Re: 737NG (was: Seating Pitch)

Date:         08 Jun 98 02:58:00 
From: (C. Marin Faure)
Organization: NorthWest Nexus Inc.
References:   1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1998.867@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
(Alex J Nieves) wrote:

> All the Boeing narrow bodies have the same uncomfortable fuselage
> diameter.  Actually, to me, it seems as though the 757 is even narrower.
> You are correct in your assumption as far as I know.  Also, one reason
> that Boeing kept the same nose design for the 737NG is because it is so
> widely recognized around the world, and changing it would lose the
> recognition.

As I have stated in other posts to other aviation groups when this subject
has come up, there is NO commonality between the 757 fuselage and the
707/727/737 fuselage.  The 757 fuselage was an all-new design and is in
fact very slightly wider in cross section than the earlier planes,
although for all practical purposes the cabin interior widths are the
same.  I used to think all four fuselages were identical, too, until I was
corrected by a senior design engineer and a 757 factory manager when I was
producing a video about 757 production back in the early 1980s.

Recognition had nothing to do with retaining the existing 737 41 Section
design in the New Generation series: I believe this decision was based
entirely on the need to keep the design and production costs as low as
possible.  As thre was no major reason to change the existing design, why
spend the money to change it?  The only thing I'd like to know is why the
eyebrow windows were retained.  For a series of videos I am producing, we
have been flying in 737s (and every other Boeing model) all over the
world.  In most cases, the airline crews block the eyebrow windows with
whatever they can find.  For instance, the Istanbul Airlines crew we flew
with had wedged a Kleenex box into the window.  I would have thought if
the windows serve no function and if crews don't like them, it would have
been a simple matter to skin over the window openings without changing the
design or tooling.  Perhaps retaining the windows satisfied some sort of
certification requirement.  I don't know.

C. Marin Faure
  author, Flying A Floatplane