Old Boeing and Airbus Workhorses' War
By Geoffrey Thomas, The Australian | Jul. 21, 2006
While all the hype in the industry today surrounds the giant A380 and the hi-tech 787, the next battle between Boeing and Airbus will be over a replacement for the world's best-selling aircraft - the 737 and A320.
And there are many who ask: Why replace these 150-210 seat airline workhorses?
The 737 may date back to 1966 but Boeing has twice undertaken major upgrades to the aircraft engines and cockpit systems. The A320 dates to the early 1980s.
With Boeing's lead in composites on the 787, it had been assumed that the technology transfer to the 737 replacement would give them an edge in finding that magical breakthrough to make the investment case.
But it's not that simple, according to Boeing vice-president marketing Randy Baseler.
"The main advantage of the lightweight composite airframe on the 787 is the additional 2000-mile (3500km) range, which is a huge advantage for a long-range aircraft," he says.
"But the single-aisle 737s and A320s are essentially used for shorter routes and don't need more range."
Publicly, Boeing has not yet found a compelling argument to replace the 737, and the industry would seem to agree. Estimates are that a new plane using existing technology would realise a gain of just 3-4 per cent in operating costs with existing technology.
But here's the catch. Those numbers assume a single-aisle 150-220 seat aircraft.
The decision that could make or break either company is whether Boeing and Airbus go back and revisit the stillborn 1980s and 90s twin-aisle designs from Douglas and Boeing.
As passenger travel habits have changed, so has the design of aircraft. And the travel habit that makes all the difference is carry-on baggage.
In the 1950s, aircraft just had hat racks, and even the large tri-jet jumbos like the 1970 DC-10 initially came with overhead bins only on the side, despite economy configurations of up to 10 seats. This was because passengers brought only small bags on board.
Fast forward to 2006 and the boarding process on any A320 or 737-particularly in the US and Europe-is snarled by passengers with huge carry-on bags looking for somewhere to shove them.
So the appeal of a twin-aisle aircraft with just six passengers across set in a 2-2-2 configuration is significant, particularly as it would allow additional centre bins.
Both Boeing and Airbus, with backlogs of 1051 737s and 1665 A320s, are wary of damaging sales of jets that are being produced in record numbers.
Nonetheless, the race is on in earnest, with Airbus well advanced in studies that are believed to focus on using an all-composite fuselage.
Boeing has enjoyed remarkable sales success with its 240-300 seat 787 built around not only economics but the passenger appeal of its cabin, which may prompt the company to take a long, hard look at a twin-aisle replacement for its 737.
Giving a hint of what might happen, or perhaps laying a bit of a smokescreen, Boeing Commercial Airplanes president Alan Mulally told reporters at the 2005 Paris Air Show that the 737 replacement could be more than one fuselage size.
"We could do three different fuselages," he said. "Five abreast, six abreast - we could even do a twin-aisle."
The US manufacturer has quietly appointed Mike Cave, vice-president for aircraft programs, to direct the 737 replacement work.
According to The Seattle Times, Cave told employees: "The 737NG is a wonderful airplane with a strong future in the marketplace. The challenge of dramatically improving on its proven economy, performance and reliability is a daunting task and one that will take considerable innovation."
Previous twin-aisle projects have included the Douglas DC-11, which started life as a joint venture between the then Douglas Aircraft Division of McDonnell Douglas and French industry.
The design evolved into a twin-aisle 214-seater and provoked great interest, but McDonnell Douglas baulked at the investment and it was shelved.
In 1987, Boeing unveiled its 7J7 showing a full cabin mock-up at the Paris Air Show. It was a little wider, allowing for a cabin with 2-3-2 seating.
The aircraft was initially to be powered by rear-mounted unducted fans, but Boeing later looked at wing-mounted conventional jet engines.
While airlines were interested, Boeing opted for the lower investment of upgrading the 737, launching the New Generation models used by Qantas and Virgin Blue.
Another major factor in the design process is that the two regional jet manufacturers have increased their offerings into the 100-seat market, so both Boeing and Airbus must scale up their original plans so as not to overlap.
Passenger comfort aside, the critical element for the 737/A320 replacement is an all-new engine.
Both CFM and IAE are conducting technology studies with a service entry of 2013.
The target is expected to be a new family of engines in the 23,000lb to 35,000lb class, with noise levels 26 per cent below today's 737 engines.
The interesting aspect here is that the noise reduction requirement would require a much higher bypass, and thus larger engine cross-section, which would not fit under the current A320 or 737 wings, dictating a larger aircraft design.