Under Starter’s Orders

While Boeing may be late out of the starting gate on the re-engined 737 Max, the fourth generation of a design that will celebrate its 50th year in 2018, it could well introduce the aircraft in 2016—a similar timeframe to that of its rival, the Airbus A320neo.

At stake is a forecast global demand for more than 23,000 aircraft in the 737/A320 market segment over the next 20 years valued at nearly $2 trillion.

And while the decision to commit to the Max was a change of direction from its all-new option, Boeing has been seriously studying both concepts since 2006.

In the end, the decision came down to reliability. American Airlines’ (AA) order in July that launched the 737 Max was all about that airline’s and Boeing’s lack of confidence that the manufacturer could bring to market an all-new composite 737 replacement around 2018 at a required 60 aircraft per month production rate within two years of its entry into service (EIS), which is what was being touted and demanded at the Paris AirShow in June.

Boeing Commercial Airplane president and CEO Jim Albaugh conceded this at the AA order announcement press conference, saying that while the technology exists for an all-new aircraft the “production system is not understood” and “customers wanted certainty on delivery schedules.”

This is not just a Boeing problem. Airbus faces a similar challenge with its A350, which is forecast to have a production rate within two years of its EIS of between 10 and 13 a month, while Boeing still has to prove to a skeptical world that it can achieve 10 a month with its 787 by the end of 2013.

While production rates of 40 and upwards a month may be manageable with a very mature program, it is virgin territory for an all new design that pushes the technology envelope.

Boeing says 737 Max deliveries will start in 2017. However, ATWhas been told that an EIS of 2016 or better is the target and the 2017 date is ultraconservative.

According to insiders, the plan is to focus the Max’s re-engining on the CFM International Leap-1B engine. Other improvements will follow, but will not be allowed to stall the push towards the earlier EIS date.

 “One of things we’ve learned on the 747 and 787 programs is that we want to make sure that any date that we quote is the date that we can meet. And I’d rather under-promise and over-deliver, rather than over-promise and under-deliver,” Albaugh said.

However, Boeing’s VP business development and strategic integration, Nicole Piasecki, said advancing the date is a
priority. “Jim wants to under-promise and over-deliver, so he is challenging the team to bring the airplane to market as soon as possible,” Piasecki said.

“Given our recent track record, we’re being very conservative—not conservative, we’re being very prudent, I should say—and disciplined to make sure that whatever we talk to our customers about, we actually have a plan to deliver on. I think you’ll see improvements on the 2017, but again our team is disciplined and we’re going to make sure we have a plan before we make a commitment.”

Airline Commitments 

While the 737 Max may have been the second option—it is one that promises to keep the design going strong through 2030. Airlines seem to agree. Boeing said it has “order commitments” from five airlines for 496 737 Maxs to be exclusively powered by the Leap-1B engine.

Boeing’s board of directors formally approved the launch on Aug. 30 and the company says the 737 Max 8 will burn 4% less fuel than the A320neo.

The aircraft will be offered in three variants: the Max 7, Max 8 and Max 9.

Boeing is promising customers up to a 7% advantage in operating costs over “future competing aircraft” and further gains may come from the Boeing “evolutionary ecoDemonstrator Program,” set to fly in 2012.

An AA 737-800 will be used to flight-test the technologies and be a test-bed for the FAA Continuous Lower Energy Emissions Noise (CLEEN) program.

Some of the technologies that will be flown in 2012 include adaptable trailing edge technology that reduces noise and emissions during all phases of flight including takeoff, cruise and landing; and a variable area fan nozzle that reduces noise and enables advanced engine efficiency technologies.

However, Albaugh says he has demanded that the changes to the 737 are minor.

“There are a lot of things we could do with the airplane, but what we want to do is limit the scope of work,” Albaugh said. “And we’re going to limit the scope of work associated with the engine. I’ve told my team I don’t want to hear ‘simple’ and ‘re-engine’ in the same phrase. But we’re going to make this the simplest re-engine possible.”

And the lack of changes will have a flow through to certification, with Albaugh saying that “our expectation is that certification will have to do with the engine and nothing more.”

The bottom line is that Boeing is focused on avoiding a blowout in redesign similar to that it experienced on the 747-8, which started life as a simple re-engine plus stretch and ended up almost a new aircraft with consequent hike in costs and delivery dates.

According to Boeing engineers that have spoken to ATW, however, more tweaks beyond a simple re-engining will be needed. Some of those have appeared in the computer renditions of the Max which sports, for instance, a 787 tail cone. Other changes that are being discussed, according to engineers, are main-wheel landing gear doors for drag reduction and a strengthening of the fuselage adjacent to the engines for additional protection from blade loss.

The wing-to-body join will also need to be strengthened to support the additional weight of the Leap-1B.

ATW also understands from a Dubai source that Boeing is also looking at raked wingtips to replace blended winglets for a longer-range model.

Boeing plans no changes to the cockpit as it wants to maintain commonality with the 737NG family. But the Sky Interior and winglets will be standard on the Max.

The Max will have some slight wing redesign and Boeing will introduce some fly-by-wire similar to what it has done with the 747-8.

Boeing engineers told ATW that the fly-by-wire element will be spoilers that could be used to maneuver load alleviation to increase the aircraft’s maximum takeoff weight.

Engine Advantage? 

At the launch announcement, CFM said the LEAP-1B engine will be a variant of its Leap-X family “uniquely optimized for the 737.” This will be one of the interesting aspects of the two competing designs. Whereas the 737 Max will be built around the Leap-1B, with most likely a 68 in. fan diameter, the A320neo wing will have to be significantly strengthened to take the heavier Pratt & Whitney GTF geared turbofan, which may negate some of fuel efficiency of a wider fan diameter than the A320neo can take.

ATW understands that the only modification to the 737 from a ground clearance perspective is larger nose wheel tires. By way of comparison, the current CFM56-7BE engine has a 61in. diameter, while the Leap-X1A and P&W PW1100G for the A320neo are 78 in. and 81 in. respectively.

The key measurement is a 17 in. ground clearance underneath the nacelle to avoid contact with taxiway lighting. The 737’s current engine size gives just over 5 in. of margin. The 66 in. fan diameter margin therefore would require no modifications and the 68 in. option would require only a minor modification.

Piasecki said the 737-8 “will have the lowest operating costs in the single-aisle segment with its fuel burn 16% lower than our competitor’s current offering and 4% lower than their future offering.”

However Airbus’ COO customers, John Leahy, disputed that, telling ATWthat “the re-engined 737 cannot possibly match the fuel efficiency and maintenance cost savings of the A320neo family.”

Adding to the debate, P&W CEO David Hess, speaking in early September at the annual Reuters Aerospace & Defense Summit, warned Boeing that it may have to rethink its strategy because the Leap-1B is too small.

“Time will tell. Boeing responded to pressure and if they feel they don’t have a competitive airplane against the A320neo, they may be forced to accelerate or look at their plans for a new plane,” Hess said. “I would be surprised if it is 15 years before Boeing launches an all new narrow-body airplane.”

“Boeing has made it clear it is going to be a minimum-change airplane and I don’t see them doing anything else for the airplane that is going to result in substantial fuel benefit, so it is going to have to come from the engine, and I will be happy to take the Geared Turbofan’s chances against a 66- or 68-in.  Leap-X any day,” Hess said.

Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel rebutted Hess’s claims, insisting it would be 7% more efficient than the A320neo.

“With regard to future product development, we don’t see a new small airplane emerging until well into the next decade,” Birtel said.

In a statement CFM president and CEO Jean-Paul Ebanga said that the Max “will provide exceptional operating economics and provide customers with unprecedented levels of efficiency and environmental responsibility while maintaining the legacy of aviation’s most reliable product line.”

The Commitment

Race  Sydney-based Centre of Aviation (CoA) said the Max could overtake the A320neo commitment numbers by the end of the year. It says that 396 of the commitments Boeing has announced for the Max are from airlines outside the US, with an additional 100 for AA.

CoA adds that Delta Air Lines could also be expected to order the Max, following its August 25 order for 100 737-900ERs.

“Southwest Airlines, the largest 737 operator and the launch customer for the 737NG, has publicly said it is not part of the commitments Boeing so far has,” CoA said in a special report.

 “Provided the neo has no more major commitments in the short-term, industry watchers see the Max possibly surpassing the neo by December,” CoA said.

The research group believes that LCCs and US-based airlines will be major buyers of the Max.

“Low-cost carriers operate 20% of the current A320 family fleet, but account for a disproportionate 55% of A320neo orders, and LCCs can be expected to lead in orders for the Max.”

CoA combines US carriers with LCCs, noting that in the US, airlines compete with each other on price, not service.

The push by Boeing for minimal changes in the Max is as much about bringing forward the EIS as a prudent move to minimize or even eliminate any costly rework after flight test starts.

It is expected that the majority of 737 orders after 2017 will be for the Max and Boeing will want no glitches in the production rate, which must stand at between 42 and 60 per month by that stage.

Where to Build?  

Boeing is yet to decide where to build the Max and is thought to be eight months away from a firm decision.

“Like on any new program, we’re taking the opportunity to make a decision on where we do the work. Certainly our Renton facility has demonstrated we know how to build this airplane, but we are going to look at Renton and other sites,” Albaugh said.

Given Boeing’s current problems with labor over its move for a second 787 line in South Carolina, it would appear that Renton will be a certainty, said analysts.

Renton can handle three 737 lines, producing 21 aircraft a month. Currently one line is at 21 and a second at 10, which will increase to 14 and then 18 before reaching 21 in 2014.

Analyst reaction to the Max launch is guarded optimism. Teal Group’s Richard Aboulafia said he “is fascinated by double-digit fuel improvements from a 68 in. fan,” while saying Boeing did not have any other choice but to re-engine.

“I never thought there was another choice as there is not enough new technology around [for a new aircraft],” Aboulafia said. “And this battle between the Neo and the Max is the most interesting two-horse race ever.”

Avitas SVP Adam Pilarski, who predicted at the 28th ISTAT AGM in Arizona in March that Boeing would re-engine, says Boeing could not afford not to re-engine with the Airbus neo, Chinese, Russian and Bombardier designs “putting the company behind.”

What may ultimately be the Max’s winning card, however, is the 737’s worldwide familiarity. With over 6,000 737s delivered, airlines know its capabilities probably better than any other aircraft and they can see the potential for more.