Re: 737-900 (was Re: Aer Lingus signs for A321s)

Date:         28 Aug 97 15:40:36 
From:         kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6
Followups:    1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>> >The -900 was approved by Boeing directors in June ...
>>
>> By "approved" I assume you mean that the board authorized the Boeing
>> sales force to present the proposal to customers, though I can find
>> nothing to support even that.
>
>Karl, the lines I put in the above thread are mainly extracted from a
>Seattle Times article published last Sunday.

Ah, I found it.  For those who don't want to search, the URL is
http://www.seattletimes.com/sbin/iarecord?NS-search-set=/3405f/aaaa006bE05f30b&NS-doc-offset=0&

>- Either it is another times : $%#% news media!
>- or the Seattle Times is (once more) better informed than all of us.

They do make it relatively clear that it hasn't been launched yet.
Three paragraphs after the mention of board approval, they cite a
Boeing VP who said the 737-900 could be launched before the end of
the year if the sales effort goes well.  I think it just read wrong
without that added context from the article.

I'm mildly surprised at their claim that the 737-900 will allow 18
more seats (three rows) over the 737-800.  What I had heard before
was that the -900 wouldn't offer more capacity then the -800, but
would allow a more generous pitch when configured to the maximum
number of seats.  I couldn't imagine enough demand for that to
justify yet another stretch; 18 more seats is far more believable.

Incidentally, I saw the first 737-800 at Boeing Field several few
weeks ago.  It was in the hangar with a 737-700 (two or three more
of which were outside).  I ignored it at first since the -700s were
more interesting than another 757, even if the 757 was in Boeing
colors.  I finally got around to looking at it more carefully (I
was not very close, unfortunately) and eventually realized that the
cockpit windows were not those of a 757 but rather a 737.  That is
a *big* aircraft!  Between the increased wingspan and the fuselage
stretch, it doesn't really look like a 737 any more.

--
Karl Swartz	|Home	kls@chicago.com
		|Work	kls@netapp.com
		|WWW	http://www.chicago.com/~kls/
Moderator of sci.aeronautics.airliners -- Unix/network work pays the bills