Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Not Many B737-600s  
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1990 times:

Why not too many B737-600s are produced compared to the 700/800/900s.
regds
HAWK


Think of the brighter side!
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1981 times:

Hello HAWK21M:

The main reason is that the -600 is much heavier than other airplanes in it's class. The empty weight of the -600 is approx 81000lbs. While the empty weight of the 717 is 68500lbs, EMB-190 59500, EMB-195 61500 and the CRJ-900 weighs in at 47000lbs. As you can see that's a lot of extra weight for an airliner to be carrying around. This also explains why there have not been many orders for the A318, it tops the scales at 86000.

Some people might say "what about commonality". Commonality is nice but you are still carrying around an extra 10000-30000lbs. That adds up into higher fuel costs over the life of an airplane. Jet Blue decided to go with Embrarer instead of ordering the A318. Why, because the A318 was just to heavy.


User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1914 times:

I concur with LMP737, Who would want to be lugging all of that unneeded weight around.

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1913 times:

Same concept applies to the 747SP.

It's also why several shrunken concepts (e.g., 777-100X, A330-500, etc) never got off the ground.


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4490 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1872 times:

Same concept applies to the 747SP.

I don't think that's quite correct. The 747SP is not in the same boat as the 737-600 or A318.

The 747 Special Performance really did have special performance: vastly increased range over early 747's using basically the same technology. There was never a huge demand for the type, and it filled its niche quite nicely.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1839 times:

This topic did raise a question for me. I was sure there are more 736s around than 739s. Sure enough the Boeing website says 72 736s versus 52 739s. So I suppose both of these subtypes will play 'second-fiddle' to the 73G/738 models. Regards.


"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineAirT85 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1830 times:

Doesn't the 739's lack of sales have something to do with its door/capacity configuration? Due to the need for another exit it seats not much more than an -800 does and therefore hasn't tapped into the charter carriers and such like other 737NG models have? Anyone else have more thorough info on that?

Tony


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 1790 times:

If the B736s are not profitable under the circumstances why produce them.
Whats the rate of production of B736s vs B739s.
regds
HAWK



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1749 times:

HAWK21M:

My guess is so that Boeing can offer a family of aircraft covering a wide range of needs. I have a feeling that if Boeing were to cease production on the -600 they might lose some orders. Or at the very least Airbus PR department would have a field day.


User currently offlineN243NW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1632 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 1713 times:

Doesn't the 739's lack of sales have something to do with its door/capacity configuration? Due to the need for another exit it seats not much more than an -800 does and therefore hasn't tapped into the charter carriers and such like other 737NG models have? Anyone else have more thorough info on that?

True, but not the whole truth. (Stats from http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737family/technical.html:

Model-----------#pax in standard 2-class config---------#pax in standard 1-class config
737-800------------------------------162---------------------------------------------------189
737-900------------------------------177---------------------------------------------------189

The maximum seating capacity of the 739 is the same as the maximum seating capacity of the 738 (they both seat 189 in one class with minimum seat pitch), due to the number of emergency exits required.

However, suppose ABC Airlines decides to buy both the 738 and 739 and equip them both in the standard two-class configuration. In this case, because the emergency exits can still evacuate 189 people safely, the 739 will seat more pax than the 738.

Why, however, would ABC Airlines (or any airline for that matter) choose the 739 in addition to/instead of the 738? Not only can the -900 seat more in a standard two-class configuration, it also has more space underneath for cargo/baggage. Sorry if any/all of this is confusing to anyone; I did my best to word it as well as I could.

About the production numbers, Boeing would never cancel the 736 or 739 production lines as long as the other 73Gs are being made, because all the same Next-Generation models are assembled at the same production facility, in the same basic way, the only significant difference being the length of the fuselage. As long as they are taking orders (and even if they are not), it seems silly to end production of the 736s or the 739s as it would not lose any money for Boeing. And who knows - with the seemingly imminent 757 production end, the 739 may have more demand.

Hope all this information helps! Feel free to correct or reword anything I've said. Cheers!

-N243NW Big grin



B-52s don't take off. They scare the ground away.
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 10, posted (10 years 11 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 1692 times:

What is the empty weight of the 737-500, is it not the smallest in the fleet, or was it replaced?


The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlinePositive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (10 years 11 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1664 times:

The 737-500/-600 are the oddballs in Boeings 737 fleet. Hardly anyone operates them and you never see them. And how does the 737-500 compare in size to the 737-300 and the 737-700??? I think the -700 is slightly longer than the -300, but where does the -500 fit in??

User currently offlineJustplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 722 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (10 years 11 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1582 times:

The 737-500 and 737-600 are both virtually the same size (fuselage-wise) as the 737-200, and are therefore designed to carry about the same passenger load. The 737-300 and 737-700 are nearly the same fuselage length.


"So many planes; so little time..."
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6451 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (10 years 11 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1507 times:

It is correct that "max seating" is 189 on both the 738 and 739 - limited by exits.

But those values really have no meaning.

Have you ever flown on a 738 with 189 seats? I haven't, but I have flown on a charter configured 738 with 184 seats - for a 45 minutes jump. And every minute was plain horror. I am 6'2", that's maybe one or two inches more than avarage, but nothing unusual.

189 pax on a 739 is also way above any reasonable treatment of customers. But it can of course take a few more seat rows than the 738 with equal seat pitch.




Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Not Many B737-600s
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why B737-530 And Not Just B737-500?! posted Mon May 14 2001 01:01:52 by Windshear
How Many Auxilary Fuel Tanks A B737-400 Has posted Sun Jun 17 2001 15:04:43 by B737
B737 Tear Straps posted Thu Nov 9 2006 13:51:34 by HAWK21M
Flare Or Not To Flare? posted Mon Oct 30 2006 09:58:37 by GlobalVillage
Weight Of B737 Emergency Exit... posted Tue Sep 26 2006 01:33:44 by Kaddyuk
Seeing Oncoming Clouds - Not On Weather Radar posted Mon Sep 25 2006 21:40:28 by JulianUK
B737 NG Overwing Exit Lock posted Sun Sep 17 2006 00:44:25 by MarkHKG
B737 QC Ops - Is This Right. posted Sun Aug 20 2006 09:44:23 by HAWK21M
Free B737-3/400+NG Operator Mini Conference posted Tue Aug 8 2006 11:58:54 by Keesje
Why 737 Are Not Consider A STOL. posted Mon Jul 24 2006 18:42:06 by 747400sp

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format