Hacker News Reader

Comment by PaulHoule | Hacker News Reader

It is a little off topic, but I hate flying the 737. The way it is shaped makes it feel tiny on the inside even when compared to the much smaller Embrarer E175. It seems to be the only large airliner you will find on domestic flights in the U.S. and it makes me take the bus or drive if I had a choice.

If Boeing were to give the 737 the 787 treatment the benefit to the flying public, airlines, environment, etc. will be huge but as long as Boeing can sell the 737 without a real upgrade it is a cash cow for them and they'll never stop making it.

View on HN

"If Boeing were to give the 737 the 787 treatment the benefit to the flying public, airlines, environment, etc. will be huge but as long as Boeing can sell the 737 without a real upgrade it is a cash cow for them and they'll never stop making it.'

The MAX 8 is very literally the 737 being given the 787 treatment. What are you asking for here? 10 abreast seating? Then it would just be a 787...

What is bad about the 737 is the circular cross section which makes it feel cramped. A truly modernized 737 would go oval. As it is my neck muscles cramp up just thinking about going into a 737.

Yeah the 787 is a very different plane, and imo a lovely flying experience as a passenger. Less noise, lower cabin altitude, spacious cabin, modern passenger cabin tech...it's great! I hope it's safe, but frankly after whats happened recently, I have my doubts.

There's a fear that a carbon fiber body won't perform as well in an Asiana Airlines Flight 214-type crash because it's apt to shatter rather than just deform like aluminum.

Yeah reasonable, but i wonder if it’s also less likely to have stress fractures that could result in unpredictable failure?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243

In theory, but aircraft are rated for and maximum number of takeoff and landing cycles so that stress fractures aren't a problem while they're in service.

Carbon fiber could change some of the economics around that, but I'm not sure if the airframes wear out from stress before or after efficiency gains make new planes more desirable.

> The MAX 8 is very literally the 737 being given the 787 treatment.

Not even close. The MAX is as basic a re-engining of the 737 NG as possible. It was an explicit design goal to minimize differences, to the point where pilots don’t even need simulator work to be approved for the MAX. (This was the purpose of the MCAS system that doomed the Lion Air fight, to make the MAX handle as similar as possible to the NG even in almost-stall conditions).

And the 737 NG is itself a refresh of the late-60s 737. Much about the aircraft is unchanged since the 60s: the fuselage cross-section (slightly smaller than the late-80s A320), door arming/opening, lack of RAT, etc.

Much of the cockpit improvements since the 80s (integrated EICAS) are missing from even the MAX, and none of the 787 innovations (composite fuselage, bigger windows, no bleed air/all-electric) were even close to coming to the MAX.

Plenty of US airlines fly the A320 and 757 domestically, and you'll even see the occasional 767, 777, and 787. AA's transcontinental A321-T is fantastic!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com