stratclub
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: 737 main gear doors fuel inefficiency

Mon Oct 29, 2018 5:57 pm

Very true. However the 707, 720, 727 and 737 all share a common fuselage cross section and many of the structural elements of all three are identical. The 737-10 MAX can carry more Passengers than a 707-320 at more than 100k less METO although the MAX does not have the range of a 707.

The 757 was more than a direct replacement for the 727. It was more like a single aisle medium range, downsized 767 With some structural elements left over from the 707, 727 and 737.
 
SteelChair
Topic Author
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: 737 main gear doors fuel inefficiency

Mon Oct 29, 2018 11:25 pm

stratclub wrote:
Ever wonder why Boeing stopped production on the 757 and not the 737? The problem with the 737 main gear is that it fails the LAR (Looks About Right) quotient but in reality the design just plain old works well with apparently a very small aerodynamic penalty and some savings on weight. On paper, the 757 is a better aircraft so it just seems reasonable it would have replaced the 737, but it didn't.


Contrary to many a.net myths, i always thought that Boeng stopped 757 production because not enough airlines were willing to pay the price required to make the program an economic success.
 
FrmrKSEngr
Posts: 407
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:05 am

Re: 737 main gear doors fuel inefficiency

Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:09 am

stratclub wrote:
Omnibus Delete installations go back to the 707. I suspect they were used so as to offer customers a fair amount of customization options to the basic airframe. What O/D did was took parts out of a tabbed installation and installed other parts per the customers/engineering requirements. It made navigating the drawings a real nightmare sometimes.

Thankfully, O/D went away once Boeing started making airframes in a more standardized manner. Nowadays, the customer more or less picks options from a standardize list of options that Boeing offers.


So the result of O/D was Internal tabulation. The same installation P/N could have different components depending on the tail number. I remember looking at Classic PLs and seeing all the internal effectivities. PIA. I am trying to convince my current employer of the evils of internal tabulations.
 
FrmrKSEngr
Posts: 407
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:05 am

Re: 737 main gear doors fuel inefficiency

Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:23 am

stratclub wrote:
Very true. However the 707, 720, 727 and 737 all share a common fuselage cross section and many of the structural elements of all three are identical. The 737-10 MAX can carry more Passengers than a 707-320 at more than 100k less METO although the MAX does not have the range of a 707.

The 757 was more than a direct replacement for the 727. It was more like a single aisle medium range, downsized 767 With some structural elements left over from the 707, 727 and 737.


The entire upper lobe of the 757 from aft of the cockpit to near the tail is very similar to the 707,727 and 737. Cross section, stringer spacing are the same, doors are very similar and they may share window forgings and transparencies. Satcom structural installations developed on the 757 work on the 737 and 707. Not sure about the lower lobe geometry.
 
LH707330
Posts: 1974
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: 737 main gear doors fuel inefficiency

Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:24 am

The 757 has the same front lower lobe dimensions as the 737 and 727, and the deeper rear lower lobe like the 707.
 
stratclub
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: 737 main gear doors fuel inefficiency

Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:44 am

The rear pressure dome on the 757 was very similar to the pressure dome on the 727 except there was no ventral airstair on the 757. The 757/767 started Boeing on cockpit standardization that continued on to the 777 and possibly to some extent the 787.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9164
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: 737 main gear doors fuel inefficiency

Tue Nov 06, 2018 6:37 am

MCIRNO wrote:
I'd also like to point out that the 738 still had better range than A320, so there's really no more wasted fuel, at least it's less than an aircraft with a gear door...


That is because it got bigger tanks, not because it burns less fuel though...

But Boeing went through two significant redesigns, with a new wing box for the NG and all those aerodynamic refinements for the Max, if there had been meaningful fuel savings to be had by giving it a full enclosed gear, it would have one by now.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gzm, iflyabunch, moyangmm, UnitedIsBae and 12 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos