JetBlue 292

[XabbaRus]

I thought it was amazing and noticed how he kept the whole thing centred.

Did anyone notice how the whole wheel unit had melted away and that it was just the stump from the axle housing up.

Amazing.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by tycho102

No, because he's got to minimize the force on it. If he had waited until he stalled out, the plane would've dropped extra force on it, making it more likely to collapse. And that's the same reason he rolled out, rather than braking hard. If he'd laid in with brakes and reversers, he's definately have caved the nose in. As it is, he used minimal brakes to make sure he shut down on the runway, rather than the overbound grass. It definately would've sunk in and snapped.

That the nose strut didn't snap on the runway does show good design. They'll have to replace that strut, and xray the airframe for stress, but that's about it. The engines probably didn't pickup any FOD, and the flaps probably didn't catch all that much junk.

I understand the reasoning behind doing what they did, but I still think that they could have stayed off it much longer and still maintained nose drop.

[SUBMAN1]

By the way, I wonder if this will end up being a software fault? Airbus is notorious for having computer problems with their aircraft. The A320 actually holds the record for most problems and faults with a new airframe design - one reason I won't fly Airbus at all.

-S

[JamesT73J]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Airbus is notorious for having computer problems with their aircraft. The A320 actually holds the record for most problems and faults with a new airframe design - one reason I won't fly Airbus at all.

-S

It's not software. Last time this happened, it was caused by an extruded O-ring in the nosewheel-steering hydraulic assembly.

The 'computer problems' mantra is a rather irritating persistent myth surrounding Airbus. The A320 is a peerless aircraft, you should give it a try; I'm positive you'll be impressed.

[XabbaRus]

Airbus are just find.

I have flown on them more times than I care to remember and I am still alive

Also flown in a Tu-141 and Il-62

[Kapitan]

i prefer airbus over boeing any day airbus are unique there also the only fully manafactured aircraft to have a proper fly by wire capibility there very reliable.

if you note the sources that say everything against them please not its bias as the source is american if the source was canadian or non european non american then it be unbias

air canada b.a luthansa air france monarch and hundreds of other have had very few problems infact the 747 has more problems than the first airbuses

as for safety the A310 is the best

airbus rules

[Torpedo Fodder]

The A320 is a peerless aircraft, you should give it a try; I'm positive you'll be impressed.

Peerless? What about the 737NG (New Generation) series (600-900), which have been consistantly outselling their A32x counterparts?

[Kapitan]

try going on a boeing in air canada they havnt got none they were boeing fanatics at one time now there fleet only consists of airbus

air india has airbuses ba lufthansa air france even american airline have airbuses

[Torpedo Fodder]

Originally Posted by Kapitain

try going on a boeing in air canada they havnt got none they were boeing fanatics at one time now there fleet only consists of airbus

Nope, they still have 32 767s in service. They were going to buy 18 777s and 14 787s this year right after they got out of bankruptcy, but that deal fell through due to rejection by it's pilot's union, who claimed the purchace would violate the cost-saving agreement Air Canada had made after it filed for bankruptcy in 2003. Now that Air Canada is re-negotiating the deal with it's pilots, the sale may yet be revived.

air india has airbuses ba lufthansa air france even american airline have airbuses

Air France, Air India and Lufthansa have plenty of Boeings in their fleets as well.

[Kapitan]

nevery heard of a boeing in air france fleet nor luthansa apart from thier 747's

i doubt air canada will keep them 767's the bigger 330 is more cost effective plus last time i hear they had more airbus than boeing aircraft

[Torpedo Fodder]

Originally Posted by Kapitain

nevery heard of a boeing in air france fleet nor luthansa apart from thier 747's

Air France's inventory is over 1/3 Boeing. As of August 2005 their Boeing fleet consisted of:

14 Boeing 737-500
6 Boeing 747-200
2 Boeing 747-300
16 Boeing 747-400
9 Boeing 747-200F
4 Boeing 747-400ERF
25 Boeing 777-200
10 Boeing 777-300

In addition to their 30 747s, Lufthansa operates over 60 737s.

i doubt air canada will keep them 767's the bigger 330 is more cost effective plus last time i hear they had more airbus than boeing aircraft

They have to keep them in service because for all practical purposes they can't buy any new aircraft at the moment, so they need every airframe they have. They were planning to replace the 767s with 777s and 787s, but that sale was scrubbed due to an agreement with their pilots over keeping operating costs down but it could be back on after that agreement is renegiated next month.

[Kapitan]

thats some thing i didnt know i suppose you could call it a tie because every major airline does have both airbus and boeing in thier fleets

so i say its a tie otherwise we be hear forever and a month argueeing a pointless point

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Kapitain

so i say its a tie otherwise we be hear forever and a month argueeing a pointless point

As opposed to the Airbus vs. Boeing poll, which is both enlightening and objective.

[Spectator]

Originally Posted by tycho102

Remember that DC-10 that lost all hydraulic power, and had to use differential thrust to do turns? That was a hardcore emergency.

yeah that was united 232 in the late 80's (89 iirc). after the crash (more than a hundred people died but also nearly 200 survived) there were some simulator tests where other pilots had to try landing a dc-10 under the same circumstances. not a single attempt was nearly as successful as the real landing was.


some time after the crash the reason for the (rear-)engine loss, which destroyed all the hydraulics was found. there was a small hole in the engine's rotor blade (not bigger than a grain of sand).

[donut]

My retirement,Boeing 727 still flying after 40 years says it all.I buy American