The 737 is a pretty "strange" aircraft

[Alpha Floor 237]

And this will sound surprising of course, given that some 8000 737s have been built, but hear me out:

 

1. Of its category, it's the only "modern" aircraft that comes with conventional Flight Controls (no FBW). The A320, Comac C919, Sukhoi SJ 100, Embraer E190 and Bombardier CSeries are all FBW.
2. Systems-wise, it has largely remained unchanged since the 1960's when the first 737 was introduced. Yes there's been lots of improvements in engines, avionics, aerodynamics and so on. But what's concerning systems, very little change: Just have a look at the overhead panels of every 737 generation. It's basically a 1960's aircraft with a glass-retrofit.
3. CWS, or Control Wheel Steering. It basically turns the 737 into an A320 (roughly speaking) in what handling is concerned. Quite a unique feature, at least there's nothing like it in any other Boeing airliner. BTW: This mode is seldom used, as far as I know, only for severe turbulence penetration.
4. The only Boeing that can still truly track a VOR radial and has a dedicated mode for that. I bet it's the only modern airliner that can still do this through the MCP as opposed to through the FMC.
5. The huge and noisy Trim Wheel. (this one is a sub-category of the second one really)
6. No "Heading Hold" function as opposed to any other Boeing.
7. The only narrow-body Boeing in production today. In the past there was: 707, 717, 727 and 757.

I guess Boeing doesn't want to "touch it too much" because, hey, if it works, don't fix it. And the 737 does indeed "work" and very well so!

 

This post is intended to be "humorous" in nature, please don't take it too seriously

[OneWhoKnocks53 51]

I never thought of it that way, but looking at the spec sheet you are absolutely right! Even the MAX still uses the NG flight deck, doesn't it?

[Alpha Floor 237]

I never thought of it that way, but looking at the spec sheet you are absolutely right! Even the MAX still uses the NG flight deck, doesn't it?

 

As far as I know, it's the same glass cockpit just with bigger "screens" xD

 

[simbio 56]

For me it's the greatest since the Tinmouse, the only negative part is the FMC that it's seems to be implemented from another aircraft as we can't rely too much for prediction on descent due to the nature of the slippery aircraft.

I am looking forward to the new MAX and what nice feature will add.

For simulation I am also curious for the new 737-300 IXEG release and what feeling will give us.

[Pe11e 812]

For me, 737 (NGX) is the most natural airliner I could fly right now. The perfect combination of everything you can imagine. A320 is robotic (in a way I like that), but doesn't feel natural, 777 is a mutant between Airbus and Boeing.

What natural means? Natural is that feeling when you have complete control over the metal monster in any given situation.

[Alpha Floor 237]

For me it's the greatest since the Tinmouse, the only negative part is the FMC that it's seems to be implemented from another aircraft as we can't rely too much for prediction on descent due to the nature of the slippery aircraft.

I am looking forward to the new MAX and what nice feature will add.

For simulation I am also curious for the new 737-300 IXEG release and what feeling will give us.

 

Interesting! From your words I deduce you're a 737 pilot?

 

So VNAV not bringing the plane down smoothly is not just a thing of FSX huh? Do you hit the DES NOW button some 20NM before T/D, or how do you compensate for that?

 

+1 to the IXEG. I'm really looking forward to that!

[simbio 56]

Interesting! From your words I deduce you're a 737 pilot?

 

So VNAV not bringing the plane down smoothly is not just a thing of FSX huh? Do you hit the DES NOW button some 20NM before T/D, or how do you compensate for that?

 

+1 to the IXEG. I'm really looking forward to that!

No, I would love to have a life like Golfcharlie232

 

The fact that you have to cheat adjust modify, you can't say it's a spot on system, the 747 and the 777 are more reliable.

But that is my simming experience.

 

"Des now" I do that and maybe more if the weather condition are horrible and also fill wind condition on various stage on forecast page.

[jcomm 5,889]

Very well seen Alpha!

 

The things we find when we have something to do :-) ... or... I shouldn't be here, now, reading posts either :-)))))

[Alan_A 1,650]

I recently came across one of those threads on pprune - one job candidate asking for advice about whether to apply to Southwest or JetBlue, and another telling him, pretty much in so many words, that if you go to Southwest, you'll be flying an aircraft (737) that's two generations behind.  This second poster went on to point to the 737 overhead as a sign of how old and kludgy the airplane was, and noted that the 737 MAX, for all its refinements, will still retain the overhead.

 

Of course, this was in the midst of a conversation about other factors that airline professionals think about, like seniority and the pace of promotion, basing and the length of your commute, the financial viability of the airline... and naturally, when it came to airplanes, there were partisans in both camps... but I was reminded of it when I read the OP because the old/new nature of the 73 was part of the discussion.

 

Whether you like that old/new quality is another question.  Mileage, amazingly enough, seems to vary... 

[Orlaam 306]

Interesting! From your words I deduce you're a 737 pilot?

 

So VNAV not bringing the plane down smoothly is not just a thing of FSX huh? Do you hit the DES NOW button some 20NM before T/D, or how do you compensate for that?

 

+1 to the IXEG. I'm really looking forward to that!

VNAV on a lot of aircraft is inaccurate, not just the 737. Most are unreliable enough that pilots usually switch to V/S or FLCH to descend. Software glitches on the different versions in conjunction with various altitude and speed constraints with atmospheric conditions being dynamic. Yeah, pilots have to eventually intervene. So it's not at an FSX (sim) thing nor is it a 737 thing. Even the 777 has problems. No plane is immune. It's computer and that's it. Putting accurate winds can help but it's not perfect no matter what.

Truth is, a lot of 737 pilots dislike it. It's noisy, hard to maintain speeds within limits, cramped to sit in, slow FMC, stupid trim wheel, and various aging issues. Then again it's piloting at it's greatest, annoying or not. A320 pilots often feel their skills have been reduced to zero so it's the opposite spectrum sometimes. You'll find that every plane has quirks that pilots really hate but other things they love. It's often a love/hate relationship with almost all aircraft out there.

[jcomm 5,889]

On 90% of my jumpseat flights in Airbuses V/S was the chosen descent method, sometimes from intermediate flight levels ...

[Alpha Floor 237]

VNAV on a lot of aircraft is inaccurate, not just the 737. Most are unreliable enough that pilots usually switch to V/S or FLCH to descend. Software glitches on the different versions in conjunction with various altitude and speed constraints with atmospheric conditions being dynamic. Yeah, pilots have to eventually intervene. So it's not at an FSX (sim) thing nor is it a 737 thing. Even the 777 has problems. No plane is immune. It's computer and that's it. Putting accurate winds can help but it's not perfect no matter what.

Truth is, a lot of 737 pilots dislike it. It's noisy, hard to maintain speeds within limits, cramped to sit in, slow FMC, stupid trim wheel, and various aging issues. Then again it's piloting at it's greatest, annoying or not. A320 pilots often feel their skills have been reduced to zero so it's the opposite spectrum sometimes. You'll find that every plane has quirks that pilots really hate but other things they love. It's often a love/hate relationship with almost all aircraft out there.

 

Thanks Orlaam!

 

Most of the times I use FLCH on initial descent and later on V/S during the step downs on approaches. VNAV I don't like it much really, just use it for the cruise.

 

It's true that it doesn't work perfectly, it just can't unless we give it ALL of the boundary conditions which is just not possible. Descending an airliner from cruize FL is something of an art, haha

[Alpha Floor 237]

I recently came across one of those threads on pprune - one job candidate asking for advice about whether to apply to Southwest or JetBlue, and another telling him, pretty much in so many words, that if you go to Southwest, you'll be flying an aircraft (737) that's two generations behind.  This second poster went on to point to the 737 overhead as a sign of how old and kludgy the airplane was, and noted that the 737 MAX, for all its refinements, will still retain the overhead.

 

Of course, this was in the midst of a conversation about other factors that airline professionals think about, like seniority and the pace of promotion, basing and the length of your commute, the financial viability of the airline... and naturally, when it came to airplanes, there were partisans in both camps... but I was reminded of it when I read the OP because the old/new nature of the 73 was part of the discussion.

 

Whether you like that old/new quality is another question.  Mileage, amazingly enough, seems to vary... 

 

Hi Alan,

 

Yes indeed pilots like to argue Boeing vs Airbus, but at the end of the day, it's "just" a job, so they will have MANY other variables to consider that are much more important than the TOOL itself.

 

I don't think any pilot will do a career decision based on the aircraft they will fly. Maybe they'll do that if all other conditions are the same, but that's never the case really.

 

For example: I as a design engineer like and am used to CATIA. But if anyone calls me tomorrow offering a much better job (salary, position, perks, conditions, possible career development, location etc) but using SolidEdge (which I don't like as much as CATIA), I will take that job instantly!

 

I personally would love to fly the 737 if I were a pilot, if only just to say that I have done so . It's a "modern classic", pretty much as close to flying in the 60's and first generation of jets as you can get with today's aircraft market.

[fnav77 56]

Boeing is a plane, Airbus a flying machine.....ha ha.... I am out.

[Pe11e 812]

Boeing is a plane, Airbus a flying machine.....ha ha.... I am out.

 

Boeing is a Ferrari F40, Airbus is Ferrari LaFerrari. And I don't refer to speed, just to a level of driving assists and electronics.

You guessed, I prefer F40 by far.