Air India Runway Excursion

[George Glass]

AuroraAustralis

If you look at the stats for the US , Europe, Canada Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc the accident rate for the B737NG is approximately zero.
Now why would that be?

[Lookleft]

Just off the top of my head: overrun in the Caribbean by a US airline, fatal in Amsterdaqm due to RA failure, overrun in the Mediterranean in similar circumstances to Air India. Or are you referring to Anglo-Saxon never made mistake because of eugenics pilots?

[George Glass]

I have flown with just about every race , religion, gender ( including transgender) and never had a problem with any of them. That’s because I have had the good fortune of only flying for First World airlines with competent training systems, strong regulators and a long history of a serious commitment to safety. I’ve flown in so-called “developing” countries and the reasons for their poor safety records is pretty obvious. Nothing to do with race. And very little to do with the aircraft either. An investigation that seeks to shift blame onto a fabricated problem with the B737NG will be futile. But it will probably happen. To save face. And round and round we go......

[vilas]

If you are trying to suggest Europeans and Americans have better flying skills if for arguments sake we agree then it proves what I said "It doesn't make it an easy aircaft to fly". ​​​​​​ There was a documentary by Al Zajeera on making of B737 800 in which Boeing workers had made serious allegations on NG fuselage which breaks on RW excursions. As you can see All I have said about 737 is not cooked up by me but said or written by US citizens. Pilots who feels MAX just needed QRH procedure need to tell it to the US congressional committee. It's valuable evidence.
​

[George Glass]

OK

Sometimes you just have back away in the face of stupidity. According to Wikipedia 10580 B737s have been built. 7061 NGs. The most popular, reliable and profitable aircraft ever built. I , like thousands of others , have flown the aircraft in horrendous conditions with complete confidence. With a HUD you can fly zero visibility approaches ,perfectly on slope ,with airspeed fluctuating by only a couple of knots because of the very effective speed carnet.

[FlyingStone]

Originally Posted by vilas

If you are trying to suggest Europeans and Americans have better flying skills if for arguments sake we agree then it proves what I said "It doesn't make it an easy aircaft to fly".

If airlines in Europe can safely operate the 737s day in and day out with 150/200h cadets in the RHS, then there's really no excuse.

Look at the UTAir 737-800 overrun in Sochi in 2018. Crew (13,000 hours each) disregarded both predictive and reactive windshear warnings, crossed the threshold at Vref+23. Aircraft touched down 1285m from runway threshold and reverser were deployed about 20s later when the aircraft was 2690m from the threshold (LDA 2895m).

How can any manufacturer improve their aircraft to prevent this kind of events, which is how a lot of 737-800 overruns look like?

[vilas]

George Glass

You didn't answer any of the points raised by non Asians except calling them stupid and instead provided sales figures. MAX had orders of almost half of all 737 sales before it was grounded. 737 when it came was better than what was available and once airlines go for a brand they are reluctant to change Boeing kept offering tinkered versions which suited any requirement and nothing much was available till the entry of A320. Then they had to plan for the future but the buying MD, 787 initial losses prevented that. Instead they tried to drag 737 for one last time which delivered Boeing a body blow. How can MCAS be fitted without redundancy when another AOA sensor was available beats me.

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by vilas

There was a documentary by Al Zajeera on making of B737 800 in which Boeing workers had made serious allegations on NG fuselage which breaks on RW excursions.
​

You do know that the 737 fuselage isn't actually made by Boeing, right? Hasn't been for about 20 years (it's made by Spirit in Wichita).
I wonder how many aircraft flying around today can go down a 50 ft. embankment without breaking the fuselage...

Hull loss accident rates (through 2018):
737NG (-6/7/8/900) - hull loss 0.19, fatal hull loss 0.08
A320 series (A318/19/20/21) - hull loss 0.19, fatal hull loss 0.09
(numbers are per million departures)
Now, those numbers have probably changed in the last couple years, but are you honestly suggesting that an aircraft that has been in service for over two decades somehow became inherently unsafe in the last two years?

[vilas]

I consider you as authority on Boeing. The subject I am discussing is not my personal crusade. Also it's not in relation to the recent AI crash. By 50ft embankment if you are referring to the Indian crash then it may be a late go around attempt that failed in that case it's going to break up. But the Bali and one more sea landing also it broke up. As you know in Hudson incident it was very hard impact but aircaft remained in one piece off course was written off later. Outsourcing is ok but who bears the overall responsibility? Al Jazeera documentary if true was bad reflection. There again below why only Boeing? You are the best person to explain.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnb...-737-jets.html

[parkfell]

If pilots operate iaw the way in which the manufactures suggests
[do what it says on the tin], the accident rate historically would be far less.
Just put the 737MAX to one side for the moment, and think about two accidents below:

Would the Air France 447 accident have occurred if it had been a Boeing : would the Turkish 1951 have stalled at Amsterdam had it been an Airbus?

Each type has its strong points, the weak points are invariably the pilots....

[vilas]

tdracer

The words I used was not unsafe but compromised and not an easy aircaft to handle.

[Chris2303]

Originally Posted by tdracer

You do know that the 737 fuselage isn't actually made by Boeing, right? Hasn't been for about 20 years (it's made by Spirit in Wichita).

Designed by ?????

[DaveReidUK]

It's becoming increasingly hard to avoid the conclusion that this thread has run its course ...

[AuroraAustralis]

Originally Posted by vilas

There was a documentary by Al Zajeera on making of B737 800 in which Boeing workers had made serious allegations on NG fuselage which breaks on RW excursions. ​

I've seen the documentary. It alleges that manufacturing defects are to blame to the break ups; I don't think that is the case, although those complaints should be heard and investigated, but it may be simply the way the 737 fuselage was designed in an era of different standards. I agree with the other posters that it is not fair to expect IX1344 to survive in one piece after going off the "cliff" (see TACA in 2008 or Pegasus this year). But take a look at history and there is an apparent trend. Compare the photos of CFIT short of runway accidents: AIRES 8250 (737-700, hit 260ft short, broke into 3), with Air Canada 624 (A320, hit 740ft short, smashed through ILS equipment and powerline, traveled up embankment, remained intact). Or ditching accidents: Lion Air 904 (737-800, broke into 2), Air Niugini 73 (737-800, broke into 2), with US Airways 1549 (A320, remained intact). Or hard impact on grass: Turkish 1951 (737-800, broke into 3) with Ural 178 (A321, remained intact). This is not to mention American 331, Caribbean 523, and UTair 579, all 737-800s which broke into 2 or 3 after traveling over relatively flat ground. The 777 also seems to fare well. BA38, OZ214, and EK521 all remained intact despite hard impacts. So perhaps its not Boeing to blame, but grandfathering of older design standards. But enough with anecdotal evidence; I've read somewhere (don't remember the source) that the 737 is a 5G fuselage, while the A320 is a 16G fuselage, can someone with expertise in this area shed light on this claim?

Originally Posted by George Glass

If you look at the stats for the US , Europe, Canada Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc the accident rate for the B737NG is approximately zero.

7 (in the region listed, 6 if IST is not counted as Europe) does not equal 0. But you have a good point; that developed countries indeed have a lower accident rate. Sadly, passengers around the world don't get to cherry pick 6 countries to fly out of. Passengers in India can't simply decide to fly Ryanair or ANA on a domestic flight, and in a country with 0 A320 overruns, despite vastly outnumbering 737s; would a nervous flier pick Air India Express, or Indigo/GoAir/Vistara, looking at the accident history? Same goes for China, where there has never been a A320 hull loss, I believe, despite the type being almost half the fleet. We can't just cherry pick the "best" countries; after the MAX accidents, so many people stated that SWA, UAL, and AAL never had a problem, the MAX must be fine, not realizing that the 3 airlines only adds up to 16% of the fleet (not to mention some pilots of SWA and AAL weren't happy with it either); and that no other mainline commercial jet designed in the 21st century has yet to have fatal accident. PS: the instant dismissal of ASRS reports in this thread is alarming.

[George Glass]

Ever flown in Indonesia?
If you have I doubt you would think that.

[FlightDetent]

Originally Posted by AuroraAustralis

Same goes for China, where there has never been a A320 hull loss, I believe, despite the type being almost half the fleet.

The aviation and piloting in China are strongly regulated and because discipline goes a long way, the results show. The people are failable in a similar fashion to anywhere else (already witnessed despite my short exposure pre-COVID) and thus procedures had been designed to guard against our own selves.

Enter stage: A punitive non-go-around policy. As opposed to a non-punitive go-around policy. Self-explanatory if you read its name right.

I also feel the -800 has an eyebrowraisingly high cover page presence with overruns. But any overrun could have been avoided by going around. More detail from a recommended reading Why and When to Perform a Go-Around Maneuver (page 5, Boeing's AERO 2014-II) Do not blame the airplane for being less pilot-proof, before evaluating properly the picture in the mirror.



Some old thread here: 737 runway overruns

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by George Glass

If you look at the stats for the US , Europe, Canada Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc the accident rate for the B737NG is approximately zero.

Let's hand pick our countries shall we ? Including New Zealand, where they gave up the few they had a while back.

In the last two years alone Aug 2018 to Aug 2020 there have been on average three 737-800 aircraft destroyed, departing the runway on landing, PER YEAR. That's one every 18 weeks. I'm not counting any other phase of flight, or things like the Ukrainian shoot-down, or the Max. Let's list them.

Aug 2018. Xiamen at Manila
Sep 2018. UTAir at Sochi
Sep 2018. Air Niugini in New Guinea
May 2019. Miami Air at Jacksonville
Feb 2020. Pegasus at Izmir
Aug 2020. Air India at Kozhikode

If I was an hull loss insurance agent, working on averages, I would be very alerted. It's more than an outlier.

[vilas]

https://news.aviation-safety.net/202...at%20equipment.
Here B737 again as latest as this year. FAA fined Boeing 19.68million for fitting unsuitable equipment but settled for 1.25 million.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by vilas

FAA fined Boeing 19.68million for fitting unsuitable equipment but settled for 1.25 million.

So was this "unsuitable" equipment subsequently removed from those hundreds of 737NGs ?

[misd-agin]

WHBM

Six A320's in the last 2.5 years. Four vs six isn't a huge difference. Yes, it's 50%. No, it's not that significant as to avoid one airplane vs. another.