This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Monolithic Structure Affordability: 737 Classic Versus Next Generation
Technical Paper
2003-01-2909
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
One recent evolution in commercial transport structure has been the emergence of monolithic structure applications. Monolithic structure reduces the number of parts that must be managed, eliminates sub-assembly operations and contributes strongly to determinant assembly practices. The cost of three components from the Boeing 737-200 and their counterparts on the Boeing 737-600 will be compared. The mid 1960's 737-200 components were assembled from sheet metal details. The mid 1990's 737-600 components are monolithic designs and utilize superplastic forming, casting and NC machining technologies. The built-up solutions and the monolithic solutions are compared based on cost infrastructures from the 1960's and the 1990's.
Recommended Content
Aerospace Standard | FERRULE, COUPLING, RIGID, FIXED CAVITY THREADED, FERRULE TYPE TUBE ENDS |
Aerospace Standard | CLAMP SUPPORT, LOOP, CLAMP |
Aerospace Standard | PLUG, EXPANSION - ALUMINUM, 2024-T4 AND 2024-T351, SHORT; STD AND .010 OVERSIZE DIAMETERS, UNS A92024 |
Citation
Weber, G. and Morgan, J., "Monolithic Structure Affordability: 737 Classic Versus Next Generation," SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-2909, 2003, https://doi.org/10.4271/2003-01-2909.Also In
References
- U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Employee Costs for Employee Compensation, Blue Collar Occupations Aircraft Manufacturing
- U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Producer Price Index - Commodities
- Boeing 737-100/-200 Structural Repair Manual Revision 86 Boeing Commercial Airplanes March 2003
- Boeing 737-600 Structural Repair Manual Revision 15 March 2003
- Boeing Advanced Quality System Tools The Boeing Company November 1998