Startvalve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (9 years 8 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2483 times:
Ok when is this going to become a they should just buy the 717 thread? To make the 737-600 lighter would mean to change it significantly internally which would cause it to lose some of its commonality with the other 737s.. If someone wants the little thing its there, if not its no skin off Boeings nose, its just there in case a loyal Boeing customer starts salivating over the A318 (or as I call it "the short bus").
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3375 posts, RR: 18 Reply 7, posted (9 years 8 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2291 times:
It seems to me that both Airbus and Boeing cannot make a light version of their short planes, otherwise Embraer wouldn't have a leg to stand on in this market. Why would anyone add a totally seperate type of aircraft to their inventory unless the alternative is a definite wrong idea in the first palce? Not saying that the 318 or 736 do not serve a market, it just means that they will be more of a niche aircraft like the 753 is.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 8 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2283 times:
to answer your question: Boeing tends to overbuild its base aircraft, in order to have the ability to stretch them should the market dictate. It did so twice with the 762 airframe. It's also stretched the 777, 757, and of course.... 737.
The problem is, the 73G is actually the base of the 737NG line due to WN's launch, not the 736. The 738 came later, as did the 739.... each having similar aggregate costs, but lower per-seat costs.
The 736, like the A318, a direct shrink with many of the same parts/components/features (and therefore, similar weight). The 736 has exceeded the acceptable margin of seats/weight that its longer brethren share. This is a common problem with shrinks.
A319 and A332 have been notable acceptions.
The proposed 771X and A335 flopped, for this reason, before ever being launched.
Mf3864 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 118 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (9 years 8 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2206 times:
So here is a stupid question:
I am the guy at Delta ordering new planes. I like the economics of the 737-700 but, dont need the capacity. Rather than buy a 737-600 why not buy the -700, outfit it in a combi config, and fill the rest of it up with cargo? Oh, the market picked up, I need more steats, take out the combi config, add seats, im good to go. Why is this such a tough nut to crack?
Tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6195 posts, RR: 9 Reply 11, posted (9 years 8 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2062 times:
736 is a FAT looking a/c. Like the girl you Didn't want to date in high school
From what I've read on the forum the 736 is VERY heavy like the A318. I think DL will purchase them as a future replacement for 732. Other than that, I hope to see more than SAS operating them
"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
Startvalve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (9 years 8 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1996 times:
I was under the distinct impression the economics of the 737-600 sucked donkey nuts. Its heavy so it costs a fortune in landing fees when you consider how few seats it has and how much fuel it burns moving its heavy butt through the air. I doubt it will see many orders especially in the US.