Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Look, It's A 737-900 At Cle!  
User currently offlineKcle From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 686 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 9 months ago) and read 1500 times:

If I was to upload this pic to this website, it would be instantly rejected, even though it is the first pic of a 737-900 at CLE.

It's nice to see something so big that fills the void the 757's left when they were pulled out, and the 737-900 will hopefully keep all of us CLE spotters intrigued until the CLE-LGW flight is re-instated.

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1444 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yeah I know how that is. They don't care what the picture is about they want it to look good and what did you take that with? If you get a picture of a Co 757-300 let me know I have some ATA 757-300 pictures too.


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineKcle From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 686 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1423 times:

The sad thing is that is about the highest quality I can get out of my scanner, too.

User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1410 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

what's the DPI number? How many? You might need some photo editing software to fix that too.


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineKcle From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 686 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1386 times:

I blew the pic up to 400 % of the original size, and reduce it down to 1024 x whatever, and I'll see what it looks like. I use Ulead PhotoImpact 6 to edit my photos, but I can't sharpen the pic, because my chinsy scanner turns the dark areas into colors. If I sharpen, the black parts become very bright and colorful. You can even see that in the pic above, look fwd. of the engine, and the shadowed area is all nasty purple and red. I'm not even going to bother posting the new one, because it looks worse. All over the new one there are colored areas that are supposed to be dark, so I just deleted it. I do not have a choice of dpi, but I know it's got to be low. My scanner is an HP 2100C ScanJet.

User currently offline777gk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1641 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1369 times:

Hate to spoil the fun, but that ain't no 737-900!

Can't quite make out the full reg, but I do see a "2" rather clearly in there, which would make the aircraft ship 2**, and all aircraft with the last three digits of the reg starting with 2 in our fleet are 737-800s. If I'm not mistaken, the 737-900s are all in the 400s. Perhaps somebody in the company more familiar with that can bail me out.

Here's a picture of a real -924 just for verification:


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Mark Abbott



User currently offline777gk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1641 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1353 times:

Gave it a closer look, and concluded the aircraft is N17233. If it is, then the aircraft is in fact a 737-824, delivered in July 1999, as evidenced by Bill Harms' excellent site:

MSN: 28943 LINE NO. 328 A/C TYPE B737-824 ENG. TYPE CFM56-7B26

DEL. DATE 07/23/99 LAST KNOWN OPERATOR (OWNER) CONTINENTAL AIRLINES (FSBU)

REG. NO. N17233 F/N 233 PREV. REG. N1787B


And, for further confirmation, here is a picture of the aircraft in question.


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Norman Walesch




User currently offlineChrisair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 2116 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1350 times:

It's a -800. Too short for a -900, and none of them have N172xx in the reg. Looks like the registration is N17233.

The -900 fleet numbers are 401-409 (410, 411, 412 haven't been delivered yet)

Sorry to ruin the excitement KCLE...


User currently offlineKcle From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 686 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

D'oh. Well, then I saw a whole lot of 737-800's that day, about 5 or 6.

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...
Boeing's 737-900 At YYT posted Sat Mar 10 2001 19:25:00 by AC_B777
KAL 'Dreamliner' 737-900 Back At BFI posted Tue Jul 27 2004 06:26:04 by LN-MOW
737-900 N737X At LAS posted Wed Apr 17 2002 22:56:08 by Cbqfan
Unidentified 737 At CLE posted Wed Feb 13 2002 02:16:54 by N766UA
Would It Make Sense For WN To Move To A At Cle? posted Sat Feb 9 2002 21:53:41 by N766UA
737-900...It Looks Like A Totally Different Plane! posted Wed Aug 29 2001 05:02:25 by Boeing757fan
Transaero 737 Detainedt At Heathrow posted Thu Nov 30 2006 13:41:44 by AceFreighter
Why No Winglets For 737-900? posted Thu Nov 30 2006 05:55:25 by UncGSO
Possible Explosive Device At CLE posted Tue Nov 14 2006 13:52:03 by MCIGuy
XtraAirways 737-400 At ORD posted Thu Nov 9 2006 00:56:43 by Scaledesigns