Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
My 737 opinion.......Whats yours?  
User currently offlineUS1091 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 568 times:

I have flown several times on a 737, and in my opinion the 737 one of the worst planes created from a PASSENGERS view. Maybe it is the easiest to fly or maintain (I really don't care!), but I think it is very uncomfortable. They have a short range, or the airlines don't often use them on long trips. There are 8 models in use, and most of them don't seem any different then the other. There's a difference between the -200 and -800, sure, but what about the -400 and -500 models. What is the point?? They all have around 20 rows of seats, and have no kind of entertainment system at all. It isn't that I hate Boeing (I really like the 777), but I just hate the 737.
I really don't like airlines made up of mainly a 737 fleet (especially Continental), and I try never to get booked on one. I think US airlines should invest more in planes like the 757, A-320, and 767. Most people around this site seem to favor the 737 over all, and I don't see why. Give your views. Do you agree, or disagree (I'm guessing most people will disagree)?

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinedc863 From Denmark, joined Jun 1999, 1558 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 567 times:

It's one of my favorite aircraft! It'll get you in and out of small airports with no problem. I remember flying Air California's 737-200 all the time out of Orange County back in 1970/71 and that plane shot off like a rocket out of that airport(mostly because it had for NA reasons). As for range it's not bad I've flown on some of Nordairs 737-200s from Montreal to the Caribbean nonstop. However if you sit behind the wing it is pretty noisy on TO.

User currently offlineMD-11 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 567 times:

Well I agree with you. I've flown on 737s 4 times and I don't like them one bit. I find it to be pretty cramped when compared to the A320 with it's wider cabin or the MD-80 with it's 2-3 seating. Also the MD-80 and A320 have quite a bit better performance when it comes to take off weights, speeds, etc. And the over 20 documented cases of uncommanded rudder movements and the recently found cracks in the front pressure bulk heads of relatively new 737s don't do anything to really improve my opinion about the aircraft.

User currently offlineShawn Miller From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 567 times:

The 737-200 is one of the most versatile aircraft out there. You can get it off of 3300 foot strips with pax. It is available as a combi aircraft, The two engines are right where you can get to them easily. There is a kit available to get them off of gravel runways.

I really don't think that it is fair to judge an aircraft based on the interior that the airline puts in the aircraft. Seating arrangements can be changed on a whim by the carrier to meet current market demands. There is going to be a lot of difference with the comfert level of a 737-200 that may have +130 tourist class seats. and Say for example Alaska airlines 737-200QC which fit a max of 111 passengers.

I should also point out that most of those entertainment systems can be bought in as aftermarket kits. I belive that there is an entertainment system option on the 700+ but please don't quote me on that.


User currently offlineBryan From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 567 times:

I personally like the 737 alot, I admit that it's a bit boring having to fly on one to almost any short haul destination nowadays, since they are so popular. I'd prefer the MD-80 if I had the choice, but you've got to give the 737 some credit for being a very safe aircraft in all conditions. I flew on an Australian Airlines 737-300 from Coolangatta to Sydney once, and there was some really turbulent weather, I thought we were going to crash. The wings were bending up and down so violently that I though they would snap off for sure, but we made it to Kingnsford smith without any problems.

Bryan


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3122 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 568 times:

You don't see differences between the -400 and the -500? If I were you, I would look with more attention to these two versions. The -400 is the largest in the 737 family and the -500 is the smaller (old generation ofcourse). I have flown on the 733, A319 and F100, and from a passanger view, the F100 was the better, very confortable.



Mirage, Faro, Portugal


User currently offlineMarkus From United States of America, joined May 1999, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 567 times:

I agree with Mirage, the F100 is easily one of the most comfortable and quiet planes I have ever flown on. US1091, you mentioned the 757 as a better (or you liked it better) than the 737. Have you ever flown on a 757? They are like cattle cars. 3+3 seating, just like the 737 only longer. While I agree with you that the 737 is not that exciting, I love to fly on them in the winter because they aren't quite as suceptable to icing problems, and depending on the airline quite nice for a short flight. I've probably flown on them 20-30 times and I must say that the 737-500 is a hell of an airplane. Gets off the ground quickly and is not a long tube with 130+ people all around you.

Cheers,
Markus


User currently offlineluv From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 567 times:

I guess that 90% of all my flights have been on 737s. The only problem I have had with the 737 was when I was six or seve years old. I was on an americawest 737-200 and was not aware that on landing the clamshell thrustreversers would do what they would do. At six it was kinda scary but ever since then, I have always tried to sit behind the wing when on a first generation 737.

User currently offlineUS1091 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 567 times:

Hello again. I am the one who started the issue about the 737, and I would like to respond to the different responses.
First to Shawn Miller: As I said before I DON'T CARE if it can take off on a short runway or can climb fast. It wouldn't matter to the general passenger aboard the plane. I said the 737 sucked from a passengers view, and therefore it is fair to judge whether it's wide and comfortable. Also, show me any 737 that has an entertainment system. Just about none do. They may have the option but no airlines take up the option.
Next to Mirage: As I also said before I don't see much difference between the -400 and -500 model. It may be a row or two longer, and maybe a little more advanced, but still what is the point. Skip from the -300 and go to the -700 or -800 model.
Next is to Byran: From what I have read and seen the 737 has had the most accidents then any other aircraft. Most crashed you read about involve a 737. True though, they have been around for a long time. But I didn't think they had a good record, though I might be wrong.
Last I would like to respond to Markus: I HAVE INFACT been on the 757 many times and it is much different from a passenger's view, like I have been saying all along. It can go much farther (even across the Atlantic!), comes with an entertainment system, and you don't feel like you are in a crowd because it is a narrow body plane.Obviously you don't know much about it.
Thanx for the comments and keep them coming. As I stated before most people seen to favor the 737 no matter what. Maybe it's because it was what they traveled on when they were younger, I don't know.


User currently offlineflyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 567 times:

I don't like it...

User currently offlineShawn Miller From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 567 times:

Remember that you put the post up so please don't jump down the throats of those of use who think the 737 is one of the best aircraft around. Just because you don't thinks so don't mean get snippy.

As a matter a fact I feet and still do that the 737 rides better that either the Airbus or the MD-80. It seems to me that the windows on the Boeing are a little larger and with the fuselage geometry it is easier to look down at the world passing by you rather than straight out of the aircraft. Was it just me but did anybody else flying an America West A-320 notice the steel bar that runs in the seat from the window to aisle right down the middle of the seat?


You question the saftey of an aircraft that has millions of hours of it. I would but forward that the much younger and smaller airbus. There is a general feeling out there that Touluse would just as soon design the flight crew out of the cockpit while our freinds in Renton and Everett design theirs to augment the pilots. There is a joke about Airbus flight crews. They are made up of one pilot/computer programmer and a dog. The pilots job is to feed the dog and the dog's job is to bite the pilot if he touches anything. Did you happen to see the footage of that out of control Turkis A-320 in Paris that kept climbing and diving over 1000 feet because the computer didn't/wouldn't release control of the aircraft to the pilot. Or what about that Air Inter aircraft that went into the side of the alps because of the ambiguous altitude setting on the autopilot controls. They blamed that oft used photo of the prototype going in the trees on pilot error but he claimed that the plane didn't respone to his inputs. This is the same accident investigation people who said that the Roselawn Ind ATR-72 crash was pilot error after the NTSB did the tanker tests that showed that the deicing boots caused ice dams on that aircraft. So I take their reports with a very big grain of salt.

I rather take the record of the 737 any day of the week.


User currently offlineL1011 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1649 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 568 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As for the range of the 737, a few years ago I flew on a USAir 737-300 from Pittsburgh to Seattle nonstop, and they had an entertainment system consisting of movies shown on TV moniters throughout the cabin, along with multiple music channels. Most of their 737s used on long flights have entertainment systems. I mean the 737-300s and 400s, not the 200s. I like the 737, even though it is not my favorite aircraft. In Australia, after flying on an Ansett A320 and a couple of BAe 146s, I felt safest when I finally had a 737.

Bob Bradley
Richmond, VA



Fly Eastern's Golden Falcon DC-7B
User currently offlineIainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 567 times:

US1091 what have you been smokin'? I don't want to say your opinion is wrong but I would like to view mine. About the 737 being easier to fly it is not by any means it will be just as hard to fly as the 747. If not harder as you have to do alot more take off and landing and there were the real skill of flying is. I think that you are confusing airline chose and the 737. If you have flown on a Virgin Express 737 hose are really confortable but if you fly continental 737 they are not as comfortable. About the TV's on board that is airline chose not plane. And the 737 is very succesful that is why they have sold 3000 of them so it can not be that bad. And thhey are alot cheaper then the 757 about $22,000,000 and they would lose so much money fly the extra 100 seats that might be empty. The difference between the 400 and 500 models can be things like range or engines or maybe capacity. I like the 737 so that is why want to put what I think down but if you don't like it go anf fly a 757 or ask Santa for a BJ that means Business jet.
Iain


User currently offlineV jet From Australia, joined May 1999, 719 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 567 times:

US1091
Try flying on a QANTAS 737 300 or 737 400. Every one of them has a video
system and multi channel entertainment system. The 733 seats a max of 116 pax and the 734 seats 139. Very comfortable flying even in economy class.


User currently offlineMD-11 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 567 times:

Shawn, fact remains that the 737 has received more air worthiness directives then any other airliner. That isn't something that can be defended with the big number of 737s that have been built, etc. And you can't seriously blame that Air Inter accident on the A320; the pilot pushed the wrong button, pure and simple.


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 567 times:

The reason that the 737 has more airworthiness reports directives is the fact that it is older than most other airliners. They began delivering 737s in the 60s. Many of these hardworking aircraft are still around. As for the 737 itself, I have flown on many of them and not had a problem with seating. I have flown on 737s owned by United, Continental and America West. Mostly 737-300s to 500s, but once a 200. They were all great aircraft. I would take a B737 over an A320 anyday. 737-300 was launched in March 1981. It holds 128 passengers in two classes. 737-400 was launched in 1983. It holds 146 in two classes. 737-500 was launched in 1987. It holds 108. Over 1600 of these types have been delivered by 1995. Production is winding down in favor of the 737NGs which will also be great. As for the entertainment system, most 737 flights aren't long enough for the airline to actually turn them on.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineMD-11 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 567 times:

I was referring to the 737-300/400/500, which are not old at all, when I was saying they have had more air worthiness directives then any other airline. I should have been more specific... But anyway, there are planes older then the 737-300/400/500 which have had less air worthiness directives addressed to them...

User currently offlineShawn Miller From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 567 times:

One thing about the middle generation of 737's. they shared a lot of common componts and design with the older aircraft so when an AD comes out it based of some componet on a 200 that was built 25+ years ago they apply to the middle generation also. That is one of the big reasons that the fuel tank inspectons that recently came out applied to both aircraft. The wing and systems changes on the new aircraft will hopefully kept that from happening in the future.

User currently offlineCool Cat IIIc From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 567 times:

Yawn...this is getting so old. One point I would like to make with reference to Shawn Miller's post is that indeed Airbus' phylosophy was at the outset too much computer orientated but they have since admitted that perhaps they were a bit to heavy on the computer side and have implemented changes in the cockpit systems. If all goes bizerk there is this little red button on the side stick which gives the pilot direct control, so it can be flown just like any old plane.

One reason Airbus had to review their philosophy a bit was that many pilots had a lot of trouble transitioning to the new technology and indeed many pilots had finger trouble as well. Remember, this was back in 1987 and computers were not nearly as widely spread as nowadays, hence many pilots hadn't worked with them. And it certainly helps to be computer literate if you transition onto the Airbus.

The crash at the airshow where the plane flew into the trees was not the plane's fault but in fact the pilot's fault, although there were mitigating circumstances. Essentially the pilot thought the plane would add power by itself if he just pulled back on the stick, which it does, except when it's below 100 ft radio altitude (for landing purposes, you don't want it to add power in the flare). So, he didn't know the full extend of the automatics and that is where the danger lies in these modern planes (same applies to modern Boeings by the way). One could of course also wonder what the heck this pilot was doing below 100 ft radio altitude in a fly by, but let that pass for now.

Automatics and finger trouble were also the cause of the crash into the Alps. They dialed the wrong thing into the autopilot panel, which could be forgiven. What can not be forgiven is that there were many other primary and secondary clues that they had dialed in the wrong setting, which they did not pick up.

Then there was the Indian Airlines crash which (pardon me) was just plane stupidity by the pilots.

As for my opinion about the 737, I think it's a very useful and versitile aircraft but it probably doesn't have quite the same passenger appeal on acount of it's narrower cabin.

One little joke then, in reference to the above crashes:

Q:Why do they call the A-320 John Wayne ?
A: It cut's down trees, climbs mountains and kills Indians.

Enough said for one day



User currently offline767-300ER From United States of America, joined May 1999, 130 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 569 times:

I have flown the 737 many times. on continetal from houston to ft. myers on the 737-500 series. it had entertainment systems in every seat. the seats were cofortable the service was good. the plane was stable and had an excellent landing. our pilot was a woman. (that is a first for me) i have also flown southwest and united airlines 737 the 737 is an excellent airplane. i have no complaints. some of you say the 737 has the most accidents and incidents. well htere are thousands out there and have been around for 20+ years. the a320 has not been around nearly as long and look at their not so perfect safety records. i personally like the 737 and all boeing narrow bodies. but the 737 is one plane no body can ever compete with. i am very happy that continental, american,and delta are all ordering the 737ng.



User currently offlineShawn Miller From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 571 times:

Yeah it is getting old.

I do remember that on the AirInter that the ambigous display on the Glaresheild control aircraft where listed as a contributing factor. I havn't flown the real aircraft but we do have a ground trainer for the FMGS That I show people how to use and I have no problem seeing where that might be a concern. I'm not sure how much help using a computer today would be for a pilot. We have gotten so much into graphics displays with macs and IBMs that we forget that the FMGS system is pure text based, I belive that it uses the same TI chip that the Commodre 64 used for it's CPU. If you don't make a mistake it just barks at you and dosn't tell you or help you figure out what went wrong(This is true for all FMGS systems not just the Airbus)

One final note: We had a speaker for Transport Canada come down an do a presentation about a year ago and he told this story about a A-320 dirver that was retireing. Any this pilot had a story about being in an Airbus when the FMGS when down. The first officer suddenly went into "Emergency mode" worrying about how they where going to control this aircraft. Finally the captain said,"turn it off" grab the stick and fly it just like you do a normal aircraft. And you know what there wasn't a big story about an airliner becomming a permanent part of the British Colombia Scenery.


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 567 times:

The 737 has proven itself time and time again in tight situations that none of us hear about because nothing happens. If you look at the worlds narrow bodied fleet, you will see 737s. Look at all the 737NGs that have been ordered. Over 1000 airframes. That is what I call a great aircraft.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineBryanG From United States of America, joined May 1999, 429 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 567 times:

Everyone says that the Airbus is much more comfortable because it has such a wide cabin. The 737's cabin is 12"4', and the Airbus is 12"7'. That's just seven little inches, or just about the length of your hand. Spread over six seats and the aisle, I wouldn't call that a significant boost in comfort. I couldn't tell the difference between the two.

User currently offlineJR737 From Portugal, joined May 1999, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 567 times:

I'm pilot on B737-200 and 300. It is a wonderful plane, today I flew from Lisbon to Brussels and back to Lis, the wx in Bru was with gusts of 25 kts and variable in the direction, "my" 737 performed very well, as usualy, with a cross wind felt in the touch down. I can't say if it's better than Airbus in such a situation, what I confirm is that 737 performes very well in a situation like that! By any reason it has been used in Funchal (Madeira Isl.).

User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 566 times:

Thank you Bryan for finally explaining that to those who always say the A320 is better or more comfortable because it is wider.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineFlyer From Canada, joined May 1999, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (15 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 566 times:

I would like to thank MD-11, who has agreed with me this issue (about the only one of you people who does!)

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
My Humble Opinion On What A350 Should Be posted Fri Nov 26 2004 21:33:16 by TP313
MAS 737-400's: Whats The Story? posted Tue Jan 6 2004 07:14:42 by Indianguy
My Humble Opinion - US Major Airline Liveries posted Sun Dec 28 2003 22:18:16 by Flybynight
My 737 Simulator posted Thu Jul 12 2001 05:32:52 by Legalman
Evidence (my Opinion) That CO Is Leaving SkyTeam? posted Thu Jun 12 2008 19:14:43 by AA737-823
After The 747-8..A380..737-900..787, Whats Next? posted Sun Aug 12 2007 02:53:02 by Simps747
Tomorrow My Last Trip On 737 Starts... posted Mon Apr 16 2007 21:38:31 by WILCO737
Boeing 737. Whats The Wire For? posted Sun Feb 4 2007 06:46:15 by Qslinger
Whats Just Shook My House At MAN? posted Sun Jul 9 2006 11:17:59 by FlyingColours
Southwest 737 Over My House In PHX posted Mon Jun 26 2006 04:56:11 by BristolFlyer