The touchscreen FMC’s bring on a ton of capability. Think 787 type box. It will be night and day..and touch screen isn’t the same as a phone. Your phone requires you to press on the screen. Jet type screens are using lasers or other systems to tell when your finger is going with very high precision. They work phenomenally . Garmin has flooded the jet markets with touch screens and it’s a non issue. I hope we still plan to retrofit the -900’s with touchscreens as we will get that awesome capability increase.

Please tell me they work better than the ACARS touch screens on the 75

The MAX touch screens are light years ahead of those.

Also the MD88/90 had the same as the 75 with regards to that ACARS screen thingy usually the reason they were glitchy wac due to dirt and stuff along the inside edge where the sensors were. A quick wipe around the inside edge of the box with a microfibre or lense cleaning cloth would usually do the trick to get it functional again

I’ve heard some muckity mucks in the 73 world verify it’s an issue. Debating on pressing on or delaying. While HUD is deferrable, the fleet has made it the default standard, so unleashing an entire sub fleet without it for possibly a long while presents an issue with fleet philosophical alignment.

Its way above most of our pay grades, other than the question of will it delay those airframes into revenue service or not.

I don't think deferral has anything to do with operating a subfleet with different equipment. But even if it did, the MEL is valid for what, 90 days?

Are they also antimicrobial? Just sayn' bring back sick call verification! Covid anyone? I hate cleaning fingerprints off screens there's no reason to touch them. Bah humbug.

Not that it would literally be on MEL or not. But that there is a rigorous debate taking place about what to do about it if it’s not ready when then plane is. The item is MEL-able, so it can clearly fly without it. However, it’s the left seat philosophical standard to use it often and there is a debate right now if it’s ok to simply unleash a rapidly growing sub category with an operationally philosophical difference that significant. I would be OK with it but it’s not my call obviously.

The 88 ACARS head was anti microbial. Not because of any special coating, but its operating temperature was only slightly below that of the surface of Venus. It was so hot the engineers had to place it at a steep enough angle to not be useable as a coffee cup warmer.

With the 10 being longer than a 9ER you’d think you’d want the HUD for tail strike awareness and prevention. Plus who knows how many CA’s have become HUD cripples ;).

Valid points. I don’t know what differences if any the 10 has for tail strike geometry. While it’s longer, is the gear taller? Different strut compressions? But you hit on a valid point in that the fleet is used to it. While it is deferrable, if it wasn’t ready when the plane was, what should we do about it if anything?

The AP, AT, APU and many other more obscure things are deferrable especially some equipment that’s optional. However a sub fleet with something fundamental to the rest that’s missing presents a concern that’s being discussed.

I can’t imagine an airline would take deliveries of 9 figure fully airworthy planes only to park them for months or years over something like that. We’ll see.