Boeing 737 question

[Cheechako]

[ QUOTE ]
In the photos above, the first is a 737-700, the second is a 777, and the third is a 737-800.



[/ QUOTE ]

CORRECT! The first, the -700 is Southwest, then the 777 and the -800 are both Delta (or at least that's what the Airliners.net captions said).

I think all 737NGs, -600 and on have that cockpit setup, which I think was based on the 777 cockpit. And please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they're all flat screen LCDs and not the big tube CRTs.

 

[Snow]

No autothrottles? That mean you have to control the throttles manualy the whole time? Damn that sucks, you actually have to do somthing other than turn knobs haha.

The 732s have a low by-pass turbofans right or are they turbojet? Also what about 737-100s? do they exhist and does anyone still use them?

 

[appel]

[ QUOTE ]
Also what about 737-100s? do they exhist and does anyone still use them?


[/ QUOTE ]

America West Airlines flew the last 737-100 until end of 1999. Do a search for N708AW on airliners.net

 

[derg]

Having no autothrottles is a pain the butt! Whew! Especially in the -88/90 because you can't hear the engines *at all* in the cockpit.

The 737-600/700/800, 767-400 and 777-200/300 all have liquid crystal displays.

 

[mpenguin1]

Some outfit in Mexico flies the 737-100, when they sent in their paperwork for training, we thought they made a typo. Sheesh!

 

[derg]

[ QUOTE ]

Some outfit in Mexico flies the 737-100, when they sent in their paperwork for training, we thought they made a typo. Sheesh!

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, the 737-100 exists!

 

[A320_DUDE]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course we did get a little upset when dispatch decided it would be a good idea to switch out a 737-700 originally planned to go from MCO-SAT to a 737-200. :/

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me guess...."Due to operational issues". Whoever sent that -200 anywhere near Florida needs to be shot.....I've had them play that game with me....sending a -200 to cover a fully loaded -700,it's not fun playing "Who's not getting on the airplane?" with them Orlando folks.....they tend to bite!!

 

[Louie1975]

Why does the 737NG flight deck look more complicated than a 747-400, or 777? It looks like they added switches!

 

[I_Money]

It is probably as it is a redesign compared to a new design. They are trying to fit new components in with old ones, and keep it as close to the old 737's as they can not to confuse the crews.

And AWA used to have a 737-200 until about 2 years ago. I can not remember the rego however it was in the purple suns colors, and the crews complained as they hated the HI as it was different.

 

[ready2fly]

[ QUOTE ]
737NG

[/ QUOTE ]
K - I'll play the happy idiot on this one: What does the "NG" stand for?

 

[Mr_Creepy]

NG - Next Generation

 

[ready2fly]

Ah - thanks.

 

[derg]

Iain- AWA still has -200's. They did, however, get rid of the last -100 a couple of years ago.

 

[twothousandgt]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the comment about the similarities/common type with the 757/767 and the 737-800 was due to the overhead panel. Boeing planned on using an overhead panel which was very similar to the 757 style, however doing so would require 800 and 900 pilots to have a different type rating compared to the current one for the rest of the fleet. As of now, if you get a 737 type rating (say in a -300), you just need to complete differences training to be certified to fly the -700, -800 and -900.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 737NG overhead is more closely related to the 727 than anything else. The 737-200 had a very similar overhead to the 727 (not sure % of commonality, but I would say 85-90%) and when the "classic" series (-3/4/500) came out the overhead panel was carried over. The 737NG series still retains an almost identical configuration. Some of the round dials went digital I believe, but that's about it.

In addition to the A/T, I had heard that SWA wasn't using VNAV in it's -3/500s because of the -200s lack of the function. This was before they started flying the -700s when the -200 was the "base" model for training with -300/-500 differences training. I *think* when the 737NGs arrived they made the -300/500 the base model with diffs in the 200 and 700. I'm not sure on that though, it's been awhile since I read that article and as always, things change.

I'm sure you've seen it before, but for those who havent this is a great site with info about the 737: http://www.b737.org.uk/pilotnotes.htm

 

[derg]

Probably the -100, but the -200's overhead was way more tricky than the 727 overhead.

 

[twothousandgt]

Don't take it to mean identical, only similar. On the 737 the F/E got the chop so his station and functions went to the overhead,panel, so you get a lot more to deal with up there. I had just heard it compared to the 727's layout by ex-727 guys who have flown the 737. To the best of my knowledge the 100 and 200 share the same layout, could very easily be wrong though

 

[IrishSheepdog]

I have the SWA FRM and FOM, and it seems they constantly refer to the -300/500 and -700 in limitations. Then, they'll throw a (oh, the -200 does this differently) type notation in there. They are fairly new updates (few months old). I'd say they are moving totally towards training the pilots on the -300/500 and -700, then pointing out some differences for the -200.

 

[NJA_Capt]

[ QUOTE ]
The bad thing about SWA is that since their -200s don't have autothrottles, all of the autothrottles fleet-wide have been deactivated. Plus, every jet, even the 'glass/efis' has the 'six pack' of flight instruments.

Here's a SWA/CAL-style glass cockpit:

The question I have is whenever SWA gets rid of the old "round-dial" -200s and -300's, are they going to transition to the NG-style of instrumentation to take better advantage of the technology?

[/ QUOTE ]

I had no idea SWA "did this" to their 737s. That is about the goofiest (sorry) thing I have ever seen. Gee, why not get rid of those gas guzzling CFMs and hang a pair of Wright Cyclones on it too. Talk about reverse engineering.

Buy a Ferrari and but a microchip in it so it runs like a model "A." Are they using VLF Omegas also?

I guess you can tell I'm having a hard time with this. I can see wanting fleet commonality, but was this really necessary. For the price of one of those screens you could outfit the whole cockpit, er ah....flight deck, with steam...I mean round gauges.

 

[IrishSheepdog]

I dunno, wasn't this an "option?" Meaning, the pilot can select between that style and the other style? For some reason I thought that was the case.

 

[IrishSheepdog]

Yeah, see:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/190890/L/