Hope some of this is for growth
04-28-2011, 03:45 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,725
The 900 might be a super duper stretched 737 and it might be cheap to operate but from a pilots standpoint it's still a tiny, little, cramped, noisy 737 up front with no place to store your bags. The 757 has a very nice flight deck though I can't give it any points for quiet. The 900 never a 757 will it be in range, performance or flight deck comfort.
I hate to say it but the 320 is about ten times nicer up front, especially on those rare days that it isn't broken!
I hate to say it but the 320 is about ten times nicer up front, especially on those rare days that it isn't broken!
05-01-2011, 12:18 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
The 900 might be a super duper stretched 737 and it might be cheap to operate but from a pilots standpoint it's still a tiny, little, cramped, noisy 737 up front with no place to store your bags. The 757 has a very nice flight deck though I can't give it any points for quiet. The 900 never a 757 will it be in range, performance or flight deck comfort.
05-01-2011, 12:43 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
"but the market spoke and the 737 won"
The "market" in this case was SWA. They pushed for the 737 to be continued.
In the early 90s Boeing actually sent reps to tell the airlines the 737 was in its last days. The reasons were, range, avionics (ClassII capabilities), lack of freight and aerodynamic efficiency. Well, 20+ years later it (-900) still doesn't have the range and flexability of the "replacements," it can't carry the same load and it is behind in the efficiency of the competitors. But, SWA wants nothing else.
The market speaks and Boeing listens!
As a friend of mine says, "people aspire to be average."
Boeing sells what people will buy.
The "market" in this case was SWA. They pushed for the 737 to be continued.
In the early 90s Boeing actually sent reps to tell the airlines the 737 was in its last days. The reasons were, range, avionics (ClassII capabilities), lack of freight and aerodynamic efficiency. Well, 20+ years later it (-900) still doesn't have the range and flexability of the "replacements," it can't carry the same load and it is behind in the efficiency of the competitors. But, SWA wants nothing else.
The market speaks and Boeing listens!
As a friend of mine says, "people aspire to be average."
Boeing sells what people will buy.
05-01-2011, 07:51 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 153
I know, Boeing doesn't build 'em anymore. Another brilliant decision from the managers who outsourced the 787. Bonuses anyone?
Don't get me started....
05-02-2011, 05:12 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 844
The 737-900 is a sea level, no terrain SAC runway aircraft. It is good for flying IAH-OKC, and not much else. CAL management will try to force the airplane into short field transcons that should be left to larger aircraft. CAL management likes putting an RJ where a 767 should be.
05-02-2011, 05:47 AM
#19
Need More Callouts
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Unbridled Enthusiasm
Posts: 2,143
05-02-2011, 06:43 AM
#20
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: B737-800 Captain, Dubai
Posts: 64
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Flyjets1
Your Photos and Videos
11
01-31-2010 08:41 AM
