Privacy and Cookies
Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.
She sounds like someone reading a script. But I like the name MAX. It’s much better than RE or NE.
Sweeeeeet!!! Although I’ve been fished-in by Boeing PR and Marketing in the past. I hope the MAX (great start with a solid name) performs and is delivered when promised.
What’s the X stand for? xerophlyte – a plane adapted for life and growth with a limited funding supply.
Er rearrange the following incredibly popular and best selling phrase or letters NOE ARBISU…… How embarrassing ! Boeing doing a glitzy promo for the plane they said would never be required. If Boeing made boats- well they’ve missed it as with the 747 800 and the latest 777. They need a few more 787 types only maybe perhaps this time they could fly in the decade they were planned for. End of trimester school report- MUST TRY HARDER !
Normand: Of course she was reading from a script; that is how matters of this nature are handled, by companies, governments, non-profits et. alii. In this case, Boeing had a specific message it wanted delivered and, thus, their spokeswoman was provided with the script containing the precise wording to deliver that specific message.
Great name. Sounds more human and relatable than NE or NG or NEO etc.
One wonders if Boeing could have made a 757 NexGen? More cargo than the 737, a new wing, these type of engines, Sky interior, 787 style cockpit, increased range…Wow.
Gotta love those pathetic Boeing video ads…ROFL
The retro colors of the video title image is brilliant though. Maybe that’s where Jim should should have sent the MAX idea – back to the 1960s…LOL
As much as some pilots would love that hot rod, Mark, I don’t think that would ever have happened given the way the market was moving.
Stretch to the max, hope it won’t break
What is MAX?
What a pickle this puts Boeing in. If you do to many modifications to the airplane airlines won’t buy your new jet when it comes out. If you don’t do enough modifications it makes you vunerable from other manufacters.
MAX? are you kidding me? maybe the 737 better is more appropriate
I think the key to this design is the pylon, is the aft end immersed partly in the exhaust flow. Can someone who knows more about aerodynamics (than me),comment on the efficiecy of this design.
This has to be one of the most restrained trillion dollar product announcements in some time.
Fantastic news and congratulations to Boeing for what I consider a very good move in the evolution of a proven product – the Boeing 737
Why are so many ‘Commentators’ so rigidly negative in their view? Come on people. Cheer up a bit and take some joy from this announcement. Personally, I get much pleasure from being a part of, plus watching the developments in Aviation.
Looking forward to EIS of the Boeing 737MAX-7/8/9
Thanks Jon! cheers Paul.
At least we know one thing now, the MAX is the last in the 737 series after old, classic and NG , simply becsuse of the name. Better than MAXimal is not possible , is’t it?
These pictures are just artists drawings, nothing has been designed yet, they don’t even know yet which fan size they are going to use. Judging by the early B787 pictures the final B737Max product will look completely different!
Why not give it a 787- like nose? with a name like MAX, that look would bring the 737 into the 21st century.
@ Neil – the pylon being in the exhaust airflow isn’t ideal, but I think it’s a relatively minor limitation on efficiency. The restricted fan size is no doubt a much more substantial limitation.
@ Peter Schneider – The final product is definitely not going to look completely different. It will still be a 737. The 787 was only a concept initially. The 737 Max has it’s basic structure already set in place. Some of the aerodynamic lines may well change, and I’m not convinced the aft body join Jon indicated had been eliminated is a real change (it may actually be a block upgrade Boeing has been toying with for a few years, or it may be completely notional), but for the most part we know it will look very much like the NG. Also, it’s starting to sound very much like they’re settling into the 66″ fan size.
I didn’t really think about the “Max” name until listening to how corny it sounded on the video. Plus, if Boeing wanted to really “Max” out all those characteristics, they’d have gone with a clean-sheet design. I don’t have any major complaints myself about flying in 737′s, but you won’t have “Max” passenger appeal with the same narrow fuselage and same small windows. You’ll have “status quo” passenger appeal. *Yawn*
If it were up to me, I’d have linked the branding to the engine and called it the 737 LEAP. Not quite as cool-sounding as NEO, but I like it much better than Max.
This video amazing. I had no idea the 737 MAX had even been released. This will totally blow away the A-320 NEO. No more compitition from Airbus at all. The 737 MAX will be amazing.
But of course!
A 66″ LeapX fan will have 7% better performance than a 78″ LeapX fan as well as a 81″ GTF fan!
Pass me that Kool-aid!
There’s a bit of Koolaid involved there, but it’s conditional Koolaid. Boeing and Airbus both have implied asterisks by their statements. Boeing’s probably says something like, “On a 500nm route.” Airbus’ probably says, “At maximum range.”
At the same time, don’t forget that the flip side of the wider seats and aisles everyone likes about the A320 is a roughly 10% larger frontal area, which means more drag. There’s also, I believe, a couple thousand pounds of dry weight difference to Boeing’s favor…the narrower fuselage comes into play again, as does the short landing gear.
It’s not about the engines in this case.
“Max” sounds only good in American English. For the rest of world it will sound stupid.
NEO though sounds stylish in much more languages.
And as long as Boeing is not covering the main landing gear, the 737 will never be as quite and efficient as the competing aircrafts
Aircraft | Aerospace | Aviation | Military | Business aviation | MRO | General aviation | Space | Airports | Engines and propulsion | Flight tests | Accidents and incidents | Flightglobal blogs | E-newsletters |
Flightglobal Pro | ACAS | MiliCAS | Ascend Online Fleets | Flightglobal Insight | ICAO | Capstats | Airport charges | Ascend Online Values | Aviation Exchange | Aircraft Ratings | Helicopter Fleets | Market Commentaries | FlightMaps Analytics
Aircraft profiles | Interactive business jet guide | Civil sims census | Commercial aircraft directory | Engines directory | JP Fleets | Military sims census | Industry resources
Browse by job role | Career advice | Jobs by email | Jobs search | Recruiter services | Training courses | Browse by discipline | Training recruiter services
Air show & event images | Cutaway drawings | Member galleries | Image store | Historical images | Historic magazine archive | Atlas aircraft tracking | AirSpace forums
Airline Strategy Awards | Air shows | Conferences | Exhibitions | Flightglobal Achievement Awards | Flightglobal events | Flightglobal Webbies
… part of Reed Business Information
© 2015 Reed Business Information