How about noise? Pollution? Fuel consumption? Are you still using electronics such as computers in your house that are 30 years old? Just because they are paid off and a cheap way to plug some gaps doesn’t mean they should be kept long past their sell by date at the expense of the environment.

Yes other airlines like BA are using aircraft they shouldn’t be but it’s not really comparable. A wide body is much more expensive and they would need to be replaced by the latest models that are harder to get your hands on. We are talking about picking up some 737-800s that are 10 a penny at the moment and probably dirt cheap to buy or lease.

I personally think the CAA should ban the use of aircraft older than 30 years from operating in this country’s skies. The DVLA should do the same for cars. Before anyone thinks that’s an extreme view genuinely ask yourself whether it would be conceivable for you to be using a 30 year old computer, TV, mobile etc. Tech that old is not acceptable.

whether it would be conceivable for you to be using a 30 year old computer, TV, mobile etc. Tech that old is not acceptable.

My hi-fi is over 30 years old and nothing comes close to the sound quality that is available today.

How did you decide that 30 is the magic age the planes become obsolete and dangerous? Why not 20? Or 15?

There are regulations about much of what you are complaining about and these aircraft still safely meet the requirements and are well maintained. If you believe otherwise contact the CAA and let them investigate.

The ancient implement the spade is clearly still effective well past your 30 years threshold, better put it down now.

It'll give you time to go away and think of which other professional groups you want to insult the integrity of.

And on your environmental 'argument' - how is scrapping something which is perfectly functional and replacing it with something newer a benefit? The biggest impact is building the thing

Nothing to replace 757 or 733 except what Jet2 have on order and even then 733 has a niche which 738 is too big for.

Maybe tell the Canadian's to scrap their B737-200's too whilst at it.....

My 2 MGB's are 50 years old are far more reliable than some of the modern cars available today. All mechanical and no fancy electronics to worry about.

You make an argument for withdrawing older aircraft on environmental grounds, but how much is the environmental cost of scrapping and then building a replacement? Computers are totally different to a piece of machinery such as an airframe surely? I don't believe for example that a 30 year old aircraft would have the same avionics kit, same engines etc. throughout its operational life. They are consumables and must to some extent be capable of updating so the age of the airframe itself isn't the whole story. Noise pollution is certainly a more valid argument, but I for one can't tell that much difference between the noise levels of, for example a 737-800 and and 737-MAX - perhaps its down to my "cloth ears". Is a 737-300 really that much noisier than a 737-800? If it was significantly noisier than more current technology then I would be surprised if legislation were not introduced to severely restrict their us, but so far as I am aware it hasn't so far.

Now if it were a 1-11, 732, 727, DC-9 or MD-80 the noise is very evident but even they could have modern technology and vey low hours flown

I suppose you'll lose your mind when you realise a large number of GA aircraft are 50+ years old. Working wonderfully I might add.

I have a freezer in the cellar that is probably 30 years old and it has outlasted the later ones(2) and still works perfectly should I go and throw it away and buy anther one

I think he’s just kissed good bye to the entire historic war bird collection. May as well close Duxford and the Shuttleworth collection right now!

Had the delight of following a 37 year old Sierra Cosworth RS yesterday - it was in superb nick, sounded brilliant and the guy driving it was looking very proud. Rather than upgrade constantly and have a never-ending cycle of production leading to scrap, at greater cost each time, just use it until it genuinely won't be usable anymore.

Our engineers are some of the best - the planes cosmetically are superb especially compared to other carriers with aircraft of a similar age, and yes the older aircraft are less efficient and have higher fuel bias, but might as well keep them going until they are genuinely not airworthy.

To be fair, there is some (note the word some, not absolute) merit in RivetJoint's argument about the age of an aircraft. There's a difference between what one person decides to put in their cellar to store frozen peas, and what somebody else uses to carry passengers who don't have access to reliability info.
In 2018-19 I was in Zaporizhzhia in eastern Ukraine - the main airline at the airport were flying mainly 40 to 50 years old An-24 and Yak-40 aircraft. The aircraft worked OK... but it seemed rather unusual when other airlines in Ukraine seemed capable of using more modern aircraft.
Requiring 20 year old 738s be automatically scrapped is very much unnecessary, and I have no reason to believe Jet2's engineering is anything less than impeccable, but at some point, grandfathering and allowing aircraft to be used ad infinitum should not be possible without a special case being made for an exception. Yes, you can install very new bits of electronics in the aircraft to keep up with current regulations... but there should be a limit to this. That said, things like fuel economy, aircraft reliability, cost of maintenance and noise regulations do much, but not all, of the work in achieving this aim.
If an airline wants to use DC-3s to fly passengers for special heritage tours with a modified regime of extra attention being paid to reliability that's fine.... but using a DC-3 to fly London to Malaga (however well maintained they may be) as a matter of routine should not be possible without very good reason.

What has that got to do with Jet2 and their fleet? We aren't talking about 'heritage' flights, we are talking about a major airline operating within a regime overseen by a leading airworthiness authority.

Passengers do have access to reliability information - they know that they've been maintained by licensed professionals within a regime of tried and tested maintenance practices.

And as for the comparison to tech like computers, phones - slightly different stages in the development cycle :rolleyes:

Why? Providing the aircraft meets the regulatory requirements whats the problem. The public can research and find the info if it bothers them. The pricing regime already means most airlines will look to operate modern, efficient fleets without arbitrary bans.

Such bans end up affecting niche operators. Think Skybus (average age 42) and the Canadian operators still flying older models where it is difficult to find a newer aircraft that can operate in such conditions and still allow profitability.

The second of the 2nd hand B737-800's due to Jet2 this year, is due into Leeds this afternoon.

G-JZBT (ex SAS LN-RRH) is due to depart Oslo at 12:14 pm today.

My 31 year old "Classic" Mini has just passed it's MOT and met the required emissions standards as set by the DVSA. Your point is completely invalid.

This thread has gone off on a right tangent.

What a load of old nonsense about the 300's. They serve a purpose and clearly still have life in them.

Interestingly some of the -300's are actually newer than their oldest -800 so go figure
G-GDFD B738 YOM 1998
G-GDFM B733 YOM 1999

There are plenty of 30 year old plus class 08, 37, 43, 47 diesel engines working all over Network Rail, some older than 60 years, and don't get me started on the60 year old C 135, KC 135, RC 135s. Who would pick a user name like Rivet Joint and complain about ancient airframes?

Well the next 737-8 arrived today, LN-RRH. 13 years young.