Page 122 of 170 FirstFirst ... 2272112114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130132 ... LastLast
Results 3,026 to 3,050 of 4244

Thread: Airline News

  1. #3026
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    Airlines look toward another peak season without the MAX


    "Nov. 11, 2019, © Leeham News:

    Airlines are beginning to make plans for another peak summer season either without the Boeing 737 MAX in their fleets, or a reduced number.

    With the recertification of the MAX continually sliding, like an airline’s creeping delay at the airport, this is stating the obvious. Airlines keep shifting the true return to service (RTS) (not recertification) from 2019 into 1Q2020.

    American and Southwest airlines, the two carriers with more MAXes grounded than any other airline, now target RTS March 5 next year—just a week short of the global grounding of the airplane.

    Boeing’s chairman, David Calhoun, acknowledged in an interview with CNBC Nov. 5 RTS will now fall into 2021.

    This was two days before the Federal Aviation Administration and EASA rejected Boeing’s documentation that is required before recertification is granted. According to media reports, this could add an inconsequential number of days to the process or a significant number of weeks.

    Concerns are beginning to emerge that recertification may not come until after the first of the year.

    All this increases the uncertainty for the airlines.

    Summary

    • Creating Plan B—no MAX in the peak season.
    • Stored MAXes may face a “calendar” deadline, requiring C Checks before RTS.
    • Lessors offering new, year-long leases on A320s and 737 NGs."


    https://leehamnews.com/2019/11/11/ai...thout-the-max/


    "C check

    This is performed approximately every 20–24 months or a specific number of actual flight hours (FH) or as defined by the manufacturer. This maintenance check is much more extensive than a B check, requiring a large majority of the aircraft's components to be inspected.

    This check puts the aircraft out of service, and the aircraft must not leave the maintenance site until it is completed. It also requires more space than A and B checks. It is, therefore, usually carried out in a hangar at a maintenance base.

    The time needed to complete such a check is at least 1–2 weeks and the effort involved can require up to 6,000 man-hours."


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_maintenance_checks


    One wonders which airline's planes get the possible "C Check" first. Will FAA, EASA, SCAA, CAAC .... inspectors be required at all sites of checking, or will Boeing perform the task i.e. self certify?
    Last edited by OhOh; 12-11-2019 at 10:06 AM.
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  2. #3027
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Never ending story of 737:

    In Egypt, a Ukrainian plane caught fire with almost 200 people on board. Video
    November 10, 2019

    At the airport of the Egyptian resort city of Sharm el-Sheikh, the plane of the Ukrainian airline SkyUp caught fire from Zaporozhye. This was reported by the Ministry of Civil Aviation of Egypt.

    The liner on the chassis caught fire after landing. This was due to an oil leak from the hydraulic system, which resulted in one chassis tire flashing. Passengers and aircraft crew were urgently evacuated.

    SkyUp Boeing 737-800 (UR-SQH) on flight #PQ7153 taxied to its parking stand after landing runway 04 (L/R) at Sharm El Sheikh Intl Airport (HESH), Egypt when hydraulic fluid leaked onto hot brakes causing flames in the left maingear. The fire was exinguished quickly.

    https://strana.ua/news/232626-samole...-nojabrja.html

  3. #3028
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    ^

    A few brown pants needing a wash no doubt.

  4. #3029
    Member
    Bettyboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 10:50 AM
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    34,272
    ^^ to be fair, 737-800s are great (and very safe).

    Nothing like the 737-max, imho.

  5. #3030
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Bettyboo View Post
    737-800s are great
    Are they not one of the Boeing 737-NG family and hence have the "pickle" problem?

    "The 737 NG comprises the 737-600, -700, -800, and -900 variants,"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737


    Information - 737NG STA 663.75 FRAME FITTING AND FAILSAFE STRAP CRACKS AT S-18A STRAP

    "During maintenance in preparation for a 737-800 modification, while accomplishing General Visual Inspection (GVI) or Detailed Inspection (DET) of the wing rear spar, a crack was incidentally discovered at STA 663.75 fuselage frame fitting adjacent to stringer (S-)18A strap. Further visual inspection revealed cracks on both LHS and RHS frame fittings and LHS and RHS failsafe straps"

    https://www.regulations.gov/document...2019-0711-0002

  6. #3031
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Nope Boo, modifying a 50 year old airframe to try and cram in bigger engines or more people has turned out to be a fatal mistake.

    A new design is what's needed. Will probably be cheaper in the long run.

  7. #3032
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:43 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,215
    ^ They should have updated the 757 instead of trying to replace it with an extended 737. Pushed the design beyond reasonable boundaries when they already had a plane they could update.

    ^^ I have never seen a 737-600. A rarity indeed with only a few operators.

    I still think the airbus a319,320,321 series are far superior to the B 737. Boeing took a gamble and lost big time. A pity airbus don't have the manufacturing capability to finish off the 737. Silly bloody working rules the Europeans have doesn't help.

  8. #3033
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    A pity airbus don't have the manufacturing capability to finish off the 737. Silly bloody working rules the Europeans have doesn't help.
    What do you mean finish it off?

    They can't make NEO's fast enough and they opened a second A220 assembly line three months ago.

    They're doing just fine.

  9. #3034
    Thailand Expat lom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    on my way
    Posts
    11,453
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Boeing’s chairman, David Calhoun, acknowledged in an interview with CNBC Nov. 5 RTS will now fall into 2021.
    One can just hope that isn't a typo.

  10. #3035
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Airbus frontrunner to win big Air Arabia order: sources

    DUBAI/PARIS (Reuters) - Airbus (AIR.PA) is likely to win an order for at least 100 jets from Air Arabia (AIRA.DU) with an announcement possibly coming as soon as the Dubai Airshow next week, two sources told Reuters.

    The Emirati budget carrier has been considering the order for up to 120 jets, which would more than double its current fleet of 55 narrowbody aircraft, for more than a year.

    Air Arabia, which has held talks with both Airbus and Boeing (BA.N) and said it would make a decision by January, was expected to select the European planemaker, the two sources said.

    Airbus declined comment. Air Arabia did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKBN1XN19M

  11. #3036
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Quote Originally Posted by lom View Post
    One can just hope that isn't a typo.
    Not so much a typo as short on detail.

    Dave Calhoun, who took over as chairman from Muilenburg last month, also suggested in an interview with CNBC that the return of the Boeing 737 Max may take more than a year to fully complete.

    "It came in two fronts: one, no short-, no long-term bonus, and three, no consideration for equity grants, until the Max in its entirety is back in the air and flying safely," Calhoun said, adding that it could take until 2021.

    The company previously had said the Boeing 737 Max would return to service early in the fourth quarter, then said last month regulators would begin recertification in Q4 while backing a February timeline for a return to service that some airlines like Southwest Airlines (
    LUV) have given.
    https://www.investors.com/news/boein...rn-until-2021/

  12. #3037
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Qantas is about to fly a near-empty plane from London Heathrow airport to Sydney as part of “Project Sunrise”.

    These are the key questions and answers.

    London to Sydney nonstop – is this a first?

    No. Qantas flew exactly the same trip in August 1989 – so long ago that the plane used, a Boeing 747-400, is now parked at a museum in Australia.

    So what’s different?

    Logistically, not much. Then, as now, Qantas deftly diverted what would otherwise be a routine delivery flight from the Boeing plant in Everett, Washington, to Sydney. The plane flies to Heathrow and then continues to Australia’s largest city the long way around – and with no paying passengers onboard.

    The difference in 2019 is that commercial flights on the route are on the horizon – by 2022, according to Qantas.

    What are the details?

    The aircraft is a Boeing 787-9 “Dreamliner” named Longreach, registration VH-ZNJ, and painted to celebrate 100 years of Qantas – an anniversary that happens in 2020.

    It flew from the Boeing factory in Everett to Los Angeles, and after five days took off for Heathrow.

    The plane is equipped with two General Electric engines and fitted with 42 business class seats, 28 in premium economy and 166 economy.

    It will operate the 10,573 trip as QF7879, reflecting the Boeing aircraft type. This is the same flight number as was applied to the nonstop New York-Sydney flight in October 2019.

    What is the journey time?

    It is scheduled for 18 hours, 45 minutes, but is likely to take slightly less. The plane will have an airspeed of about 550mph, and will be assisted by favourable tail winds for much of its journey. It will easily beat the journey time of 20 hours, 9 minutes set in 1989, because the Boeing 747 had to fly slightly slower in order to minimise fuel burn.

    The aircraft is due to land at Heathrow at 7.40pm on Wednesday evening and to leave Heathrow on Thursday morning as soon as it opens for departures at 6am. It is scheduled to arrive at Sydney at 11.45am local time on Friday.

    Which way will it go?

    The exact route will depend on meteorological conditions, but it is likely to stick closely to the “great circle” route – the shortest distance between two points on the surface of the Earth.

    The flight will start with an initial heading east-north-east to Copenhagen, then across Klaipeda in northern Lithuania, Latvia and into Russian airspace – passing north of Moscow.

    The northernmost point en route is likely to be close to the city of Nizhny Novgorod at 56.3 degrees north – the same as Perth (Scotland, not Western Australia).

    The flight path then gently turns south and gradually increases its southward trajectory, crossing the northern Kazakh frontier about halfway along its length. As night falls, Qantas flight 7879 travels over northeastern Kazakhstan until it reaches the Chinese border.

    The aircraft will spend more than five hours crossing China, longer than any other country, before reaching the coast at Hong Kong and setting off across the South China Sea.

    It then cuts across the Philippines and miscellaneous Indonesian islands before making landfall in Australia, close to Darwin, around sunrise.

    Even here the aircraft has almost 2,000 miles – and four hours flying – to cover, cutting diagonally across the Northern Territory, Queensland and northern New South Wales before landing at Sydney.

    Why is Qantas doing this?

    Officially the trip is being described as an “ultra-long haul research flight to gather new data about inflight passenger and crew health and wellbeing”.

    People in the cabin – mostly Qantas employees – will be fitted with wearable technology devices and take part in experiments.

    The airline says: “Scientists and medical experts from the Charles Perkins Centre will monitor sleep patterns, food and beverage consumption, lighting, physical movement and inflight entertainment to assess impact on health, wellbeing and body clock.

    “Monash University researchers will work with pilots to record crew melatonin levels before, during and after the flights. Pilots will wear an EEG (electroencephalogram) device that tracks brain wave patterns and monitors alertness.

    “The aim is to establish data to assist in building the optimum work and rest pattern for pilots operating long-haul services.”

    But any commercial flight on the route will certainly not leave at 6am, the departure time scheduled for the Qantas test flight, so tests to measure fatigue will not be wholly helpful.

    With a journey time of just one hour longer than the Perth-London nonstop that operates every day, the scientific claims looks flimsy – though the airline says: “Qantas has already conducted data on passenger sleep strategies on its direct Perth-London service, and some of these initial findings will be assessed further as part of these dedicated research flights.”

    Qantas is understandably keen to extract as much favourable publicity as possible, as it did with a similar (though shorter) flight from New York to Sydney in October 2019.

    What about the impact on the planet?

    Flying large aircraft empty for thousands of miles creates a lot of CO2. The airline says it will compensate for the London-Sydney nonstop: “Qantas operates the largest airline carbon offset scheme in the world. This same programme will be used to offset all the carbon emissions.”

    But Anna Hughes, director of Flight Free UK, says: “The climate emergency demands a drastic reduction in emissions now, not new ultra-long haul routes.

    “Qantas cannot claim to be committed to sustainability while flying empty jets halfway around the world. Airlines are very good at referencing climate change when it serves their purpose, but there is simply no way an airline can achieve net-zero emissions while pushing ultra-long haul routes, and any claim otherwise is greenwashing.

    “While there is no doubt that flying such distances is a remarkable feat of ingenuity and engineering, now that we are aware of aviation’s role in the climate crisis, it is time to stop.”

    Surely cutting out the stops saves fuel?

    Not on ultra-long haul flights like this, where the tanks are full of fuel to be burnt later in the journey.

    According to Antonio Filippone in his book Advanced Aircraft Flight Performance, a modern aircraft (specifically the Boeing 777-300, though values are likely to be similar for the 787) on a very long route should optimally refuel every 3,450 miles – if suitable airports are available close to the shortest route. This takes into account the significant extra fuel consumed on the ground and during the ascent.

    For the London-Sydney flight, refuelling at Kazakhstan’s largest city, Almaty, and Cebu in the Philippines, divides the journey into three almost identical segments and adds only 74 miles (about eight minutes’ flying time) to the trip – though the journey would take hours longer because of the time on the ground.

    When will fare-paying passengers be able to take a nonstop flight from London to Sydney?

    Qantas calls its plan for nonstop flights connecting Sydney with both London and New York Project Sunrise. Scheduled flights are expected to start by 2022, if Airbus or Boeing can supply a suitable aircraft – either the A350 or 777X respectively. But Alan Joyce, chief executive of Qantas, says: “There’s plenty of enthusiasm for Sunrise, but it’s not a foregone conclusion. This is ultimately a business decision and the economics have to stack up.”

    A decision is expected by the end of 2019. In time, there could also be nonstops from London to Brisbane and Melbourne, and from Paris to Sydney.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9200841.html

  13. #3038
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    United scrubs 737 Max flying from schedules until early March


    "United Airlines has joined American Airlines and Southwest Airlines in removing the 737 Max from its schedules until early March 2020, a change aligning US carriers' expectations even as Boeing projects the aircraft will be flying before year end.

    United now expects its 737 Max flights will resume 4 March. It previously had removed the aircraft from its schedules until early January.

    The move scrubs an additional roughly 3,300 flights from Chicago-based United's schedule. The carrier disclosed the change in a statement that provides no details about reasons behind the decision.

    "Moving forward, we’ll continue to monitor the regulatory process and nimbly make the necessary adjustments to our operation and our schedule to benefit our customers who are traveling with us," the airline's statement says.

    Assuming the Max returns to service in early March 2020, United will have cancelled more than 16,000 flights as a result of the grounding, which took effect in March, its figures show.

    Earlier this month, American and Southwest pushed back their expected Max reentry dates. American's schedule now has Max flights resuming on 5 March, and Southwest set the date at 7 March.

    Despite those moves, several days ago Boeing issued a statement saying it expects the US Federal Aviation Administration will clear the Max to fly in December. Once that happens, airlines will likely need to run pilots through new training."

    https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...ntil-e-462264/

  14. #3039
    Thailand Expat David48atTD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Palace Far from Worries
    Posts
    14,393

  15. #3040
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Because they've done cost/benefit analyses and it isn't worth it.

    Next?

  16. #3041
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    ^ A surprising discovery. Many many years ago I have learned somewhere that the soviet bombardiers made some 50 years ago had the wheels spun before landing by a hydraulic engine inside the wheel.

  17. #3042
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    What is it with Boeing getting all these free passes from government agencies?

    Oh, that's right, they pay for them.

    When NASA confirmed last year that it would conduct a safety review of SpaceX and Boeing, the two companies it had hired to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, a top agency official said it would be “pretty invasive,” involving hundreds of interviews with employees at every level of the companies at multiple locations.

    Such an in-depth probe of the corporate cultures would be time-consuming and expensive, requiring modifications to the contracts awarded to the companies. Ultimately, NASA agreed to pay SpaceX $5 million for its review, and it proceeded.

    Boeing, however, said such a review would require an additional payment of about $25 million, according to a person familiar with the negotiations. NASA balked at the cost and decided that a far more limited paper audit would suffice, along with a few interviews of key personnel, according to four agency and industry officials familiar with the matter.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/techn...l-examination/


  18. #3043
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    Was the NASA "paper review" on Boeing conducted by NASA, Boeing or NASA people employed at/seconded to, Boeing?

    It seems to have been the FAA model.

  19. #3044
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Was the NASA "paper review" on Boeing conducted by NASA, Boeing or NASA people employed at/seconded to, Boeing?

    It seems to have been the FAA model.
    Sounds like they just sent them them some questionnaires to fill and without too much concern over checking the answers.

  20. #3045
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    More Boing, Boing 737 woes surfacing.

    Boeing to fix engines on 7,000 jets after fatal accident probe

    "New York (CNN Business)Investigators of a fatal accident on a Southwest Airlines plane last year recommend that Boeing retrofit the engines of nearly 7,000 jets to prevent a repeat of the accident.

    A single passenger was killed on the plane when a fan blade broke and caused part of the engine covering to hit the side of the jet. That broke one of the windows, and the cabin rapidly depressurized. The crew was able to land the plane, but the woman sitting next to that window was killed.

    The National Transportation Safety Board, which investigated the accident, recommended Tuesday that Boeing redesign part of the outer covering of the planes' jet engines to prevent it from flying into the plane should a fan blade break free on a future flight. It said that all Boeing 737 Next Generation series airplanes should be retrofitted with whatever fix Boeing comes up with.

    Boeing has delivered about 6,700 of the 737 NG jets to airlines around the world, but it has stopped taking new orders for them as it shifted to the 737 Max. It has fewer than 100 of the NG planes yet to build and and deliver.

    Boeing 737 NG planes have not been affected by the grounding of the 737 Max in the wake of two fatal crashes. But the 737 NG had other safety issues, including the discovery of cracks on some of the older planes on a part used to keep the wings in place. Those cracks have grounded a handful of the 737 NGs.

    The final decision on any fix is up to the Federal Aviation Administration, not the NTSB, whose role is to investigate the causes of accidents. But Boeing (BA) said it is already working on enhancements of the engines' design to addresss the NTSB's recommendations. And it said until that fix is in place inspections of the fans blades will allow the planes to operate safely.

    "Our common goal is to help prevent similar events from happening in the future," it said.

    The NTSB blamed neither Boeing (BA) nor Southwest (LUV), saying that the crack in the fan blade was not detectable and that the risk of the engine casing breaking free was unknown before this incident.
    But shares of Boeing fell as much as 2% immediately after the report was released, although it later recovered much of that loss."

    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/19/business/boeing-737-ng-fix-southwest-airlines-fatality/index.html


    No identification of the engine type, political correctness? Two undetectable or unknown risks have been identified which require fixing.

    How much a year does Boeing spend on Duck-tape?

    One hopes the FAA and the other global airworthiness certifiers don't take the same "suck it and see" the increasingly financially exposed Boeing management's attitude smells of.
    Last edited by OhOh; 21-11-2019 at 01:19 AM.

  21. #3046
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:43 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    12,215
    ^ CFM56-7B engine fitted to numerous airbus and Boeing jets.

  22. #3047
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Oooh fuck that's gonna hurt.

    And this:


  23. #3048
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,561
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    ^ CFM56-7B engine fitted to numerous airbus and Boeing jets.

    It's not the engine:

    The NTSB has concluded there is a potential structural vulnerability in the engine casing on all Boeing 737 “Next Generation” (NG) aircraft. These are the versions of the twin-jet with the suffix -600, -700, -800 and -900.
    Or to be more specific:

    After investigating an engine blowout that killed a Southwest Airlines passenger last year, federal safety officials on Tuesday said Boeing should be required to redesign the engine casing on its 737 NG airplanes, and airlines should retrofit more than 6,800 planes currently in service worldwide.
    https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...sands-of-737s/



    But again the FAA did fuck all:

    |The tragedy raised questions about safety oversight because of a similar engine explosion on a different Southwest flight 19 months earlier. After that earlier incident the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandated inspections of engine fan blades — but the inspections failed to detect the cracked fan blade that caused the fatal accident.

    <snip>

    On Flight 1380, it was the disintegration of the fan cowl that did most damage. That’s the middle part of the pod that wraps around the engine; a part that opens up on hinges to allow access for maintenance.
    The design requirements for the engine casing — known as the nacelle — are developed by Boeing. The 737 NG nacelles are then designed and built by a division of United Technologies.
    The 737 NG, with nearly 7,000 flying worldwide, is the model prior to the 737 MAX. The MAX has a different engine and casing and is not affected.
    Boeing said it “is working on a design enhancement that would fully address the safety recommendation from the NTSB.”


    “Once approved by the FAA, that design change will be implemented in the existing 737 NG fleet,” Boeing added.

    You have to fucking laugh. They have made no systemic changes to the FAA that guarantee anything other than a cursory glance and an automatic rubber stamp.

  24. #3049
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    potential structural vulnerability in the engine casing on all Boeing 737 “Next Generation” (NG) aircraft
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Boeing said it “is working on a design enhancement that would fully address the safety recommendation from the NTSB.”
    Similar response to the MCAS crashes. Meanwhile the affected Boeing 737 NG family of planes are still flying.

    Time scale of design - unqualified, timescale of certification - unqualified, time scale of upgrades - unqualified, number of passengers at risk until all planes upgraded - 5,600,000 passengers/day

    Boeing 737 NG engine blade + Boeing 737 NG engine casing failure + Boeing 737 NG Wing Pickle fatigue exposure:

    7,000 planes x 4 flights per day x 200 passengers per plane.

    "As currently the effect is only, one death/incident, the proven risk is only 28,000 passengers/day," the company Director of Risk Management, reported to the board.

    "Yeah we can live with that!", the Boeing President was heard to say.

    Next item on today's agenda, "The Boeing 777" ....
    Last edited by OhOh; 22-11-2019 at 08:56 PM.

  25. #3050
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,223
    Dubai-air-show-order-tracker


    Airline News-ac-orders-png

    http://order tracker provides regula...ils of all the
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Airline News-ac-orders-png  

Page 122 of 170 FirstFirst ... 2272112114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130132 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •