Why did Boeing get rid of top cockpit windows in the 737?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bexhill-on-Sea
Age: 77
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
737-NG
"I think no company still makes sextants, even though some nostalgics still might use them ( I heard it is quite a difficult way to navigate)"
Ships are still required to carry sextants, and are used to practice the "art", just in case GPS is not available for some reason, failure of the receiver(s) plus it's not good practice to relay on only one method of position fixing.
Tamaya and Plath at least still manufacture them.
"I think no company still makes sextants, even though some nostalgics still might use them ( I heard it is quite a difficult way to navigate)"
Ships are still required to carry sextants, and are used to practice the "art", just in case GPS is not available for some reason, failure of the receiver(s) plus it's not good practice to relay on only one method of position fixing.
Tamaya and Plath at least still manufacture them.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The eyebrows made an ugly duckling just a homely duckling. Loved them on my good old reliable 727 and 737-100 and 200. Good spot for the GPS suction cup too
. Never missed breakfast or last call for happy hour.
I put paper cut out of sky scenes in the wells where the eyebrows used to be. Need to keep the nostalgia going.
. Never missed breakfast or last call for happy hour.I put paper cut out of sky scenes in the wells where the eyebrows used to be. Need to keep the nostalgia going.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CatpnBlogs - how about figuring a spot 2 or 3 miles on final and using that as a roll out point? Doesn't require rotating your head 90 degrees, and up, to look through a small window.
I've used that technique many times when the runway is on the 'wrong' side. Runway is X. Pick a spot 2-3x on final and base you turn off of that. Building, road, field, etc. Pick something, fly over it. Sporting when you're at 30 degrees of bank, 1000' FPM, and can't see the runway.
Did that years ago into XXX. A week later talking with the mechanic and he was talking about the crazy approach he'd seen. Crazy? 100% within SOP. After years of watching 10 mile straight-in's he wasn't prepared to see a fairly tight visual pattern.
Removing the eyebrow windows impact on the noise in the cockpit? It dropped from 'too loud' to 'still too loud'.
I've used that technique many times when the runway is on the 'wrong' side. Runway is X. Pick a spot 2-3x on final and base you turn off of that. Building, road, field, etc. Pick something, fly over it. Sporting when you're at 30 degrees of bank, 1000' FPM, and can't see the runway.
Did that years ago into XXX. A week later talking with the mechanic and he was talking about the crazy approach he'd seen. Crazy? 100% within SOP. After years of watching 10 mile straight-in's he wasn't prepared to see a fairly tight visual pattern.
Removing the eyebrow windows impact on the noise in the cockpit? It dropped from 'too loud' to 'still too loud'.
Last edited by misd-agin; 12th Jun 2012 at 15:03.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: california, usa
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loved them: The eyebrow windows were wonderful for circle-to-lands when the PF is in a seat opposite the direction of turn to base/to final....a (sight)picture's worth a thousand words. e.g. Circle to RNY26 PAJNe.g. Circle to RNY26 PAJN. The eyebrows usually had dark green plastic inserts to keep the sunlight down.
If you have a look at the cockpit window layout of a B-17 there is a certain similarity for the lineage of forward fuselage that started with the 707. The main difference being the pressurisation of the jets. Just MHO. As for being useful in a visual approach, I usually found looking out the main windows or asking my cockpit colleague "howgozit" worked better than looking for a threshold out of windows 4 and 5.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: california, usa
Posts: 58
'Loved them: The eyebrow windows were wonderful for circle-to-lands when the PF is in a seat opposite the direction of turn to base/to final....a (sight)picture's worth a thousand words. '
Could not agree more, they were very useful on the lovely B727.
They seem an odd ommision on military 737's
Location: california, usa
Posts: 58
'Loved them: The eyebrow windows were wonderful for circle-to-lands when the PF is in a seat opposite the direction of turn to base/to final....a (sight)picture's worth a thousand words. '
Could not agree more, they were very useful on the lovely B727.
They seem an odd ommision on military 737's
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing Next-Generation 737 Gets a Face-Lift
SEATTLE, Jan. 26, 2005 -- Boeing [NYSE:BA] this week rolled out its first 737 without eyebrow windows, the four small windows above the front windshield. In the past the eyebrow windows helped provide better crew visibility, but today's advanced navigation systems have made those windows obsolete. The design change reduces airplane weight by 20 pounds and eliminates approximately 300 hours of periodic inspections per airplane. Retrofit kits to cover eyebrow windows will be available mid-2006 for the in-service 737 fleet.
Last edited by Trent 972; 16th Jun 2012 at 10:13.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Devonshire
Age: 96
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Astro, your way from the stars !
Astrodomes were fitted to earlier aircraft and were calibrated. The lower parts, near to the fuselage, had some distortion and one aimed to avoid using lower altitude stars etc. (Each minute of distortion would displace a position line by one nm.)
Initially pressurised aircraft ( DC6 vintage ?) had Astrodomes. I heard that one lost its Navigator and for a while N/O would use a "monkey chain" to prevent this happening. Periscopic sextants (Hughes or Kollsman?) were put through a special hole in the roof - too small to lose any N/O ! But they did require precomputing because you got a small field of view of the sky, using precomputed tables. It was sometimes possible to obtain a series of Sun/Moon/Venus fixes and in broad daylight too - professionally very satisfying.
LT
Initially pressurised aircraft ( DC6 vintage ?) had Astrodomes. I heard that one lost its Navigator and for a while N/O would use a "monkey chain" to prevent this happening. Periscopic sextants (Hughes or Kollsman?) were put through a special hole in the roof - too small to lose any N/O ! But they did require precomputing because you got a small field of view of the sky, using precomputed tables. It was sometimes possible to obtain a series of Sun/Moon/Venus fixes and in broad daylight too - professionally very satisfying.
LT
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bermuda Triangle
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To me, these windows always were totally pointless. Always covered with a scratched sunscreen and/or newspapers. One instructor once told me that they were there because some regulations stipulated minimum accumulated square inches of windows in a cockpit. I am not trying to sell the idea, but it sounds plausible. The DC-8 and DC-9 had these eyebrow windows too. A little larger than in the Boeings but totally useless as well. These regulations may have been thrown away, but all the later models do have larger windows.
- There has never been a regulation for area of cockpit glass.
- They were never included for astro-navigation.
- They were never included because "the 707 used to do in-flight refuelling"
They have always been there for visual circling (left pilot uses the right windows in a right turn and vice versa). As 99% of operations are now ILS to ILS, and European pilots, at least, wouldn't know a circling approach if it ran over them, and simulator projection screens never extended high enough to include the eyebrow windows (so those who only manoeuvred in the simulator never saw how useful they were), the "cost-benefit" ratio has been deemed excessive.
Last edited by Checkboard; 18th Jun 2012 at 14:20.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: London, England
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New sextants still in demand
The most affordable metal (bronze arc, aluminium body) sextants, such as the Astra III, fetch $800-$900 new. The Davis Instruments Mark 25 is remarkably accurate for a plastic instrument, and at about $250 sets the standard for beginners' sextants.
Tamaya and Cassens & Plath are indeed still making excellent sextants (I have a Tamaya Jupiter) and the Chinese-made Astra 3B is a fine instrument at a very reasonable price although the optics in the telesope don't match those of the German or Japanese units. Mechanically you can't fault them.
The other German manufacturer was C. Plath of Hamburg, a separate company to Cassens & Plath. For a number of years I owned and used a C. Plath Navistar Classic, one of their top models. A brief history of the C. Plath company follows (taken verbatim from the Nautical Antiques website operated by master mariner Joel Jacobs, from whom I bought my Tamaya Jupiter.)
quote:-
"C. PLATH COMPANY HISTORY: In brief, Carl Plath started manufacturing sextants, in addition to other nautical products, in Hamburg Germany in 1862 though the purchase of the David Filby instrument company though the company's origin dates back to 1837.
As a result WW II, C.Plath was dismantled completely by the occupation forces. Around 1950, various prohibitions were lifted, and C. Plath was allowed to begin production again of sextants and other nautical instruments. Also in 1949,C.Plath was offered a gyrocompass patent and in 1951 the first gyrocompass designed to this patent was presented to the public. C.Plath progressed from the role of instrument maker to that of a modern marine navigation equipment manufacturer. In the following years the product range was expanded by many more modern designs such as autopilots, speed logs, radio direction finders, etc.
In 1962 C.Plath was acquired by Litton Industries, a large American concern.The C.Plath North American Division was set up in 1978 in College Park near Washington. 1996 saw the introduction of the world's first fiber-optic solid-state gyrocompass by C.Plath. The first ever gyrocompass with no moving parts.
Sperry Marine was formed in 1997 with the combination of C.Plath, Decca Marine and Sperry Marine with more organizational changes yet to come. After 163 years, C.Plath changes its name to Sperry Marine in May 2000. In 2001 Sperry Marine becomes part of the Northrop Grumman Corporation.
In the 1990's Plath came out with a series of new sextant designs with overlapping designs and confusing names. They seemed to have lost their way. Shortly thereafter, C. Plath quit producing sextants. The parent company has completely liquidated everything including machinery, equipment and spare parts."
Unquote.
The other German manufacturer was C. Plath of Hamburg, a separate company to Cassens & Plath. For a number of years I owned and used a C. Plath Navistar Classic, one of their top models. A brief history of the C. Plath company follows (taken verbatim from the Nautical Antiques website operated by master mariner Joel Jacobs, from whom I bought my Tamaya Jupiter.)
quote:-
"C. PLATH COMPANY HISTORY: In brief, Carl Plath started manufacturing sextants, in addition to other nautical products, in Hamburg Germany in 1862 though the purchase of the David Filby instrument company though the company's origin dates back to 1837.
As a result WW II, C.Plath was dismantled completely by the occupation forces. Around 1950, various prohibitions were lifted, and C. Plath was allowed to begin production again of sextants and other nautical instruments. Also in 1949,C.Plath was offered a gyrocompass patent and in 1951 the first gyrocompass designed to this patent was presented to the public. C.Plath progressed from the role of instrument maker to that of a modern marine navigation equipment manufacturer. In the following years the product range was expanded by many more modern designs such as autopilots, speed logs, radio direction finders, etc.
In 1962 C.Plath was acquired by Litton Industries, a large American concern.The C.Plath North American Division was set up in 1978 in College Park near Washington. 1996 saw the introduction of the world's first fiber-optic solid-state gyrocompass by C.Plath. The first ever gyrocompass with no moving parts.
Sperry Marine was formed in 1997 with the combination of C.Plath, Decca Marine and Sperry Marine with more organizational changes yet to come. After 163 years, C.Plath changes its name to Sperry Marine in May 2000. In 2001 Sperry Marine becomes part of the Northrop Grumman Corporation.
In the 1990's Plath came out with a series of new sextant designs with overlapping designs and confusing names. They seemed to have lost their way. Shortly thereafter, C. Plath quit producing sextants. The parent company has completely liquidated everything including machinery, equipment and spare parts."
Unquote.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Wherever Carmen decides
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Checkboard
and European pilots, at least, wouldn't know a circling approach if it ran over them
Alas, it is becoming harder and harder due to onerous ATC procedures (especially in the Greek islands). Eyebrow windows would make some of these visuals a little easier. There is nothing more satisfying and enjoyable than flying a good visual approach.
The eyebrow windows on the DC9 saved a midair collision on short finals during a circling approach....
Number 2 cut the corner and was descending upon number one...FO in number 1 glanced up and saw belly of DC9-51 filling the window....pushed stick forward (below 500 agl)....
Trainee in tower....
Knew all the crew...skipper in number 2 wasn't the brightest and one of the few I threatened not to fly with (5 years later had an incident with him in the DC10)...before CRM and one of those with a bully boy mentality.
Number 2 cut the corner and was descending upon number one...FO in number 1 glanced up and saw belly of DC9-51 filling the window....pushed stick forward (below 500 agl)....
Trainee in tower....
Knew all the crew...skipper in number 2 wasn't the brightest and one of the few I threatened not to fly with (5 years later had an incident with him in the DC10)...before CRM and one of those with a bully boy mentality.