cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Going Boeing?

Highlighted
Community Veteran
Posts: 20,030
Thanks: 2,724
Fixes: 40
Registered: ‎06-11-2007

Going Boeing?

23 REPLIES 23
Highlighted
Pro
Posts: 281
Thanks: 139
Registered: ‎24-02-2009

Re: Going Boeing?

My regular holiday airline is Jet2 and they run a lot of 20 yr old 737s and 30yr old 757s.  I feel it is only a matter of time before an old economy airline plane suffers a serious failure in flight.  They do have a rather smart A330 though if you get really lucky.

I wonder where the newer aircraft of Monarch and Thomas Cook are now?

Might not be a problem when the Labour government ban all air travel to show how commited they are to saving the planet!

 

Highlighted
Seasoned Champion
Posts: 1,804
Thanks: 1,340
Registered: ‎21-11-2018

Re: Going Boeing?

The short haul planes get a real beating as take off / landing are stressful for airframes and engines.. I guess a good parallel is like local short trips being worse for a car than motorway miles..

Highlighted
Hero
Posts: 3,251
Thanks: 1,286
Fixes: 5
Registered: ‎17-05-2013

Re: Going Boeing?


@TeeGee wrote:

 

I wonder where the newer aircraft of Monarch and Thomas Cook are now?


@TeeGee 

I don't know the age of these but some are being stored here until ... ?

Highlighted
Superuser
Superuser
Posts: 8,602
Thanks: 1,969
Fixes: 129
Registered: ‎30-07-2007

Re: Going Boeing?

@TeeGee I think you'll be surprised about the age ( or lack of!) of jet2's fleet https://m.planespotters.net/airline/Jet2

The oldest 737 in passenger service is only 9 yrs old. A lot are less than 3 yes old. They do still have a few 757s which are upto 14 yes old

 

Edit , ignore that above , those delivery dates are to jet2 , you're right the aircraft are actually older than that!

 

Highlighted
Community Veteran
Posts: 19,488
Thanks: 478
Registered: ‎12-08-2007

Re: Going Boeing?

Boeing has now stopped production of the 737 Max. And the FAA is is taking a firm stand with Boeing over its over optimistic press statements.

 


Last week, a critical discussion between the FAA and Boeing’s CEO regarding the 737 MAX’s return-to-service took place. FAA Administrator, Stephen Dickson, called a meeting with Boeing CEO, Dennis Muilenburg, to tell him to “pull back on public statements about an imminent return to service for the 737 MAX” as many believe that Boeing’s current goal is far-fetched and unrealistic.


 

Highlighted
Community Veteran
Posts: 15,216
Thanks: 1,097
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: Going Boeing?


@wotsup wrote:

The short haul planes get a real beating as take off / landing are stressful for airframes and engines.. I guess a good parallel is like local short trips being worse for a car than motorway miles..


Believe it or not they don't use flimsy 0.5mm sheet steel on these aircraft chassis like they do cars.. they actually build them properly with a very strong airframe.

The problem Boeing has is over conficence in itself. Ever since the introduction of the 777 where Boeing was allowed to bypass certain tests based on their previously excellent safety standards, Boeing has become complacent that it is the master of its craft and doesn't need to reassure anyone that something is done properly - and thus because they don't have to reassure anyone like they did decades back, they've let their standards slip - presumably in the name of profit like most companies.

The real issue is that instead of actually tacking the CoG problem properly or fixing the defective speed sensors they've admitted to using, they thought they'd tap out a few lines of code and be cheap on the matter - so cheap that they didn't even bother to tell pilots how to turn off the system that would attempt to nosedive them into the ground based on readings from a known duff sensor.

If they've started becoming tight about fixing something as critical as a sensor (which compared to the cost of the overall plane is low) then what else have they cut corners on? - I'll bet they've been slicing away quality all over the place, presumably their top brass is an ex banker who didn't cut the mustard in that industry when it tanked under their leadership too.

I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Highlighted
Aspiring Champion
Posts: 1,206
Thanks: 386
Fixes: 6
Registered: ‎22-10-2015

Re: Going Boeing?


@7up wrote: The real issue is that instead of actually tacking the CoG problem properly or fixing the defective speed sensors they've admitted to using, they thought they'd tap out a few lines of code and be cheap on the matter - so cheap that they didn't even bother to tell pilots how to turn off the system that would attempt to nosedive them into the ground based on readings from a known duff sensor.

Seems Boeing has clowns doing the design and monkeys in charge. I must admit I'm a bit perplexed by their statement:

In one of the communications, an employee said the plane was "designed by clowns".

The planemaker described the communications as "completely unacceptable".

 

By that, do they mean he /she should have said nothing or that the language used was unacceptable? I'd rather know what is wrong with any product.Perhaps if they had listened to the employee's concerns, they wouldn't be where they are now.

 

Maybe I need to start checking on what aircraft I'm getting in to next time I go fly.

 

Ever helpful. Grin Sure, I’d love to help you out. Now which way did you come in?
Highlighted
Pro
Posts: 902
Thanks: 205
Fixes: 4
Registered: ‎22-11-2014

Re: Going Boeing?

Reported in the FT  that a major Boeing supplier is laying off 2,800 jobs due to the MAX issue.

And whilst probably not a aircraft faliure (and a different model in the same stable), Boeing being back in the news with the Iran crash is not going to be helping.

Highlighted
Aspiring Legend
Posts: 11,769
Thanks: 3,860
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎04-11-2014

Re: Going Boeing?

@Marksfish 

It might not help, but surely it will not damage the company in any way. They can hardly be blamed for what looks certain to have been a missile strike by Iran.

Highlighted
Seasoned Champion
Posts: 1,804
Thanks: 1,340
Registered: ‎21-11-2018

Re: Going Boeing?


@7up wrote:

@wotsup wrote:

The short haul planes get a real beating as take off / landing are stressful for airframes and engines.. I guess a good parallel is like local short trips being worse for a car than motorway miles..


Believe it or not they don't use flimsy 0.5mm sheet steel on these aircraft chassis like they do cars.. they actually build them properly with a very strong airframe.


 The airftrame life is counted in takeoff and landing cycles, the transition from ground to air, then to altitude then landing again is one cycle due to stresses involved on landing gear, engines and fatigue cracking due to changes in air pressure inside and outside the cabin.  One flight cycle for a 737 short haul aurcraft my be many takoffs per day and flights of hundreds of miles.  A flight cycle for a Jumbo jet may be once per day and flight of 5 to 10,000 miles.  So in its lifetime a shorthaul jet will see many more takeoffs than a longhaul aircraft.  I only compared it to a car because most people already know 'motorway miles' are much better for a car than stop start short journeys - and long haul planes do 'motorway miles, where most of their flight time is 'cruising' - where short haul do mainly stop-start which is harder on the cars components.

 

This thread is not about the 737 Max centre of gravity issue - it is about cracks in the airframe at wing roots - where the landing gear loading stresses are greatest.

Highlighted
Pro
Posts: 902
Thanks: 205
Fixes: 4
Registered: ‎22-11-2014

Re: Going Boeing?


@Minivanman wrote:

@Marksfish 

It might not help, but surely it will not damage the company in any way. They can hardly be blamed for looks certain to have been a missile strike by Iran.


I'm not so sure. The travelling public will be the ones to vote on whether they trust the Boeing 737 going forward. Although if proven to be an Iranian missile which downed it, it will not help that another 737 has produced fatalities. People will be nervy about travelling. That said, air travel is still a safer form of travel than driving!

Highlighted
Seasoned Champion
Posts: 1,804
Thanks: 1,340
Registered: ‎21-11-2018

Re: Going Boeing?


@Marksfish wrote:

That said, air travel is still a safer form of travel than driving!

That depends on---

1. which part of the world the plane is flying.

2. who is driving the vehicle.

 

Highlighted
Pro
Posts: 902
Thanks: 205
Fixes: 4
Registered: ‎22-11-2014

Re: Going Boeing?

Not really. Statistically fewer people die from air travel than die in traffic accidents. Although, there will be fewer flights than car journies, aircraft carry far more people than the one car commuter on his drive to work.

 

But I get what you're saying 😉

Highlighted
Hero
Posts: 3,142
Thanks: 1,154
Fixes: 9
Registered: ‎05-09-2016

Re: Going Boeing?

@wotsup, and don't forget the temperature difference of about 90C, from 40C on the ground in some places to -50C at cruising altitude and back again, something that also affects short-haul aircraft more than long-haul ones.