Hacker News Reader

2. is a great question I would like an answer to.

Here is a side by side comparison with an a320: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/61161/is-there-...

FWIW That's a 737 Classic. The engines were already too big (and still smaller than the A320 engines) as evidenced by the flattened nacelle. The engines grew with each successive generation (NG, MAX).

I've read (but not confirmed) one of the other things keeping the 737 so low to ground is the type of emergency exit used. Extending the gear so that the whole mess sits higher off the ground would require new exits and a ton of extra things to certify.

Yeah, there’s a lot of knock-ons with “just” extending the gear. It would definitely cost a lot more (though still far less than a complete new airframe), which is obviously why Boeing and customers wanted to dodge it.

On the other hand, building a plane so aerodynamically unsound that it cratered 346 customers the moment it went out the door is the very textbook definition of “false economy”. One that Boeing itself will be paying for for years to come; even as those who made all the actual decisions gently golden-parachute to the ground.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com