Narrowbodies over Atlantic

Page 3 of 4<1234>
October 2nd, 2017 at 9:12:17 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
Quote: Dalex64
If they did not have air stairs large enough, how did they get them to the replacement planes?


If all else fails, they can deploy the slides.

I assume they used air stairs. I also read the passengers stayed on the plane for hours.

Now, the great metropolis of Goose Bay probably doesn't have a major aircraft repair facility. The engine naturally requires replacement, but AF also should check the whole wing for damage. So either they'll have to fly in mechanics and an engine, or just mechanics and then fly the ugly air whale on three engines elsewhere.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
October 2nd, 2017 at 10:24:48 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 2
Posts: 2076
I heard they left them on the plane because they didn't have the facilities in the airport or the rooms available in the surrounding area to handle them.

The aircraft on the other hand was prepared to deal with them for the duration of their planned trip. With the APU running they'd have air conditioning and "in flight" entertainment available.

Still pretty awful, though. Being cooped up on a plane when you aren't moving would be very psychologically frustrating to me.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
October 2nd, 2017 at 10:37:05 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
Quote: Dalex64
The aircraft on the other hand was prepared to deal with them for the duration of their planned trip. With the APU running they'd have air conditioning and "in flight" entertainment available.


And working toilets.

But is AC a consideration that far north in late September?


Quote:
Still pretty awful, though. Being cooped up on a plane when you aren't moving would be very psychologically frustrating to me.


You can always amuse yourself by loudly saying "Boy, I sure hope none of the other engines blow up!" :)
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
October 2nd, 2017 at 11:51:02 AM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 2
Posts: 2076
AC is required when you have so many people in such a (relatively) small space with ventilation only controlled by pressurization.

However in the absence of actually cooling (or heating) the air, at a bare minimum you need to circulate it and continue to bring in fresh air.

https://aerospace.pall.com/en/commercial-fixed-wing/how-cabin-air-systems-work.html
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
October 9th, 2017 at 5:48:51 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
I am still amazed that their has been no discussion of grounding the A380s on Air France.

In 2010 the accident led to the temporary grounding of the rest of the six-plane Qantas A380 fleet. It also led to groundings, inspections and engine replacements on some other Rolls-Royce powered A380s in service with Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines, but not in the A380 fleets of Air France or Emirates, which were powered by Engine Alliance engines. Singapore Airlines resumed operations in one day.

Qantas grounded 3 of the 6 planes for 23 days. They resumed the LAX-SYD flight after about 8 weeks. The plane with the blown engine stayed grounded for 5 months.
October 9th, 2017 at 6:51:51 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
Quote: Pacomartin
I am still amazed that their has been no discussion of grounding the A380s on Air France.


Do you mean AF has grounded the A380s and no one's talking about ti, or that AF hasn't even considered grounding their A380s?

I assume the latter, as I'd have heard about the former. Also I'm pretty sure I've seen the AF A380 flying over Mex City since the engine accident over Greenland.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
October 9th, 2017 at 7:18:40 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
Quote: Nareed
AF hasn't even considered grounding their A380s


I haven't heard anything about them even taking them out of service for a day.
October 9th, 2017 at 8:12:02 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
Quote: Pacomartin
I haven't heard anything about them even taking them out of service for a day.


I assume it has been considered and rejected.

I've heard nothing about the investigation, save that Denmark delegated it to France (the incident took place above Greenland, which is under danish jurisdiction), and that engine pieces were found in Greenland. I've heard nothing from the engine manufacturer, either, or from other airlines using the engine on their A380s.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:29:57 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 763
Posts: 9026
Quote: Pontifications: Boeing 737-9 roll-outĖNothing Special in the Air By Scott Hamilton March 6, 2017, © Leeham Co

Iíve said it before and Iíll say it again. Boeing should forget about the MAX 10 and go straight to designing a replacement for the 737.

The MAX 7 has fewer than 70 announced sales, far, far worse than the -700NG (which is winding down at 1,128).
The MAX 9 is doing little better than the -900ER.
Boeing wonít regain market share with the MAX 10.

Yes, Boeing has more sales potential with existing 737 operators than Airbus has with existing A320 operators (because the ratio of new-to-old isnít as high with Boeing as with Airbus). But some 737 operators may just decide to retain the NG fleets longer with the expectation Boeing will take the jump to a new airplane, rather than ordering an interim solution.

The only way Boeing will take the lead over Airbus is to launch an entirely new airplane. This resets the competitive clock to zero. Commonality, except for cockpits, wonít be an issue. The 787/747-8 experience was costly and traumatic. But these are in the past.
Itís time for Boeing to be bold again.
https://leehamnews.com/2017/03/06/pontifications-boeing-737-9-roll-nothing-special-air/


Scott Hamilton also takes Boeing to task for not breaking out orders on their website between variations. The official argument is that "customers can switch between models". But customers could do this with the NG, too, and Boeing always broke out these figures.

Boeing's motivation is obvious. They don't want to highlight that they are getting crushed by the A321neo sales.

Boeing has at least 5 years of production with the MAX-8. They should give it up by trying to stretch it out another year with sales of the MAX-9 and MAX-10 and "be bold again".
October 10th, 2017 at 7:45:14 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 332
Posts: 11962
Quote: Pacomartin
Boeing has at least 5 years of production with the MAX-8. They should give it up by trying to stretch it out another year with sales of the MAX-9 and MAX-10 and "be bold again".


It's hard to disagree with that. However, Boeing has been this way for decades. their last clean slate narrow body was the 757, over 30 years ago. Everything since then has been an upgrade of the 737. And it's not like they didn't try, they just didn't do.

Perhaps they went into too fanciful and impractical a direction. There was the 7J7 with unducted fan engines, where the engines didn't pan out. The Sonic Cruiser which offered higher fuel consumption for a modest increase in speed.

Instead they ate McDonnell Douglas and rebranded the MD-90 as B717.

They can't eat Airbus. They can try to drive Bombardier out of business, but that would backfire
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
Page 3 of 4<1234>