Engineers and pilots favourite and least favourite aeroplanes
 

Which aeroplanes, in your opinions, were great from a pilot perspective but not so easy to maintain ? And vice versa. I've heard praise from both quarters for the early DC9s and 737s. Descriptions such as rugged, simple, belt and braces. Conversely, I've heard at least one pilot describe the Jetstream 41 as a pilot's aeroplane but I've worked with several engineers who were less complimentary. I haven't yet spoken to a pilot who didn't like flying the Viscount, 757 or TriStar but, again, I gather the TriStar could be a pig to maintain.

Any stories or opinions? Thankyou.

Time to resurrect Eric "Winkle" Brown's classic quote about an aircraft he was testing (variously attributed to the Blackburn Botha and/or the Westland Wyvern): "Access to the cockpit is difficult. It should be made impossible."

The B757 has many good points, but in turbulence the ride in row zero is very poor. There seems to be a fuselage resonance which soon builds to the tea-spilling stage. The 767 does not suffer that, and is better in other ways too - e.g. more logical systems, notably hyd and pneumatic. Of the two, I much preferred the 767.

Bae ATP. Another Technical Problem.
Absolute dog toffee of an aeroplane to maintain.

Never flew it, but I recall it being known as the racing snake.

Yes, perhaps a reference to the high idle thrust (on the RB211) with engine anti-ice on, when it is most reluctant to slow down. Makes winter approaches interesting.

I once knew a pilot - now deceased - who had flown various British types in his long career, including the Viscount, HS748, ATP and 146. He once said the Viscount was "a beautiful aeroplane to fly" whilst pointing at the ATP parked outside the office and essentially saying the latter type just didn't compare.

The DH Dove was a delight to fly but the inverted engines made changing cylinder heads a very messy job. Other than that, I didn’t hear our engineers complaining too much.

Most of my engineering history has been on piston-engined aircraft, small and large. Favourites are DC3, An2, Dove and Heron. Despised are Jodels, Robins and Grumman AA5s. I wouldn't do overtime on any of them.

Fokker F-27 Friendship. Simple, rugged, never let you down. The original "gentleman's horseless carriage". I can't recall the engineers complaining too much either.

Alternatively, the aircraft you are currently flying (with some exceptions)

DA-42 (‘06) with the original Thielert 1.7L, what an absolute delight to fly.
Gave our Head of Maintenance sleepless nights and heartburn though.
Every single later incarnation took away from that initial brilliant airplane.
A fuel hog with the Lycomings and just a hog in every aspect with the Austro’s :yuk:

BAe146 from a contractor engineer's point of view. Always lots of work to keep the money rolling in.
A lot of people hated them but I loved them. Just the right size, big enough to be a proper aeroplane without too much cabin/seats/galley/IFE stuff to deal with.

I'm a short-a*** and for me the worst aircraft to get in and out off was by far the unlamented Edgar Percival EP9 - one needs to be virually double-joined and heaven help you if you needed to get out in a hurry.. The Vampire's cockpit is also cramed and untidy ... luckily I'm not too claustrophobic.
I've worked on many types but by nationality British ones were horrible - no space to get in an access hole with a normal wrist as well as a spanner. Here I refer to types such as the Spitire (airframe fuel and hydraulic systems especially) and Vampire (working on a Goblin in situ) French ones such as their helicopters were great and American ones such as C47, AT6 and even the Mustang also nice.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
 

Embraer 145, hardly goes wrong on my time working on them.
SAAB 2K always going tech for something.
Jetstream 41.. Jurassic, noisy and horrible to work on.

Slightly off topic but loading containers into the belly of Lakers DC-10's and A.300's showed a certain diveregence of design philosophy - the DC-10 system was simple, rugged and mechanical. The A.300's wasn't - computerised sensors etc. Worked ok so long as all your containers were absolutely true and square.... :rolleyes:

So big = good; small = not so much :)

B757 was a delight. Lighter on the controls than a 76, beautifully responsive with oodles of power, RB211 535e4. Yes, it was like sitting on the end of a vibrating ruler in chop. Even easier to land than a VC 10, both had trailing trucks but the 76 had them on the wrong way round and the 75 was much simpler to operate !

The MD900 Explorer is a maintenance engineer's nightmare - requires more planned maintenance per year than any other aircraft I know, maintenance manuals are ambiguous and poorly written, spare part availability is poor. However, all pilots I know are in love with it.

I also hated to work on the B737, which is praised by many pilots, but is full of outdated systems. I was working on it together with the A320, and the contrast is huge. The latter is the most user friendly aircraft I have ever seen.

Another vote for the B757 !
Generally a nice aircraft to work on.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the BAC 1-11, there was a joke that the designer's daughter must have been raped by an aircraft engineer !
I only had very limited experience working on them but I remember some bits were a bit of a nightmare to get to.
Although every pilot I ever spoke to seemed to love them.

The Sikorsky S76. I love the stone age technology of holding the horizontal stabiliser in place with wedges.

Wiffle tree?
CSDS?
CASC UNIT?

Oooer! I'm having flashbacks! 😁

From a pilots point of view, Saab 2000 every time. Beautiful to fly, quick and great in a crosswind. Engineers and accountants were less enthusiastic though.

Tristar... hydraulic charging area .... dancing on ice comes to mind!!

Interesting perspective


I found the 757, with two ailerons vs four on the 767 to be far less responsive in roll, pitch control was worse with a significant dead spot on rotation and when lowering the nose after landing


The 767 had much better handling all around with well harmonized, linear response in all axes, it also had a much better ride in turbulence. The only thing the engineers got wrong was the forward trailing main landing gear bogies which were quite unforgiving

Two favourites from opposite ends of the spectrum - VC10 taught me a lot about engineering and aircraft systems back in the days when everything was mechanical based, whereas now I enjoy the A380 due to the interactivity of the maintenance systems and the amount of information available to diagnose a problem, follow it through a linked AMM and link to an MEL if required..

Not so much an aircraft I didn't like, but the P&W JT9 was a dog of an engine, particularly from the bleed system point of view. Just getting access to anything as it was usually buried below a hot bleed pipe on a turnround followed up by trying to get core cowlings closed when they were based on a baked bean tin design, if the guide arms hadn't come out of the rollers as well!

God that brings back memories. 😁 Servicing no. 2 engine was always an interesting experience.

757...Extra airplanes
edit forgot to say my least favorite but I don't have one really, not yet at least...

I've always had a soft spot for the 767 - it was the first program I worked after Boeing hired me out of college (called the 7X7 for the first year after I hired in). I also liked in as a passenger - the 2-3-2 seating in coach was great (fortunately precious few operators 8 across configuration - I did a flight test at one point on an 8 across configuration and I could barely fit in the seat (and I was fairly thin in those days).
I ended up working the 767 for a good portion of my Boeing career and never regretted it.

On a General aviation platform, I had constantly seen the DHC Chipmunk as a pilot favourite, recently got to have a go at one finally and it didn't disappoint at all, it was so beautifully harmonised and rigged! Maintenance wise id have to say a PA31 in the middle of summer on a hot tarmac, never want to repeat that nearly felt like a stroke.

Got to give the 747-400 my vote. Beautifully harmonised controls and, according to DP Davies, very easy to fly accurately.
Very popular with pilots, engineers and passengers so what’s not to like.

747-400 is hands down the best to fly.

I worked on the Javelin, Hunter and that servicing nightmare, the Lightning. The Hunter was by far the easiest.

Very surprised that no one has mentioned the 3-30 - the 'shed'.

I will leave readers of this post to guess which end of question being asked it belongs to in my opinion.

And nearly everything held together with A102 bolts - 11/32" AF.

As AA62 has mentioned military aircraft, I must go with him on the Hunter. Best aircraft of any that I ever flew and for the engineers apparently a dream. An engine change overnight was a regular occurrence unlike the Swift which I believe took about a week !.

Moments:- Trident, wire locking main oleo charge plugs, my apprentice test, deadly fast flight controls.
Viscount & HS748 Dart types, frightening night shift engine run with nut compressor ''wash! Refitting primary heat exchangers.
BAC1-11, my 1st licence, changing belly heat exchangers, working on clamps in engine stub wing (also Trident 1&3), I think, 9 of hydraulic filters in wheel well and having to look up to extract the seals but avoid Skydrol drips and that suicide main door without the handbrake type lever wedged in the flight deck. Windscreen wiper motor change. However, pilots enjoyed flying the -400, so sure, one took it under a bridge in the Bahamas and I loved it for paying off my 1st mortgage.
V.Vanguard cutting out de bonded outer skin to then rivet same shape repair patch without damaging the thinner inner skin.
L1011 bleeding the 4 hydraulic tanks without a mask, leading edge actuator, Cat 3 reinstatement checks, main oleo leaks despite spare seal carrier, the 5 pumps in rear toilet tank gummed up with blue paper, duct area overheats. Loved it as a passenger and for paying off 2nd mortgage.
B727 checking leading edge area just when the Flight Engineer thinks your finished and resets breakers and puts B pumps on, luckily my ear defends did not block the noise of the pumps going on.
B747 types flight deck main windscreen change as a line job but an otherwise lovely machine.

Sleeve Wing,
IIRC an engine change on the Hunter was a couple of hours due to the ability to split the fuselage at the transit joint.

My humble opinion ....

The B747 ( Classic and -400) were fabulous aircraft to fly in every area .... however my preference will always be for the B777. Twin engine reliability, and twin engine total thrust. The last of the American "Muscle Cars" !!!

As an engineer I never liked working on the 1,11, although it was a good looking plane, same for the A300/310, often looked like a coal miner after working on the 707 JT3D's! I had a fatal attraction to the CL44 and now the MD11. As for favorites, probably the 146, 757 and 777.

Easily the worst I've ever worked on was the English Electric Lightning,doing a compressor blade check on an after flight was not very nice in the Saudi heat.
I liked the BAC 1-11 but I only ever worked on Omani Air Force and executive examples that had low hours.
As a contractor the 146/RJ and ATP were good for keeping the shekels rolling in.