What Does Age Have To Do With An Aircraft?

[spacedaddy]

I saw in another thread a listing of relative age of South African airlines fleets. Does anyone believe that age of an aircraft has anything to do with safety?

[Greenpilots]

Most times it is a good indication. Just think about getting new spare parts. Why is an airline using out-of-date aircraft? Financing problems?
I am not saying it is unsafe to operate old aircraft, I am just pointing out that it is a grey field that needs further investigation in each case.

[evanb]

Yes, the older an aircraft is the more stress the airframe has undergone. Also, as it gets older the more maintenance it requires to remain in top condition. The more maintenance it requires the greater the margin for human error. Also, as it gets older and requires more maintenance it will incur greater costs creating greater incentives to cut corners.

My opinion, not a statement of fact since an older aircraft can be better maintained than a new aircraft, but the incentives point towards new aircraft for me.

[chuks]

Nigeria put a blanket ban on aircraft older than 25 years, some time back. So there age has quite a bit to do with it! Whether that is a technically sound decision is something that is hard to say, really.

Generally, younger is better, I suppose but a properly maintained and flown older aircraft can be far safer than an almost-new one that is not given proper maintenance or is flown by less-able crew. Just look at how many crashes there have been on quite low-time aircraft recently to see what I mean by that, while it is unfortunately true that most crashes are not down to technical problems with the aircraft.

[DaFly]

A340s get cut up after 80k hours frame time.
Specially with pressurized a/c the problem lies with pressurization cycles, which are somehow related to age. The skin material can develop fatigue cracks and just give in after it has been through thousands of pressurization cycles. This is a factor, that can only be addressed to a certain extent by maintenance, since those cracks can only be detected by x-ray during major phase inspections.

[unstable load]

Interestingly, helicopters are basically unlimited, given the correct maintenance, but the Oil and Gas industry decided in their wisdom that the 20 year rule should also apply to their aircraft, thus, effectively removing stalwarts like the S61 and B212 from the equation overnight.

[Metro man]

New aircraft have the latest technology, compare the safety features of an A320 and a B737-200. Also why fly an aircraft so long that age related problems develop ? I don't want to be the one that discovers a problem with the engine mounts manifests itself after XXXX hours.

An older aircraft can be quite safe if maintained properly and improvements can be retrofitted, but this requires comprehensive technical back up. If you can afford this you can probably afford to buy new.

Cathay Pacific used to buy used aircraft and overhaul them to a high standard, the cost of doing this vs buying new worked out for them as quality engineering was not expensive in Hong Kong at the time.

[four engine jock]

So then. Take a good look at the Aircraft that have crashed lately. Not the old ones.
I dont think age has anything to do with it. A properly maintained aircraft can operate as good or better that a new.

[Bob3213]

I wouldnt let a 6th grader fly my aeroplane... :}

[chuks]

I knew of some Bell 212s that sort of came undone after quite a few hours, despite getting proper maintenance, stuff like the honeycomb on the upper deck delaminating and causing some very strange vibes! So much for no life limits, especially when the word on the street is that the basic design for the Army (the UH-1 "Huey") was a machine meant to be used for 1, 500 hours and then thrown away, with seats designed to be sat upon for one hour at a time. Well, that is what I heard across the bar anyway.

Most accidents are down to human error so that flying new equipment is no guarantee of safety at all, no. That said, would you rather get on an Air Twangoland B-737-800 or their B-737-200, say? That one is a "no-brainer!"

[desertopsguy]

My outfit operates a fleet of aging boeings, approaching 20yrs. Our company should be called Heartbreak Airways because that is all these aircraft do. Our maintenance costs are through the roof, they are not fuel efficient and yes there have been some safety related technical problems.

Meanwhile our main competitor operates a new fleet without the same issues.

You think a new off the line Boeing new gen will be the same as a classic? I suppose you have never heard of corrosion?

Old stuff wears down and breaks down more often.

Anyone who thinks age is not an issue is kidding themselves!:ugh:

This is also reflected in the lease costs.