737 Question...

[FL717]

I know the exact answer to the question but it is imbedded deep into my harddrive. Midnight tonight it will come out. I know it is only on the 300/400/500/600 the 700/800 do not have the same gear.

You're exactly right. In fact... the -700 and the -800 have the same gear, which is why a -700 sits higher than the -300. Put a -300 and a -700 side by side from a distance, I can only tell the difference externally by the gear height, and the "2nd" hole in the "tailcone" next to the APU exhaust, which is the APU compartment cooling vent. Its been a while since I taxied behind a 737, and do not remember in which model that I noticed the "crabbed" taxi. It very well may have been on a specific model.

AA's HUD 737's (and I think most HUD 73's) are authorized CATIII to normal minima. Of course these aren't autolands but the effect is the same, get it down SE in crappy weather..

At AirTran on both the B-717 and the B-737 we are/will be required to perform an autoland for Cat II and Cat III approaches. It seems funny listening to someone talk about a hand flown approach below Cat I, but you make a good point about getting down SE in crappy WX.

By design, this autoland requirement of ours forces us to look for us better WX single engine. Of course... there is ALWAYS Captains authority in an emergency, but to justify that there better not be a "suitable" airport at Cat I anywhere "close".

 

[ultrarunner]

What's the specific reasons sited for Airtran to be going with the extra expense of having an Autoland fleet. You guys gettin fogged out all the time?

Are SWA and JB doing autolands?

 

[FL717]

What's the specific reasons sited for Airtran to be going with the extra expense of having an Autoland fleet. You guys gettin fogged out all the time?

When I upgraded to Captain on the B-717, we didn't have any of the old B-737's left, and we had not gone out to bid on a new aircraft, so only the B-717 was considered in the Cat II/III decision making mix.

At that time the company was really pushing to get all the pilots trained in Cat II/III, because they believed that this would take advantage of the aircraft capability, and reduce some of the possible weather (low vis) problems associated with the ATL hub and spoke system that we relied on. As with most airlines (except SWA) when the Wx gets crappy at the hub, flight schedule integrity becomes non existent, and for a small airline like AirTran with limited aircraft and flights, it REALLY costs us $$$, and defeats part of the "Low Cost Carrier" plan.

Apparently when they got the FAA approval, it was predicated on Autoland Only approaches below Cat I, and this did not change when we got the new B-737's.

 

[ultrarunner]

Interesting. I had always thought that the training and equipment expense requirements outweighed any advantaged related to disruption of service.

Maybe that's not the case with a "smaller carrier".

thanks for the reply.

 

[calfo]

If you look at the scissors on the mains on a 737, you'll see a small hydraulic actuator that allows the gear to shift (I think) 2 or so degrees left or right. Our 737-700's didn't come with them at first and some of the crosswind landings were somewhat jarring. After the planes were fitted with the actuators, we can land sideways again...

 

[FN FAL]

It's prly all the old Ghetto Jets you're behind. I believe most of those are bent!

Don't laugh to hard...we just sent a Caravan back to Cessna. Seems they riveted the plane together crooked...it's been gone a while but I heard they had to un-rivet it and do some serious body work to make it right.