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?
737 Max - Boeing grounds the fleet after second crash | Production temporarily suspended
- Thread starter Ramshock
- Start date
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.
Long haul is a different story as for many years there was no viable alternative to the 777.
It's not particularly difficult depending on what you are trying to do. Ryanair are Boeing for sure but Easyjet are Airbus for example.
Aer Lingus
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/fed...g-737-max-inspectors-were-underqualified.html
Audit failure for regulators. Massive kick for the FAA.
Audit failure for regulators. Massive kick for the FAA.
Norwegian also use 737's and Turkish have a fleet of 737-8 and 900s
Norwegian have been flirting with bankruptcy for years and I wouldn't fly Turkish whatever aircraft they use.
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.
Turkish are great.
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.
Turkish is one of the best imo.
Why is that?
They've managed to damage a lot of their aircraft in recent years, mostly through pilot error.
Air France went through a similar period a decade ago.
Turkey is in EASA as a non EU member. They one of the best airlines in Europe.
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.
Look through their accident history in recent years. They have had a lot of minor incidents and some major ones.
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.
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.
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.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/business/boeing-flight-simulator-text-message.html
Boeing Pilot Complained of ‘Egregious’ Issue With 737 Max in 2016
Boeing Pilot Complained of ‘Egregious’ Issue With 737 Max in 2016
Boeing keeps coming out of this looking worse and worse
stock took a dump today, as expected with that kind of news.
I hope whatever money they thought they'd save is still saved....
I hope whatever money they thought they'd save is still saved....
Lives
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.
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?
Some dessert in california apparently.
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).
There are only 2 airplane manufacturers out there, and Airbus doesn't have the capacities to make Boeing redundant.
It'll cost them a lot of money for trying to be cheapskates, on development, though.
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.
They'll re-brand it because of the reputational damage (same reason they wanted to keep the "737" tag in this aircraft).
I read somewhere the cost of scrapping the 737 fleet would be around $80b. that's just the current airframe. Probably way more.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/11/...ly-higher-crash-risk-faa-concluded/index.html
FAA was lauded by some on here as being right for not grounding the aircraft when European and Asian agencies were doing so, as it was based on 'mass hysteria'. It turns out FAA had evidence to shut it down after the first crash itself but chose not to because ..... Can't see how it is not straight up a case of corruption. If the incident happened in America, it would have been a much bigger issue and plenty would have already resigned by now, most likely a FBI investigation would already have been underway too.
FAA was lauded by some on here as being right for not grounding the aircraft when European and Asian agencies were doing so, as it was based on 'mass hysteria'. It turns out FAA had evidence to shut it down after the first crash itself but chose not to because ..... Can't see how it is not straight up a case of corruption. If the incident happened in America, it would have been a much bigger issue and plenty would have already resigned by now, most likely a FBI investigation would already have been underway too.
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.
It's not aerodynamically unstable. That's the biggest misconception that has come out of this debacle .
It is stable. A control surface change will cause the aircraft attitude return to it's original state after some oscillations, even without further pilot input.
All transport category aircraft are stable. This is not the case with fighter category aircraft which (the latest generations ) are inherently unstable due to the requirement of fast maneuvering. They require constant corrections by the onboard computers.
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 $$$.
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.
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.
I kinda want to go exploring around places like that and old boneyards.
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).
No one will let him near brand new parked aircraft though.