Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Breaking news: Ethiopian Airlines flight has crashed on way to Nairobi

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Evan
    replied
    Bring on the Ambulance Chasers. Maybe the best way to find a missing plane is to follow the lawyers.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-bo...-idUKKBN1YR0FC

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    And where are they now? Still at Boeing? If not what action do you expect Boeing to take with them?
    No, that's my point. They probably cannot be held accountable, yet they were the ones who masterminded this nightmare. Perhaps there is some legal angle but I doubt it. McAllister and Muilenburg certainly inherited the mess, but that doesn't exonerate them. They knew what was going on and went along with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    And where are they now? Still at Boeing? If not what action do you expect Boeing to take with them?

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    Who?
    Harry C. Stonecipher, CEO 2003-2005, President 1997-2005
    James McNerney, CEO 2005-2015, Chairman of the Board 2005-2016, President, 2005-2013

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    Stonecipher and McNerney
    Who?

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    It seems Boeing has finally begun taking steps to fix the problem at Boeing. But ousting McAllister and removing Muilenburg as chairman seem like sacrificial goating to me (although with very nice platinum parachutes I'm sure). The real culprits appear to be Stonecipher and McNerney, who are safely out of reach now. Still, it would be nice if we find out they aren't.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/b...callister.html

    Leave a comment:


  • flashcrash
    replied
    Originally posted by elaw View Post
    Are frogs migratory?
    Depends if it's an African or European frog

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    If a frog had wings, and it wasn't a stretched version of a frog trying to fill the gap left by a frog that had been cancelled by the creator, who was trying to avoid a costly new frog development by stretching an older, shortlegged frog, thus creating a long frog with low ground clearance, it wouldn't need a tailskid cartridge to detect every time it bumped its ass a-hoppin.

    It's an old saying.
    Clever.

    And no acronyms. ABLS?

    Leave a comment:


  • ATLcrew
    replied
    Originally posted by elaw View Post
    Are frogs migratory?
    Not at all. But they can be carried.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    No I don't.
    If a frog had wings, and it wasn't a stretched version of a frog trying to fill the gap left by a frog that had been cancelled by the creator, who was trying to avoid a costly new frog development by stretching an older, shortlegged frog, thus creating a long frog with low ground clearance, it wouldn't need a tailskid cartridge to detect every time it bumped its ass a-hoppin.

    It's an old saying.

    Leave a comment:


  • elaw
    replied
    Are frogs migratory?

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    And if frogs had wings, well you know how the rest goes.
    No I don't.

    If a frog had wings, it should refrain from pulling up relentlessly as it could stall?

    OR

    If a frog had wings, there should be clear procedures on how to handle warnings as "keep flying" is too vague and not specific to the species of the frog?

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    There were transatlantic 737 flights, with a technical stopover in Halifax or something. The 737NG can fly routes from North America to Europe with ETOPS 180. The 757 can fly some nonstops however.

    I think, if Boeing wasn't in the mood for a new airframe development, the 737 line should have ended instead of the 757, and new, shortened 757 variants, if engineering allowed for it, should have been introduced to replace the -700 and -800 NG's. I was saying this twenty years ago. The main reason then is the main reason now: ground clearance for the ultra fans that we knew were coming in the 1990's. A shortened 757 with new wings, engines and perhaps lowered gear height would not have needed artificial stability augmentation, would not have crashed right out of the box and would not have been grounded indefinitely, and probably would have been delivered to Lufthansa on time. Sure, a new type certification would have been required, but the process would have been minimal, the tooling and supply chains would have mostly existed and the cockpit commonality would allow for minimal changes to existing training resources. The 757, re-engined with some new avionics and a bit of FBW would be a real 21st century aircraft. The Max is a desperately dolled-up piece of antiquity.
    And if frogs had wings, well you know how the rest goes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    Should the 757 production have ended after only 23 years? That's a question which I've never discussed. That was 2004. I was not yet here in this forum back then.

    But this question probably is crucial and as new as this Friday: Is the 737 max-9 able to replace the whole type 757?

    I mean, here on my home airport, I have never in my life seen a 737 who crossed the Atlantic Ocean nonstop!
    The 757-200 has a range of not more than 3,900 nautical miles with MTOW. That is not quite enough for JFK, in case of a German B752, but for Boston Logan.
    The 737 max-9 has a range of not more than 3,500 nautical miles with MTOW. That is neither enough for JFK nor for Logan, if that were a German 737 max-9.

    I don't feel good with the replacement 737 versus 757. Does that mean, United reduces the longhaul flights?
    In Germany, the longhaul theoretically starts at 2,000 nautical miles. But all jet pilots on TV say, longhaul is nothing without having crossed the pond. Boston Logan, at least.
    3,800 nautical miles. In a 737 max-9? Impossibile!

    PS: Guess one good a/c type for Boston Logan... 747-800 passage, right.
    There were transatlantic 737 flights, with a technical stopover in Halifax or something. The 737NG can fly routes from North America to Europe with ETOPS 180. The 757 can fly some nonstops however.

    I think, if Boeing wasn't in the mood for a new airframe development, the 737 line should have ended instead of the 757, and new, shortened 757 variants, if engineering allowed for it, should have been introduced to replace the -700 and -800 NG's. I was saying this twenty years ago. The main reason then is the main reason now: ground clearance for the ultra fans that we knew were coming in the 1990's. A shortened 757 with new wings, engines and perhaps lowered gear height would not have needed artificial stability augmentation, would not have crashed right out of the box and would not have been grounded indefinitely, and probably would have been delivered to Lufthansa on time. Sure, a new type certification would have been required, but the process would have been minimal, the tooling and supply chains would have mostly existed and the cockpit commonality would allow for minimal changes to existing training resources. The 757, re-engined with some new avionics and a bit of FBW would be a real 21st century aircraft. The Max is a desperately dolled-up piece of antiquity.

    Leave a comment:


  • traveler
    replied
    There tickets have such a good price, comparing with other companies. But after this crash it makes you think what is more important - pay a bit more or fly with Ethiopian Airlines and worry about that your plane can also crush.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X