MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6386 posts, RR: 50
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2453 times:
I'd take any 737 series over the DC-9 anyday. The cabin is more spacious, takeoff is more powerful, and on the 732's, I really enjoy watching those thrust reversers delpoy upon landing. Always a nice sight.
One of my personal pet peeves about the DC-9 in economy class is this: at the window seat, the cabin curves inwardly as the walls reach the floor, so there's less space under each seat....for bags or for feet. Seats seem noticeably smaller than 737 coach seats as well, regardless of the airline.
Steve in MSY
Next trip 6/12 - 6/15: MSY-SEA on AS, SEA-LAX on VX, LAX-N.O on Amtrak
Ha763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3580 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2361 times:
The 737 walls also curve in at floor level and looking at the scale drawings, it curves in more on the classics than the DC-9. Remember, the widest point in the cabin for the 737 is about shoulder level, which means that the walls curve in at the floor. It's just the the legs on the DC-9 seats are placed so that the smallest under seat space is under the window seat while on the 737, the smallest space is under the aisle seat.
That being said, I do like the DC-9, especially the DC-9-50. It just looks so sleek and elegant when compared to a 737-200.
Trident From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 484 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 6 days ago) and read 2302 times:
Boeing were slightly late out of the gate with their short haul jet. The project got the go ahead in 1965, the same year the DC-9 first flew. Deliveries began in 1968, two year after the DC-9 had entered service. However, by the mid 70s the 737 was drawing level with the DC-9 and, by the end of the 80, had pulled significantly ahead.
Significantly, the initial "success" of the DC-9 actually destroyed the Douglas Aircraft Company. Serious cash flow and supplier problems relating to the DC-9 programme brought the company to its knees in 1967 and it was only the buy out by the much smaller McDonnell Aircraft Corporation that "rescued" the project. Ironically, the only McDD airliner product kept in production after the Boeing takeover in 1997 was the 717, the last variant of the DC-9 theme.
It is interesting that after McDonnell took over in 1967, not a single totally new airliner design was launched by McDonnell Douglas right up to the company's demise 30 years later. All post 1967 projects were continuations or redesigns of projects initiated by Douglas (the DC-10 was launched in 1966 - before anybody asks).
Cessna172RG From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 747 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2225 times:
I have flown on all types of Northwest DC-9's (10/30/40/50) and I have flown a few times on a 737-200 (Aloha) and here's my experience...
The 737 offers a larger seat and more room. But, if you sit behind the wing, it is very noisy (on the -200, on the -800 by Continental and ATA, I have noticed a much more smoother ride and less noise). Window seating on a classic 737 did not curve in as much as it does on a classic DC-9...more on that in a second... Yes, the 737 classic thrust reversers are a kick to watch too!
The DC-9 in the forward cabin is a lot less noisier, but having a window seat can be a royal pain. The cabin, a few feet below the window, curves in dramatically and if you are a large person, you have to cross your legs to sit comfortably. Plus, the seats are very small, probably smaller than found on Skymark Airlines in a high capacity config...fortunately for me, I had only to sit in mine for a little over an hour.
The MD-80, however, as configured by Alaska, offers a very large seat, and the window seat lacks the dramatic inward curve. Very comfortable.
Elwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2173 times:
You all know I'm going to pick the DC-9. But here's why:
The DC-9s are still flying in numbers Boeing could only drool over (by comparison) back in 1968. More DC-9s are flying now than 737-100s were ever built. And I can tell you from personal experience that the 737-200 is a much less comfortable aircraft to ride in flights over 1 hour (vibration!), and is far less reliable.
Sorry, I gotta stick with Douglas on this one.
You're absolutely right. The engineers built an excellent aircraft, but the finance and management guys screwed the pooch on estimating how many would end up getting sold.
Douglas estimates in the small, short-medium range market 1967-1977 (number of models ordered)
Marketing - 2000, half to be supplied by Douglas (they would have been right!)
Finance - 1000, half to be supplied by Douglas
Operations - 500, half to be supplied by Douglas
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.