737-900ER flaps 15° and go around performance
09-08-2016, 09:23 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,265
Ergonomics and comfort are another story. It's only "next gen" if your generation was born in the 30's.
09-08-2016, 11:26 PM
#32
Stuck Mic
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,059
The bad news for Guppy lovers is that everybody crashes NG's a little bit. The good news is everybody walks away.
The USAIR bus in the Hudson is the only 320 hull loss in North America, ever. The bad news is that buses flown by 2nd tier (or worse) airlines crash at about the same rate as NG's, but they are horrific crashes and everyone generally is reduced to their carbon based substrate.
But, NG's can't get away from their landing incidents. At first I thought is was because the fuselage was a foot or two closer to the danger point. After flying it for 4 years, I think that factor is the problem. It is just a little closer to hitting the ground and crashing.
So far no tail strikes or curb feeler strikes (new wingtips) for me. But I feel that is a simple statistical anomaly that wouldn't be there if I was 2 feet higher off the ground.
In general, I like Boeing better than Airbus. Except for the Uber Guppy.
JMHO
The USAIR bus in the Hudson is the only 320 hull loss in North America, ever. The bad news is that buses flown by 2nd tier (or worse) airlines crash at about the same rate as NG's, but they are horrific crashes and everyone generally is reduced to their carbon based substrate.
But, NG's can't get away from their landing incidents. At first I thought is was because the fuselage was a foot or two closer to the danger point. After flying it for 4 years, I think that factor is the problem. It is just a little closer to hitting the ground and crashing.
So far no tail strikes or curb feeler strikes (new wingtips) for me. But I feel that is a simple statistical anomaly that wouldn't be there if I was 2 feet higher off the ground.
In general, I like Boeing better than Airbus. Except for the Uber Guppy.
JMHO
America west has one in Phoenix in 2002. Air Canada has one I think last year (you said North America) and US air might have had a second one in Philly in 2014 ( not sure if that one was a hull loss). And northwest mechanics totaled one if that counts!
Still a very solid record, and they have a tray table for meals which gives bonus points
09-09-2016, 12:24 AM
#33
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
Im no fan of the guppy which I currently fly and will take a bus over a guppy any day if QOL were the same but you're wrong on hull loses.
America west has one in Phoenix in 2002. Air Canada has one I think last year (you said North America) and US air might have had a second one in Philly in 2014 ( not sure if that one was a hull loss). And northwest mechanics totaled one if that counts!
Still a very solid record, and they have a tray table for meals which gives bonus points
America west has one in Phoenix in 2002. Air Canada has one I think last year (you said North America) and US air might have had a second one in Philly in 2014 ( not sure if that one was a hull loss). And northwest mechanics totaled one if that counts!
Still a very solid record, and they have a tray table for meals which gives bonus points
The USair fly 1702 was a high speed abort, probably above V1 as the Captain had already rotated. V speeds not displayed as pilot error caused the V-speeds to dump caused by a runway change prior to TO.
I think American alone has put 3 NG's off the runway, if I remember right.
I felt safer landing every other airplane that United has, and I have flown everything but the 10 and the 747. Landing the 300/500 was no problem. The 700 is no problem. The bigger ones with the higher approach speeds and a long fuselage seems problematic.
No flaps 15 for me in an uber guppy.
09-09-2016, 05:19 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,253
The 900 is a POS that only a bean counter could love. Still given that when it was ordered the same bean counter would have rather have deployed 500 76 seaters at the regionals, I'll take it. The 800 stops just fine as many years of Air Mic life shows. Save up your butt hurt for the MAX when it shows up. Absolutely no one is looking forward to that.
09-09-2016, 06:50 AM
#35
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
The 900 is a POS that only a bean counter could love. Still given that when it was ordered the same bean counter would have rather have deployed 500 76 seaters at the regionals, I'll take it. The 800 stops just fine as many years of Air Mic life shows. Save up your butt hurt for the MAX when it shows up. Absolutely no one is looking forward to that.
09-09-2016, 07:13 AM
#36
Stuck Mic
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,059
09-09-2016, 07:33 AM
#38
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
I read (I think in AW&ST) that because of the nose gear stretch, they can't fully fit it in the fuselage!
It will sit under a small bulged door. In almost all the "Artist's renderings," they have the belly banked away to hide this.....but I did see one drawing where it showed.
I still contend that the 737-900, as the "DC-3 of the Jet Age," should revert to that legacy...and be a tail-dragger. Put the nose gear at the aft pressure-bulkhead!
Guys with Cub or Turbo Porter experience would get hiring preference.
09-09-2016, 08:09 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Cessna 150
Posts: 655
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like the 9ER has better landing performance than the 800. If my memory serves me right, the 800 also has higher approach speeds than the 9ER, but not the 900. I think we all agree the 900 has the performance of a submarine.
The MAX does have a longer nose gear and re-engineered pylons to mimic similar ground clearances to the current models. If you look at that Rorschach test chart of body ground contact angles, the ventral fin of the curb feelers and tail are the most vulnerable to contact, but the aircraft state to do that would be very undesirable.
A check airman I flew with once said, "I'm not telling you to fly fast, but I am telling you to never ever fly slow". Words to fly by.
The MAX does have a longer nose gear and re-engineered pylons to mimic similar ground clearances to the current models. If you look at that Rorschach test chart of body ground contact angles, the ventral fin of the curb feelers and tail are the most vulnerable to contact, but the aircraft state to do that would be very undesirable.
A check airman I flew with once said, "I'm not telling you to fly fast, but I am telling you to never ever fly slow". Words to fly by.
09-09-2016, 08:11 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
The crazy thing is the proposed 737-10 Max that would require "telescoping" main gears to accommodate bigger motors. Yikes. Just stop this madness already, Boeing.
