The 737 performance improvement package (PIP) will arrive in mid-2011, delivering about a 2% cut in fuel burn on longer stages. It comprises the CFM56-7B Evolution powerplant providing a 1% improvement in overall aircraft efficiency, and a minor clean-up of the airframe's aerodynamics giving a further 1% gain.

EVOLUTION FLIGHT TRIALS

Flight trials of the CFM56-7B Evolution nacelle began in the number one (left-hand) position of a 737-900ER in August, with the test engine featuring a longer nacelle than the standard -7B.

Ahead of the PIP, a new cabin, dubbed the Sky Interior, will be introduced including features such as larger 777/787-style pivot bins, sculpted sidewalls and revised windows. The new interior, which Boeing hopes will deliver a 2-4dB cut in cabin noise, is due to enter service with FlyDubai in the fourth quarter of 2010.

Although Airbus views the 737 package as a catch-up move by its rival, it confesses that it is "talking with CFM" to see what of the CFM56-7B Evolution package is transferable to the A320's CFM56-5. Unlike the 737, however, the A320 models (except the A318) are also offered with the International Aero Engines V2500, meaning that Airbus will need to encourage both parties to pursue engine upgrades to ensure performance parity across the family.

With the 2,400 aircraft on backlog representing over six years of production, Airbus expects output will run for at least another decade and ultimately deliver more than 8,000 aircraft.


© Joe Walker
Flight trials of the CFM56-7B Evolution nacelle began in the number one (left-hand) position of a 737-900ER in August


While Airbus has not announced any major new upgrade in response to the 737 PIP, an ongoing airframe weight saving effort should trim 250kg off A320s delivered from 2010, while more aerodynamic cleaning up means that aircraft delivered from January 2009 have a 1% improvement in drag standard.

This year, approval was given for an optional 1t increase in MTOW, achieved through a software upgrade to the flight-control system, which is retrofittable to A320-200s from MSN1903 (a 2002-delivered aircraft) onwards. The higher weight provides around 280km (150nm) additional range or a payload increase equivalent to 10 passengers.

An innovative new use for an A320 variant began in September when British Airways inaugurated A318 transatlantic services from London City airport to New York. To gain approval for operations into the tight London City runway, Airbus has developed changes to the flight controls on approach that are activated by a switch in the overhead panel. This allows the aircraft to have a different aerodynamic braking system for approach and touchdown.

Airbus is staying quiet on its plans for an A320 winglet programme after completing another round of test flights this year. However, Airbus sources say that it has decided to go ahead with a programme, but is yet to finalise whether to adopt Aviation Partners' design or its own "sharklet" device.

Looking towards the long term, there is little enthusiasm on either side of the Atlantic to move forward with all-new replacements, as neither airframer can yet see the requisite quantum leaps in airframe and engine technology.

Airbus's chief salesman John Leahy is confident that A320 and 737s will still be in production a decade from now, although concedes that this could be with "a different engine".

All the big-three engine makers have suitable new technology programmes under way. P&W leads the pack with its geared turbofan, which is due to enter service in 2013 on the Mitsubishi MRJ regional jet and the CSeries. CFM International is developing the Leap X turbofan/open rotor for service readiness from 2016, while Rolls-Royce is exploring developments.

Airbus is expected to decide whether to launch a re-engining upgrade for the A320 before the end of 2010 for a service entry in around 2015, with the GTF seen as a leading candidate. Boeing chief executive Jim McNerney has said he believes a re-engined narrowbody is viable in the near term and that a derivative re-engined 737 would cost in the range of 20-30% of a full development programme.

As a result, he says, "the re-engine case is stronger than I anticipated it would be, which doesn't mean that's what we'll decide". CFM has indicated it could accelerate the Leap X schedule - set for certification in 2016 - should it be selected to power China's new C919 airliner, which would open the door for Boeing to consider the engine for any 737 upgrade.

One of the drivers behind the two rivals' reluctance to be the first to blink is that their sales performance in the sector is fairly evenly matched. Last year, Airbus racked up 472 A320 family orders, and delivered 386 aircraft, while Boeing's 737 sales stood at 484 and deliveries at 290 (strike affected). In 2009 the 737 has a slight edge on its rival at the nine-month point with 71 net orders against 47 for the A320.

Deliveries are evenly matched, with Airbus having shipped 290 single-aisles and Boeing 280. Included in the Airbus shipments is the first A320 off the new Chinese assembly line in Tianjin, which is ultimately expected to produce four single-aisle aircraft a month.

Pour Nc Nermey semble considérer que finalement une remotorisation est plus intéressante que prévu.
A noter que la refonte du 737 semble en apparence plus profonde et radicale que celle de l'A320

L'article parle aussi de l'A320...

Bonne lecture


_________________
@avia.poncho

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Ven 5 Fév 2010 - 8:52

Bonjour à tous

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/02/04/338040/singapore-2010-boeing-examines-extending-737-nosegear-to-accommodate-new-engine.html




SINGAPORE 2010: Boeing examines extending 737 nosegear to accommodate new engine
By Jon Ostrower

Amid increasing industry speculation about the imminent launch of re-engined narrowbodies, Flightglobal has learned how Boeing could engineer the tricky installation of an advanced turbofan under the wing of the 737.

To provide additional clearance under the wing to accommodate a larger engine nacelle, Boeing is examining the feasibility of raising the 737's nose landing gear, say industry sources. According to those familiar with the plan, an extension of the nose landing gear of 15cm (6in) would yield an estimated 5cm of additional diameter in the fan.

One internal industry assessment of the feasibility of a re-engined 737 seen by Flightglobal says that the aircraft can currently handle a 1.6m fan without any modification.

A new engine with a 1.6m fan would yield an approximate 12% improvement in specific fuel consumption, before any other airframe modifications are incorporated says the assessment. An engine with a 1.7m fan combined with a "modest increase" in landing gear height would yield fuel burn similar to a re-engined Airbus A320.

Any increase in the length of the nosegear is likely to require a larger wheel well, and by extension would reduce space available in the aircraft's forward avionics bay.

It was once believed that extending the 737's main landing gear would provide the required clearance. However, increasing the size of the main landing gear would yield a significant weight increase and complicate stowage.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes vice-president marketing Randy Tinseth recently confirmed to Flightglobal that Boeing had competed a successful technical feasibility study into the installation of a new engine on the 737, but that the modification would require "a lot of work".

The leading candidates for the re-engining are CFM International's Leap-X advanced turbofan and a possible offering from International Aero Engines that is likely to be based on partner Pratt & Whitney's geared turbofan.

P&W's commercial engines senior vice-president sales Bob Keady says that IAE is the "preferred route to market" for new engine offerings for either Airbus or Boeing single-aisle aircraft, but adds that P&W has been "doing some work" with both airframers about installing the GTF on their existing aircraft.

"We think we can have an effective installation of the GTF on the 737," he says.


Boeing réflechi sur l'intégration de moteurs plus volumineux sous l'aile du 737...

Le levier pourrait être l'allongement du train avant... +15 cm sur le train avant donne + 5 cm de tolérance sur le diamètre du fan.
Je signale à ce sujet le petite analyse réalisée


Par curiosité je regardais les "nouvelles" garde au sol de l'A330F...
En relevant l'avant, si les moteurs sont devant le centre de gravité, ils montent eux aussi...

A330-200 : entre 0.67 et 0.72 cm entre le bas des nacelles et le sol (ce sont les RR qui sont les plus bas) selon le centre de gravité
A330-200F : entre 0.82 et 0.87 cm... tjs pour RR

Soit plus +15 cm...
La différence de diamètre de soufflante entre un trent 700 et un 800 est de 32 cm.


Ici http://avia.superforum.fr/airframe-widebodies-f6/airbus-a330-f-t536.htm

Actuellement sans modif, l'avion peut embarquer une soufflante de 1.6 m de diamètre suffisante pour un gain de conso d'environ 12%
Une soufflante de 1.7 m nécessite des modifs pour avoir les mêmes ratio d'amélioration que sur l'A320...

Toute modif, même sur le seul train avant pose des contraintes :

1) train avant : l'allongement grignote la soute avionique
2) train principal : poids, cinétique...

Bonne journée


_________________
@avia.poncho

Paul
Whisky Quebec

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Paul le Ven 5 Fév 2010 - 12:56

Bonjour,

pour modifier les trains principaux, c'est encore plus compliqué. Pour les allonger, il faut déplacer les point d'ancrage des trains vers l'extérieur de l'aile pour ne pas toucher au keel beam, ce qui nécessite de refaire une bonne partie de l'aile.

Merci

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Sam 6 Fév 2010 - 23:40

Bonsoir Paul

Il me semble aussi, même s'il est toujours possible de tenter d'adapter une cinétique complexe pour reduire l'empreinte du puits de train.
Ce qui est sûr c'est que plus long c'est plus lourd.

Boeing n'avait-il pas eu à traiter ce genre de challenge avec le 767-400 ?

Bonne soirée


_________________
@avia.poncho

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Ven 12 Fév 2010 - 8:42

Bonjour à tous

Boeing propose un calendrier

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/02/11/338346/boeing-expects-decision-on-re-engined-737-this-year.html



Boeing expects decision on re-engined 737 this year
By Jon Ostrower

Boeing CEO James McNerney has targeted 2010 for a decision on re-engining the 737, the first clear timeline the company has provided on the future of its narrowbody family of aircraft.

"That will be a call we make this year, it will be a mid-decade intro, if we do it," says McNerney, speaking at the Cowen and Company Aerospace/Defence Conference.

"What it finally gets down to is how big is the productivity and performance leap that's available throughout re-engining for our customers. If you try to force a re-engining and it doesn't provide enough productivity or performance for your customers all it does is suck orders out of your current airplane, and yet if it does provide a big enough leap, it will be worth it," he adds.


"We're studying it very seriously," McNerney emphasises.

McNerney also appeared to further reinforce the fact that Boeing is seriously expanding its offering on the 737 from its sole-source CFM International CFM56-7B engine to an option from Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce that could take the form of an offering by International Aero Engines.

"The engine guys, they are pushing very hard," says McNerney. "They are very convinced - virtually all three of the major ones are convinced - that they have the technology that will give us enough, but I think we've got to vet that and I think we've got to spend a lot of time talking to customers this year, but this will be the year we make that call."

Boeing recently announced that it had planned to make additional research and development resources available for the future of 737 and 777 product development, while appointing two teams to study advanced product development for both airframes.

Speaking recently at the Singapore air show, Airbus chief operating officer customers John Leahy said that he hoped a decision on re-engining the A320 would be "sorted out" prior to the Farnborough air show in July.

"Obviously What our competitor does will bear on our decision and Airbus sounds very aggressive on re-engining. I think we're both taking it very seriously," says McNerney.

McNerney says that the short term options for the 737 include re-engining the airframe or waiting to do a clean sheet design, and adds that his company remains keenly aware of the coming competition in the narrowbody market, especially from the 100 to 149-seat Bombardier CSeries.

"If we can offer between 12-15% productivity, I think you can't sit on a lead as you've got the Canadians and the Chinese, and the way we're going to win is though innovation. If you milk a product too long, you invite competition. I think building on a lead and sustaining innovation, is the best long term answer to keep us competitive. You'd rather obsolete yourself a little bit than have someone else do it."


Décision cette année pour mise en ligne au milieu de la décade

MacNermey semble ouvrir la porte à une solution à deux motorisations :
a) CFM
b) IAE avec PW er RR --> un peu comme pour Airbus

Cette année outre les discussions techniques avec les motoristes il y a prévu des disccussions avec les clients pour cerner les attentes

Bonne journée


_________________
@avia.poncho

jullienaline
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par jullienaline le Ven 12 Fév 2010 - 11:24

Bonjour à tous,
Salut poncho,

Dans l'article, la citation du 777 m'a intriguée, alors j'ai cherché un peu du côté de Seattle.

Le journal The News Tribune de Tacoma, ville proche de Seattle, donne ceci :

Boeing considers 737 update

Technology: Company plans midsummer decision on whether to change to new engines

Expect a decision by midsummer on a new version of the world’s most popular jetliner, the 737, Boeing chairman Jim McNerney said Thursday.
If the company moves forward with an updated 737 with new-technology engines, McNerney told analysts at a conference put on by investment firm Cowen and Company, the new version should be rolling off the assembly lines by the middle of the decade.
A decision on the fate of the company’s best-selling plane could be followed in early 2011 by a decision on a redo for the company’s midsize twin-jet, the 777, the company chairman said.
The decision-making process is being driven in part by new technology developments and competitive pressure.
Canadian, Russian and Chinese planemakers are all entering the lower end of the 737 size range with new planes carrying 100 to 150 passengers powered by new-technology engines. And in the large size, twin-aisle market, Boeing rival Airbus is considering building a stretched version of its A350-XWB widebody called the A350-1000 that would encroach on the 777’s size range.
Airbus is also considering re-powering its A320, its competitor to the 737.
“What it finally gets down to is how big is the productivity and performance leap that’s available through re-engining for our customers,” said the Boeing CEO. “If you try to force a re-engining and it doesn’t provide enough productivity or performance for your customers, all it does is suck orders out of your current airplane, and yet if it does provide a big enough leap, it will be worth it,” he said.
Both Boeing and Airbus in recent years had considered creating fresh single-aisle planes using composite technology such as that used in Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner.
But both aircraft makers, burned by new plane development that has proven far more expensive and difficult than they planned, have shied away from building clean-sheet aircraft in the single-aisle category until technology advances far enough that the new design will yield a major leap in efficiency.
Instead, they’re now looking at installing new engines that could improve fuel efficiency 12 percent to 15 percent over existing designs and, in the case of the 777, perhaps designing a new composite wing that could reduce weight, improve aerodynamics and cut maintenance.
Creating updates of the two planes rather than new designs could cost perhaps 30 percent of the costs of creating new planes from scratch. The updates could also mean more assurance of continuing business for the Western Washington factories where the planes are now built. Boeing has said it might hold another contest to determine where to build new-design planes as it did with the 787 Dreamliner. Boeing will build some of those planes in South Carolina. Boeing builds 737s in Renton and 777s in Everett.
Boeing could offer more than a single brand of engine for the 737 this time around. The 737 is now offered only with an engine built by CFM, a partnership of General Electric and France’s Snecma. All three engine-makers, Pratt &Whitney, Rolls Royce and General Electric, are designing new engines for the A320 and 737.
“The engine boys, they are pushing very hard,” McNerney said. “They are very convinced – virtually all three of the major ones are convinced – that they have the technology that will give us enough, but I think we’ve got to vet that, and I think we’ve got to spend a lot of time talking to customers this year, but this will be the year we make the call.”

http://www.thenewstribune.com/business/aerospace/story/1067039.html

On peut noter pour le 737 que :


  • La décision pour le 737 sera prise avant le milieu de l'été. A mettre en parallèle avec celle que doit prendre Airbus d'ici juin pour l'A320.
  • Un gain de productivité de 12% à 15% est visé.
  • Livraison au milieu de la décennie. 2015 ?
Et pour le 777 :


  • Une décision prise en début d'année 2011.
  • Une nouvelle voilure composite pour diminuer le poids, améliorer l'aérodynamique et diminuer les coûts de maintenance.
  • Un gain de productivité de 12% à 15% est aussi visé.
Jim McNerney estime que le coût de développement serait de 30% de celui d'un appareil entièrement nouveau.

En prime, une photo sympa d'un fuselage de 737 sur un wagon de chemin de fer.



Amicalement


_________________
Jullienaline

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Mar 16 Mar 2010 - 8:44

Bonjour à tous
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/03/16/339496/boeing-gauges-possible-modifications-for-737-re-engine.html


Details are emerging about possible structural modifications that could be introduced if Boeing decides to re-engine its Next Generation 737.

During an interview with ATI and Flightglobal at the Istat conference in Orlando, Florida, Boeing Commercial Airplanes VP of marketing Randy Tinseth explained, "We've talked in moderate detail about what has to be done. What we think we're going to have do is we'd have to have a new pylon, a new nacelle, strengthening of the wing and potential strengthening of the wingbox."

Tinseth explains that Boeing "doesn't really want to touch the main landing gear and we don't have to. We've looked a little bit around maybe some minor modifications around the nose landing gear, still yet to be determined."

He also explains that when a new powerplant is installed on the airframe, some minor additions are necessary to the avionics.

"What we have to do between now and the time we make a decision is to keep diving deep on the technical side and make sure that we're absolutely confident that we'll be able to go forward from a technical perspective," says Tinseth. "We haven't seen any show stoppers yet."

Taking time to address some theories that re-engined offerings from Boeing and Airbus are stop-gap measures until a new narrowbody is introduced Tinseth says: "Let's take a step back. We've looked at what it would take to replace today's 737 for a long time now, and we know it is all about significant improvements in efficiency, maybe 15% to 20%."

Tinseth says the wish list by customers includes up to a 30% improvement in airframe maintenance costs that could possibly incorporate composite technology from the 787, a wider cross section and a lower price.

"They're asking for everything as you might envision customers will do," says Tinseth. "So we have had a really difficult time figuring out the technology package we'd have to have to make that all happen, and frankly, if you make the decision to re-engine the aircraft, you raise that bar even higher."

That scenario makes re-engining far from an interim solution, says Tinseth. "If you raise the bar higher then you really have to continue to have a robust technology plan in place to someday replace the aircraft, but it gets harder."

Declining to supply specifics regarding Boeing's evaluations of the front runners to supply re-engined powerplants, CFM with its Leap X engine and Pratt & Whitney with the PW1000G geared turbofan, Tinseth says: "I don't want to give a scorecard. But I will say we're involved with all the engine manufacturers really trying to understand the technical feasibility of the benefits to understand the benefits those engines will provide."

However, Tinseth says what is interesting about the current dynamic is that "we're in a position today that I don't think we envisioned ourselves in five years ago, with the run up in fuel price, the engine manufacturers have acted very quickly to respond to that, and they've brought a number of very compelling solutions to the market."

He believes as some of those solutions develop they become "very intriguing when you can re-engine an airplane and provide up to a 15% fuel burn improvement".

Still, Tinseth says Boeing is going to take the time to make the right decision about re-engining the 737.

However, he admits: "These engines are available, and we have a lot of new competitors coming to the market with those engines, so it is changing the competitive landscape."

Tinseth says he's not shocked by new competitors entering the single-aisle market. "I'm not surprised by what the Japanese are doing, or what the Chinese are doing, or what the Russians are doing in terms of entering that market. It's a big market place - 19,000 airplanes over the next 20 years. I fully expect one or more of those new entrants will be successful."


Pour Boeing a priori c'est :
1 nouveau pylone
1 nouvelle nacelle
1 renforcement des ailes
et probablement un renforcement du caisson central
Pas de modif sur le train principal
Et probablement un peu de modif sur le train avant.

Rien de bien neuf

Si ce n'est que Boeing parle ouvertement de la concurrence.

Concurrence élargie qui va se battre avec les mêmes moteurs probablement...

Bonne journée


_________________
@avia.poncho

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

B737 remotorisation ...

Message par Beochien le Mer 17 Mar 2010 - 14:40

Salut Poncho ...
Randy se fout du monde comme d'hab ... pure intox ... il essaye de manipuler Airbus avec son histoire de juste bricoler la roulette avant du 737 pour laisser la place aux moteurs NG !
Ca m'étonnerait beaucoup que cela passe, surtout sur le GTF !
Et le LeapX, s'il est bridé en diamètre ... ne sera ... qu'un CFM56 avec des insert techno !
Et encore, bravo l'artiste !

Saludos

JPRS !
---------------------------------------
De plus

Bonjour l'intox et les manipulateurs (Bis)!
Je viens de voir qq chose d'intéressant de la part de SUV ! la douche froide, télécommandée par Boeing, sais pas ... maintenant il est retraité et peut être consultant pourquoi et pour qui roule t'il ???
Bon en gros remotoriser ne sert à rien !
Moi je veux bien, mais Russes et Chinois, ils semblent avoir choisi !

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/03/16/339548/hazy-questions-benefits-for-re-engined-narrowbodies.html

Bien, je le mets là , mais ça vaut pour tous les monocouloirs ... 737-320 !

Speaking at the annual Istat conference in Orlando, Florida after
his retirement last month, Hazy says that a potential 12% to 15% fuel
efficiency improvement gained from re-engined airframes could be wiped
out by yet-to-be determined maintenance and capital costs.
It is
unknown if technology supplied by engine manufacturers will produce the
30,000 to 40,0000h time on wing that CFM International engines and IAE
V2500s currently enjoy, he says.
Hazy cautions airlines need to
consider both maintenance costs and potential expenses of training
staff to maintain the new powerplants.
He also warns of rising
capital costs offsetting any gains in engine efficiency. "These are
questions no one is coming up with answers to," Hazy says.
The
last thing the industry needs is premature product obsolescence, says
Hazy. Re-engined aircraft could pressure values of existing narrowbody
aircraft, he adds, making financial transactions more challenging.

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Mer 17 Mar 2010 - 16:17

Bonjour Beochien

SUH semble encore un peu dans le bizness Wink

Du point de vue des immobilisations il a bien raison.
Cela dit, les remplaçants (les vrais) étaient prévus dans ces eaux là...
Peut il se plaindre du remplacement des 767 par des 787 ?

Après ça peut être un signe vers les avionneurs pour éventuellement offrir cette possibilité en rétrofit (et là à priori seul Airbus doit pouvoir le faire sur les cellules les plus récentes...).

Bonne journée


_________________
@avia.poncho

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Mer 17 Mar 2010 - 16:36

Je viens de jeter un oeil sur les PHI des CFM56-7 et le projet LeapX, 1700 mm contre 1550, si j'ai bien compris, pas aussi dilué que cela finalement le LeapX, (Ca sent le coup du GENX2/748) et c'est pour cela que (Voir Article sur MTU côté A320) j'ai qq doutes quant aux 15, voir 16 % promis !

Et au passage, je vois ou SUH est allé chercher son argumentation, chez MTU !

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/03/08/339090/mtu-seeks-winning-position-on-future-narrowbodies.html

le Leap X selon CFMI

http://www.cfm56.com/media/pdf/LEAP.pdf


Dernière édition par Beochien le Mer 17 Mar 2010 - 16:42, édité 1 fois (Raison : Ajouts)

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Ven 19 Mar 2010 - 9:59

Bonjour Beochien
Bonjour à tous

Une position intéressante d'un exec de boeing

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/03/18/339640/boeing-must-resist-requirements-creep-on-re-engining-737.html

As it moves closer to a decision on re-engining the 737, Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Jim Albaugh says his company must resist the urge to modify the 737 too much.

"You've got to watch out for the requirement creep. Our engineers would love to put every bell and whistle on this airplane that they know of, we have to resist that," says Albaugh.

"I will do everything I can to reduce the requirements creep, so it doesn't become an equivalent of a major change to the aircraft, and we certainly don't want it to become a new airplane. When we do a new airplane we want to bring the right technologies to it, which will really give us a leap over what we've built today."

For example, adding 787-style avionics and flight deck to the 737, while potentially desired by Boeing's customers, would serve to drive up the development cost and price of the re-engined aircraft.

"It's really driven by the technology that's available and can you close the business case for a re-engining," says Albaugh.

Other issues to consider include how long a production line would be in place for a re-engined 737 and then also understanding when new tehcnology might come along that "would really drive you towards a new airplane".

Albaugh adds that the re-engining question is a "very complex algorithm" that takes into account the dispatch reliability of an existing airframe with a new engine, as well as any maintenance implication of airlines introducing of a new 737 model along side Next Generation and Classic 737s, as would be the case with Southwest Airlines.

"It's not as easy to just say, you can get 10-15% efficiency, let's go do it," he says.

"One thing I've learned that there's nothing simple about a derivative airplane. There's certainly nothing simple about a re-engine. If you did a re-engine the pylon would change, the empennage would change, you'd have to raise the front gear a little but, drive some different loads into the airplane, drive some different loads into the wing."

Additionally, Boeing has begun wind tunnel tests on various designs for a re-engined 737, evaluating the aerodynamic characteristics of a larger engine, as well as a modified strut and pylon.

Albaugh says he holds weekly Friday meetings to discuss the progress on the re-enginging studies.

Boeing expects a re-engining decision to come in the latter part of this year.


Maîtrise des envies des clients
Maîtrise des rêves des ingénieurs
Maîtrise des délais
Maîtrise des coûts

Investissement à minima....

Pas sûr qu'il y a ait de nouvelle avionique

Encore un fois on peut le voir sous deux angles :
1) pas trop démoder l'existant
2) pas trop investir dans un appareil de transition

bonne journée


_________________
@avia.poncho

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Mar 23 Mar 2010 - 14:38

Je dirais même plus, Poncho ... pas trop d' envie de le faire le 737 remotorisé chez Boeing ! Poncho !
Boeing est loin d'être sûr de s'en sortir aussi bien qu' Airbus sur le sujet !
Donc un peu d'intox vers les clients, bien relayée par SUH .... ça peut aider un peu ...
Moi j'attends la réaction de Ryanair surtout ... il doit commander et ne pourra attendre la nouvelle génération ... qui s'éloigne d'un an tous les ans héhé !
Et depuis l'année dernière Michaël O Leary est devenu bien trop silencieux !
Il à mis ses négociations de renouvellement de flotte (200-400 Monocouloirs) en veilleuse, alors que c'était le bon moment de traiter à - 50% !
Je le verrais bien relancer ce négoce, à travers une annonce de re-motorisation, au salon, par exemple !

JPRS

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Mer 5 Mai 2010 - 21:36

Bonsoir !

Un point de vue de BCL qui en vaut bien un autre ... Un nouvel avion, les raisons, pas les détails ... une présentation bien étayée à laquelle je souscris ... Le remplaçant du 737 vu par Flyingcolors !
Une objection !
Et 5 ans pour faire un avion à partir du scratch, ben on a vu ce que cela donne avec le 787 !

Reste à voir ce que donnera une cellule moderne, avec les mêmes moteurs ... qu'un "Remotorisé"... si c'est mieux qu'un 787, pourquoi pas ...
Mais ne pas oublier que les épaisseurs de CFRP, dans l'état de l'art, ne peuvent pas diminuer proportionnellement à la taille des éléments, because résistance à la grèle, par exemple !
Contrairement à l'aluminium !

------------------ L'article Flyingcolors -----------------

http://flyingcolors.onewavemedia.com/blog/?p=772

Boeing 737: Re-engine or Replace?

There is some new speculation and reports that Boeing is now leaning towards a new development aircraft to replace the 737 instead of a re-engine project. See the Seattle Post Intelligencer blog post HERE. The best of business cases for a re-engine project are usually fraught with risk and I’m sure that is no different in the case of this aircraft. Although the 737 dates back to the late 1960’s, current versions date only from the 1990’s and continue to sell very well.



There are a few variables at play here. First, Boeing doesn’t want to hurt its backlog of 737 orders and that’s understandable given the high profitability they provide. Airbus is in the same position and neither company prefers to blink first. On the other hand, if Boeing moves forward with a new design, it’s fairly certain that Airbus would blink rather quickly.



Airlines want new, more efficient aircraft and they would prefer a leap in efficiency equivalent to what was seen in the mid 1980’s with new models. Newly developed aircraft at that time were offering a 35 to 40% improvement in efficiency (cost per passenger seat mile) over the first generation of aircraft still flying. They would like to see that leap again and, unfortunately, that’s unlikely.



The curve on engine and airframe technology advancements has reached a point where it is smoother and less steep. Our knowledge of aerodynamics, engineering on airframes, new materials and, yes, engines, has become more stable. There is less of a learning curve than there was with our first two generations of aircraft. That means gains of 15 to 25% are probably what is achievable in the next round and that’s still very, very good.



Engine manufacturers are much more confident of their ability to deliver on their end than they were just 2 years ago. Circumstances have changed and that leads to a company like Boeing examining the future and seeing less risk. That’s a good thing. At some point, the risk becomes appropriate and I think they’re approaching that point and realize it.



Boeing has a great deal of new knowledge on using new materials and I suspect that their one challenge in using, say, CFRP for a B737 style aircraft is in figuring out how to scale it down. Now that the 787 program is in production and testing, they likely see that it is a problem they can solve.



Finally, making a move to build a new aircraft is timely for two reasons. First, they’re development work on both the 787 and 747 is winding down. New variants of the 787 will require a fraction of the development staff that the original design required. They have resources that are freeing up and who could be put to use on new programs.



Second, it would potentially put Airbus in a very constrained position. Airbus is constrained on resources and money at present. The A380 program is not earning them money and, if anything, is badly hurting their cash flow. That program refuses to scale up into planned production and, what’s worse, airlines continue to defer their orders without ordering any additional aircraft.



Airbus also is in the middle of developing the A350 and faces a number of technological challenges there, too. They’re as new to the CFRP fuselage as Boeing is and it’s taking time to figure out how to build that aircraft right. While production delays haven’t been announced, there isn’t an analyst out there who believes that this aircraft will show up on time and on budget. It will most likely have as many challenges facing it as the 787 did and that means another program sucking up resources and money.



Finally, Airbus has problems with its military A400M aircraft development and a number of countries are very upset with Airbus performance there as well. To add more fuel to the fire, Airbus/EADS will be attempting to win the KC-X tanker program at all costs and that requires still more resources that are in scarce supply.



If Boeing announces a new build in the next year, it puts the fire to the feet of Airbus to come up with something in response and makes Airbus react to Boeing instead of the other way around. Will they announce a new build? Yes, I think in the next 12 to 18 months we’ll hear of the launch of a 737 replacement program probably taking something on the order of 5 years to complete.

Filed under: Airline Fleets by ajax

Bonne chance !

JPRS

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Mer 5 Mai 2010 - 23:01

Bonsoir,

Dans la même veine j'ai ça

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/204743.asp


Despite upstart rivals and Airbus' expected re-engining of its single-aisle A320, Boeing may be leaning toward forgoing re-engining its 737 in favor of a whole new airplane, according to a new report.
"(W)e think current thinking could be leaning towards a new airplane," Richard Safran of the Buckingham Research wrote after Boeing Capital Corp's annual investor's update, as reported by Leeham News & Comment.
Opting for an all-new single-aisle offering could put Boeing at a short-term disadvantage if Airbus went ahead with A320 re-engining, but Airbus probably would respond to such a decision by scrapping re-engining and launching its own new program, Safran wrote.
There are a couple of obvious advantages to a new program. For one, Boeing could leapfrog the upstarts, such as Bombardier's CSeries and upcoming offerings from Brazil, China and Russia, rather than playing catch up with an updated 737 that still would not be as efficient as the all-new planes. Also, an announcement of a forthcoming re-engined 737 could erode Boeing's deep backlog for existing 737s.
Boeing Boeing Chairman, President and Chief Executive Jim McNerney addressed this point during the company's first-quarter conference call, saying: "We try to make these decisions in a way where the current demand for current products is supported as we move into derivatives or all new airplanes, and we've got a process in place that we don't think is going to cannibalize the demand we see now."
Airplane leasing companies, which are huge customers, don't want to see their existing 737s devalued by a re-engined model (a replacement would do that too, but not as soon).
"The last thing we need is premature obsolescence like what we have in the computer industry," Steve Udvar-Hazy, chief executive of Air Lease LLC, and the founder and former head International Lease Finance Corp., the world's biggest airplane buyer, said during the annual conference of the International Society of Transport Aircraft Traders in March, according to an Aviation Week report.
Leeham's Scott Hamilton wrote: "We know from our own conversations that key Boeing customers want a new airplane rather than a re-engined aircraft."
Boeing executives are "reasonably convinced at this stage that there isn't yet a business case for an (re-engining) program," Hamilton added, saying Airbus executives are divided on the question.
But a new airplane is an expensive and risky proposition, particularly coming on the heels of the delayed 787 Dreamliner and 747-8 programs. And, even if Airbus follows suit in opting for a new plane over re-engining, waiting on a new program would give the upstarts more time to press their advantage and establish a foothold in what has been Boeing and Airbus turf. Alternatively, it could take the wind out of their sales, as airlines opt to wait for the new planes.
Airbus, of course, is in the middle of its A350 XWB program, still having troubles ramping up A380 production levels and just saw a World Trade Organization panel rule that European government launch aid to Airbus programs violated trade rules on subsidies.
Both Boeing and Airbus have promised a decision by the end of this year.
Getting back to the Washington perspective, Hamilton noted in a separate post that a 737 replacement could be built elsewhere, while a re-engined 737 would be sure to stay in state.
"Boeing Commercial President Jim Albaugh is on record saying he wants to build the 737 replacement airplane right here in Puget Sound," Hamilton wrote. "But he added a significant caveat: it depends on labor. And the IAM still doesn't get it."
The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers has to be more willing to compromise, and Washington still has "business climate issues affecting Boeing, Washington aerospace more broadly and business in general that need to be adjusted," Hamilton said.


Alors alors ?

Couper l'herbe sous le pied au C919 et au Cseries ?
Faire un nouvel avion ?

A suivre


_________________
@avia.poncho

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Mer 5 Mai 2010 - 23:40

D'abord un remarque ... A et B ont un infini respect pour le parque de leurs clients, et sa valeur résiduelle ... en facade !
Et espérent qu'il le mettront le plus vite possible à la casse, pour pouvoir le remplacer !
Comme les constructeurs auto !
Pervers et faux culs à la foi !

Ce que je commence à sentir est que Boeing étant perdant sur une remotorisation en //, avec de plus les winglets qui arrivent sur les A 320 !

Ils vont probablement lancer un nouveau modèle plutôt que de se lancer dans une remotorisation plus longue, plus coûteuse et perdante !
S'ils veulent garder la parité sur une remotorisation, ce sera en appuyant sur le bouton "Remises"

Donc j'opte pour un nouvel avion chez Boeing ... pour 2017 ou 18
Avec peut être une remotorisation light "Symbolique" du genre leapX à la 919, avec un fan un peu sqeezé, façon Genx2, GE sait faire et assez vite !
Et ce n'est pas exclu que CFMI soit discrètement au boulot sur le sujet, Boeing est exclusif avec eux !

La grande question est quel avion ...
Il sera assez classique, en full barrel probablement, pour Boeing, et bien fait cette foi ... mais pas forcément ultra-léger !
Grande question ... quelle taille, mono ou Bi couloir ... 200 ou 250 pax max ?

Si Airbus lance la remotorisation ... facile pour eux ... ben ils auront 2-3 ans pour réfléchir à la meilleure manière de contrer, Me Too, plus grand, ou plus petit ... et peut être gagner un an, en préparant bien leur coup !

Je ne crois pas qu'ils (Airbus) abandonnent la remotorisation, ils l'ont visiblement promise a qq clients, ils sont plus engagés que Boeing !

Et ... qq années tranquilles, pendant qu'ils se sortent des pétrins A400M et A 350, peuvent représenter 1000 ou 1500 avions A320NG de plus, sans gros risque !

Aprés il leur restera à bien viser et améliorer un peu, comme pour le A350 !
Et RR sera peut être enfin prêt avec un meilleur moteur Basketball

Et tout le monde aura le temps de réfléchir sur les futurs "Unducted" pour 2025 .... alien

Les cycles d'avions tous les dix ans maintenant ... dur l'avenir What a Face

Vu de ma fenêtre ! drunken

JPRS

Poncho (Admin)
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Poncho (Admin) le Jeu 6 Mai 2010 - 8:35

Jolie fenètre ! Wink

L'idée d'Airbus de mettre la remotorosation en option sur l'avion actuel laisse présager (ou espèrer) la possibilité d'un retrofit partiel à une partie de la gamme (avions les plus récents ?) moyennant les renforts adéquats... un peu comme le winglets.
Je ne sais pas si ça peut être rentable ou réaliste, mais ça peut protéger la valeur résiduelle...
Probablement plus valable pour le couple CFM56 - LeapX que pour le versant IAE dans l'état actuel.


_________________
@avia.poncho

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Jeu 6 Mai 2010 - 11:20

Bonjour!
Je n'oublierais pas la remotorisation GTF, sur l'Airbus, n'en déplaise à JL, car le poids pourrait être égal ou inférieur aux motorisations actuelles, du moins pour le moteur !
La nacelle et le pylon, je ne sais pas !
Et peut être pas de renforts à prévoir, si ce n'est ceux qui seront réalisés pour les winglets dans 2 ans !

JPRS

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Jeu 6 Mai 2010 - 16:22

Bonjour

Les nouveaux (Soit disant) Monocouloirs, le débat s'amplifie … point d'orgue à Farnborough !
Partiellement repris de Anet, Lequebecois , Merci !
Rien de bien nouveau, si ce n'est que Boeing laisse penser qu'il y va pour un nouvel avion, une convergence singulière sur le sujet !
Reste à savoir quel avion sortira du chapeau, l'annonce, ce serait ??? seulement pour la fin de l'année, EIS (Sérieuse) vers les 2018 !
Le moteur, ou la gachette, semble être un rapport de : Richard Safran, de Buckingham Research, non visible sur le net ! (Si qq'un le trouve ce rapport !)

Info ou intox ??
Dans l'ordre Donc, Richard Safran, s'appuie sur la conférence Boeing, et les confidences d' Airliners, et ... feeds Scott Hamilton, qui feed Seattle PI, qui s'appuie sur SUH ! C'est un peu tordu quand même, mais la mayonnaise est montée !
Espérons que ce n'est pas une information circulaire qui s'autofeed qq part !
Ce serait amusant que ce paquet, débouche sur des réactions compulsives des acteurs …. Airframers, Airliners, Lessors et motoristes …

Vu ailleurs, sais plus où, que Enders est contre la remotorisation des A320 séries, JL pour et LG pour !

Quel Bazar !

------------------- Le Seattle PI Extrait -----------------------
http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/204743.asp
Vu par Poncho Merci

Report: Boeing leaning toward replacing, not re-engining 737
"(W)e think current thinking could be leaning towards a new airplane," Richard Safran of the Buckingham Research wrote after Boeing Capital Corp's annual investor's update, as reported by Leeham News & Comment.

"The last thing we need is premature obsolescence like what we have in the computer industry," Steve Udvar-Hazy, chief executive of Air Lease LLC, and the founder and former head International Lease Finance Corp., the world's biggest airplane buyer, said during the annual conference of the International Society of Transport Aircraft Traders in March, according to an Aviation Week report.

Leeham's Scott Hamilton wrote: "We know from our own conversations that key Boeing customers want a new airplane rather than a re-engined aircraft."

Boeing executives are "reasonably convinced at this stage that there isn't yet a business case for an (re-engining) program," Hamilton added, saying Airbus executives are divided on the question.

But a new airplane is an expensive and risky proposition, particularly coming on the heels of the delayed 787 Dreamliner and 747-8 programs. And, even if Airbus follows suit in opting for a new plane over re-engining, waiting on a new program would give the upstarts more time to press their advantage and establish a foothold in what has been Boeing and Airbus turf. Alternatively, it could take the wind out of their sales, as airlines opt to wait for the new planes.
----------------------------
Le blog et l'analyse de Scott Hamilton, Leeham !
http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/boeing-leans-toward-new-737-not-re-engine-analyst/#more-2951
Vu par le Cousin, Merci !

Boeing is leaning toward a new airplane to replace the 737 rather than proceeding with a re-engining program, an aerospace analyst wrote in a report issued today.

Richard Safran of the boutique Buckingham Research came away from Boeing Capital Corp’s annual investor’s update with an analysis that is a potentially paradigm-shifting conclusion that Boeing will forget about the widely-assumed plan to re-engine the 737 to meet an expected decision by Airbus to re-engine the A320 family–itself a decision largely driven by competition from Bombardier’s CSeries.

Safran’s report also cites “channel checks” with unidentified airlines, lessors and bankers to reach his conclusion that Boeing is likely to proceed with a new airplane. We know from our own conversations that key Boeing customers want a new airplane rather than a re-engined aircraft, so Safran’s report is consistent with what we are hearing (or vice versa, depending on your viewpoint).

Here is what Safran said:

At the conference, BA discussed its narrowbody strategy and the 737 upgrade. Despite BA’s discussion, we think current thinking could be leaning towards a new airplane. If BA opts for a new design, we would view BA stock more favorably as that could defer the substantive R&D and CAPEX spending on a narrowbody product until after 2013 (assuming a 2019-2020 service entry).  That improves BA’s earnings and cash flow in 2011-2013 when aircraft deliveries and earnings are projected to grow.

The possible Airbus response to a new BA narrowbody

Foregoing a 737 upgrade could put BA at a short-term disadvantage should Airbus proceed with an A320 upgrade that enters service in 2015. However, if BA opts for a new narrowbody, Airbus will likely scrap its upgrade and proceed with its own new airplane. Despite severe cash flow problems caused by the A380, A400M, and A350 R&D, we believe Airbus will be able to finance an A320 replacement. Despite the WTO findings in the US case against illegal subsidies to Airbus, Airbus will seek Reimbursable Launch Investment (RLI) for an A320 replacement program. Any new Airbus program would be on a similar timeline to a new BA program, eliminating any perceived near-term disadvantage to BA and likely maintaining the status quo.

-------------------------------------

Bon, celui qui s'y retrouve …
Ben qu'il reprenne la suite !

JPRS

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Jeu 6 Mai 2010 - 16:47

Bonjour,

En réponse à Poncho !

--------------

L'idée d'Airbus de mettre la remotorosation en option sur l'avion actuel laisse présager (ou espèrer) la possibilité d'un retrofit partiel à une partie de la gamme (avions les plus récents ?) moyennant les renforts adéquats... un peu comme le winglets.

---------------

Je serais Airbus, j'encouragerais au moins un motoriste à concevoir (Et financer) un programme de rétrofit ... Peut être accompagné en risque partagé d'un fabricant de nacelles ... !
Le plus affamé, et le plus avancé pouvant être P&W, de plus, il peut éventuellement être dans les mêmes poids que les moteurs actuels (A vérifier)
P&W d'ailleur, avec le moteur du Séries C, peut s'occuper dans 2 Ans des 318-319, pour commencer !
Bon, le 319 est le plus intéressant évidemment, et adieu la commonality ... mais 15% d'écos ca peut rester intéressant !
Cela n'exclut évidemment pas les autres motoristes, dont Snecma qui connaît bien le problème, pour RR je ne sais pas !

JPRS

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Sam 22 Mai 2010 - 13:47

Bonjour !

Comment fabriquer un 737 !
Bon article d'avril, sur Renton, le 737, avance à 2 pouces par minute !
Question subsidiaire ...
Comment adapter un nouveau désign, Full Barrel, sur cette chaine ...

------------------- Le lien à travers msnbc, 3 pages ---------------

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36507420/ns/business-us_business/page/3/

- J'ajoute : Boeing à re-signé pour 20 ans les facilités Aeroportuaires de Renton ! Un signe ?

RENTON, WA—Today, Renton Mayor Denis Law, City Councilmembers and The Boeing Company finalized a new long-term lease agreement for Renton Municipal Airport. The base lease term is 20 years, and it includes two 10-year options.

Read more: Boeing signs 20-year lease at Renton airport - Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle)

http://seattle.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2010/05/17/daily26.html


JPRS

Beochien
Whisky Charlie

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Beochien le Dim 23 Mai 2010 - 13:00

Bonjour ...

Toujours sur le même sujet, et après la conférence destinée aux investisseurs de Boeing ..;

Les spéculations vont bon train, !

José Anselmo, en remets une petite couche , assez nuancée !
Ben oui replonger dés 2011, pour 13 billions de RD, alors que le 787 (Ni le 748) ne sont livrés, et surtout, le ramp up assuré ... ça ne plait pas trop aux actionnaires, ni aux analystes financiers !

Commentaire personnel :
1/ Quelles technos pourraient accompagner un nouvel avion destiné à remplacer, le 737 .... sans préjuger des études futuristes des divers BE ..
Il faut reconnaître que 2-3 avions dans les 48-53 % plastoc, peuvent servir de guide,!
Ne pas oublier que 3 longueurs seront quasi obligatoires dés le départ :
- La techno du 787, reconduite et optimisée (Pas facile à Renton)!
- le C-Séries, assez pragmatique et bien moins coûteux à développer !
- La A 350 d'Airbus, moins coûteux aussi, que Boeing ne devrait pas suivre !
2/ Côté moteurs, 3 candidats sur le plateau ! Et des moteurs en cours de développement !
- Le LeapX, avec GE assuré d'un poste !
- P&W qui ne devrait pas manquer le coche cette foi avec le GTF !
- Et RR avec son RB 282, qu'ils auront le temps de développer et d'essayer cette fois !

Conclusion ... ce nouvel avion sera peut être seulement une 1/2 nouvelle génération, plutôt de la génération du 787, ou du C-Séries, que la vraie nouvelle génération, attendue aprés 2022-24 !
Donc, pourquoi dépenser 13 milliards, si Bombardier le fait pour à peine 3-4 ... une question que ne manqueront pas de rappeler les investisseurs, et McNerney le sait bien !

3/ Le timing ... On peu penser que s'il y a décision cette fin d'année, chez Boeing, de lancer une "Nouvelle" génération, un nouvel intérêt relativement récent!
Donc, rien ne doit être bien avancé chez Boeing, entre les plans Y1, remplacés d'ailleurs par le RS 737, vers 2006, et ce qui est prévu vers 2024 ... Ils ont besoin d'une petite année pour "fixer" le projet ..
- Donc, ils sauront ce qu'ils peuvent proposer sérieusement début 2011 (Hors effets d'annonce) !
- EIS 6 ans après ... si tout va bien!
- Au moins 1 an, voire 2 pour arriver à en fabriquer 20+ par mois ....

Cela fait 2018 mini, plus probablement 2019, pour que les Airlines en reçoivent en quantités significatives ...
Et McNerney est bien obligé d'en tenir compte, après l'expérience du B787 !

Question : Si Airbus re-motorise, et Boeing ne le fait pas pas ...
Combien d'avions va perdre Boeing .... pendant ce lapse de temps ... car il deviendra douteux que le 737 prenne beaucoup de nouvelles commandes ??
Mon avis perso ... les analystes parlent de 1000, je prétends au moins 2000 avions, si Airbus remotorise seul !

Que va faire Airbus de son côté ??

Tomas Enders submergé dans ses problèmes de production, comme de développement, freine un max côté re-motorisations !
Etre confronté au lancement d'un nouvel avion par Boeing, et être obligé de suivre qq mois après avec un remplaçant du A320, ne doit pas le réjouir non plus ...
En plus il risque de devoir affronter les deux ! la Re-motorisation, et le nouvel avion ! What a Face :briques:

John Leahy qui veut remplir de nouveau son carnet de commandes pousse à fond ! Lui il voit Bombardier, COMAS et LE MS21, et même Embraer qui aiguisent les couteaux ! :épée:
Et vont avoir les moteurs qu'il faut pour prendre une part du gâteau !tchin

Aucune décision n'est prise, ni côté Airbus, ni côté Boeing !
Attendre Farnborough, et la fin de l'année !
De l'encre va couler d'ici là !

------------------------ L'Article de AviationWeek---------------

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/commercial_aviation/ThingsWithWings/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=7a78f54e-b3dd-4fa6-ae6e-dff2ffd7bdbb&plckPostId=Blog%3a7a78f54e-b3dd-4fa6-ae6e-dff2ffd7bdbbPost%3a99b0d541-90c4-4034-8410-701e68bb727e&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Ils reprennent beaucoup d'élements précédents !

A Brand New Narrowbody For Boeing?
Posted by Joe Anselmo at 5/21/2010 1:14 PM CDT
Is Boeing preparing to up the ante in the race to build a better passenger jet? Morgan Stanley analyst Heidi Wood is predicting the company will spend as much as $13 billion to develop an all-new aircraft to replace the Boeing 737, bypassing a less ambitious move to outfit the aircraft with more efficient engines.

Boeing and Airbus need to do something to keep their brisk-selling narrowbody 737 and A320 families competitive with Bombardier’s upcoming CSeries jet and new aircraft being developed by China’s Comac, Russia’s United Aircraft Corp. and potentially Brazil’s Embraer. Conventional wisdom has held that the two biggest airframers would re-engine their 737s and A320s. A decision by Boeing to develop a brand new aircraft instead would be costly and potentially risky.

The rationale behind Wood’s case is that a re-engined 737 would be less fuel-efficient than a re-engined A320. “We think Boeing is prudent to be pre-emptive with an all-new airplane,” she says. “Southwest Airlines has been agitating for a new 737 replacement for years and would be among the first launch customers.” She predicts a 737 successor could enter the market in 2017-18, about two years behind a re-engined A320.

Senior Boeing executives expect to make a decision on the 737’s future in the fall. Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO James Albaugh says the company is hearing mixed opinions from buyers: Those that already have the 737 prefer a re-engining; those that don’t want a brand new airplane. Investors would frown on the latter option, given that hefty R&D expenses for the 787 and 747-8 have been a drag on earnings and are just winding down. There also is a big question of whether the next-generation technologies needed to make a new aircraft a “game-changer” could be ready so quickly. Boeing CEO James McNerney is mindful of Wall Street’s concerns. “It’s hard to see us returning to the R&D levels of the last few years,” he says.

Meanwhile, Boeing plans to spool up production of the 737 to 34 per month by 2012, from 31.5 currently, and is looking at going as high as 40 per month as airlines return to profitability. The company already has more than 2,000 orders for 737s in its backlog. But the clock may be ticking on an aircraft that has been updated several times since it first flew in 1967. As Boeing and its competitors jockey for position, airlines and investors await their next moves.

JPRS

Contenu sponsorisé

Re: Boeing 737MAX

Message par Contenu sponsorisé Aujourd'hui à 2:04


    La date/heure actuelle est Sam 10 Déc 2016 - 2:04