Closing them will become harder and Cause more back injury’s

Just get rid of the overhead bins under seat carry bags only strictly enforced. The UK airline Jet2 offers free 22kg hold baggage.

Ah thank you so much! I hope being able to watch this video made up for not being able to attend! 😁✈

Thank you so much, I'm glad you enjoyed it! 😁 Greetings to you in beautiful Finland 🇫🇮 from the UK 🇬🇧!

I hope the ceilings are higher. Literally crouching or being on my knees to stack bags or catch them isn't very nice 😅

Ah thank you so much Marc! I'm glad you are finding my videos interesting and informative 👍🏻😊

Ah yes, I have just noticed my video is the first on KZfaq showing the inside of the new 737 MAX 10! I should have titled the video as exclusive! Haha 🙈

Tui always have crammed the seat pitch too close which is why I now fly Jet2. But it seems Boeing are turning cattle class into battery poultry class

Certainly great for space! More space for bags is never a bad thing. I just wish I didn't have to break my neck every time I sit down or stand up 🙈 Haha

@@travelswithbieber lol, these are the sacrifices we make to get bags in sideways. Lol.

Haha! I would even say the Falcon's loo is bigger than this. It really is tiny! 🙈

Thank you so much!

@@travelswithbieber you're welcome!

Hi Robert, I absolutely agree! The A220 offers a much brighter and more spacious cabin. The MAX 10 is so dark and cramped and the mood lighting on the ceiling just doesn't do it for me, unfortunately! 👎🏻

The 220 isn’t even a competitor to the max 10. I’m 6’4 and have no room issues on the 900er depending on how the airline configured the amount of seats. There’s a reason companies like Delta orders both planes because they have their place in the routes they’re used for. Me personally because I work both planes every day the 737 are definitely easier to work with and they don’t have to do an engine cool down when taxiing into the gate like the newer air buses do. I do wish they would’ve made a new 757 though. That plane is old but still out matches every other narrow body. I like the 321 but the 737 definitely isn’t as bad a as people make it seem

Boeing has completely screwed up the model designations & develop when they decided to make the 727 followed by the 737. The 707, 727, 737 & 757 .... are all narrow body jets .... with the same size fuselage. The 727, 737 & 757 .... are simply variants of the 707. The 707 designation should have been for narrow body of that size fuselage ... regardless of the number of engines, size of wing/tail and length, So the 727 would be a 707 tri engine for medium range route and the 737 would be 707 twin engine for short range routes. Then Boeing decided to build the 747 which is a large wide body with four engines for long range routes. This designation would be correct. But then in the late 1970's Boeing saw the success of MEDIUM wide body jets and knowing twins jets is the future with larger turbofan engines .... decided to make the 757 & 767 to fill the gap between the 737 and 747. Again. The 757 & 737 have the same size fuselage as the 707. Boeing made the 777 because the 767 was not correctly sized to cover all of the Medium wide body Jets. The 747 was correctly sized to cover cover large wide body market. However, Boeing never developed a tri or twin Jet variant ..... of the 747 ... as they had done with the 707. A 747 twin Jet ... would have been very attractive to the carriers who bought the A380 ... just as the 727 and 737 were attractive to airlines rather than the quad engine, heavier and longer 707. The A320 was designed in the early 80's ... when the small, medium & large jet market had been established. Airbus was able to properly size the A320 to cover every route & airline needs for small jets(narrow body). The fuselage size of the 737 was determined by the 707 which was designed for transatlantic routes with the technology of that time. Of course the A320 is a well designed and great aircraft. And even though Boeing has messed up completely messed up the development of its aircraft, the 737 is not as good ... but still is good enough to be profitable to Boeing & airlines. And unfortunately, because Boeing is able to make money from relices from the 60's ... Boeing will unlikely replace the 737(small) & 777(large) with a new design for at least another 10 years. smh.

@@abelincoln8885 The 737 needs a replacement but the 777X will be fine. It doest make any sense to release a new plane every decade while you can refine the available design. The 777X design could fly until the 2040's .

@@mmm0404 The 757 with a slightly wider fuselage should have replaced the 737 in the early 1980's. Boeing made a huge mistake developing the 757 & 767 with the ratings & for the same Routes. The 757 had the exact same size fuselage (narrow body) as the 707, 727 & 737. Boeing should have only had three main types of planes: small, medium, large. The small aircraft will be narrow bodies & the other two will be wide bodies. Boeing also knew by the 1980's that engines were getting bigger because they will be high bypass turbo fans ...requiring tall landing gear, and the 737 with the same fuselage as the 757 had short landing gear. And Boeing knew that twin Jets is the future which is why there was no three or four engine 767 or 777. The 737 ... was simply a twin engine shorter .... 707. The 757 was simply a better twin engine 707. All three had the same size fuselage Again. Boeing should have only had three types of aircraft and they all should have been twin engines with tall landing gear: small (737), medium ( 767), large (777). The last variant of the 747 offered to airlines... should have been been the X with a new composite gull wing and twin engines. Otherwise Boeing should have offered the 777 X in early 2000s to counter the A380. Boeing knew that all jets will be Twins ... and the engines are getting bigger requiring taller landing gear way, way back in the late 70's when they were developing the 757 with the same size fuselage as the 707, 727 & 737. It is now 40 years too late for Boeing to replace the 737 ... with a better version of the A320. It should have been the 757 back in the early 80's with the latest glass cockpits & electronic flight systems. Airbus now dominates the market .... with superior aircraft. Boeing is still selling thousands of 737s, and is profitable with the 787 & 777. Boeing needs to continue making money from the OGs ... while completely redesigning all three types ( small, medium, large) together with the same rated advance glass cockpit significantly superior to anything Airbus has, take back dominance of the market. The problem for Boeing is, Airbus is also planning its Next Gen fleet ... when it already has the best Airliners on the market and dominate it. No. Boeing must speed tens of billions developing the replacement of the 737 ... which will only be a better version of the A320 which was designed in the 80's and is clearly the best small airliner on the market. The A350 is superior to the both the 777 & 787 with all the latest tech. Airbus built the A350 ... because ... Boeing built the 787. The A380 was specifically designed to be superior to the 747. See the problem ... with Boeing developing the replacement of the 737? Airbus now dominates the market ... with superior aircraft ... and can easily build a better a better A320 with the latest tech. Boeing must continue with the Legacy aircraft while it is making $$ ... and plan to replace its entire fleet ... with aircraft that are significantly better & superior to the competition. Airbus is now here to stay because Boeing completely screwed up the development of the 757, 777 & 787. The Competition is good. But Boeing is constantly doing catch up ... with one model at a time ... unwilling to change its ways .... when it knew way back in the late 70's that twin Jets is the future, wide bodies for long routes ... and the Engines are getting bigger requiring tall lading gear Boeing developed the 767 ... 10 years after Airbus A300. The 777 was developed because of the A330 and to cover the medium to large jet market. The 787 is simply a composite 767 with all the bells & whistles ... & it was made because Boeing never offered a twin engine 747 or a 777X to counter the A380. Again. Boeing has known for decades that twin Jets is the future and the engines are getting bigger. When Boeing was developing the 757 & 767 ... it should have planned ahead ... with a future fleet of twin jets only all with tall landing gear. This would mean the 737 will have to be replaced ... by the 757 ... and the 747 will either have to become a twin jet or a larger aircraft (777) would replace it. So Boeing should have n developed the 757 (small) .... 767(medium)... & ... 777(large) by the mid 80's and offered all three aircraft to the airlines ... with a twin engine 747 being considered. But Boeing offered the 757 & 767 with the same rating for the same market. The 757 has the same size fuselage as the 737, but has the tall landing gear for the bigger turbofan engines. Boeing should have offered a small, medium & large turbofan twins in the early 80's. And Boeing must now do what they should have done 40 years ago .... and significantly higher costs ... to compete with Airbus & retake dominance of the market. Airbus only had the A300 when Boeing was developing the 757 & 767. Airbus is now the market leader with superior product including the A320 which was designed in the 80's. It is stupid for Boeing to focus on developing the replacement of the 737 ... which will only be a better version of the A320 designed in the 80's. Airbus will simply design a better aircraft to Boeing's. Boeing has to completely reboot its entire range and the aircraft have to be dramatically better than the Airbus, to steal back customers and then compete hold a slight advantage. Not always doing catch up and a piecemeal approach.

If ever pay attention you never see obese people fly.

Haha! You're not the first, and certainly won't be the last 🙈