aircraft type with career zero hull loss

[KLOS]

Is there any commercial aircraft type which has had a hull - loss free history before being retired. I know that historically they tend to be sold on second hand thereby increasing the incidence of write-off. Is the 717 a currently operating example?

Thanks

[Skipness One Echo]

The Dassault Mercure I think?

[Ms Spurtle]

Does the 717 count?
It's just an MD80 (DC9) at the end of the day.

[Talkdownman]

Does the 717 count? It's just an MD80 (DC9) at the end of the day
....or a Charlie 135, even...

The Boeing C-135 Stratolifter is a transport aircraft.......Boeing gave the aircraft the internal designation of Model 717 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_C-135_Stratolifter#cite_note-0)

[DaveReidUK]

Does the 717 count?
It's just an MD80 (DC9) at the end of the day.

It's also still in service (just). The question was about retired types.

I can't think of any apart from the aforementioned Mercure.

[N707ZS]

Shorts Belfast?

[DaveReidUK]

Shorts Belfast?

Certainly loss-free, but describing the Belfast as a "commercial aircraft", HeavyLift notwithstanding, is pushing it a bit.

[Gibon2]

Fokker 70 - heading towards retirement, no hull losses yet (but less than 50 built).

For currently operating types, if you get into sub-types and define "no hull loss" as "no hull loss in commercial flight operations", then I think the 717, 737-600, 737-900, 777-300, E145, E170, A318, A319, A330-300, A340-200, A340-500 and A380 all have perfect records so far - touch wood.

Of these, perhaps the A319 has the most impressive record: over 1300 built, and nobody's managed to seriously prang one yet.

[DaveReidUK]

Fokker 70 - heading towards retirement, no hull losses yet

True - fortunately, it's built like a brick you-know-what:

http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/oe-lfo/1.jpg

[effects]

"Of these, perhaps the A319 has the most impressive record: over 1300 built, and nobody's managed to seriously prang one yet."

N313NB cn1186 DBR 19 Jan 03

[Gibon2]

N313NB cn1186 DBR 19 Jan 03

That was a prang on the ground while being moved for maintenance, so not counted under my "no hull loss in commercial flight operations" definition.

[siftydog]

I think the VC10 had a zero hull loss record save Dawsons Field? Or was 1 written off after a heavy landing?

[KLOS]

Did not Nigeria Airways lose a VC 10?

[treadigraph]

VC-10 - three destroyed in accidents - Nigerian, BUA and East Aftrican,(four if you include the RAF example that was DBR in a ground incident) and three by terrorist/military action, MEA, BOAC and BA.

[Swedish Steve]

The Handley Page 42.
Eight were built in 1930 for Imperial Airways.
One was destroyed in a hangar fire.
The other seven were transferred to the RAF in 1939
in good working order-
(The RAF wrote them off in a year)

[terrain safe]

VFW 614. Only the prototype was lost (as a lot of them are).

[Groundloop]

VFW 614. Only the prototype was lost

Surely then that counts as a hull loss!

[grounded27]

Please respect it as the MD-95.

[fujii]

None lost on commercial operations although one was destroyed in an airship hangar fire. The remainder were destroyed after being impressed into RAF service but those weren't commercial operations.

[Groundloop]

The Handley Page 42.
Eight were built in 1930 for Imperial Airways.
One was destroyed in a hangar fire.
The other seven were transferred to the RAF in 1939
in good working order-
(The RAF wrote them off in a year)


Handley Page HP42
None lost on commercial operations although one was destroyed in an airship hangar fire. The remainder were destroyed after being impressed into RAF service but those weren't commercial operations.

Do you ever get a feeling of deja-vu?:ok:

[sevenstrokeroll]

simply changing the name or number on a plane, eg the A319 vs the A320 is a bit much of a stretch about hull losses. I mean a DC9 31 is different than a DC9 32 but come on??????

a safe plane, safe pilot, safe proper mx and respect for the sky...

[Lightning Mate]

Sorry guys:

Q1 what is a "plane"

Q2 what is a "prang"

[OAB11D]

If we are talking about hull loses in pax service the. TU 144 is a candidate

Although it only made about 50 pax flights

Still 100% is 100%

[Groundloop]

I don't think anyones been killed in an Embaer 145.

They've made over a thousand and sold them everywhere, so if correct, not a bad record.

The question concerned hull losses - not necessarily involving fatalities.

ASN Aircraft accident Embraer EMB-145LU (ERJ-145LU) PR-PSJ Vitria da Conquista Airport, BA (VDC) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20100825-1)

[Phileas Fogg]

AN-225 ..... :)

[MKY661]

A318? Wonder if that has?

[Phileas Fogg]

I'll take a stab that the B737-100 type made it through it's service life without a hull loss!

[DaveReidUK]

This is all getting a bit silly now.

The OP posed the question

Is there any commercial aircraft type which has had a hull-loss free history before being retired.

Note:

commercial (= not military)
type (= not variant)
retired (= no longer in service)

So far, we've only had two responses - Mercure and HP42 - that qualify on all counts. Any other offers ?

[Phileas Fogg]

Well if it's all about variants then the B707, B720, B727, B737 & B757, all Mk's of each, may be considered the same type as they all use(d) the same design of fuselage yet each merely had different attachments fitted to them!

Just because, for marketing purposes, the manufacturers designated these as different types doesn't change the fact that they are all variants of the same original design.

So what's the difference between an A330 and an A340, I'd suggest they are two variants of the same type ... oh, but if it's down to the number of engines then a Trident Three cannot be considered the same type as, or indeed a variant of, a Trident One or Two.

[DaveReidUK]

Well if it's all about variants then the B707, B720, B727, B737 & B757, all Mk's of each, may be considered the same type as they all use(d) the same design of fuselage yet each merely had different attachments fitted to them!

Just because, for marketing purposes, the manufacturers designated these as different types doesn't change the fact that they are all variants of the same original design.

So what's the difference between an A330 and an A340, I'd suggest they are two variants of the same type ... oh, but if it's down to the number of engines then a Trident Three cannot be considered the same type as, or indeed a variant of, a Trident One or Two.

Strangely, the industry doesn't seem to find it confusing at all, despite the best efforts of the manufacturers to bamboozle us.

Given that all commercial aircraft types are certificated, the Type Certificate is a pretty good place to start when trying to differentiate between what is a different type and what is merely a variant.

So, for example, none of the Boeings listed share the same TC, nor do the A330/A340, but the A318/A319/A320/A321 do.

[Mechta]

Airspeed Ferry (unless being destroyed in a hangar by vandals counts).

R100 Airship

Graf Zeppelin Airship