Otto says it well and nothing anyone has said about 737 NGs is untrue. It's a small tube and pit. There are certain routes where given the load and airport challenges, the 757 would be a better fit (SJO-EWR comes to mind). However, the 737 NG family does provide a lot of flexibility at a reasonable cost. The -700... SNA-EWR is no problem any time of year. Unfortunately, is it only holds 12/112. The -800 is a nice compromise and works well on transcons, but it can't do EGE or SNA-EWR, and SJO-EWR is usually a challenge. The -900ER is OK for transcons in the summer, but westbound transcons in the winter are tight. As has been said it eats runway and has a pretty tight margin for tailstrikes on landing. I've flown the 737 for over 10 years and never had to make a fuel stop (though we've just had the -900ERs for a few years and it does have flights with scheduled fuel stops). Like you say... we don't control what they buy. It's up to us to determine who flys them and for how much.

 

With luck UCAL will keep the busses for a long time, I never want to sit in a guppy cockpit again.

 

Until you hit a flock of geese.

 

Agreed, bus cockpit WAY roomier than guppy.

KC

 

Try doing what Sully did in a Boeing. Plus, I'm sure a Boeing wouldn't fair any better.....

 

More room to tackle those revisions, right?

 

Not when you already have "Ship Kits".

 

Hence the at the end.

 

don't worry, if you actually look out the window you can avoid the geese!

 

At least he would of known that the engines weren't flamed out in a Boeing.