Guy Norris/LOS ANGELES
Confused over Boeing's plans for future 747 derivatives? Take heart. For two years since the cancellation of the ambitious 747-500X/600X development, Boeing appears to have been as perplexed as anybody.
Devising a strategy for product development is, at best, an inexact science. Boeing knows this all too well, with its experience of the 747SP and, to a lesser extent, the 720. On this occasion, the Seattle-based giant does not have the field to itself. For the first time in the large aircraft arena, the company faces strident competition from Airbus, which is preparing a dual assault on the 747 in the shape of the A340-600X and A3XX. Although Boeing professes not to be influenced by the European consortium, it has been unable to ignore the destabilising effect of the A3XX on the 747-500X/600X or the impact of the growth versions of the A340 on the 777-200X/300X.
With or without pressure from Airbus, Boeing's determined "market driven" ethos has had aviation bosses of the calibre of Sir Ralph Robins of Rolls-Royce and Maurice Flanagan of Emirates referring publicly to their confusion over its development plans.
Boeing seems to have had almost as many problems understanding market needs as the airlines have had in comprehending the manufacturer's array of study proposals.
The result has been an alphabet soup of projects, studies and proposed derivatives. From the early 1990s, airlines have seen the Very Large Civil Transport and New Large Aircraft emerging as the 747-500X/600X. Following their cancellations, the original 747 growth plans were dusted off and revised, to produce the 747-400X. This then mutated into derivatives, including the -400LRX, -400ERY, -400ERX, -400XStretch, -400Y Stretch and laterly the -400IGW - the only variant actually on offer.
Confusion has been caused by both sides. Airlines have vacillated over range, payload, direct operating cost targets, technology, commonality and, most importantly, a willingness to commit. Boeing has attempted to react to this changing picture by producing concepts for derivative after derivative.
Now, it seems that Boeing sees light at the end of the tunnel. Two major factors are behind this improvement. The impact of the mergers with McDonnell Douglas and Rockwell, and the subsequent production crisis, now appear to be largely behind it. Secondly, the airlines are presenting a clearer picture of their requirements.
"We've caught our breath," says Boeing director of product marketing Joe Ozimek. "We're over the merger and the production hump. Now we see the future of the 747 as a real issue." Airlines are giving product definition teams something on which to focus. They need "range, range and range", says the company.
Boeing knows that providing range also gives room for manoeuvre when increasing payload. "We're looking at a pretty mixed bag. Operators to and from the US West Coast would like incremental payload increases. Range is the issue for Oriental airlines flying to the USA and Europe. For British Airways and many other European carriers, range is an issue to the Orient, whereas for KLM, for example, it is payload. All this translates into increasing the weight of the -400, which we're doing with the 910,000lb IGW [413,000kg increased gross weight]." The -400IGW is structurally strengthened and has extra fuel tankage in the wingbox centre section area.
The -400IGW provides the potential foundation for new solutions without recourse to expensive new designs, says Ozimek. "We continue to believe that the market for a 500-plus seater is between 400 and 500 aircraft. So that's not enough to support a new aircraft, but it's big enough to support a derivative," he adds. The market for a slightly smaller aircraft, of fewer than 500 seats, is estimated at about 1,000 aircraft over 20 years.
"We take the 910,000lb aircraft and stretch it to add 70 seats. We would then let the range 'fall out' of the 7,800nm [14,430km] -400IGW and have a simple stretch capable of around 6,900nm. That would solve the West Coast and North Atlantic portions of the market in the 400-500 seat area.
"Another approach is that of the -400Y. Joe Sutter [acknowledged as the father of the 747] gets the credit for this," says Ozimek. The key to the -400Y is a 2.3m root insert in each wing. "If we put it in, we would add 100,000lb of fuel. That would solve all our fuel problems."
Boeing has talked to former Douglas engineers about the development of the MD-80, which used an adapted DC-9 wing with a similar type of root insert. "This is not difficult. It gives you all the fuel you need and it makes the aircraft grow in seat capacity by 90 passengers because the root grows the wing box," says Ozimek. This time, Boeing is not being seduced by the temptations of introducing wholesale 777-style technology. "There will be some changes in the cockpit [to flat panel displays], but it will be transparent technology," he adds.
The -400Y could lead to other derivatives using the larger wing on a non-stretched body, but Boeing says that, for now, the "-focus is on how we solve the demand for the 400-500-seat aircraft". So far, the market research gives Ozimek a "warm feeling" that Boeing is on the right track with the -400Y.
Boeing hopes that customers will help by ordering the -400IGW. If that occurs this year, the company believes that it could have a -400Y available by 2002 or 2003 - pipping the A3XX by up to a year.
Source: Flight International
