Guy Norris/SEATTLE
As it enters the 21st century, Boeing faces its toughest challenge. After dominating global commercial aviation for over 40 years, it ended the 1990s under threat on all fronts from Airbus Industrie.
Boeing's product development (PD) group is therefore taking on a more critical role than ever before. Perhaps surprisingly, PD was until recently seen as the "poor relation" in the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group. It often took a back seat as the latest concepts were prematurely passed to production and revised to the point of being unrecognisable. PD complained of being under-resourced and not treated seriously.
But this is changing, says David Anderson, product development director within the newly formed Product Strategy and Development Organisation (PS&D). "We're getting a lot of attention from [Commercial Airplane Group president] Alan Mulally and the leadership team." Anderson explains that PD's reformation is part of radical changes that have swept through Boeing over the past 18 months. The changes are designed to boost PD's efficiency, to help make new products "better, cheaper, faster". But they are also expected to bolster customer confidence in Boeing's future - confidence that has been dented in recent years by backtracking on the 747-500X/600X, cancellation of the MD-11F, indecision over the 777-200X/300X and confusion among airlines after details of its Large Airplane Product Development (LAPD) studies were leaked to the press.
"We may never have been as confused as the market thought we were," says Anderson, "but there is substantially more direction now."
The current structure evolved from the "creation centre" approach that formed the blueprint for a more integrated, company-wide PD process. The centre was set up to lead the strategy, early development and implementation of new Boeing products and "features" (such as enhanced ground proximity warning). It was also wholly, or partially, responsible for product development and enabling technology, engine strategy, competitive analysis, customer requirements and product marketing.
The holistic nature of the new approach was summed up in early 1999 by engineering vice-president Walt Gillette: "Think of the creation centre more as a capability than a place." The new set-up not only embraced engineering, which "hosted" the centre, but also reported to the equally new profit centres: single and twin aisle, and customer services. It also worked closely with the Phantom Works, which provided the raw research and development, and rapid-prototyping knowhow.
The PS&D structure closely follows this lead and, under John Roundhill's leadership, gathers together the formerly disparate PD elements of aircraft, strategies for product, engine and features and the research and development activities of engineering and manufacturing. "The idea is to collect all the front-end stuff together," says Anderson. "We begin with the product strategy and then bring it together with the customer requirements organisation under Joe Ozimek. It gives us a chance to communicate and bring strategy and R&D together so we have the right product."
The new-look PD can therefore embrace the product "platforms" and profit centres on an equal footing and come up with new products that are more "production ready", says Anderson. "This gives us an opportunity to make sure the PD strategy doesn't get pigeonholed. The old PD was mostly seen as an engineering organisation and now we're really more enterprising, as evidenced by the closer involvement of R&D and manufacturing. I don't consider myself to be a director of engineering, but really a director of product development - and that includes the financial element, and the factory operations and the suppliers," he says.
PD projects
Flexible and standard aircraft
New market forces are at play in commercial airliner procurement. Airlines are increasingly obsessed with low costs and are combining forces with new alliance partners to study their options. The result, Boeing believes, will be nine or 10 supergroups with massive spending power, rather than the historical hotch-potch of airlines with independent requirements. "I think the trend towards global interdependencies is really evident," says Mulally. According to Boeing, 55% of airlines are linked into one of the major new alliances - a figure it expects to rise to between 80% and 90% over "the next few years".
In response, Boeing is studying "flexible" and "standard" aircraft. The airlines themselves began the process by forming an alliance to study increasing aircraft commonality to reduce the price of the proposed 747-500X/600X. Although these derivatives were cancelled in January 1997, the concept itself was appealing enough for the airlines to continue. They believed that defining a standard configuration for any new aircraft would help reduce the number of abstract changes. After its bitter experience in the early days of the 747-400, plus similar production issues with the more recent Next Generation 737 family, Boeing appears eager to meet the airlines with its flexible and standard approach. Boeing, Bombardier and some seat manufacturers have attended recent meetings, although Airbus "chose not to attend the last meeting", according to sources within the airline group.
717-100X/300X
Shortened and lengthened derivatives of the 717-200 were originally conceived by McDonnell Douglas (MDC) as the MD-95-20 and MD-95-50 respectively. The shorter version, renamed the 717-100X, is seen as a 75-80-seater, and the larger aircraft, renamed the 717-300X, would seat between 125 and 130. Boeing faces a dilemma over the go-ahead of these derivatives, particularly the larger one, which has attracted most interest. Thanks to Boeing's self-created "family" concept, it knows that more airlines would consider the 717 if there were more than one variant available to suit their wide-ranging network requirements. But without a larger order backlog for the basic -200 model, Boeing is reluctant to commit further resources to newer variants. The market, meanwhile, remains equally unsure about Boeing's commitment to developing the 717 family, and is holding back from selecting it.
737-700ERX and winglets
Essentially a long-range passenger derivative of the Boeing Business Jet (BBJ), this project combines the fuselage of the -700 with the stronger wing and more powerful engines of the 737-800. Capable of flying 7,400km (4,000nm) routes, or from major US East Coast cities to Europe, it can be outfitted for a variety of configurations, ranging from a maximum of 138 passengers in an economy layout, to 50 or 60 in business class only with 1.4m (4.6ft) pitch seating. Roundhill describes the latter option as "the ultimate fragmentor" and sees potential operations in the Pacific and Australasia as well as the North Atlantic. "It could be brought into the market fairly quickly for these routes as we have already developed the auxiliary tank system with PATS [for the BBJ]," he adds.
Other potential 737 developments are focused on the use of winglets, again derived from the BBJ, to improve its competitive edge in the fierce war with the Airbus A320 family. The most immediate application is expected to be on the -800 variant as certification work and test flying have been accomplished as part of the business jet design. The composite blended winglet design, produced by Aviation Partners of Seattle, is also being studied for applications across the board, including other 737 models, Classics as well as Next Generation, and 747s in particular. Winglets may be offered on the 737-700 in the first quarter of 2000, both as a possible retrofit and on new-build aircraft. The drag-reducing devices produce fuel savings that will result in up to 7% increased range, or higher payloads. It is also conceivable that the devices could feature on the 737-700C Combi, now in initial manufacture at Renton, and the stretched -900, due to enter service in 2001.
747-400X
The focus for future 747 derivatives - so long an emotive issue at Boeing because of inherently enormous expense - has settled on a new family with a modified wing. The two main members of the family would be a 446-passenger version with a range of 16,000km and a stretched version capable of flying 500 passengers in tri-class seating across ranges up to 14,000km. Boeing believes the modified wing's efficiency, plus new engines and other systems, will enable it to "meet or beat" the proposed seat-mile costs of Airbus' competing A3XX family, despite the Airbus being an all-new design. A board decision on whether to offer the 747X to airlines is expected in early 2000, with entry into service no earlier than 2004/5.
In broad terms, Boeing believes the higher-capacity 747X will fulfil what it perceives as limited market demand for aircraft with between 400 and 500 seats on traditional trunk routes that are plagued by airport capacity limitations. At the same time, the strategy calls for the 777X to meet the growing need for more point-to-point long-haul operations as fragmentation begins to take hold in the Pacific.
757-200X
While new interiors and individual flightdeck improvements derived from the recently developed 757-300 are under study for the standard 757, the main emphasis for new derivative work is on the longer-range, higher-gross weight -200X. Although Boeing has had a longer-range 757 in its sights for some time, development has been stalled by the cost of designing a stronger wing. Thanks to the -300, this is now available and could form the basis for a 123,500kg (272,000lb) maximum take-off weight (MTOW) version with 9,250km range.
The additional 650km range will be provided by two 1,900 litre (500USgal) auxiliary fuel tanks situated in the hold. As well as using the stronger -300 wing, the -200X would also employ the stronger fuselage and gear of its stretched predecessor.
PD planned to seek board authority to offer the -200X by 2000. Boeing believes it will stimulate much-needed new sales of the 757 to tour operators and other airlines looking to fly between Europe and the US East Coast and Mid-West.
767-300ERX/400ERX
Spurred by requests for greater range, and feeling the competitive bite of the A330-200 in particular, Boeing is focused on long-range derivatives of the 767-300ER and its recently developed stablemate, the stretched -400ER.
The -400ERX is a relatively simple derivative, using space in the horizontal stabiliser to house up to 4,540kg of extra fuel and push the aircraft's range up to 11,500km. Projected entry into service, however, has slipped progressively to 2003 in the face of softening traffic and lower yields among key potential launch customers such as American Airlines. Boeing initially targeted service entry as early as March 2002, based on development work required for a fairly straightforward weight increase to 211,000kg.
More fundamental questions are being asked about how to develop the -300ERX, which would be aimed at ranges of 12,000km or more to outdistance the A330. "With the -400 coming on line, we have changed the wing, the cockpit and the interior. So how do you treat the -300?" says Ozimek.
"It's a question in relationship to the A330-200. The A330's advantage over the -400 is range, and we know how to fix that. The question is, how do we get the 767-300 in line with the -400? There are lots of approaches. We can take the -400 wing and put it on the -300, install a new interior and put the new flightdeck in the -300. Or we could shrink the -400. We're still looking at the data."
With longer ranges in prospect, Boeing is also studying a speed increase for the 767. Designed in the wake of the fuel crisis of the 1970s, the original 767 wing was optimised for fuel-efficient cruise speeds rather than the high Mach numbers of the 747.
Although the 767 is considered adequate for current operations, the airlines are pushing Boeing for more speed as the range pushes out towards 11,500km.
"At about that range, you are on the 12h 'bubble'," says Ozimek. "After that time, you have to put another pilot in the cockpit, so if you can get flight time down to 11.5h, you're doing yourself a favour. That's why we're looking at increasing speed."
The design point of the 767's supercritical wing means that speed increases must be handled delicately. "The wing is subject to high drag rise, and if we push the throttle too much, the fuel burn goes up precipitously," adds Ozimek, who says the speed would need to rise by at least 3-5% to M0.82 to make it worthwhile.
777-200X/300X
"The 777X is our number one priority," says Anderson. "We have got authority to offer, and we have built work in that area in anticipation of launch." Transition of the 777-200X/300X from PD to production will also provide a blueprint for the new-look PS&D. "A lot of people who are working on this in PD will go through to production with it," says Anderson.
The 777X programme accelerated towards its long-awaited go-ahead throughout 1999 as the configurations of both versions firmed up around the sole-source selection of the General Electric GE90-115B. Assuming a firm launch commitment around the first quarter of 2000, Boeing plans to finalise the engineering design work throughout the year. This will be based on the baseline specification and nominal performance figures now agreed with the "tier one" group of leading candidates for the aircraft, including Air France, All Nippon Airways, Cathay Pacific, Malaysia Airlines, Singapore Airlines and GE Capital Aviation Services. The outline schedule calls for the configuration to be frozen by March 2001. Engineering design release is provisionally targeted for September, coinciding with the first run of the GE90-115B about a month later.
Both the -200X and -300X will have a MTOW of 340,000kg, a strengthened horizontal stabiliser and wing based on the current -300, extended wingbox and raked wingtip, reinforced vertical stabiliser, strengthened fuselage sections and nosewheel, revised nacelle and strut. It will also have new main landing gear wheels, tyres and brakes.
The 301-passenger -200X will have a range of 16,300km, while the larger -300X will have capacity for 359 passengers in three classes, and a range of 13,500km. The -300X, being longer, will also have a semi-levered main gear and electronic tailskid to enable it to operate at maximum weights in hot temperatures from standard runways. The -200X will be equipped with new rudder power control units, and provision for up to three auxiliary fuel tanks in the aft cargo hold.
Assembly of the first -300X will begin in 2002, with FAA certification of the engine scheduled for November that year. First flight is set for December 2002, coinciding with the start of assembly of the first -200X. Engine/airframe certification of the -300X is aimed at August 2003, with first deliveries expected the following month. The -200X will roll out in April 2003, with the first flight due the following month. By December 2003, Boeing hopes to have certification for the ultra-long-haul -200X, and will deliver the first aircraft in January 2004.
Although this schedule puts the 777X programme behind the A340-500/600 by 12 to 15 months, Boeing says the twin's lower operating costs will attract enough customers to more than make up for the delay. For the longer term, the company is studying further stretches of the -300X, already the longest airliner in service as the current -300. The outline design could be up to 8m longer, with capacity for 420 passengers and a range of 13,500km.
Source: Flight International
