Wonderful JU 52 about to be grounded .... by LH‘s saving frenzy?

[obrock]

Unfortunately still only in German language, however the contents means, that Lufthansa will not sponsor the good old Junckers 52 anymore...and and that means this wonderful historic airplane could soon be grounded:
As I dont have enough posts here yet and am not allowed to post links, pls google for „Muss "Tante Ju" am Boden bleiben?“ .
This is another bad news only month after LH has stopped the rstauration of the Super Star project and is about to ship the remains to Germany, probably not to make it flyable again.
LH is a commercial enterprise, true.
However this company has a tremendous history in aviation and until now has been substituted the JU for many years.
Its very sad that apparently the economists in the board apparently have gained majority now and do not want to spend another penny into the remembrance of its own history.
Very sad for all those volunteers who spent hours by hours by acting as pilots, flight attendants or mechanics. Public statement by LH exspected by tomorrow...

[treadigraph]

Here's the link...

Very sad if it proves to be the case, always admired Lufthansa for their support of the old timers. Tried to get a flight in it out of London City, all seats had sold out...

[gearlever]

Rambo C.S. at his best.

First slaughter Lockheed Starliner L-1649A and now the JU 52.

His bonus will again be guaranteed.

[BEA 71]

Originally Posted by gearlever

Rambo C.S. at his best.

First slaughter Lockheed Starliner L-1649A and now the JU 52.

His bonus will again be guaranteed.

I have travelled on D-AQUI, I have seen it many times, on the ground, touching the skin, watched it flying
overhead our house on its way from Oberschleissheim to the mountain region. Was fascinated by the
sound of either the BMW or Pratt & Whitney engines, depending whether the Lufthansa or the JUAir 52
was flying. Yes, I would miss the sound and the sight, but, please, for the sake of safety, lets accept that
these birds need to be grounded now, and displayed in aircraft museums. It is a nuisance, saying that the
LH CEO´s Bonus will be guaranteed. This man is a pilot himself, to my knowledge loves aircraft as much as
we do, but he has a responsibility. For the money of the company, but also for the safety of the aircraft
owned by LH, or flying on the LH flag. . After the shut down of the Super Star Project, and after the JUAir crash
follow up action was to be expected.

[BRE]

HB-HOT had a lot of corrosion and fatigue issues and non-conforming repairs, so Ju-Air have their homework cut out for them and hope to be back this summer. D-AQUI was probably in a better state, so I doubt this was the reason, even if learnings from HB-HOT may have prompted a few additional checks and repairs.

It is true that if there was a crash, it would reflect on LH, but I doubt that this was the reason for their decision.

[OvertHawk]

Originally Posted by BEA 71

I have travelled on D-AQUI, I have seen it many times, on the ground, touching the skin, watched it flying
overhead our house on its way from Oberschleissheim to the mountain region. Was fascinated by the
sound of either the BMW or Pratt & Whitney engines, depending whether the Lufthansa or the JUAir 52
was flying. Yes, I would miss the sound and the sight, but, please, for the sake of safety, lets accept that
these birds need to be grounded now, and displayed in aircraft museums. It is a nuisance, saying that the
LH CEO´s Bonus will be guaranteed. This man is a pilot himself, to my knowledge loves aircraft as much as
we do, but he has a responsibility. For the money of the company, but also for the safety of the aircraft
owned by LH, or flying on the LH flag. . After the shut down of the Super Star Project, and after the JUAir crash
follow up action was to be expected.

I can understand why a large brand like LH would wish to distance themselves from perceived risk in operating this kind of aircraft, but to say that they cannot operate and carry passengers safely is simply not correct.

With the correct procedures, maintenance, training and support aircraft like the DC3, JU-52, DH Dragon Rapide etc. can (and I hope will) fly passengers safely for decades to come.

OH

[SMT Member]

Companies are run by people who drive spreadsheets for a living. It's neigh on impossible to place a value on a historic aircraft doing loss-making sightseeing flights.

I sympathise with the cadre of old hands who kept the aircraft going, as well as the new generation of mechanics and pilots who they taught to fiddle with something that's not run by software and microchips.

Count myself luck I had a chance to fly D-AQUI many, many, moons ago as a 'thank you' from Lufthansa Technik. They'd move the operations from FRA to TXL (or vice-versa, can't recall) and had lost the PW engine manuals in the process. As a young sprog I was sent to the basement of the company I was a trainee at, to see what I could dig out. Found both an original engine- and parts manual, both of which were professionally copied and bound in leatherclad binders, then sent free-of-charge to a very grateful Lufthansa.

[Less Hair]

They had wasted so much money on the failed Star Liner restoration project before that now the upper floors feel like they can't pump in any more money in historical aircraft that are not as reliable as current airliners. Plus Lufti is set to become more european. Their brand Eurowings will take over more business and Spohr seems to be prefering to take down old brand elements like their 100 years old yellow from the logo. It's transition not tradition.

[Daysleeper]

Originally Posted by OvertHawk

I can understand why a large brand like LH would wish to distance themselves from perceived risk in operating this kind of aircraft, but to say that they cannot operate and carry passengers safely is simply not correct.

OH

What is your definition of safe?
What is a Lufthansa customer's definition of safe?
How does the hazards associated with an 80 year old aircraft compare with a modern fleet?
How would the loss of a Lufthansa branded (and operated) JU-52 and its passengers affect customer perception of the brand?
What is the Lufthansa board's definition of safe?
How do the individual members of the main board feel about holding civil (and potentially) criminal liability for the risk level associated with the JU-52 operation?

[BEA 71]

Originally Posted by OvertHawk

I can understand why a large brand like LH would wish to distance themselves from perceived risk in operating this kind of aircraft, but to say that they cannot operate and carry passengers safely is simply not correct.

With the correct procedures, maintenance, training and support aircraft like the DC3, JU-52, DH Dragon Rapide etc. can (and I hope will) fly passengers safely for decades to come.

OH

Overt Hawk, the point is not that aircraft can not be kept in flying condition, this we all know. But you can not replicate air transport of the period. I am a airline historian,
and I was very lucky to have travelled on all the Douglas aircraft ( except DC 5 ) from DC 3 to DC 10 in airline service, this is something you can not bring back. All you can offer, is joy rides. Even D-AQUI is a very modern aircraft, more or less a Airbus type in a old shell. If you are really interested in air travel in the old days, I recommend you read the book " Croydon to Concorde " by Captain RE Gillman. It is worth more than a hundred joy rides. Join him on a flight into Cork, jump seating on a Jupiter Class 52 on a foggy day.

[ATC Watcher]

From what I hear from the inside , the Connie fiasco ( to finish it to make it airworthy for EASA would have cost more than what was spent already ) has shaken the tree . Even finished it would have been extremely expensive to fly it. (in 2017 Breitling also ended their sponsorship to the SCFA Connie which remained grounded after that , but hopes to get it back in the air this year ) It is not that much the JUAir accident ( which also shook the tree) but rather the costs and the difficulties in maintaining D-AQUI , causing long periods of being unavailable in 2018.
One has also to remember the accident of their Safir in 2014 . So money yes, but not only. Very sad for all those involved who love historical aircraft.
The DLBS voluntary work now will likely be focused on restoring the FW200 Condor, a magnificent aircraft, but most certainly not for flying anymore.,.

[OvertHawk]

Originally Posted by Daysleeper

What is your definition of safe?
What is a Lufthansa customer's definition of safe?
How does the hazards associated with an 80 year old aircraft compare with a modern fleet?
How would the loss of a Lufthansa branded (and operated) JU-52 and its passengers affect customer perception of the brand?
What is the Lufthansa board's definition of safe?
How do the individual members of the main board feel about holding civil (and potentially) criminal liability for the risk level associated with the JU-52 operation?

Which was exactly the point I was making!

Your points are mostly well made, certainly those that relate to the branding of LH, passenger expectation and board risk tolerance. If I was on the board of LH I'd probably advise them against operating the aircraft.

As for how the hazards of a well managed historic fleet stack up against a modern fleet - well why don't you ask the pax on the brand new 737X that crashed in Indonesia recently?

I come back to my original point that historic aircraft can be operated well within a risk band that is acceptable to many people and that is easily as safe as a great many modern civil air transport operations.

[ATC Watcher]

Originally Posted by OvertHawk

Which was exactly the point I was making!



I come back to my original point that historic aircraft can be operated well within a risk band that is acceptable to many people and that is easily as safe as a great many modern civil air transport operations.

+1 . Absolutely , and it can be profitable too , just a good example here : HOME

[Less Hair]

They wanted to certify it for commercial passenger ops and wanted the cockpit to be modified to about C-130J glass cockpit standards, This led the FAA to request proper flight testing and major recertification work. The whole project went out of control including it's cost.
While it feels cruel now I think there was no other option than closing things down except maybe mothballing everything somewhere.

[BRE]

Except that the Ju-52 is owned by a foundation, LHBS, not Lufthansa. And the Safir was owned by a private company, ProFlight, and only slated to go to LHBS. So it is probably not a legal tort risk, just one of publicity.

[Less Hair]

Lufthansa said it subsidized the Ju 52 flights themselves and there was no perspective to ever get them profitable. This is why they now stop marketing the seats for passenger flights.

I have heard there might be help from non-LH sponsors. It hopefully won't be the end of this bird.

[AviatorDave]

Originally Posted by BEA 71

.. , and after the JUAir crash
follow up action was to be expected.

The JuAir crash most likely did not play a role in LH's decision. I would bet it's purely based on economic factors.

[AviatorDave]

Originally Posted by Less Hair

They had wasted so much money on the failed Star Liner restoration project before that now the upper floors feel like they can't pump in any more money in historical aircraft that are not as reliable as current airliners. Plus Lufti is set to become more european. Their brand Eurowings will take over more business and Spohr seems to be prefering to take down old brand elements like their 100 years old yellow from the logo. It's transition not tradition.

Pretty much fits into Germany's overall policy of ridding itself of any defining, characteristic traits and elements, and transitioning to some undefined crowd, which is perceived as being particularly "European" or "Globalist".

[Less Hair]

It's true there is almost a fashion right now in Germany to question everything existing. Including parts of science (like psychology) and many old habits. The post-unification period is ending and now some new generation fills the ranks. On the other hand many things were done just because there were done that way forever without thinking about other options before.
I'd certainly like to keep the Ju flying. It's even a registered flying monument.

[EDMJ]

I find it puzzling/irritating/non-credible that

- nobody forced the aircraft on LH, they acquired it themselves in the early Eighties. Its operation was their own idea, and the operating foundation/trust (DLBS) was only founded afterwards,
- if they claim as a reason that a financially viable operation is not possible, then it took them more than 30 years to realize this;
- the statement in the link to NDR seems to convey the impression that LH is trying to rid themselves of any direct association with the aircraft. Nonetheless, (1) it appears in their fleet listing in their onboard-magazine, (2) much of the junk in their "World Shop", such as watches, suitcases, jackets etc., is "Ju 52" labelled/inspired, (3) it carries their logo, (4) it's flown by LH aircrew, and (5) when I flew it in some 10 years ago from Munich Airport, it was with an LH flight number and a LH boarding pass. They've used it thoroughly as a LH billboard!

According to a post in a German forum, the 2018 season was cut short by a cracked engine bearer, and it is currently in a hangar in Munich.

I suspect that the real reasons are

- corporate concern for bad press after the Ju Air accident, and/or
- lack of trust/interest/sympathy/patience with the operator, DLBS, after the massive cost overruns with the Constellation project (there are also statements on various Internet sources of embezzlement and misuse of funds for that project in the USA).