Boeing Starts Developing 737 MAX Replacement: Overdue Or Premature? - Boeing General

Boeing Starts Developing 737 MAX Replacement: Overdue Or Premature?

Ben Schlappig — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 23:51:43 +0000

It sounds like Boeing is working on developing its first new ”clean sheet” commercial aircraft type in over two decades. I’m not sure if that’s refreshing to see and shows that Boeing is trying to innovate, or is just plain confusing, given the aircraft it’s replacing.

Continue reading: Boeing Starts Developing 737 MAX Replacement: Overdue Or Premature?

Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.

omarsidd — Mon, 13 Oct 2025 10:45:30 +0000

Considering it took them 14 years and counting for 777X, I guess it's not premature. What is premature is doing it without some major advancement of the technology that can be integrated at the same time. Blended wings, lifting bodies, next generation engines, similar changes that are generational and typically only possible during a clean-sheet design.

Leo — Fri, 03 Oct 2025 18:27:05 +0000

Boeing should have started the clean sheet replacement instead of debut 737 max series! It is looong overdue!

ImmortalSynn — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 21:37:46 +0000

Huh? Narrowbodies were the first jets to fly any kind of long-haul routes at all, and have been doing long-hauls (including transatlantic) in every decade since the 1950s.

ImmortalSynn — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 21:29:44 +0000

"Calhoun was a selfish idiot that put profits over safety and future of Boeing." True, do-nothing-Dave was no asset to the Boeing, but you're about 2 CEOs short of the real culprit. It was under Jim McNerney when Boeing made all the disastrous decisions to rush the 737MAX out the door, while lying-by-omission about MCAS. He paid zero price for any of it, and walked away well-compensated.

AeroB13a — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 15:12:09 +0000

Misplaced response …. jetset, please see my response above. I chose the wrong runway to land on …. I’m such a numpty today Rodney!

AeroB13a — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 15:06:25 +0000

Understood jetset, thank you, the tail wagging the dog syndrome or the equivalent …. :-)

jetset — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 14:29:10 +0000

This could just be the fate they have to accept at some point - is it better to lean in on the wide body segment and maintain some of the competitive advantages they held (777 engine exclusivity for example) or do they try to stay relevant in the narrow body segment where they have ceded massive market share. Clearly they are failing at trying to do all of it at the same time (in terms of certification delays, etc.).

jetset — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 14:26:47 +0000

It's probably the right decision at this point. The MAX issues reflect the challenges of pushing an existing frame to its limits to get the fuel efficiency and performance gains Boeing wanted for a new plane. The engines needed to be much larger to drive fuel efficiency but their size was problematic on the existing 737 frame. The A320 has taller landing gear and higher wing clearance and can naturally handle larger engines whereas the older design of the 737 favored shorter landing gear to reduce weight which creates problems for adding larger engines. Whether they continue to push the existing 737 frame with compromises (and likely don't achieve as material performance and fuel efficiency increases as Airbus could get out of the A320) or design a new plane which creates manufacturing ramp up challenges, certification risks, and pilot retraining needs, they will have a period of time where sales and market share will be challenged vs. Airbus. At this point, the latter decision feels best for long-term success but that clearly wasn't how they were thinking about strategic decisions over the past 2 decades.

jetset — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 14:18:01 +0000

Certainly - there would be strategy folks always thinking about this and also small teams of engineering folks who would be contributing to these projects to offer perspectives on what can be achieved with clean-sheet vs. re-engine designs.