freeurmind
weak willed
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2017
- Messages
- 5,883
Trying to search for the results of the Inspector General's investigation into the FAA but couldn't find anything. Does anyone have any news on this?
Not many major airlines in Europe use the 737 on their short haul flights anymore. Just Ryanair, KLM and Turkish, although I'd avoid the latter for other reasons. Easyjet, BA, Air France, Swiss and Lufthansa all use A320s.I was going to recommend EasyJet as I think they are one of the few airlines in Europe that are an all Airbus fleet.
Careful, Embraer and MD both owned by Boeing now. Well, MD merged with Boeing in the late 90's, I think.
It's not particularly difficult depending on what you are trying to do. Ryanair are Boeing for sure but Easyjet are Airbus for example.They have their hands on a lot of aircraft. It will be close to impossible to accomplish this. You would be better of going on ground transportation.
Aer LingusI was going to recommend EasyJet as I think they are one of the few airlines in Europe that are an all Airbus fleet.
Careful, Embraer and MD both owned by Boeing now. Well, MD merged with Boeing in the late 90's, I think.
Norwegian also use 737's and Turkish have a fleet of 737-8 and 900sNot many major airlines in Europe use the 737 on their short haul flights anymore. Just Ryanair, KLM and Turkish, although I'd avoid the latter for other reasons. Easyjet, BA, Air France, Swiss and Lufthansa all use A320s.
Long haul is a different story as for many years there was no viable alternative to the 777.
Norwegian have been flirting with bankruptcy for years and I wouldn't fly Turkish whatever aircraft they use.Norwegian also use 737's and Turkish have a fleet of 737-8 and 900s
Norwegian are doing OKish, they tried to expand to quick on slim routes , they do OK from Gatwick and seem to be performing better, they were affect by engine trouble with their 787's.Turkish are no better no worse than an other European Airline, those I now that have flown with them said they were excellent.Norwegian have been flirting with bankruptcy for years and I wouldn't fly Turkish whatever aircraft they use.
Norwegian had to beg for extra time to repay bonds the other week. The demise of Thomas Cook will help them but they're not in good shape.Norwegian are doing OKish, they tried to expand to quick on slim routes , they do OK from Gatwick and seem to be performing better, they were affect by engine trouble with their 787's.Turkish are no better no worse than an other European Airline, those I now that have flown with them said they were excellent.
Why is that?Turkish are dangerous.
They've managed to damage a lot of their aircraft in recent years, mostly through pilot error.Why is that?
All this Turkish Airlines stuff. I have looked at Flight Global and I could not find anything specific showing that they were any less or more safe than the industry norm.Turkey is in EASA as a non EU member. They one of the best airlines in Europe.
Norwegian had to beg for extra time to repay bonds the other week. The demise of Thomas Cook will help them but they're not in good shape.
Turkish are dangerous.
Look through their accident history in recent years. They have had a lot of minor incidents and some major ones.All this Turkish Airlines stuff. I have looked at Flight Global and I could not find anything specific showing that they were any less or more safe than the industry norm.
If they are so dangerous (not you saying this I accept), then where is the data.
Let's be clear - they're not some African charter airline. Still, they've written off 4 aircraft in the last 10 years and had 10 serious incidents in the same time frame. That is a lot for a European airline.Turkish is IOSA certified and hence their safety rating is very high class. Ground incidents are not counted as a lot of times it's ground handling equipment hiring the aircraft.
Plus they operate to the EU which is under EASA ( Turkey is an associate member not being in the EU) and they get regularly SACA by EASA inspectors.
If they find anything amiss they get grounded too if it's serious.
Boeing keeps coming out of this looking worse and worsehttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/business/boeing-flight-simulator-text-message.html
Boeing Pilot Complained of ‘Egregious’ Issue With 737 Max in 2016
LivesI hope whatever money they thought they'd save is still saved....
Some dessert in california apparently.I heard on the radio this morning that they’ve been producing 42 new aircraft per month over the last however long. So where the feck are all these planes sat?
Too big to go down so they would get bailed out if it ever looked likely. There's over 200 companies that supply parts/services to them, so it would have a massive effect on the economy. PW and GE also are tied in quite tightly with Boeing (RR less so).The more I read about this the more I think it will take down the company. I don’t see how they get out of this one. They can’t easily redesign the planes, this series is the bedrock of their sales, they must have lawsuits lining up, they killed Ralph Naders niece (I believe), talk about a bad bad opponent to have, and they appear to have a massive cultural problem on top. They are so screwed. The FAA also comes out really poorly.
There are only 2 airplane manufacturers out there, and Airbus doesn't have the capacities to make Boeing redundant.The more I read about this the more I think it will take down the company. I don’t see how they get out of this one. They can’t easily redesign the planes, this series is the bedrock of their sales, they must have lawsuits lining up, they killed Ralph Naders niece (I believe), talk about a bad bad opponent to have, and they appear to have a massive cultural problem on top. They are so screwed. The FAA also comes out really poorly.
It wont bring them down. Even with the cost of all this, there's still a good chance they will make a profit this year. It might be the end of the 737 though, i said that at the beginning.The more I read about this the more I think it will take down the company. I don’t see how they get out of this one. They can’t easily redesign the planes, this series is the bedrock of their sales, they must have lawsuits lining up, they killed Ralph Naders niece (I believe), talk about a bad bad opponent to have, and they appear to have a massive cultural problem on top. They are so screwed. The FAA also comes out really poorly.
They'll re-brand it because of the reputational damage (same reason they wanted to keep the "737" tag in this aircraft).It wont bring them down. Even with the cost of all this, there's still a good chance they will make a profit this year. It might be the end of the 737 though, i said that at the beginning.
I read somewhere the cost of scrapping the 737 fleet would be around $80b. that's just the current airframe. Probably way more.It wont bring them down. Even with the cost of all this, there's still a good chance they will make a profit this year. It might be the end of the 737 though, i said that at the beginning.
Don't think they'd get away with such a cheap approach.They'll re-brand it because of the reputational damage (same reason they wanted to keep the "737" tag in this aircraft).
It's not aerodynamically unstable. That's the biggest misconception that has come out of this debacle .Don't think they'd get away with such a cheap approach.
The 737MAX is done for. A plane that plummets from the sky like a piece of rock once its electronic systems fail doesn't instill confidence.
I know I wouldn't board a plane that is aerodynamically unstable, and I know a lot other people who share my view.
I heard on the radio this morning that they’ve been producing 42 new aircraft per month over the last however long. So where the feck are all these planes sat?
That isn't right. It was installed because increased thrust changes it's attitude, which doesn't happen with other transport aircraft. It does this because the engines had to be jammed under the wing as a result of a too low undercarriage, which itself is caused by US regulation (changing it would result in a "new plane" according to us regulation = lots more costs). But it is stable.The reason MCAS was installed is NOT to provide stability. It was solely to make the Max feel and handle like the NG in certain situations , and avoid the necessity of a new type rating for pilots, which would cost airlines $$$.
I kinda want to go exploring around places like that and old boneyards.
This video is half a year old though. So another ~250 have been finished since (and this is only a fraction of what was finished at the time).
Easily the worst crisis in ~110 year history of the company. Can't wait until Donald involves himself to get them flying again.
My guess is you still have plenty of time to do so because it will be a very long time before they fly again (if ever).I kinda want to go exploring around places like that and old boneyards.
I kinda want to go exploring around places like that and old boneyards.
No one will let him near brand new parked aircraft though.My guess is you still have plenty of time to do so because it will be a very long time before they fly again (if ever).