Rumor Mill 737-900ER
12-24-2012, 05:16 PM
#61
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: 36N15
Posts: 323
The -800 is the best of the bunch. -700 a close second. However, the -900 is kind of a pig compared to those two. Its heavier so it doesn't perform as well, especially when you're trying to get the beast stopped.
Other than that, its still a good airplane.
Other than that, its still a good airplane.
12-25-2012, 08:17 AM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,331
Originally Posted by Road Dawg
Back in the day the sales team for the 75 should have sold the hell out of that plane. It can smoke a 73 in all areas short hops, long hops, trans ocean, fly slow, fly fast go high, haul cargo, and they didn't parlay that bet!!! How could things be different?
RD
.
RD
.
12-25-2012, 10:52 AM
#63
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: 36N15
Posts: 323
Originally Posted by sailingfun
The 737's only saving graces are that its easier to service at the gates, 30 percent cheaper overall non fuel costs then a 757, lower fuel burn then the 757 on a per seat basis and far cheaper to build. I am befuddled why the 757 is not still in production. The only possible reason I can come up with is that airlines want to make money.
12-25-2012, 02:20 PM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: 737 F.O.
Posts: 180
Originally Posted by sailingfun
The 737's only saving graces are that its easier to service at the gates, 30 percent cheaper overall non fuel costs then a 757, lower fuel burn then the 757 on a per seat basis and far cheaper to build. I am befuddled why the 757 is not still in production. The only possible reason I can come up with is that airlines want to make money.
12-26-2012, 09:38 AM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,933
Originally Posted by Ottopilot
The difference between a 757 & 737 (I've flown both) is that the 737 makes money for the airline. 
The 700 is a joy to fly in all conditions. Second best Boeing to the good old reliable 727-100.
The best part about flying the -900 is setting the parking brake and doing the parking checklist. The airplane is a slug.
12-26-2012, 10:46 AM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,575
Originally Posted by captjns
One does not set land speed records on the 757 as compared with the -800 or -900 for both takeoff or landing.
The 700 is a joy to fly in all conditions. Second best Boeing to the good old reliable 727-100.
The best part about flying the -900 is setting the parking brake and doing the parking checklist. The airplane is a slug.
The 700 is a joy to fly in all conditions. Second best Boeing to the good old reliable 727-100.
The best part about flying the -900 is setting the parking brake and doing the parking checklist. The airplane is a slug.
I've done transcons on the -900 when hot & heavy. My initial altitude was FL310 due to performance, but I couldn't get over FL290 initially. Still, the flight was done cheaper than a 757 could do it. I choose to fly the 737 over the 757 due to quality of life. They pay the same and I don't have to fly all night on the 737's. Our 757's do Europe. Been there, done that. No thanks. Besides the 737 is a little slower, so I make more.
12-26-2012, 04:26 PM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,933
Originally Posted by Ottopilot
Besides the 737 is a little slower, so I make more.
My previous carrier, a European LOCO carrier is up to about 300 of the -800s. In my 4 years 3 monts flying with them, I've taken one... yep count the number... two mx delays. One was a false vibration indication after engine start, and a PSEU light that illuminated after start and would not extinguish... even after we "CTRL, ALT, DEL" the jet. That said, one can't complain about reliability.
12-26-2012, 05:10 PM
#69
New boss = Old boss
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: Ca B737
Posts: 2,762
Those who say the -900 is a slug. Are you talking about the -900ER? I haven't flown it yet but with the short field wing and the 27k power I expect it is much better than the early 900s. Anyone?
I like the the springy feel in turbulence. The -700 is much stiffer and suffers from pitch hunting in a climb (VNAV). I'm to looking to fly a fighter jet. For me it's all about quiet comfort and 200k/yr. I'd rather do it in a -900, 1 or 2 leg a day than a -700, 5 legs a day.
I like the the springy feel in turbulence. The -700 is much stiffer and suffers from pitch hunting in a climb (VNAV). I'm to looking to fly a fighter jet. For me it's all about quiet comfort and 200k/yr. I'd rather do it in a -900, 1 or 2 leg a day than a -700, 5 legs a day.
12-26-2012, 05:42 PM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,933
In our part of the world during monsoon season, its not uncommon to experience conditions of ISA +20 to +25. With the 900 one is stuck a couple of thousand feet above turboprop operators... not nearly enough to clear the CBs when at Max Weight.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
