739max 2.0 Would the Max9 benefit by including the proposed Max10 initiatives?

amdiesen · Sun Jun 04, 2017 11:55 pm

proposed MAX 10 initiatives:
- telescoping landing gear
- larger engine, uprated 31,000 lbf (140 kN) CFM LEAP-1B
- stronger wing
current Max-9 objective:
- range improvement after 2021 (4,149 mi; 6,676 km)

N62NA · Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:44 am

If it's possible and doesn't cost a lot, I'm sure Boeing will do it. They'll do almost anything to keep the 737 relevant!

ikolkyo · Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:07 am

This has been brought up before, issue is that the MAX 9 is already flying and this would create 2 different versions of the same aircraft on a small order base. Not a good combo but he performance benefits would benefit the aircraft very much.

keesje · Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:14 am

It would make the -9 a much better aircraft. What won't go a away is that the -9 is only a slight seat capacity increase over the -8 while it weighs 3t more. It's only 2.5m / 9 ft longer, limited by angles. A likely -10 will "correct" this, making it much more attractive than the -9 in terms of cost per unit.

reidar76 · Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:30 am

There is no need to update the -9. The 737-8/-9-10 is very close in size, and all three variants falls in-between the A320 and A321.

The A320 is slightly smaller than the 737-8, and the A321 is larger than the 737-10. We don't need a new 737 version for every row added. :-)

If the 737-10 is launched there won't be new orders for the -9, and many existing orders will be converted from -9 to -10 (or downsized to -8). In practice, the -10 will be the new -9.

LAX772LR · Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:33 am

ikolkyo wrote:
This has been brought up before, issue is that the MAX 9 is already flying and this would create 2 different versions of the same aircraft on a small order base.

Didn't stop them from doing the 739ER when the 739 had more or less just come out.

ikolkyo · Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:12 am

LAX772LR wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
This has been brought up before, issue is that the MAX 9 is already flying and this would create 2 different versions of the same aircraft on a small order base.

Didn't stop them from doing the 739ER when the 739 had more or less just come out.

The first -900 was delivered in 2001 and the first -900ER was delivered in 2007. Different senario IMO because the -900ER was only pursued once 757 production stopped in 2004.

par13del · Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:08 pm

Well these are different times, the bigger issue is where were these engineers who have come up the 10 model, were they under a rock somewhere when the 900ER was taking flak and the MAX 9 getting little to no traction while the A321 was going leaps and bounds?
I really think this needs to be resolved before Boeing embarks on any new program, if creative thought / talent are being subdued Boeing is heading for a major crisis.

queb · Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:30 pm

reidar76 wrote:
If the 737-10 is launched there won't be new orders for the -9, and many existing orders will be converted from -9 to -10 (or downsized to -8). In practice, the -10 will be the new -9.

exactly. the -10 will cannibalize -9 orders

Newbiepilot · Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:47 pm

I would expect most 737-9 orders to get converted to the 737-10 and that the 737-9 might fade away like the 737-600 did after few were built.

Newbiepilot · Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:55 pm

par13del wrote:
Well these are different times, the bigger issue is where were these engineers who have come up the 10 model, were they under a rock somewhere when the 900ER was taking flak and the MAX 9 getting little to no traction while the A321 was going leaps and bounds?
I really think this needs to be resolved before Boeing embarks on any new program, if creative thought / talent are being subdued Boeing is heading for a major crisis.

There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%). There are 500 739s out of 6,000 737NGs in service. The 737 production has been steadily increasing for years at massive profits. A.net has overly analyzed the A321 vs 739 competition in my opinion and not necessarily is looking at the bigger picture. The impact of airlines switching to bigger narrowbodies has been a relatively recent trend and Boeing is doing something about it. This is not a sign that creative thought / talent is being subdued. This is a company reacting to a changing market. It could be argued that Boeing should have reacted sooner, but they had plenty of development work going on. Outside of the A vs B numbers game, where Airbus landed some gigantic orders, the 737 MAX has a gigantic backlog approaching 4000 planes this year. Boeing is doing just fine and not headed to a major crisis.

par13del · Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:55 pm

....or the first version of the MAX 7

par13del · Mon Jun 05, 2017 1:00 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the A320NEO family. There are 500 739s out of 6,000 737NGs in service. The 737 production has been steadily increasing for years at massive profits. A.net has overly analyzed the A321 vs 739 competition in my opinion. The impact of airlines switching to bigger narrowbodies has been a relatively recent trend and Boeing is doing something about it. This is not a sign that creative thought / talent is being subdued.

I agree the trend is recent, but so is the MAX 9 and the proposed MAX 10, that is the concern, was the MAX 9 rushed out before all and sundrry had their input, it now appears that the major limitations of the 900ER are being addressed by the 10, it should have been done on the MAX9 which just entered flight testing, so the time frame between the 737-9 and the 9ER will seem like generations if the 10 does come off.

cuban8 · Mon Jun 05, 2017 1:27 pm

Is there still time to convert most of the 737-9 max orders if the max 10 gets announced? The second hand value of a 737-9 max will drop significantly if the max 10 gets the go ahead. I guess no airline would want to hold on to a 737-9 max if that happens...

par13del · Mon Jun 05, 2017 1:48 pm

The issue is that the money for the MAX 9 variant has been spent, it is in flight testing and the MAX 10 has not yet been made formal and approved, all of which can be done if Boeing decides it will bite the bullet and take a loss. The MAX 10 will arrive even later, the big question is whether it will gain any additional orders over the current version of the MAX 9, the book wizards may just be saying continue to sell the 9 and develop the 10 in tandem at an acceptable cost.

KarelXWB · Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:42 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%).

par13del wrote:
I agree the trend is recent

That picture will change dramatically as A321 output now represents 50% of all A320 family production. Right now that's not happening on the 737 MAX family.

mjoelnir · Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:50 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
par13del wrote:
Well these are different times, the bigger issue is where were these engineers who have come up the 10 model, were they under a rock somewhere when the 900ER was taking flak and the MAX 9 getting little to no traction while the A321 was going leaps and bounds?
I really think this needs to be resolved before Boeing embarks on any new program, if creative thought / talent are being subdued Boeing is heading for a major crisis.

There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%). There are 500 739s out of 6,000 737NGs in service. The 737 production has been steadily increasing for years at massive profits. A.net has overly analyzed the A321 vs 739 competition in my opinion and not necessarily is looking at the bigger picture. The impact of airlines switching to bigger narrowbodies has been a relatively recent trend and Boeing is doing something about it. This is not a sign that creative thought / talent is being subdued. This is a company reacting to a changing market. It could be argued that Boeing should have reacted sooner, but they had plenty of development work going on. Outside of the A vs B numbers game, where Airbus landed some gigantic orders, the 737 MAX has a gigantic backlog approaching 4000 planes this year. Boeing is doing just fine and not headed to a major crisis.

So let us compare recent delivery numbers of 737-900ER and A321.

2016 222 A321 and 52 737-900ER
2016 184 A321 and 73 737-900ER
2016 150 A321 and 70 737-900ER

The 737-900 is not catching up, the divide is widening.

Natflyer · Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:58 pm

I think you need to fix something there. How many 2016s are there? Is it now 2016b?

Stitch · Mon Jun 05, 2017 5:00 pm

par13del wrote:
The issue is that the money for the MAX 9 variant has been spent, it is in flight testing and the MAX 10 has not yet been made formal and approved, all of which can be done if Boeing decides it will bite the bullet and take a loss. The MAX 10 will arrive even later, the big question is whether it will gain any additional orders over the current version of the MAX 9, the book wizards may just be saying continue to sell the 9 and develop the 10 in tandem at an acceptable cost.

If the A321-200 is selling more on it's capacity than it's performance, the 737-10 should do well since it is much closer to the A321-200 in capacity than the 737-9 is.

I see the 737-9 appealing mostly to true two-class operators (those with a 2+2 premium class and 3+3 economy class) whereas the 737-10 will appeal more to those who operate a single 3+3 economy class. It could also appeal to those who operate a three-class system (2+2 premium class, 3+3 extended legroom economy class and 3+3 economy class).

mjoelnir · Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:15 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
par13del wrote:
Well these are different times, the bigger issue is where were these engineers who have come up the 10 model, were they under a rock somewhere when the 900ER was taking flak and the MAX 9 getting little to no traction while the A321 was going leaps and bounds?
I really think this needs to be resolved before Boeing embarks on any new program, if creative thought / talent are being subdued Boeing is heading for a major crisis.

There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%). There are 500 739s out of 6,000 737NGs in service. The 737 production has been steadily increasing for years at massive profits. A.net has overly analyzed the A321 vs 739 competition in my opinion and not necessarily is looking at the bigger picture. The impact of airlines switching to bigger narrowbodies has been a relatively recent trend and Boeing is doing something about it. This is not a sign that creative thought / talent is being subdued. This is a company reacting to a changing market. It could be argued that Boeing should have reacted sooner, but they had plenty of development work going on. Outside of the A vs B numbers game, where Airbus landed some gigantic orders, the 737 MAX has a gigantic backlog approaching 4000 planes this year. Boeing is doing just fine and not headed to a major crisis.

So let us compare recent delivery numbers of 737-900ER and A321.

2016 222 A321 and 52 737-900ER
2016 184 A321 and 73 737-900ER
2016 150 A321 and 70 737-900ER

The 737-900 is not catching up, the divide is widening.

2016 222 A321 and 52 737-900ER
2015 184 A321 and 73 737-900ER
2014 150 A321 and 70 737-900ER

fixed

flyingclrs727 · Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:26 pm

Stitch wrote:
par13del wrote:
The issue is that the money for the MAX 9 variant has been spent, it is in flight testing and the MAX 10 has not yet been made formal and approved, all of which can be done if Boeing decides it will bite the bullet and take a loss. The MAX 10 will arrive even later, the big question is whether it will gain any additional orders over the current version of the MAX 9, the book wizards may just be saying continue to sell the 9 and develop the 10 in tandem at an acceptable cost.

If the A321-200 is selling more on it's capacity than it's performance, the 737-10 should do well since it is much closer to the A321-200 in capacity than the 737-9 is.

I see the 737-9 appealing mostly to true two-class operators (those with a 2+2 premium class and 3+3 economy class) whereas the 737-10 will appeal more to those who operate a single 3+3 economy class. It could also appeal to those who operate a three-class system (2+2 premium class, 3+3 extended legroom economy class and 3+3 economy class).

Couldn't it also work as a replacement or supplement to what United used to call "Premium Service" 757's for transcon service?

mjoelnir · Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:29 pm

Stitch wrote:
par13del wrote:
The issue is that the money for the MAX 9 variant has been spent, it is in flight testing and the MAX 10 has not yet been made formal and approved, all of which can be done if Boeing decides it will bite the bullet and take a loss. The MAX 10 will arrive even later, the big question is whether it will gain any additional orders over the current version of the MAX 9, the book wizards may just be saying continue to sell the 9 and develop the 10 in tandem at an acceptable cost.

If the A321-200 is selling more on it's capacity than it's performance, the 737-10 should do well since it is much closer to the A321-200 in capacity than the 737-9 is.

I see the 737-9 appealing mostly to true two-class operators (those with a 2+2 premium class and 3+3 economy class) whereas the 737-10 will appeal more to those who operate a single 3+3 economy class. It could also appeal to those who operate a three-class system (2+2 premium class, 3+3 extended legroom economy class and 3+3 economy class).

In your opinion it is capacity, in my opinion it is both, capacity and performance.

The 737-900/900ER appeals mainly to airlines in the USA, AS, DL and UA operate 297 out of 485 delivered. I expect that will be the case for the 737-9 and a possible 737-10 too.

by738 · Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:51 pm

Telescoping landing gear sounds like a maintenance nightmare.....

Newbiepilot · Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:10 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%).

par13del wrote:
I agree the trend is recent

That picture will change dramatically as A321 output now represents 50% of all A320 family production. Right now that's not happening on the 737 MAX family.

That is probably why a launch of the 737-10 is imminent. Boeing is reacting to the changing market.

Newbiepilot · Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:11 pm

by738 wrote:
Telescoping landing gear sounds like a maintenance nightmare.....

The dual shock strut design on the 777-300ER is probably a good starting point for what the additional maintenance requirements will be.

scbriml · Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:30 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%).

Your numbers are off - very nearly 1,500 A321s out of a total of some 7,500 A320 family deliveries, or 20%. As others have pointed out, A321 deliveries are currently trending towards 50% of all deliveries.

Newbiepilot wrote:
Outside of the A vs B numbers game, where Airbus landed some gigantic orders, the 737 MAX has a gigantic backlog approaching 4000 planes this year. Boeing is doing just fine and not headed to a major crisis.

Short memory? Boeing not long ago dominated the single-aisle market. Their decline to 40% market share is reflected in their repeated adjustments to the MAX lineup. IMHO. the majority of -10 sales will come from -9 conversions or airlines that would have purchased the -9 anyway. I don't see the -10 stealing many A321 sales. I'm sure they'll launch the -10 with a big fanfare and a hatfull of orders. Subsequent analysis of those orders will likely reveal a slightly different story.

Stitch · Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:34 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
In my opinion it is both, capacity and performance.

Well if Boeing launches it, we'll find out. If it does sell well, then that is evidence that the A321 sold primarily on capacity. If it sells poorly, then it's performance.

mjoelnir wrote:
The 737-900/900ER appeals mainly to airlines in the USA, AS, DL and UA operate 297 out of 485 delivered.

They are all true two class operators so not surprising, IMO.

scbriml wrote:
Boeing not long ago dominated the single-aisle market.

30 years is not my idea of "not long ago", but YMMV.

mjoelnir · Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:05 pm

Stitch wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:
The 737-900/900ER appeals mainly to airlines in the USA, AS, DL and UA operate 297 out of 485 delivered.

They are all true two class operators so not surprising, IMO.

I think it has more to do with how they are used. The the typical USA airlines, using the frame, have big fleets and do not need to use the 737-900 and later the 737-9 or perhaps -10 in challenging conditions, you just use another frame on that. The typical A321 user has a smaller fleet and needs to use those frames also on hot and high or shorter fields, capacity and performance is my reason.

airzona11 · Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:14 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Stitch wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:
The 737-900/900ER appeals mainly to airlines in the USA, AS, DL and UA operate 297 out of 485 delivered.

They are all true two class operators so not surprising, IMO.

I think it has more to do with how they are used. The the typical USA airlines, using the frame, have big fleets and do not need to use the 737-900 and later the 737-9 or perhaps -10 in challenging conditions, you just use another frame on that. The typical A321 user has a smaller fleet and needs to use those frames also on hot and high or shorter fields, capacity and performance is my reason.

Good points. But it is interesting that the 739s are used extensively on the long transcon/hawaii flights by AS/DL/UA, where the efficiency is preferred to performance. The A321 being a good plane doesn't make the 739 a bad one.

par13del · Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:46 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
In your opinion it is capacity, in my opinion it is both, capacity and performance.

The 737-900/900ER appeals mainly to airlines in the USA, AS, DL and UA operate 297 out of 485 delivered. I expect that will be the case for the 737-9 and a possible 737-10 too.

Which was also the case with the 757, US carriers needed the extra capacity and performance, the Airbus competitor A321 struggled doing transcon's until it was upgraded.
The Boeing a/c was made with the US market in mind so......the initial A321 was designed to not have all the excess's of the 757 thus being lighter and more efficient.
Funny how things are now coming full circle, the A321 is on the way to outrange the 757.

TWA772LR · Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:58 pm

In regards to the 737-10, is Boeing really going with a telescopic gear? Or can they do a less technically complex, dual bogie MLG? It'd be a runway pig, but could enable it to have an MTOW edge over the A321.

This is going to be a very interesting Paris Air Show.

ikolkyo · Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:00 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
In regards to the 737-10, is Boeing really going with a telescopic gear? Or can they do a less technically complex, dual bogie MLG? It'd be a runway pig, but could enable it to have an MTOW edge over the A321.

This is going to be a very interesting Paris Air Show.

Well there is a reason they are using telescopic gear.. No room to make the gear bay larger, you can toss the double bogie gear out the window for a 737.

TWA772LR · Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:05 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
In regards to the 737-10, is Boeing really going with a telescopic gear? Or can they do a less technically complex, dual bogie MLG? It'd be a runway pig, but could enable it to have an MTOW edge over the A321.

This is going to be a very interesting Paris Air Show.

Well there is a reason they are using telescopic gear.. No room to make the gear bay larger, you can toss the double bogie gear out the window for a 737.

Of course you can't make it longer in the same direction as the wingspan, but how about the same direction as the fuselage? A company with the talent of Boeing can find a way. Airbus did it for the A320s delivered to Indian Airlines(Airways?).

Stitch · Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:05 pm

par13del wrote:
Which was also the case with the 757,...The Boeing a/c was made with the US market in mind...

British Airways and Eastern Airlines were the two main drivers of the 757's design so I'd say it was made for both the US and European domestic markets.

TWA772LR wrote:
In regards to the 737-10, is Boeing really going with a telescopic gear? Or can they do a less technically complex, dual bogie MLG? It'd be a runway pig, but could enable it to have an MTOW edge over the A321.

Being a "runway pig" is one of the issues which is why they are going to the new gear configuration to help alleviate that to some extent.

TWA772LR wrote:
Of course you can't make it longer in the same direction as the wingspan, but how about the same direction as the fuselage? A company with the talent of Boeing can find a way. Airbus did it for the A320s delivered to Indian Airlines(Airways?).

The double-bogeys for the Air India A320-200s was to reduce the pavement loading at airports with less-capable facilities. The MTOW was unchanged.

TWA772LR · Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:11 pm

Stitch wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:
Of course you can't make it longer in the same direction as the wingspan, but how about the same direction as the fuselage? A company with the talent of Boeing can find a way. Airbus did it for the A320s delivered to Indian Airlines(Airways?).

The double-bogeys for the Air India A320-200s was to reduce the pavement loading at airports with less-capable facilities. The MTOW was unchanged.

Did Airbus have to do any modifications to the A320 wheel well for this mod? Could Boeing (in theory) do the same to the 737s wheel well?

Flyglobal · Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:58 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
Stitch wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:
Of course you can't make it longer in the same direction as the wingspan, but how about the same direction as the fuselage? A company with the talent of Boeing can find a way. Airbus did it for the A320s delivered to Indian Airlines(Airways?).

The double-bogeys for the Air India A320-200s was to reduce the pavement loading at airports with less-capable facilities. The MTOW was unchanged.

Did Airbus have to do any modifications to the A320 wheel well for this mod? Could Boeing (in theory) do the same to the 737s wheel well?

Not without major design chnages. If they could they would have done it latst for the MAX.

Flyglobal

strfyr51 · Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:07 am

par13del wrote:
Well these are different times, the bigger issue is where were these engineers who have come up the 10 model, were they under a rock somewhere when the 900ER was taking flak and the MAX 9 getting little to no traction while the A321 was going leaps and bounds?
I really think this needs to be resolved before Boeing embarks on any new program, if creative thought / talent are being subdued Boeing is heading for a major crisis.

so?? Are you working at Boeing? I'm almost Sure they know what the -9 shortcomings are, Especially since Those who have them on order already know..
Which is why the-10 is getting BUILT !! .

DfwRevolution · Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:32 am

KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%).

par13del wrote:
I agree the trend is recent

That picture will change dramatically as A321 output now represents 50% of all A320 family production. Right now that's not happening on the 737 MAX family.

But some of that is just a short-term artifact of the A320 production conversion to the neo.

I am seeing that A321 orders account for about 25% of the A320neo backlog. It's certainly possible the A321neo customers are front-loading their deliveries and the A320neos are back-loaded, but it seems far fetched that long-run production will see 50% production going to A321 models.

mjoelnir · Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:23 am

DfwRevolution wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
There are about 1200 A321s in service compared to 6500 total for the entire A320 family (18%).

par13del wrote:
I agree the trend is recent

That picture will change dramatically as A321 output now represents 50% of all A320 family production. Right now that's not happening on the 737 MAX family.

But some of that is just a short-term artifact of the A320 production conversion to the neo.

I am seeing that A321 orders account for about 25% of the A320neo backlog. It's certainly possible the A321neo customers are front-loading their deliveries and the A320neos are back-loaded, but it seems far fetched that long-run production will see 50% production going to A321 models.

The main reason for the increased percentage of the A321 in the ceo production is IMO, that there are nearly as many A321, 245, as A320, 294, on backlog and that the A321 has reached 21.6% overall of 8027 ordered A320 family ceos.

Regarding the neo, 27.4 % of 5054 ordered A320 family neos are A321. The numbers are end of April.

KarelXWB · Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:50 am

DfwRevolution wrote:
I am seeing that A321 orders account for about 25% of the A320neo backlog. It's certainly possible the A321neo customers are front-loading their deliveries and the A320neos are back-loaded, but it seems far fetched that long-run production will see 50% production going to A321 models.

Unless more conversions are underway.

keesje · Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:52 am

The current NEO backlog will leave the factories as ~50% A321NEO's, so ~ 2500.

Conversions A320->A321 are taking place all the time, hardly anybody is upgrading 737-8 to -9's.

The 739-A321 25-75% marketshare is an euphemism supported by Boeing (short term stock value) and Airbus (we know, let all doze).

B737-9 backlog is soft, Lionair took less then 10 ac/yr over the last 10yrs / UA is on the fence.

Boeing is now fighting to prevent remaining 737 airlines like JAL, UA, Spicejet, Alaska, Xiamen, KLM and Ryanair also switching to A321s. I think the pressure on Boeing in this segment is pretty high at this stage.

Newbiepilot · Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:12 am

keesje wrote:
Conversions A320->A321 are taking place all the time, hardly anybody is upgrading 737-8 to -9's.
...
B737-9 backlog is soft, Lionair took less then 10 ac/yr over the last 10yrs / UA is on the fence. .

Both of these statements are probably true because orders are likely in the process of being converted to the 737-10 in preparation for formal launch of the 737-10.

If you think only Lion Air and United ordered the 737-9, you are wrong. You also don't know which airlines converted orders because many airlines never announced what type of 737 MAX they ordered in the first place because they had negotiated contracts that allowed the fleet breakdown to be decided at a later date.

737-9 customer published by Boeing:

StTim · Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:25 am

That is not a hatful of blue chip airlines.

keesje · Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:53 am

If we would put the numbers of aircraft ordered next to it, the Picture creates an entirely different perception. It's Lion, UA and the rest. I'm not sure Lionair even has confirmed -9 orders anymore. Can anyone come up with a recent credible source / confirmation?

Lionair going for -8's would half the -9 backlog. Lionair growth over the last 17 years has resulted in 120 aircraft in service, they have a backlog of 400+, including 200 A321s.

I consider United as strategically sittingon the fence. Not that thats' a problem, IMO they'll get a great deal out of this whatever happens.

r2rho · Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:08 pm

The question is rather, does the MAX9 make any sense once the MAX10 is available? I think for most airlines no. The MAX10 is more or less a MAX9.5, and what the MAX9 should have been IMO. But the MAX 9 is already produced and flying... might as well finish the job, and bridge the gap until the MAX9.5/10 is available.

Revelation · Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:44 pm

Flyglobal wrote:
Not without major design chnages. If they could they would have done it latst for the MAX.

Flyglobal

Indeed. All that has come from the 'Mad Max' discussions is a knuckle in the landing gear that pushes the pivot point less than a wheel diameter rearward and a small stretch. If anything more was justified, we would have seen it.

oldannyboy · Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:17 pm

Natflyer wrote:
I think you need to fix something there. How many 2016s are there? Is it now 2016b?

Nahhh.. We're in 2016-MAX. Or -neo?.. wait a minute... :scratchchin:

Dutchy · Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:40 pm

r2rho wrote:
The question is rather, does the MAX9 make any sense once the MAX10 is available? I think for most airlines no. The MAX10 is more or less a MAX9.5, and what the MAX9 should have been IMO. But the MAX 9 is already produced and flying... might as well finish the job, and bridge the gap until the MAX9.5/10 is available.

Depends on the premium Boeing would ask over the Max9, I guess.

Newbiepilot · Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:22 am

keesje wrote:
If we would put the numbers of aircraft ordered next to it, the Picture creates an entirely different perception. It's Lion, UA and the rest. I'm not sure Lionair even has confirmed -9 orders anymore. Can anyone come up with a recent credible source / confirmation?

Lionair going for -8's would half the -9 backlog. Lionair growth over the last 17 years has resulted in 120 aircraft in service, they have a backlog of 400+, including 200 A321s.

I consider United as strategically sittingon the fence. Not that thats' a problem, IMO they'll get a great deal out of this whatever happens.

The first 737-9 is going to Lion Air. The second is already in the Lion Air paint scheme, which is pretty credible sign to me that Lion is getting 737-9s

For your information, Alaska is an important player too. Alaska launched the original 737-900. It was built around their request for a higher capacity plane to fly their SEA-ANC and SEA-LAX routes.

All this may change with the 737-10.

keesje · Wed Jun 07, 2017 3:06 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
If we would put the numbers of aircraft ordered next to it, the Picture creates an entirely different perception. It's Lion, UA and the rest. I'm not sure Lionair even has confirmed -9 orders anymore. Can anyone come up with a recent credible source / confirmation?

Lionair going for -8's would half the -9 backlog. Lionair growth over the last 17 years has resulted in 120 aircraft in service, they have a backlog of 400+, including 200 A321s.

I consider United as strategically sittingon the fence. Not that thats' a problem, IMO they'll get a great deal out of this whatever happens.

The first 737-9 is going to Lion Air. The second is already in the Lion Air paint scheme, which is pretty credible sign to me that Lion is getting 737-9s

For your information, Alaska is an important player too. Alaska launched the original 737-900. It was built around their request for a higher capacity plane to fly their SEA-ANC and SEA-LAX routes.

All this may change with the 737-10.

That's a pretty credible sign :bigthumbsup:

Nothing left of the commitment for 200 that showed up earlier though for Lionair. Alaska is a MAX-9 customer, 17 on order. They announced they are taking further NEO's too, with Virgin America they are A321NEO launching customer.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net