the 7500th B-737 !!

Profile picture for user KERVYN

Member for

12 years 4 months

Posts: 806

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=2628 CONGRATULATIONS to BOEING !
Original post

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 652

Yes...by name. But there is little is anything in common with the earlier incarnations. Still...quite an achivement nonetheless
Profile picture for user symon

Member for

14 years

Posts: 992

there is little is anything in common with the earlier incarnations
Ummmmmm.... apart from fuselage cross section and nose?!

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 652

There are structural difference probably there too. What is impressive is five and a half thousand A.320 series which are essentially similar. Boeing must have felt the NG 737 were very different as they re started the build number sequence to try and show that they were nothing like the previous.
Profile picture for user Matt-100

Member for

7 years 2 months

Posts: 569

Incredible, and to think at some point in their history around 10% have flown for Southwest!

Member for

9 years 6 months

Posts: 949

It's still on the same TCDS, doesn't make it too different in my mind. Still an impressive number to have delivered.

Member for

11 years 5 months

Posts: 268

Yes but are we well served by a manufacturer churning out the same fifty year old concept, with nothing but a series of small and safe steps avoiding any real advances? What about hybrid wings, or blended wings? Will the £2billion for aerospace recently promised by the UK government be used for anything like this? http://www.technologyreview.com/sites/default/files/images/nasa.hybrid.wingx299_0.jpg Or this? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1d/NASA_BWB.jpg What about sonic cruisers, flying close to Mach1? Remember, the fastest airliner, apart from Concord, was the VC10, itself a fifty year old design, cleared to Mach 0.93. The VC10. An airliner still faster than any Boeing airliner for a half century. http://www.dmflightsim.co.uk/assets/images/VC10UPD_03.jpg Steven
Profile picture for user Matt-100

Member for

7 years 2 months

Posts: 569

That second design concept was ruled out by Airbus nearly 2 decades ago, there is no feasible way to evacuate it in under 90 seconds in an emergency.