Difference btwn 737 300-400
Guest
Posts: n/a
737-300 = Max Take Off weight - 61,234Kgs
Length 32.18m.
737-400 = Max Take Off weight - 65,000Kgs.
Length 35.22m.
Other principal dimensions the same.
Other notable difference is a slightly different air conditioning system.
Also 400 has four overwing exits as opposed to -300 has 2.
Hope this helps.
Kebab.
Length 32.18m.
737-400 = Max Take Off weight - 65,000Kgs.
Length 35.22m.
Other principal dimensions the same.
Other notable difference is a slightly different air conditioning system.
Also 400 has four overwing exits as opposed to -300 has 2.
Hope this helps.
Kebab.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Other difference:
flap limit speed for flaps 1 -300: 230 kts and -400: 250 kts.
In Holland we fly the -300, -400, -800 and -900 on a single type-rating, with a little bit of additional training required.
Works fine, though.
[This message has been edited by static (edited 10 March 2001).]
flap limit speed for flaps 1 -300: 230 kts and -400: 250 kts.
In Holland we fly the -300, -400, -800 and -900 on a single type-rating, with a little bit of additional training required.
Works fine, though.
[This message has been edited by static (edited 10 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
PFM, in Australia there are currently two separate B737 endorsements :
B737-100/200 and B737-300/400/500
Each of these is available as a command or as a co-pilot only endorsement.
So yes, the B737-300 and B737-400 can be flown on the same Australian type endorsement, although if you are in QF then you will be subject to their internal CAR 217 check and training organisations 300/400 differences course.
On the hardware side, the 400 also has a retractable tailskid, and in QF operation, an extra fuselage fuel tank.
The QF 400's are even quasi-ETOPS approved for those long flights over your way, where they are more than 60 minutes from a suitable enroute alternate for part of the way.
B737-100/200 and B737-300/400/500
Each of these is available as a command or as a co-pilot only endorsement.
So yes, the B737-300 and B737-400 can be flown on the same Australian type endorsement, although if you are in QF then you will be subject to their internal CAR 217 check and training organisations 300/400 differences course.
On the hardware side, the 400 also has a retractable tailskid, and in QF operation, an extra fuselage fuel tank.
The QF 400's are even quasi-ETOPS approved for those long flights over your way, where they are more than 60 minutes from a suitable enroute alternate for part of the way.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I believe that the original 737-300 that came out in 1984 did not have an EFIS flightdeck??? I recall seeing a pic of a Continental Airlines 737-300 with the old analogue style flightdeck. Although AN and Australian opted for the EFIS upgrade(EADI/EHSI).Did the majority of -300's that were built come out with full analogue display or the EFIS option??
Guest
Posts: n/a
PIA WAS THE FIRST AIRLINE IN ASIA TO FLY B737-300 BUT OUR GREAT ENGINEERS DICIDED AS THEY WORKED ON DC3 THAT IT SHOULD HAVE ONLY THAT AND ALSO NO DUAL AUTO PILOT APPROACH AND CAT 2 NOW WE HAVE ONE EFIS ACFT WHICH THE WANT TO GET RID OF OR CHANGE WITH AN ANALOGUES ONE IFTHEY CAN
Guest
Posts: n/a
Some of the earlier -300 serial numbers were delivered with the old style ( mechanical instruments ) flightdeck. We had a couple of them and although they were already available with EFIS, our company opted for the "old style" to make the conversion from the -200adv easier. The mechanical flightdeck is exactly the same as the EFIS one, only the EADI and EHSI (CRT's) are replaced by conventional ones. Even LNAV worked although there was no MAP to show what you had created in the FMC. The last one was sold last year and indeed went to Southwest.
(Flaps one is normally used only for improved climb preformance. You trade excess runway for speed wich gives you a higher climb gradient.)
-----------------------
Track
(Flaps one is normally used only for improved climb preformance. You trade excess runway for speed wich gives you a higher climb gradient.)
-----------------------
Track
Guest
Posts: n/a
We fly -300s, and for us Flaps 1 IS a Take-Off setting, although our standard T/O Flaps setting is 5. But in some performance limited situations use of Flap 1 or 15 might get you out... Only thing to keep in mind is the significantly reduced tail clearance on rotation if you use Flaps 1.
Greetz, TopSwiss
Greetz, TopSwiss
Guest
Posts: n/a
As a matter of interest some photos on airliners.net that show the differences in the 737-300/400
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=146796
Southwest 737-300 Analogue
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=104312
737-300 Digital
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=110439
737-400
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=146796
Southwest 737-300 Analogue
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=104312
737-300 Digital
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=110439
737-400
Guest
Posts: n/a
A quite subtle difference (no-one I know has ever been able to explain this) is that whilst the approach speeds are exactly the same for a -300 and for a -400, the stall margins are different, being 1.3Vs on a -300 but just 1.23Vs on a -400, both at flap 30. Related to this is the fact that the margin above the stall for stick shaker is significantly reduced on a -400 compared to a -300. I'd love to know how this difference arose.
