Read the forum code of contact
By: - 13th October 2014 at 21:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good to see.
I went to the Boeing website about it and was impressed.
They're still predicting better fuel efficiency than the 320NEO.
The new winglets are part of the reason.
Meanwhile, in the last 2 months, I've had three trips in 737-700/800s.
Nice enough aircraft...the Southwest configuration seemed to be more comfortable than my most recent 320 trip on Easyjet (to compare low cost carriers).
By: - 14th October 2014 at 13:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
They're still predicting better fuel efficiency than the 320NEO.
The new winglets are part of the reason.
Its a bit early to be sure that is the case.
The relative orderbook certainly wouldn't strongly back it up.
By: - 14th October 2014 at 17:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Its a bit early to be sure that is the case.The relative orderbook certainly wouldn't strongly back it up.
Boeing sales are quite healthy considering the year-long head start the Airbus has had in sales.
From a Boeing news release yesterday announcing a new sale of 50 aircraft:"2,295 orders for the 737 Max models from 47 airlines".
Still Boeing predicts better fuel economy, and they're saying the new winglets are one of the reasons.
Their computer simulations might be off, but I'd expect they have them fairly well nailed down to avoid disappointing customers...especially since many contracts have penalty clauses if the aircraft doesn't live up to expectations.
One think I've never understood is the original 320 wing could not support blended winglets...whereas Boeing has offered them for years either from the factory or through a kit offered by Aviation partners.
A week out of service and $500,000 and you get 2-3% fuel savings.
By: - 15th October 2014 at 08:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Boeing sales are quite healthy considering the year-long head start the Airbus has had in sales.
But relatively around 2/3s that of NEO.
The year head start is irrelevant at this point in time as that 1/3 extra represents many more years manufacturing.
Still Boeing predicts better fuel economy, and they're saying the new winglets are one of the reasons.
Their computer simulations might be off, but I'd expect they have them fairly well nailed down to avoid disappointing customers...especially since many contracts have penalty clauses if the aircraft doesn't live up to expectations.
Oh, I'd reckon the disconnect would be between engineering and marketing. Not reality and engineering.
One think I've never understood is the original 320 wing could not support blended winglets...whereas Boeing has offered them for years either from the factory or through a kit offered by Aviation partners.
That'd depend on the static and fatigue margins within the wing structure.
(Don't forget, the A320 wing is older than the 737NG wing.)
A week out of service and $500,000 and you get 2-3% fuel savings.
But may* reduce your inspection intervals - its never black and white.
*==should - otherwise the non-winglet operators are getting a bad deal.
By: - 29th October 2014 at 15:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One think I've never understood is the original 320 wing could not support blended winglets...whereas Boeing has offered them for years either from the factory or through a kit offered by Aviation partners.
A week out of service and $500,000 and you get 2-3% fuel savings.
http://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com/products_list_prices.php
I was going to disagree with your price assessment from memory, but having checked the figures, the quoted prices are generally above $1,000,000!!!
By: Anonymous (not verified) - 13th October 2014 at 20:10 - Edited 10th April 2020 at 19:45
[ATTACH=CONFIG]232377[/ATTACH]
The 737 MAX is off the starting blocks!
http://www.boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2014/10/max_takes_shape_1.html