Yes!! New 717

alphaspeed

New Member
Sorry man, but the only way to make the 717 compete with the 737 is to stretch it out. They've been there, done that. The 717 is a very good short haul aircraft for around 100 pax. If you want to stretch it to 737-600 capacity, you'd just end up with another MD88/90. The DC9 wing just doesn't have the ability to efficiently carry the weight. I wish it did, my company is committed to the MD80 series. AirBii, and Fluffs are kicking our behind.

alphaspeed
 

Timbuff10

Well-Known Member
I was kinda like you until I flew on Frontier's A-319. Nothing Boeing currently has is gonna kill the A-320 series. I just took a ride on a 737 to LAS this morning and then a A319 back tonight and the difference is amazing! The 737 is a very good but old design, it is time for something new from Boeing in that market.

Take a ride on Frontier or Jetblue and you will see the difference.

Besides who wants to sit in the back of a new version of the DC9 and have the engine 10 inches from your head? Hopefully Boeing is working on a new design like they are witht he 7E7. I would like to see Boeing succed but I just dont think a private company such as Boeing can compete with Airbus, if you think about it, its almost unfair.
 

zmiller

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
I was kinda like you until I flew on Frontier's A-319. Nothing Boeing currently has is gonna kill the A-320 series. I just took a ride on a 737 to LAS this morning and then a A319 back tonight and the difference is amazing! The 737 is a very good but old design, it is time for something new from Boeing in that market.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just out of curiosity, what can you tell about an airplane by just riding in one? When I fly commercially, I notice three things: footroom, service, and noise. Of those, only noise is related to the plane and not the airline, and even that is largely based on where I'm sitting and whether or not I have a pounding headache. Should I assume the MD80 is vastly superior to the 320 because American loads footroom into their MD's, while my only A320 experience was a 6hr, cramped, turbulent, and very hungover flight from Hartford to Phoenix on America West last year? The real differences in how "good" airplanes are are known only to those that fly and operate them.

I suspect that nothing Boeing produces will "kill" anything Airbus makes, and that market shares of each will likely have as much to do with political wrangling as airplane quality. I'm just making an uninformed guess, though.

Sorry to rant, but your post reminded me of the only time I ever looked at Airliners.net's message board: There were a bunch of nonpilots bitching about which plane was better based on comfort and how much they enjoyed their flying experience--"Oh, I had a lovely trip from FOS to DAI in a brand new A-ten million--what an excellent aircraft! I had so much legroom, and the stewardesses were so attractive!"

-Zach
 

Timbuff10

Well-Known Member
Well, just by riding in one I can tell that an A319 rotates in a far shorter distance than all of our 737-300s. I also notice that the cabin width is greater on the 319 than the 737 which means your shoulders tend to touch the person's next to you on a Boeing. Leg room was actually about the same but that is only determined by how the airline wanted the seats installed, not how well the airplane is made. Noise I would say is about the same on the 737 and 319 so that's not a factor. As far as noise I was comparing the 319 to the 717 which has the engine right next to your head if you are sitting in the back.

As far as working on them, the design of the Airbus beats the 737 design hands down. On the airbus the cargo doors open outward, on the 737 they open inward. Guess what happens if the bags shift in flight and fall in front of the door. You aint getting that door open, wheras on a Airbus you hit the switch and it opens outward automatically instead of manually like on the 737. The Airbus can carry alot more cargo because it is simply a bigger airplane.

In short, no I have not flown either plane but i have been in every nook and cranny of them, rode in the jumpseat while taxiing in them, and work on them nearly every day. The pilots I have talked to that switched from the 737 to the 319 are all amazed by how much easier they are to fly. The 319 does more than a 733 more efficiently and they cost substantially less. I believe boeing tried to sell Frontier 737-700s for well over $50 mil when Airbus offered more for far less.

next time you have a chance to book Frontier or Jetblue, try it out, at the very least you will be able to watch live TV, which for me is a huge plus if im not in a window seat.

Tim
 

TrinidadGT20

Vice President of Awesome
Hmm.. time for some clarification. Let's not, however, turn this into an A v. B flame war.

The 737-600 can carry from 110 to 132 pax. It's entirely fair to say it's selling horribly. I think a stretched 717 (717-300) with about 120-130 pax would sell much better than the 737-600. I've read there are several airlines (Midwest, AirTran) that have offered to be the launch customer for the -300. Instead Boeing is sticking to their guns on the 737-600 and I think it's hurting sales. The 717-300 would probably be priced better against the Airbus A319 too than a 737-600. The MD80 series planes were extremely popular among the airlines and I think a modern 717-300 would do very well.

I've read on Boeing's website (and others) that the 717 is much more fuel efficient than the A318 and it is easier/cheaper to maintain. These facts do not go unnoticed by airlines. A stretched 717 I feel would do well against the A319 (124 pax on average) and would probably be more fuel efficient and easier to maintain as well. I'm certainly no expert in aircraft engineering so if the wing on the current 717 can't handle a -300 series I believe you. Having the engines in the back is an advantage, IMHO. It's quieter overall.

The advantage Airbus has of course, is their family of planes that can carry 100 - 220 pax with a common type rating. Boeing currently has 110 - 190 in the 737NG, according to their website.

As far as the A320 (family) v. the 737NG family I do believe the Airbus is a superior airplane in many ways. As a Boeing shareholder, this is very concerning to me. You're right, the A320 family is a wider aircraft but only by a couple of inches. Those couple of inches do make a difference. I've flown many times (at least 20 times in the last calendar year) on USAir's Airbus' and a handful of times on Delta's 737-800. I like the Airbus better. I've flew a few times on a TWA 717 and liked it a lot--it was very comfortable and quiet.

I really hope Boeing scraps the 737 by 2008 and has a new, unadvertised (secret) 737 replacement in the works, in addition to the 7E7. And, although I know is almost 100% certain to never happen, I secretly wish Lockheed would get back into the commercial market with a killer plane that would shame Airbus! I know, I know...that's crazy talk.
 

Timbuff10

Well-Known Member
I work with 737s and 319s and like the Airbus better. It's bigger and i like bigger airplanes. The 319 is about the same height as a 757.

Ive flown on an AA MD80 a few times and all i remember was looking out the window and seeing an engine in my face. I know a pilot that used to fly 80s for CO and all he ever says about them is that that thing was the most dangerous plane he has ever flown. I cant imagine the 717 would be that much different?

If Boeing doesnt do something like come up with a new airplane to replace the 737 then they are going to get blown out of the water.
 

zmiller

New Member
Tim,

My only point is that (no offense intended) you aren't really in a position to say which airplane is *truly* better. You can say which one you find more comfortable, which (with the exception of width) is in no way a function of airplane design, you can say which you enjoyed flying on more, and you can say which one is easier to load bags into, but that has very little bearing on which is a better airplane overall.

[ QUOTE ]
Ive flown on an AA MD80 a few times and all i remember was looking out the window and seeing an engine in my face.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because you were in the last seat in the plane, not because the plane sucks.

[ QUOTE ]
It's bigger and i like bigger airplanes. The 319 is about the same height as a 757.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good. You like bigger airplanes. Again, no implications at all for which is a better airplane.

[ QUOTE ]
I know a pilot that used to fly 80s for CO and all he ever says about them is that that thing was the most dangerous plane he has ever flown.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I've heard of older pilots who are scared out of their minds by Airbuses. I'd bet it's a personal preference thing. Doug, is the MD80 the most dangerous plane you've ever flown?

[ QUOTE ]
Well, just by riding in one I can tell that an A319 rotates in a far shorter distance than all of our 737-300s.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you're a passenger, you take winds, density altitude, and loading into account? The data I found had very comparable takeoff rolls for the a320 and 737-300 (and shorter for the 319 and later 737). The differences were pretty minimal.

[ QUOTE ]
If Boeing doesnt do something like come up with a new airplane to replace the 737 then they are going to get blown out of the water.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no clue which is a better airplane. The a320 seems to work for Frontier and Jetblue, but 737 sure isn't driving Southwest out of business. The bottom line is that I, with 160hrs in light singles, have no idea of the specific operating characteristics, so I'm not going to predict one company or the other getting blown out of the water. Again, I think the relative market shares of the two are more likely to be decided by politics, not airplane quality.

-Zach
 

Jason

Well-Known Member
But it doesn't matter which one is technically better according to pilot and/or engineering standards!! What does matter are things that Timbuff stated - things like a couple more inches of shoulder and head room, looking out the window and not seeing the engine nacelle 3 inches from your face, seeing a computerized modern cockpit. Pilot's opinions don't matter - the opinions of passengers however do matter and right or wrong those things are what they base their opinions on as to wether they think an Airbus or a Boeing is a better airplane.


Jason
 

Jason

Well-Known Member
Oh - and comparing a 20 year old MD80 to a new Airbus? Come on get real - I'm not saying that that MD 80's are dangerous or life threatening but I don't think anyone can argue that given a competent crew the there are alot of advanced avioncs on the 'bus that promote better situational awareness and safety that the MD 80's don't have.

If you want to get into safety issues compare an A320 and the new generation of 737's

Jason
 

zmiller

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
the opinions of passengers however do matter

[/ QUOTE ]

That's interesting. Do you really think that most passengers really even know what type of plane they're on? Or are able to tell the difference between this and this? I mean, Southwest is doing better than anyone else in the industry and they're arguably one of the least plush airlines out there. I'm NOT arguing that pilot's opinions matter...I'm saying that bottom line does. What ever is cheapest to obtain and run that won't scare the passengers off...am I wrong?

-Zach
 

Pilot Hopeful

Well-Known Member
Yikes!

Sounds like we need to get back to our true reasons for flying. I don't know about you guys, but I'd be thankful to fly any of the aforementioned planes. After all, flying is flying, and there's something special about flying in any plane that never saps the joy of the experience.

Cessna...Piper...Airbus...Boeing...

Pilot: Want to come along for the flight? (Would anybody here reject the offer if the pilot happened to be flying a(n) ___________ ?)
Me: Sure! Thanks for the opportunity to share the wonder of flight.
 

Parabellum

New Member
I'm gonna have to agree with Zach on this one. Most passengers don't even know and could care less what type of jet they're on. Its pretty hard to tell the differences between 737s and A320s unless you're actively looking for them.

More than anything, I believe politics is playing the biggest role in determining who sells more airplanes. I don't think its a coincidence that most new orders from the Middle East are going to Airbus, nor do I believe that they're even taking aircraft quality into consideration.
 

alphaspeed

New Member
wow, this has gone further than I would have expected. I hate to rain on anyones parade, but the 717 has been stretched. MD called it an MD87. The 717 is apparently a great airplane for what it was designed to do, be a short haul carrier of around 100 seats. If you attempt to put more seats in the tube, the tube gets too long. Simple. The length creates w&b problems, efficiency suffers as you start to have to carry ballast fuel to stay within cg. You get additional tailstrike problems on rotation and flare, The narrow tube takes longer to load and unload for some reason. I'm not sure why. The only advantage that I can see with increased length is that you get more overhead bins.

The DC9 series are good airplanes, Each dash number has served its owners well, but the overall design is just too dated. If McBoing wanted to, they could revamp the MD87, but even with Rolls engines, it still wouldn't offer anything over the 737-700.

I hope that McBoing will continue to produce and promote the 717 because it does give them an A318 fighter that is already developed. I doubt that they want to do the work to shorten up a 737NG just to make it a onehundred seater.

alphaspeed.
 

Timbuff10

Well-Known Member
Zach,

You are correct when you say that I am not in a position to say which one is the better airplane and everyone has to think that also. I really dont care to be honest because the difference cant be that much, but what I am in a position to say is which one is a better deal and the Airbus is a better buy at this point. I mean lets face it, they do the same things, fly the same pretty much with subtle differences. The 737 is the best selling airliner ever and has been around for a very long time but Boeing is not able to beat the price that Airbus can put on their planes. The only real reason why Frontier is changing from an all Boeing fleet to all airbus is that the planes cost less. Other reasons were 319s are more fuel efficient, and mx was way cheaper on them. Frontier is getting A319s from airbus $10-12 million cheaper than what Boeing wanted for an airplane that did basically the same thing. Plus Airbus gives the first part that needs to be replaced to Frontier for free.

If you still want to know which is the better airplane, I can tell you what some 319 pilots have told me that just switched from 733s. The exact words from the guy that showed me the cockpit a few weeks ago was "you are gonna love this thing, its freakin cool man". He also referred to the 737 fleet as "the clunkers".
 

zmiller

New Member
Tim,
Thanks for clarifying. You obviously have greater insight into aircraft choice than most people. My only point was that when you said...

[ QUOTE ]
I just took a ride on a 737 to LAS this morning and then a A319 back tonight and the difference is amazing!

[/ QUOTE ]

...it sounded like you were basing your judgements on your experience as a passenger, not an airline employee. You've got the inside scoop to some degree--flaunt it!

-Zach
 

mpenguin1

Well-Known Member
717 was made for the short haul market, hence the smaller wing, the 717 also weighs less than the 737's. Stretching the 717 would require a trip back to the wind tunnell, bigger wing, improved engines, etc.

Airtran loves the 717, and they had the chance to go to an all 737 fleet but chose the 717. Speaking of a bigger 717, hmmm? Sounds like a MD90, wonder who flies that bird?

Now if they stretch the 737 one more time, it is going to start looking like a 757, what an amazing aircraft that 737, truly amazing.
 
All different aircraft.

The 717 is essentially a stretched RJ. It's incredibly efficient (moreso than the A320 family) and reliable (again, moreso than any Airbus).

The 737 is only the best selling and most popular commercial airliner of all time. That isn't an accident or fluke. Boeing must have done something right.

The Airbus family is simply a computer with wings attached. Silly me, I thought pilots liked to fly and not program computers. Plus, anyone who saw the footage of the Airbus flying into the trees at the Paris airshow a few years back will think twice before boarding a plane that likes to overrule the judgement of the pilots on board.

Also, to argue price savings is using a little fuzzy math (thanks, W). The Airbus is subsidized by the French government and is not a real company. If D.C. had any balls, they'd slap a tariff on that flying computer equal to the amount of the French subsidy. Suddenly, that price difference goes right out the window.

Hmmm.... Buy Boeing and help the American company (and shareholders like me) or buy an Airbus and subsidize socialism. Let me think...
 

pljenkins

Resident Knucklehead
Whoa, Industry.. Take it easy there, pal...

[ QUOTE ]
The 717 is essentially a stretched RJ. It's incredibly efficient (moreso than the A320 family) and reliable (again, moreso than any Airbus).


[/ QUOTE ]

First off, the 717 isn't a big CRJ, it's a smaller MD-90.

The dispatch reliability of the A320 series and the 737 series are about even.

[ QUOTE ]
The 737 is only the best selling and most popular commercial airliner of all time. That isn't an accident or fluke. Boeing must have done something right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember too that, yes the 737 series is the best selling airplane of all time, but it's also a design that dates back to the '60s. The first A320 didn't fly until some time in the '80's. Boeing has a 15 year head start on Airbus.

[ QUOTE ]
The Airbus family is simply a computer with wings attached. Silly me, I thought pilots liked to fly and not program computers. Plus, anyone who saw the footage of the Airbus flying into the trees at the Paris airshow a few years back will think twice before boarding a plane that likes to overrule the judgement of the pilots on board.


[/ QUOTE ]

The modern 737 is as much a flying computer as the A320. Explain the 777! You should have the whole story on the Paris Airshow accident before you start blaming the airplane entirely. That accident was as much the pilot's fault as it was the airplanes. The initial problems with the aircraft's design have been addressed, including alot of "requests" that pilots made to the manufacturer (like for instance, allowing the pilot to control throttles directly rather then "by wire").

[ QUOTE ]
Also, to argue price savings is using a little fuzzy math (thanks, W). The Airbus is subsidized by the French government and is not a real company. If D.C. had any balls, they'd slap a tariff on that flying computer equal to the amount of the French subsidy. Suddenly, that price difference goes right out the window.


[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps. But using that argument, how do you think Boeing would be doing if foreign carriers stopped buying Boeing airplanes? Airbus is as much a company as is the US Postal Service or AmTrak is.

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm.... Buy Boeing and help the American company (and shareholders like me) or buy an Airbus and subsidize socialism. Let me think...

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL... Hey, I don't like the French any more then they like us, but I don't think that qualifies them as Commies.
Let's leave the McCarthyism in the past, shall we?

Paul

Oh, forgot to mention too... A sizable portion of the A380 project will be manufactured right in the good ole US of A.
 
Top