Max Engine question
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Max Engine question
If one of the biggest issues the 737 8Max is the larger engine then is it not possible just to remove the problem sized engine and replace it with the standard engine off a regular 800? My guess the MCAS system would not be needed then and this would get consumer confidence back and at least the aircraft could be flying again.
Re: Max Engine question
I’m pretty sure no airlines would be interested in that. You would end up with an overpriced NG. The Max was all about fuel savings. You take that away and you have an airplane nobody wants.
Re: Max Engine question
But now we have a Catch 22. The airplane is not flying so now it is really a fuel saver. The public is educated and even an MCAS fix will still leave doubts in peoples minds. Another accident after the fix will probably kill off the airplane anyways. This should be interesting to see what happens with it.
Re: Max Engine question
Then you should just buy a regular 738. The Max engine is a newer design for fuel savings, HOWEVER, the major change is the placement of the engines more forward, that's what creates the efficiency and different thrust vector which required the MCAS for certification.ehbuddy wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 8:42 pm If one of the biggest issues the 737 8Max is the larger engine then is it not possible just to remove the problem sized engine and replace it with the standard engine off a regular 800? My guess the MCAS system would not be needed then and this would get consumer confidence back and at least the aircraft could be flying again.
Re: Max Engine question
I’m pretty sure it’s the larger diameter fan that leads to the increased efficiency of the LEAP engine. If they could’ve kept the engines where they were they would’ve, but the gear was too short.
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 8132
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: Max Engine question
The 737 MAX took over a year from first flight to certification even though its ostensibly the same aircraft as the NG save the engines and with Boeing doing a lot of the FAA’s work to speed it up.
Re-engine-ing them would probably take nearly as long and perhaps not give satisfactory results without very major structural modifications to the pylons since the engines would still be mounted further forward and on a different thrust line than in the NGs... they’d just be smaller.
Most importantly, you’re carry around the extra weight and bulk of pylon/wing structure/etc with none of the benefits of a new engine. You’ll have a plane that you spent a hundred million on that you’re now spending millions more on procuring new outdated engines and booking MROs to modify once you get the modification approved so it will fly.. but now perform worse than a 20 year old NG.
I think a straightforward fix is easier. Whether it be modifying the MCAS system to behave in a safe manner or eliminating MCAS all together by breaking commonality with the older 737s and adding bandaid aerodynamic fixes like strakes or fins or a larger stabilizer to restore stability at the expense of some efficiency.
Re-engine-ing them would probably take nearly as long and perhaps not give satisfactory results without very major structural modifications to the pylons since the engines would still be mounted further forward and on a different thrust line than in the NGs... they’d just be smaller.
Most importantly, you’re carry around the extra weight and bulk of pylon/wing structure/etc with none of the benefits of a new engine. You’ll have a plane that you spent a hundred million on that you’re now spending millions more on procuring new outdated engines and booking MROs to modify once you get the modification approved so it will fly.. but now perform worse than a 20 year old NG.
I think a straightforward fix is easier. Whether it be modifying the MCAS system to behave in a safe manner or eliminating MCAS all together by breaking commonality with the older 737s and adding bandaid aerodynamic fixes like strakes or fins or a larger stabilizer to restore stability at the expense of some efficiency.
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
Re: Max Engine question
Nobody in the flying public will ever get on anything remotely related to a 737 Max again. That's a much more delicate issue than fixing the physical issues.
Re: Max Engine question
Yes, the fan and the rest of the engine are different for efficiency. The nose gear was raised 7 inches to accommodate both the the fan size and more forward placement of the engines. It's the more forward engine placement that caused the problem.
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 8132
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: Max Engine question
I’m not so sure about that. The DC-10 suffered through much worse and it was a staple of wide body airliners for over two decades after.
Heck, the 737 has suffered worse. Aloha Airlines convertible and the lap joint issues that still persist to this day. The rudder PCU issues where two planes were lost and a few more nearly so. Numerous issues with the early CFM56s resulting in one high profile crash and even some recent uncontained failures as well.
Ever since I worked on the 737-200s after working on the nearly perfect 727s I’ve always had the opinion that the 737s were a poorly made aircraft that used parts-bin solutions from Boeing’s first two airliners and tried to apply them to a high cycle regional aircraft. And that was reinforced when I worked on the Classics and NGs which kept piling on the compromises in the name of commonality.
But people see $199 on the website and they book not caring which plane or which airline is running it.
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
Re: Max Engine question
“The public is educated...” funniest thing I’ve read today!!!ehbuddy wrote: ↑Tue May 14, 2019 9:01 pm But now we have a Catch 22. The airplane is not flying so now it is really a fuel saver. The public is educated and even an MCAS fix will still leave doubts in peoples minds. Another accident after the fix will probably kill off the airplane anyways. This should be interesting to see what happens with it.
Re: Max Engine question
Two flights from YYC to YYZ, one is an NG and one is a MAX, offer the MAX flight for $20 cheaper and the public will get on it!
Re: Max Engine question
You spelled $2 wrong...
Liberalism itself as a religion where its tenets cannot be proven, but provides a sense of moral rectitude at no real cost.
Re: Max Engine question
All good points for sure, but it's apples to oranges because we are in a different time now, a time of social media and massively coerced opinion. This is a force that can and will completely overshadow anything else. Delicate may actually be an understatement.iflyforpie wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2019 6:19 pmI’m not so sure about that. The DC-10 suffered through much worse and it was a staple of wide body airliners for over two decades after.
Heck, the 737 has suffered worse. Aloha Airlines convertible and the lap joint issues that still persist to this day. The rudder PCU issues where two planes were lost and a few more nearly so. Numerous issues with the early CFM56s resulting in one high profile crash and even some recent uncontained failures as well.
Ever since I worked on the 737-200s after working on the nearly perfect 727s I’ve always had the opinion that the 737s were a poorly made aircraft that used parts-bin solutions from Boeing’s first two airliners and tried to apply them to a high cycle regional aircraft. And that was reinforced when I worked on the Classics and NGs which kept piling on the compromises in the name of commonality.
But people see $199 on the website and they book not caring which plane or which airline is running it.
Re: Max Engine question
4600 of them are on the books. They need to be built. $600 billion dollars worth. FB will not stop that.DanWEC wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2019 8:36 pmAll good points for sure, but it's apples to oranges because we are in a different time now, a time of social media and massively coerced opinion. This is a force that can and will completely overshadow anything else. Delicate may actually be an understatement.iflyforpie wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2019 6:19 pmI’m not so sure about that. The DC-10 suffered through much worse and it was a staple of wide body airliners for over two decades after.
Heck, the 737 has suffered worse. Aloha Airlines convertible and the lap joint issues that still persist to this day. The rudder PCU issues where two planes were lost and a few more nearly so. Numerous issues with the early CFM56s resulting in one high profile crash and even some recent uncontained failures as well.
Ever since I worked on the 737-200s after working on the nearly perfect 727s I’ve always had the opinion that the 737s were a poorly made aircraft that used parts-bin solutions from Boeing’s first two airliners and tried to apply them to a high cycle regional aircraft. And that was reinforced when I worked on the Classics and NGs which kept piling on the compromises in the name of commonality.
But people see $199 on the website and they book not caring which plane or which airline is running it.
Liberalism itself as a religion where its tenets cannot be proven, but provides a sense of moral rectitude at no real cost.
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 8132
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: Max Engine question
Social media balances things out in other ways, though.DanWEC wrote:
All good points for sure, but it's apples to oranges because we are in a different time now, a time of social media and massively coerced opinion. This is a force that can and will completely overshadow anything else. Delicate may actually be an understatement.
For one, the media bandwidth is so great that lots is lost in the noise. It’s no longer Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite on a couple of news networks telling most of the nation about a disturbing truth in an unavoidable fashion. It’s many different online sources usually selected and skewed to the viewers own biases where they skim headlines and skip over a “3rd world” airliner crash as surely as I skip over anything about Kim Kardashian.
Next. There is the public skepticism of the media. There’s lots of people in our own industry who think that Boeing and the MAX are scapegoats for poor pilots. How much more so for completely uninformed individual? People don’t know what to believe anymore, but they don’t see parades of airliners crashing in the western world. They’ll vote with their wallets.
Finally, social media isn’t all that new. Let’s take Southwest Airlines and how many incidents and accidents we’ve seen on social media. The Burbank overrun (subject of an internet meme), the fatal Midway overrun, the holes in the roof from cabin failure on two occasions.. one eventually fatal, the nose dive into LGA, two exploded engines. SWA has yet to post a quarterly loss because their customers have unwavering confidence in the company and their aircraft.
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
Re: Max Engine question
Right, but have you ever seen such a vilification of an aircraft by the public up to this point? While the basis of it might be rooted in fact, we cant think of it logically, social media really has a lot to do with it.
Re: Max Engine question
By the time the Max flies again everyone will have moved on the the next Facebook crisis. People care about price and that’s it. As has been said, charge $20 less on a max flight and you’ll fill it.
Re: Max Engine question
Those of us who remember the DC10 issues in the late 70's and early 80's will tell you the 737 is still streets ahead in terms of reputation.
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: Max Engine question
I suspect that even right after relaunching the Max, only the most savvy flyers will be looking at the aircraft type when booking their tickets and they will be looking for reasons such as avoiding a type they know had crappy seats, lack of leg/elbowroom or didn’t have overhead bins large enough for their over-stuffed carry-on items.
Even if it was likely that people were still paying attention, all it would take is a subtle renaming of the model to have its troubles forgotten or overlooked.
-
- Rank 6
- Posts: 453
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 11:45 pm
Re: Max Engine question
The majority of the flying public can't tell an Airbus from a Boeing anyway. I guess some people might question the ticket agent on the aircraft type, they could just say it's a Piper 797 or whatever and the passengers would happily say thank you and herd themselves on in.