Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
| Quoting 14ccKemiskt (Reply 48): A 60s aircraft for the 2010s? Not sure if it is going to survive very long. But for now, it will do. |
| Quoting AS512 (Reply 51): Wouldn't the mains need to sit higher to account for the larger engines? |
| Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 54): Of course, forgot to mention the 787 like tail cone that's been added. It's actually an extension of sorts, no? |
| Quoting liftsifter (Reply 39): Did they at least raise the window line so that, you know, you can actually look out the window... One of my biggest pet peeves with the 737, besides the narrow and short cabin. |
| Quoting barney captain (Reply 47): The -700NG has a 1% nose down stance, the MAX will sit at 0%. I don't believe the overall height will change. |
| Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 60): It seems Boeing also doesn't see the difference of the MAX to the current family as that big, as they continue the line numbering system with l/n 5602, while when they started the NG they restarted with l/n 1, the classics had a separate run of l/n 1 to 3132. I actually expected them to restart with l/n 1 again separately from the NG's. |
| Quoting OKCFlyer (Reply 64): Why is there is a window plug 4 slots forward of the wing? |
 Photo © Maurits Vink |  Photo © Alevik |
| Quoting queb (Reply 66): Quoting OKCFlyer (Reply 64): Why is there is a window plug 4 slots forward of the wing? I don't know why, but this window is always plugged |
| Quoting OKCFlyer (Reply 64): Why is there is a window plug 4 slots forward of the wing? |
| Quoting queb (Reply 66): I don't know why, but this window is always plugged |
| Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 22): The NGs had more of a nose-down attitude to the Classics, and looked the better for it. |
| Quoting JHwk (Reply 72): The renderings of first class look nice. I wonder if they found a cleaner looking solutions for the rafts for etops birds; the Sky interior makes it look like an awful afterthought on UA's Hawaii 737s. |
