Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 494 posts

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#421

Post by spuwho »

While McDonnell Douglas seems to be the whipping boy for Boeing Commercial Aircraft (BCA) problems, many of the business decisions actually predate the merger. As a college student in 1988, a BCA executive was invited to speak in our capstone class about Boeing plans for the future. The executive spoke about their extensive outsourcing strategy. Where Boeing would still design the platform, but suppliers would be required to design/build to spec. This distribution of work was supposed to drive out the vertical costs of design/build inside Boeing. The 777 was at the time in testing out at Moses Lake and nearing release. The reaction in the class was somewhat of a shock. Boeing was essentially "giving away" their book on how to make an airplane (a quality one) and turning it over to all of these suppliers with a mandate to do it more cheaply. The Boeing exec was quite pleased with how much money this was going to save the company as they became only the prime assembly point, with essential components coming in JIT mode from around the world. Students were quick to challenge him during the Q&A asking how they were going to maintain quality by so much outsourcing, he stated that there would be contractual requirements and inspections to make sure the components met the spec. McDonnell Douglas business methods are not above it either as they too were looking to outsource MD-9x parts production overseas before they were bought out by Boeing. Their effort to partner with Airbus to build a super-jumbo by fusing certain MD-11 design elements (MD-12) is no secret.

So in summary, let me state for the record that Boeing's redirection into outsourced suppliers and engineering was moving forward by 1988. Well before the merger with MCD.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#422

Post by DocTomoe »

buildsjets wrote: post #215
addaon wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't that something that's more the responsibility of the airlines, who decide how many seats are put in a plane, following the limits of the aircraft? For pitch, yes. For width, no —- you run into quantization pretty quickly. The difference between sardines and standard economy is less than the difference between 3+3 and 3+2 — it’s not really feasible for most traditional airlines to choose a different number of…

Seat and aisle widths are customer selectable options. Hence, a customer may order a 787 with 3-3-3 seating or 2-4-2 seating. The vast majority of airlines chose sardines instead of comfort. In a 737, customers only can get 3-3 seating, but they can choose wide (17.8”) seats and skinny aisles, like Southwest does, or they can choose skinny (17.1”) seats and wider aisles, like Alaska does.

... with wider seats and skinny aisles bringing more weight (-> more fuel consumption), and slower boarding/deboarding times (-> more time on the ground), both of which are cost drivers.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#423

Post by arethuza »

HPsquared wrote: post #416
ipdashc wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Colonizing Antarctica is a few orders of magnitude easier than Mars and we've barely progressed with that I hear this somewhat often, and I find it a bit disingenuous since it's not like we're trying that hard to colonize Antarctica, we're mostly preserving it as well as we can, no? And the existing Antarctic bases aren't total hellholes or anything, AFAIK the larger ones are relatively normal spaces with power and…

The same considerations apply to Mars.

Hence the "Reds" vs. "Greens" in the KSR Mars trilogy.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#424

Post by DocTomoe »

Denvercoder9 wrote: post #209
addaon wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't that something that's more the responsibility of the airlines, who decide how many seats are put in a plane, following the limits of the aircraft? For pitch, yes. For width, no —- you run into quantization pretty quickly. The difference between sardines and standard economy is less than the difference between 3+3 and 3+2 — it’s not really feasible for most traditional airlines to choose a different number of…

There's no incentive. Passengers rarely know what type they'll be flying on when they book, and prioritize it over price even less. For airlines, a bigger airplane is a distinct disadvantage though, as it's operationally more expensive (increased cross section equals increased drag equals increased fuel burn).

> Passengers rarely know what type they'll be flying on when they book, and prioritize it over price even less.

Virtually every booking page gives you that information during booking, and I (and several of my friends) actively avoid any flight that has a MAX operating it, to the point that we'd rather fly longer and/or more expensive alternative routes operated with other models.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#425

Post by KevinMS »

rainsford wrote: post #278
KevinMS wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understand is that the 737 Max was fine if they treated it as a new airplane. The problem was the put gizmos on it to make it behave like a regular 737 so pilots didn't need to get retrained on it. Those gizmos are what crashed it when you didn't know how they behaved when they failed.

The problem is that the whole point of the 737 Max was that airlines didn't have to treat it as a new airplane. If they did, it would have lost a lot of the value proposition and there would have been more support for an entirely new replacement instead. It would be a fascinating case study in perverse incentives and unintended consequences if it wasn't for the loss of life that resulted.

According to my research (watching youtube videos), putting those big turbofan engines (which had to be pushed forward and up to fit) gave the plane different flying characteristics which, under the rules of whatever, required new pilots to be retrained to some degree (at least flight simulator training), which made it a real pain for some airlines to ship their pilots off to wherever those simulators are.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#426

Post by macintux »

petre wrote: post #345
macintux wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never had any interest in wearing a watch to bed. Still don’t, although theoretically I could charge it for a few minutes in the evening to make that possible. The Watch has helped me lose 30 pounds, has significantly helped motivate me to exercise more, and has let me keep my phone on silent mode for at least 5 years now. For me, it’s a great device.

I have a Garmin with roughly the same functionality and I only need to charge it every other week. If you use the GPS the battery gets drained in about a 6 hour activity, but I've recharged it at a refuge while eating.

I understand, and I don't care. I charge my watch overnight, and if I don't have a charger, I can power it off overnight and still have juice for the next day. It's simply not a big deal for me.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#427

Post by alkonaut »

mjg59 wrote: post #158

Boeing currently has an awkward gap between the 737 and the widebodies that was previously filled by the 757 - the 737 Max 10 (which still isn't certified!) only has about two thirds of the range of the A321XLR, and a slightly lower passenger capacity. Airlines that currently have 757 fleets and who need that range are going for Airbus instead, and Boeing just doesn't have an answer for it. So while, yes, any new Boe…

So given that both the basic recipe for the 737 and A320 are pretty old by now, how much "better" could a new clean sheet narrowbody realistically be, given recent in aircraft design?

And how much better would it _need_ to be, in order for large 737 operators to be convinced to place their next order for the new 7007? (yes, like nVidia, I trust they'll just add a number and start over when they run out of numbers).

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#429

Post by 0xTJ »

It'll be interesting to see if they can turn around their reputation. For my own travel decisions, a flight scheduled on a Boeing plane has a genuine impact on considering other options, especially if I have flexibility. Not because I'm worried about an incident (I know that flying is incredibly safe, and feel very comfortable with it), but out of pure spite.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#430

Post by j5r5myk »

sfn42 wrote: post #370
cgio wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A phrase does not mean anything by itself. People mean something when they use it. You could argue that expressions carry some meaning, by virtue of shared use. But your definition does not align with the meaning most people make of this specific expression as you can witness above.

People misuse expressions. A common one is the customer is always right. The actual wording is the customer is always right in matters of taste but people cut off the ending which changes it from a sensible and useful proverb to a bunch of nonsense. Of course the customer isn't always right. They're always right in terms of what they want to buy, not in all other terms. Similarly an exception like a lawyer being a go…

There is a common phenomenon where people claim proverbial quotes were originally longer. One I often hear is “Jack of all trades master of none” originally including the follow up “often better than a master of none.”

If you research this, as well as the customer as always right as you claim, you will find no evidence of their longer ‘original’ forms [1].

[1] https://www.snopes.com/articles/468815/customer-is-always-ri...

Post reply on HN