Boeing Says New Model to Replace 737 Max Not a Priority: FT

HELLFIRE

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-01/boeing-says-new-model-to-replace-737-max-not-a-priority-ft?embedded-checkout=true
https://archive.ph/vqsaG (nonpaywall)

Launching a new aircraft to replace the best-selling Boeing 737 Max isn’t an immediate priority, the aircraft manufacturer’s Chief Executive Officer Kelly Ortberg told the Financial Times in an interview. The market isn’t ready for the model, he said, adding that Boeing is also not currently in a financial position to invest in the development of new planes. …

On one hand, “Go Figure…”

On the other, “I guess Boeing has bigger fish to fry…”

Regards

WalterDnes

According to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boeing_737_MAX_orders_and_deliveries

Boeing has 4,763 MAX aircraft in its backlog as of March 31, 2025.

The Boeing CEO is quoted in https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/boeing-increase-737-max-production-rates as planning to boost production to 42 MAX’s per month. Assuming no new orders, that’s 110 months (over 9 years) of backlog.

Also, to paraphrase Carl Sagan, developing a brand new plane costs “billions and billions” of dollars.

Thane_Bitter

HELLFIRE It is sort of a sweet spot of a plane, it’s not too big like the massive double decker that airbus built, or their 474, it’s bigger with more capacity than the narrow hull short hauls, I hate to call it the minivan of airliners but it sort of is a good all purpose plane (when doors and software aren’t sending it into the ground).

The big issues (ignoring software, quality control, et al) is they can’t do much more with respect to engines on the plane because of the low wing. The intakes of the engines are already squashed to reduce sucking up ground debris, newer engines tend to be ever larger in diameter because a larger fan is more efficient.

The 373 started being drawn on drafting boards, long before CAD and endless other advances but it has evolved over time to remain a very usable and efficient aircraft.

HELLFIRE

WalterDnes Assuming no new orders, that’s 110 months (over 9 years) of backlog.

The danger though – as long pointed out – is Boeing loses “street cred” as an engineering firm.

IIRC, McDonnell Douglas never built a truly new commercial aircraft and rather kept making derivatives of their existing products.

shrugs

Thane_Bitter It is sort of a sweet spot of a plane

From my limited understanding of the trade, “middle of the market” is the term used.

I’ve been hanging onto these links for awhile, but worthwhile in helping visualizing things :

https://simpleflying.com/explored-the-networks-of-the-5-boeing-737-max-operators-in-the-us/ – Explored: The Networks Of The Five Boeing 737 MAX Operators In The US

https://simpleflying.com/10-busiest-boeing-737-max-8-routes-canada/ – The 10 Busiest Boeing 737 MAX 8 Routes In Canada

Obviously the heaviest US airlines usage is the CONUS, with hops out to Alaska, Mexico, Carribbean South America, and as far as Hawaii.

Canada is heavily east-west traffic between the major cities.

I couldn’t find similar articles for EMEA and APAC, but no doubt they’re of similar pattern – “short” to “medium” haul with a profitable load of passengers, and costing less to operate than previous gen aircraft or a widebody jet.

But I totally agree regarding how much has been squeezed out of the 737 airframe over 50odd years. By that same token, the 757 was the “new” product, but between the post-9/11 reality and the size of the 737 orderbook, Boeing chose to follow the money…

Regards

GrumpyCanadian

HELLFIRE but between the post-9/11 reality and the size of the 737 orderbook, Boeing chose to follow the money…

Yet, at the same time, being too dedicated to the ideology of “follow the money” has been largely responsible for trashing their reputation and, ironically, their financial difficulties, as well as (worst of all) injuries and deaths.

HooRU

More on Boeing and production schedule and controversies.

Somewhat-Reticent

HELLFIRE Boeing is also not currently in a financial position to invest

… in actually airframe re-balancing every time they increase engine size/power,
since all they have to do is tweak complex software to compensate ( endlessly ).
Never mind the increasing multiple sudden impulses to restore ground level,
pilots only have to figure out - in seconds - which component has gone awry.
When interrupted from concentrating on professional education requirements
by sudden deviation from autopilot flight-plan.
(If only they’d had a universal auto-balancing airframe design at first …
but no, that would’ve taken a penny more … )

Hydraglass

Based on the flight market today and the reconfiguring airline operators have done, the vast majority of flying could be done with the 3 planes Boeing has to offer, and likely will be suitable for 20-30 years forward if not longer. Putting money into something “new” at this point would seem to me to be silly and a waste of effort to reinvent the wheel. The 767 is a perfectly well suited craft for long major transcontinental flights with 200 or more passengers. The 757 is well suited for on-continent long flights as well as shorter transcontinental flights with lighter passenger loads than the routes the 767 can handle. The 737 in its variants can handle just about everything needed on-continent for short to medium haul flights with varying capacity based on variant. They are all relatively good on fuel efficiency compared to the last generation planes, and there’s still a small demand for the occaisional 747 jumbo jet but that’s falling more to air cargo and less to passenger needs – it’s rare to need to take 500 people on a long transcontinental flight - now that segment is more like 200-250 ppl, and the 767 could handle easily with using half the fuel. What do we want to replace? Where’s a target to create a whole new generation aircraft? What segment is lacking? What’s worth 50 billion dollars over 15 years to develop?

real_aurgathor

Hydraglass The 767 is a perfectly well suited craft for long major transcontinental flights with 200 or more passengers. The 757 is well suited for on-continent long flights as well as shorter transcontinental flights with lighter passenger loads than the routes the 767 can handle.

While some 757 and 767 are still in service. 757 production stopped some 20 years ago while the 767 production is now cargo only, and both are being replaced in passenger service.

WalterDnes

Hydraglass The 737 in its variants can handle just about everything needed on-continent for short to medium haul flights with varying capacity based on variant.

Actually, Westjet is flying 737 MAX-8 jets between Halifax and Amsterdam https://simpleflying.com/westjet-7h20m-transatlantic-737-max-flight/

WestJet is heading back to the Netherlands with almost daily service (six times weekly) to Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (AMS) via Halifax Stanfield International Airport (YHZ). WestJet will be the first nonstop option available connecting the two cities, according to FlightAware data.
The route will be served by Boeing 737 MAX 8jets. Westjet’s shiny new planes will be making the westbound trans-Atlantic crossing of 3,041-mile (4,894 km) in seven hours and 21 minutes, per FlightConnections.

One other minor point, the 757 was manufactured 1981-2004 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_757 The newest body is over 2 decades old.

The problem with the term “737” is that it has evolved so much over the years, as Boeing has manufactured 22 different variations over the years https://simpleflying.com/boeing-has-built-22-variations-of-the-737/

The original 737-100 (April 8, 1967) could carry 85 passengers 1,540 nautical miles (2,850 km).
737 MAX 9 - 193 passengers 3,550 nautical miles / 6,570 km.
737 MAX 10 - The biggest Boeing 737 ever built, can carry 204 passengers 3,300 nautical miles / 6,110 km.

If you want more passengers/distance, Boeing offerrs the 767 and 777.

real_aurgathor

WalterDnes If you want more passengers/distance, Boeing offers the 767 and 777.

Not the 767. And I already mentioned that above.

WalterDnes

real_aurgathor Not the 767. And I already mentioned that above.

Did you mean to type “757”. I was replying to Hydraglass, and had my browser open for a while, researching cites.

HELLFIRE

Somewhat-Reticent … in actually airframe re-balancing every time they increase engine size/power,
since all they have to do is tweak complex software to compensate ( endlessly ).

By that same token, can only tweak and stretch and “hack” so much, versus looking at a clean-sheet design.

Mind you, I’m just a guy on the internet… what do I know? 😃

Hydraglass What’s worth 50 billion dollars over 15 years to develop?

Basically the Boeing C-Suite’s logic 20 years ago.

WalterDnes If you want more passengers/distance, Boeing offerrs the 767 and 777.

Don’t forget the 787 in there as well 🙂

Regards

WalterDnes

HELLFIRE By that same token, can only tweak and stretch and “hack” so much, versus looking at a clean-sheet design.

The 737 family has arguably hit that wall. The airlines are always demanding better fuel economy. Laws of physics imply that this requires higher bypass ratios which implies bigger engines. That’s why we have Y-U-U-U-G-E turbofan engines nowadays.

The latest generation of more economical turbofans simply don’t fit under the wings of ye olde 737. Boeing had to move the new engines forward and up abit. This introduces a nose-up bias to the thrust. Boeing added MCAS with a nose-down bias to compensate. “That did not end well”. MCAS was overly aggressive and sometimes drove the plane nose-first into the ground.

Boeing has backed off on MCAS https://www.boeing.com/737-max-updates/

MCAS

This required software function operates in unusual flight conditions only and now relies on two sensors, activates only once and never overrides pilots’ ability to control the airplane.

I wonder if we’ll start seeing engines mounted on top of, instead of under, wings.

Somewhat-Reticent

WalterDnes I wonder if we’ll start seeing engines mounted

… at the stern / tail / rear ?

HELLFIRE

https://www.ajot.com/news/boeing-books-303-new-orders-and-hits-737-max-production-target-in-blockbuster-may – Boeing books 303 new orders and hits 737 MAX production target in blockbuster May

Boeing is heading into the Paris Air Show after a blockbuster May that included booking 303 new orders and rolling out 38 new 737 MAX jets, a production rate that it has been working to reach for more than a year. The company also delivered 45 aircraft last month, it said Tuesday. It was the sixth-highest monthly order tally in Boeing’s history, according to company data. …

FWIW.

Regards

WalterDnes

HELLFIRE I previously mentioned that as of the end of March, Boeing had over 9 years order backlog. They’ve picked up a whole bunch of orders by end of May. According to https://flightplan.forecastinternational.com/2025/06/11/airbus-and-boeing-report-may-2025-commercial-aircraft-orders-and-deliveries/

At its projected 2025 production rate, Boeing’s current backlog now equates to approximately 11.5 years of output, a clear indication the manufacturer is struggling to produce and deliver aircraft at a pace that meets demand.

telcodad

HELLFIRE WalterDnes If you want more passengers/distance, Boeing offerrs the 767 and 777.

Don’t forget the 787 in there as well 🙂

I guess we won’t now: 🙁

Boeing stock’s resounding recovery is suddenly in jeopardy after Air India crash
Boeing’s stock is leading the S&P 500’s decliners early Thursday, raising concern that the great run it’s had over the past few months is now over after 787 crash
By Tomi Kilgore, MarketWatch - June 12, 2025
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/boeing-stocks-big-recovery-now-in-jeopardy-after-air-india-crash-6a1edf09

Shares of Boeing Co. were hit hard in early Thursday trading, after one of the aerospace giant’s jets crashed in India, raising concerns that the big rally they’ve seen over the past couple of months may be over.
:
The selloff comes after the stock had soared 57% off the 2½-year closing low seen in early April, as investors were growing more confident that the company’s troubles, stemming from years of regulatory and public backlash over crashes in 2018 and 2019, were finally in the past. ….

Somewhat-Reticent

Local authorities think “ability to fly” sells “REAL ID” …