Cockpit Chronicles: Know your Boeings

One of the first things any aviation enthusiast or pilot learns is how to tell one airplane from another. Usually, those of us aviation obsessed types pick this up as kids.

But a few frequent fliers, airline employees and maybe even some pilots may not be able to catch all the nuances that separate the various types of jets. We’ve broken down the differences between the various Boeings to make you a better spotter. So the next time you fly, see if you can spot the differences.

707: Let’s face it. If you see the 4-engine narrow body Boeing 707 flying around, it’s probably painted in Qantas colors and it’s owned by John Travolta. There aren’t many 707s still flying. There are, however, a number of military KC-135 tankers flying that supply fighters and transport aircraft with fuel. This airplane is a re-engined 707 that has been in use for decades.


Boeing 707

The 707 is somewhat easy to confuse with the Douglas DC-8 that’s still widely in use by freight operators. But the DC-8 has two scoops on the nose that drive a turbo compressor which pressurizes the airplane. The 707 also had a long pitot tube HF radio antenna mounted to the top of the vertical stabilizer.717: This is the oddball of the Boeing fleet. Inherited when Boeing purchased McDonnell Douglas, the 717 is essentially a re-engined MD-80. Unlike the MD-80, however, the 717 features a larger engine made by Rolls-Royce and the vertical stabilizer is squared off at the top, and especial toward back. Airtran (soon absorbed by Southwest) and Midwest are the two main operators of the 717 in the U.S. These are the only Boeings with two engines mounted at the rear.


Boeing 717

727: This is an easy one. The T-tail and three engines mounted at the rear of the airplane give it away. The only other non-Russian tri-engined airplanes are widebodies that don’t have the horizontal stabilizer mounted on the top.

FedEx and other cargo operators such as Amerijet still operate the 727. There were two types of 727s made, the -100 and the -200, with the more rare and shorter -100 featuring a slightly oval shaped number two engine inlet.


Boeing 727-200

737: Offered in the late ’60s as a more fuel efficient airplane than the 727 it is by far the most popular Boeing. This type has so many variants that we’ll use the engines, tail skids (or lack thereof) and over-wing exits to tell them all apart, starting with the…

737-100: Since only 30 -100s were built, and none are actually flying since 2005, we’ll go ahead and skip the slightly shorter 737 that was initially delivered to Lufthansa.

737-200: The easiest way to spot a 737-200 is to look at the engines. If they look like long and narrow tubes below the wing, then you know they’re the late ’60s to early ’80s 737 that many of us grew up with. They were also much louder on takeoff. Today a number of Central and South American countries still fly the 737-200. The airport in Caracas is filled with them, in fact.


Boeing 737-200

737-300, -400 and -500: These 737s, now called the ‘classic’ at Boeing, were easy to spot from the -200. The engines are much larger, and in many ways similar to the ‘New Generation’ engines on the most recent 737s. The easiest way to tell them apart, however, is the flatter lower cowling on the classic 737s. The -500 is the shortest, followed by the -300 and then the -400, which seats enough passengers to require two over-wing exits like the -800 and -900 below.


Boeing 737-400

737-600, -700, -800 and -900: The ‘next generation’ 737 as Boeing calls them, are the most popular 737s in the sky today. They’re much more fuel efficient than their predecessors, and most are now fitted with winglets that increase their efficiency a further 5%. Some of the classic 737s have also been retrofitted with winglets just to throw you off. In fact, the 737-500 can be fitted with winglets, but so far, the newer 737-600 which is the same length, can not.


Boeing 737-800

737 Max: Boeing has recently announced the 737 “Max” which will follow the same shape as the -700 through the -900, with the name 737-9 “Max” used to differentiate these updated narrow-body Boeings. So far the only way I can tell them apart is with the engines which are differently shaped and include v-shaped cutouts at the trailing edge of the cowling called chevrons. But truthfully, we don’t know what the final look of the 737 Max will be. It’s scheduled to go into service in 2017.

747: With it’s bulging upper deck, the 747 is by far the easiest Boeing to spot. The -100 to -300s didn’t have winglets, while the newer two-pilot cockpit -400 has abrupt winglets at its tips. The new 747-8 has a completely new wing design that doesn’t need winglets to eek out maximum efficiency. It has the chevrons that are featured on the 737 max and the 787.


Boeing 747-400

757: Some say it’s the prettiest Boeing, with it’s long legs and tall stance. The nose on the 757 was completely redesigned when compared to the more traditional 707, 727 and 737 front ends to reduce the drag and noise inside. In Boeing airliners, the pointier the nose, the noisier the cockpit. The blunt nose 767 is one of the quietest.

It’s sometimes easy to confuse the 757 for the 767, but if you look closely at the bottom of the aft fuselage, the 767-300 has a tail skid. The 757 and the short and stubby looking 767-200 don’t have this tail skid as they’re less prone to tail strikes on takeoff and landing.


767: The 767 is a widebody airplane that shares the same cockpit features and layout as the 757, which means that pilots can fly both airplanes, even switching between the two in the same day or same trip. On landing, the 767 wheel ‘trucks’ hang down, while the 757 trucks hang at an upward angle.


777: The quickest way to tell the 777 from the 767 or any other Boeing is to look at the tail ‘cone’ at the end of the fuselage. It’s flattened into a wedge which gives it a unique look. Taking a hint from some Russian airplanes, the main landing gear features three trucks of wheels compared to the two sets on the 757 and 767.


787: One look at the upward bending wing and swooping rudder on the 787 and you know it’s not like any other Boeing. The cockpit has gone from six to four large windows. And as mentioned before, the back side of the engine cowlings feature ‘chevrons.’


While this post wasn’t meant for the super spotter or seasoned pilot, it just might help people who are casual flyers pay attention to what model or type of Boeing they prefer to fly aboard.

Next week I’ll talk a little about how pilots of each of these Boeings have discovered their different personalities, both good and bad.

Cockpit Chronicles takes you along on some of Kent’s trips as an international co-pilot on the Boeing 757 and 767 based in New York. Have any questions for Kent? Check out the Cockpit Chronicles Facebook page or follow Kent on Twitter @veryjr.

Boeing’s 787: Engineering a quieter airplane

It has long been rumored that Boeing‘s new 787 Dreamliner will be the quietest commercial jumbo jet in its class. Take a look at the back of select engine nacelles on the airframe and you can see an obvious difference. That egg crate design is in place for improved acoustic performance, which means a better experience for not only passengers but the people living near airports and flight paths.

Boeing just published a video showing some of the other improvements and the testing that they’re working on. Take a look at the show above.

Breaking: Boeing plans new aiplane — 797?

Jon Ostrower over at Flight Blogger has some interesting gossip for us from the airplane world: Boeing‘s CEO Jim McNerney was quoted earlier this week as saying that the manufacturer is looking into new airframes above and beyond the 787.

From Ostrower’s blog, McNerney says [bolding by Ostrower]:

We’re gonna do a new airplane. We’re not done evaluating this whole situation yet, but our current bias is to not re-engine, is to move to an all-new airplane at the end of the decade, beginning of the next decade.

“It’s our judgment that our customers will wait for us, rather than move to an airplane that will obsolete itself when [Airbus does] a new airplane. I understand why they’re doing it, we haven’t seen the need for it yet. I feel pretty comfortable we can defend our customer base both because they’re not going ahead of us, they’re catching up to us and because we’re going to be doing a new airplane that will go beyond the capability of what the neo can do. I feel very good about our position there.”

Reached for comment, Bernard Choi from Boeing Corporate communications shed further light:

We continue to evaluate and are actively working with our customers and industry partners to identify the best solution to dramatically reduce fuel burn and carbon emissions and to lower overall operating costs. We continue to evaluate the potential of a new airplane design in terms of fuel burn, operating costs, carbon footprint, reliability and passenger comfort. Of course technology availability will be a critical issue and an area of focus during 2011, but we expect to have more clarity by mid-year. Based upon what our customers want, we maintain the ability to select from several choices, including a new engine or an all-new airplane.

Could this be the long rumored 797 that frequently crops up on myth sites? Probably not to the effect of those legends, but it does say that Boeing is seriously thinking about new airframes in an active, agressive manner.

Bad week for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner – more delays and cabin smoke

It has been a pretty lousy couple of years for the new Boeing Dreamliner. Initially, the 787 was supposed to be delivered to its first customer in May of 2008 – that was then delayed till November 2008. And since then, the delays have kept on coming.

The previous delay set a 2010 target, but last week it became obvious that they’d hit another snag – so the first delivery won’t take place till some time in 2011.

Delivery delays are not the only issue grounding the new plane – this afternoon one of the flight test planes had to make an emergency landing at Laredo airport after the pilot declared an emergency due to smoke in the cabin. The plane landed, and the 40 members of the test crew had to evacuate down the emergency slides. According to one report, there were several minor injuries.

Boeing and the FAA will gather as much data as they can about the incident, and it is currently unknown what kind of impact this latest setback will have on the 2011 delivery dates.

Update: The Seattle Times reports that the smoke came from a serious fire in the electronic equipment bay of the plane.

The fire affected the cockpit controls, and the the plane lost its flight displays and auto-throttling systems. This means that the plane had to land with limited electronic flight controls. Flames were observed coming from the bay, and a person “close to the situation” said that if the incident had happened at 25,000 feet, the fire could have been extremely serious.

[Photo: JEREMY MELLOUL/AFP/Getty Images]

Plane Answers: Have turbulence encounters become less common?

Welcome to Gadling’s feature, Plane Answers, where our resident airline pilot, Kent Wien, answers your questions about everything from takeoff to touchdown and beyond. Have a question of your own? Ask away!

Fellow Gadling writer Mike Barish (author of the hilarious Skymall Mondays asks:

I have a plane answers question of my own for you and thought others might be curious, too.

Not sure if it’s my perception, improvements in technology or changes in flight paths, but it truly seems like I experience less turbulence in general, and less aggressive turbulence when my flights do hit it, than I did back in the 1980s. What’s changed to make flights smoother?

You’re likely right, Mike.

In the past ten years, more of the airplanes flying today have advanced radar, with features such as ‘Predictive Windshear’ and better depiction of turbulence associated with precipitation.

The FAA has also installed weather monitors for Air Traffic Controllers that show the level of intensity for a given cumulonimbus build-up of clouds. It’s comforting to hear “we show a level three thunderstorm along your route of flight, deviations to the right or left are approved” from ATC before the weather even shows up on our radar.

Occasionally these advisories are for storms that are well below us, but the courtesy report is well appreciated, especially since they include the intensity of the weather, which saves us from having to pan and tilt our radar to determine if a cloud could cause significant bumps. Exceedingly wet clouds that climb above 25,000 feet are the best indicator of possible turbulence, and it takes some manipulating of the radar to find those.
Dispatch plays a role in forecasting where the weather may be during our flight and routing us on a different and possibly less direct path to get around the weather.

The other possible explanation for your experience may have to do with where you’ve been sitting lately. The difference between turbulence at the rear of the airplane versus over the wing or in the front is rather significant, especially on stretched versions of airliners like the A340-600, the 757-300 and the 737-900. On your next flight, if you’re sitting in the back, pay attention to how the flight attendants in the front are walking and continuing their service, while those in the back may have to sit down.

So, if turbulence gives you the willies, try getting a seat in the front.

Coincidentally, this post is being written in the business class section of a 757 while I’m on my crew rest break. It’s bumpy enough that the main cabin flight attendants are seated, but our purser is currently serving drinks up front without much difficulty.

In the future, the 787 will have a ‘gust suppression’ capability that is said to improve the rides by adjusting the rudder constantly to compensate for some types of turbulence. I can’t wait to experience that.

Do you have a question about something related to the pointy end of an airplane? Ask Kent and maybe he’ll use it for the next Plane Answers. Check out his other blog, Cockpit Chronicles and travel along with him at work. Twitter @veryjr