Max Engine question

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
ehbuddy
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 7:55 pm
Location: Halifax

Max Engine question

Post by ehbuddy » 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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

ant_321
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 474
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:43 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by ant_321 » Tue May 14, 2019 8:47 pm

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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

ehbuddy
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 7:55 pm
Location: Halifax

Re: Max Engine question

Post by ehbuddy » 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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1427
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by Heliian » Wed May 15, 2019 4:23 am

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.
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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

A346Dude
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by A346Dude » Wed May 15, 2019 4:05 pm

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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
iflyforpie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7703
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Winterfell...

Re: Max Engine question

Post by iflyforpie » Wed May 15, 2019 5:10 pm

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.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1559
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: Max Engine question

Post by DanWEC » Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm

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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1427
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by Heliian » Wed May 15, 2019 5:38 pm

A346Dude wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 4:05 pm
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.
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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
iflyforpie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7703
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Winterfell...

Re: Max Engine question

Post by iflyforpie » Wed May 15, 2019 6:19 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm
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.
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.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?

Blue42
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:33 am

Re: Max Engine question

Post by Blue42 » Wed May 15, 2019 7:42 pm

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.
“The public is educated...” funniest thing I’ve read today!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
  

Blue42
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:33 am

Re: Max Engine question

Post by Blue42 » Wed May 15, 2019 7:44 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm
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.
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!
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
telex
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 357
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:05 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by telex » Wed May 15, 2019 8:23 pm

Blue42 wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 7:44 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm
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.
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!
You spelled $2 wrong... ;)
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1559
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: Max Engine question

Post by DanWEC » Wed May 15, 2019 8:36 pm

iflyforpie wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 6:19 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm
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.
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.
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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
telex
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 357
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:05 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by telex » Wed May 15, 2019 8:40 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 8:36 pm
iflyforpie wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 6:19 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm
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.
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.
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.
4600 of them are on the books. They need to be built. $600 billion dollars worth. FB will not stop that.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
iflyforpie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7703
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Winterfell...

Re: Max Engine question

Post by iflyforpie » Wed May 15, 2019 9:02 pm

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.
Social media balances things out in other ways, though.

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.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1559
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: Max Engine question

Post by DanWEC » Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm

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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

av8ts
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 778
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 8:31 am

Re: Max Engine question

Post by av8ts » Fri May 17, 2019 1:04 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm
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.
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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7013
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Making aviation exhausting, everywhere

Re: Max Engine question

Post by photofly » Fri May 17, 2019 1:39 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm
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.
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.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Kirk: This is a dangerous mission. Likely, one of us will die. The landing party will be me, Spock, McCoy, and Ensign Ricky.
Ensign Ricky: Aw, crap.

GyvAir
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1777
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:09 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by GyvAir » Fri May 17, 2019 6:14 pm

av8ts wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 1:04 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 5:15 pm
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.
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.
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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

jakeandelwood
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 11:45 pm

Re: Max Engine question

Post by jakeandelwood » Fri May 17, 2019 11:39 pm

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.
---------- ADS -----------
  

plhought
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Calgary

Re: Max Engine question

Post by plhought » Sat May 18, 2019 3:54 am

photofly wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 1:39 pm
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.
Image
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”