737 NGs Unsafe to Fly?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
737 NGs Unsafe to Fly?
1. Can't use the speed brake above 300 kts IAS due excessive empennage vibration.
2. Can't fly above 270 kts IAS if it's been de-iced due to elevator balance problems unless maintenace action is accomplished (Unlikely on line flying with quick turnrounds)
What is going on in Seattle? These things can only help Airbus in their sales drive! (easyJet order etc)
Airbus seems to be a lot cheaper, less to operate, better performance figures and altogether a better bet than the NG.
I can't help but think Boeing have missed a great oppurtunity to get ahead of the game with the NG, and have put together an airplane that does not feel right.
2. Can't fly above 270 kts IAS if it's been de-iced due to elevator balance problems unless maintenace action is accomplished (Unlikely on line flying with quick turnrounds)
What is going on in Seattle? These things can only help Airbus in their sales drive! (easyJet order etc)
Airbus seems to be a lot cheaper, less to operate, better performance figures and altogether a better bet than the NG.
I can't help but think Boeing have missed a great oppurtunity to get ahead of the game with the NG, and have put together an airplane that does not feel right.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not unsafe
I dont think that the 737 NG is unsafe , the problems with the elivators all stem from the fact that the controls can go into a true manual reversion and work if the aircraft has a FULL electrical faiure , this is something that the airbus cant do ( yes I know that this is extreamly unlikely).
Boeings do have a fix for these problems but it will take time to get the aircraft into the sheds to have the work done and Boeing are taking a very cautious aproach on these problems.
Both Boeing and Airbus make very safe aircraft and to put the risks of flying into perspective I am going to to do something statisticly far more risky when I finnish this post .........make a cup of tea !.
Boeings do have a fix for these problems but it will take time to get the aircraft into the sheds to have the work done and Boeing are taking a very cautious aproach on these problems.
Both Boeing and Airbus make very safe aircraft and to put the risks of flying into perspective I am going to to do something statisticly far more risky when I finnish this post .........make a cup of tea !.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is nothing wrong with the NGs. We have a whole fleet of them including the -900. You have to consider that the NGs are a whole new aircraft and therefore it takes time to work the bugs out.
One of our FOs flew them as an active duty (US) Navy pilot, and went overseas a number of times. He described the same frustrating extra limitations on the airframe, and also claimed that the cockpit pilot seats are some of the most uncomfortable such seats he has ever sat on. He was surprised by numerous disappointments, and wondered if Boeing was under severe pressure to design these newer types, with the foreign, government-subsidized competition breathing down its neck.
If the 737NG is on emergency power, does it also have engine-driven hydraulic pumps, with a RAT which extends with double engine-flameouts, and can provide (center?) hydraulic pressure for primary flight controls, as with the 757? I would still prefer the concept of a 737's conventional flight controls to that of a plane which needs on-line computers to safely fly, but will never get to choose between the two types of planes, as a replacement for our old narrow bodies. The 727s here will soon be gone, except for athletic charters.
If the 737NG is on emergency power, does it also have engine-driven hydraulic pumps, with a RAT which extends with double engine-flameouts, and can provide (center?) hydraulic pressure for primary flight controls, as with the 757? I would still prefer the concept of a 737's conventional flight controls to that of a plane which needs on-line computers to safely fly, but will never get to choose between the two types of planes, as a replacement for our old narrow bodies. The 727s here will soon be gone, except for athletic charters.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: where ever I lay my head
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get your story right IO, quote: with the foreign, government-subsidized competition breathing down its neck.
Isn't there a certain company in Seattle who uses military money to develop commercial aircraft variations?? Things like a cargo door on the 737.. Isn't there a state funded organisation who is doing research into aviation for commercial companies called NASA or something..
In Europe the only aid is that the governements have given is loans ie things you repay..
by the way: yes the NG is crap..
Isn't there a certain company in Seattle who uses military money to develop commercial aircraft variations?? Things like a cargo door on the 737.. Isn't there a state funded organisation who is doing research into aviation for commercial companies called NASA or something..
In Europe the only aid is that the governements have given is loans ie things you repay..
by the way: yes the NG is crap..
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Northeast US
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
737NGs
The NGs series is one hell of an aircraft! Boeing took an already great product and made it even better than was thought possible! They used what they learned on the 777 and brought the best features to the Guppy......new advanced wing design, great new flight deck, and a passenger cabin to rival the A32x series. Yes it has had it share of problems....but that is expected with any new aircraft. My company already has 120 of the great aircraft and has another 200 on firm order....and I have to say we are very impressed and very happy with the 737NGs! (or as we call them the "Super Guppys") I know some here are diehard Airbus folks but please do not bash a perfectly good airplane!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Around the World
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
737 NG Unsafe to fly? Hmm.. let's have a look at the accident statistics... Oh, I see. Very dangerous aircraft.... 
Aviation Trainer, too.... Go back to your C-152. A B-737 NG is definately not the approariate Aviation Training aircraft for you.
Aviation Trainer, too.... Go back to your C-152. A B-737 NG is definately not the approariate Aviation Training aircraft for you.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: ATLANTIS
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you follow all those ADs, there is not any place left for a placard anymore now on the flightdeck, it must be safe to fly it. That is what you get if you certificate a new concept on an old model.
The good thing with the 270kt restriction is, that noise levels on the flight-deck have dropped considerably.
The good thing with the 270kt restriction is, that noise levels on the flight-deck have dropped considerably.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Earth (just)
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHAT ARE YOU ON ABOUT?
"Placards"??? We got one one the flight deck - ONE - UNO - UN - 1
and that don't look too official (more like a company created reminder for the less attentive).
Jeez - you guys gimme the bleedin ebejeebies sometimes. If you don't like the NG then don't fly it - there are plenty of us who will!
"Placards"??? We got one one the flight deck - ONE - UNO - UN - 1
and that don't look too official (more like a company created reminder for the less attentive).
Jeez - you guys gimme the bleedin ebejeebies sometimes. If you don't like the NG then don't fly it - there are plenty of us who will!
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: South East England
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing=good aeroplane.Did a 1000 hours on the 738, certainly not my favourite Boeing but an excellent commercial aeroplane.It would be my first choice if starting a new outfit and hoping to make money!!.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone else spotted the irony of posting these two comments in the same paragraph:-
...with the foreign, government-subsidized competition ...
and
One of our FOs flew them as an active duty (US) Navy pilot...
...with the foreign, government-subsidized competition ...
and
One of our FOs flew them as an active duty (US) Navy pilot...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Uranus
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlemen,
I've just come home from flying an NG, unsafe? Never.
Seriously irritating? Yes, its about time that the speedbrake, icing and fuel pump issues were sorted out for good. Talk about a pain in the ar*e.....................
I've just come home from flying an NG, unsafe? Never.
Seriously irritating? Yes, its about time that the speedbrake, icing and fuel pump issues were sorted out for good. Talk about a pain in the ar*e.....................
ZbV
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Samsonite
Age: 51
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B737NG Versus A320
Since I have not flown the A318- A321 I cannot compare myself.
I have heard rumours that Airbus narrowbodies leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to runway performace ie required runway lenghts ( Higher speeds) at equivalent weights when compared to the B737 NG family -600 to -900. Anyone care to enlighten me.
I have heard rumours that Airbus narrowbodies leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to runway performace ie required runway lenghts ( Higher speeds) at equivalent weights when compared to the B737 NG family -600 to -900. Anyone care to enlighten me.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
StressFree -
You have summed the whole thing up - It should all be sorted out, and soonest, please.
And thanks all of you for reminding me about the world's most complicated procedures for the center pumps, which I'd forgotten to mention in my original post!
You have summed the whole thing up - It should all be sorted out, and soonest, please.
And thanks all of you for reminding me about the world's most complicated procedures for the center pumps, which I'd forgotten to mention in my original post!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: N. Europe
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Hmm.. let's have a look at the accident statistics... Oh, I see. Very dangerous aircraft...."
I take it you are one of the people who actually believe that the Concorde went from being the world's safest aircraft to one of the most dangerous in one morning as well?
Statistics are a dangerous tool if not used correctly.
Cheers,
Fred
I take it you are one of the people who actually believe that the Concorde went from being the world's safest aircraft to one of the most dangerous in one morning as well?
Statistics are a dangerous tool if not used correctly.
Cheers,
Fred
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Somewhere in Europe
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew both the A320-series as the 737-800.
My first impression of the 737 NG was a big disillusion. This was not the kind of aircraft that I expected from Boeing to compete with the A320.
Yes, it had new engines and wings, yes it had some nice LCD-screens. But that's it. Almost nothing has changed to the '60's technology.
After flying with it I discovered that the cockpit was extreme noisy due to the lack of isolation. Pilots at our company were flying with ANR headsets !!
The approach speeds are higher : it's a Cat. D aircraft (even the Airbus A330 is a Cat. C). Strange for such a small aircraft.
And then the AD's came; No speedbrake above 300 knots,... !!
Also due to the fact that the wings are thinner, we had several cases of de-icing the wingsurface at 10°C OAT after a long flight and with eco-fuel in the tanks. Never saw this in my life and I must say that it is very difficult to understand !!
When you come from the 737EFIS, the 737NG is a great aircraft but when you come from another modern aircraft, the 737NG is a dissapointment. But unsafe ??? It's on the limit I think....
My first impression of the 737 NG was a big disillusion. This was not the kind of aircraft that I expected from Boeing to compete with the A320.
Yes, it had new engines and wings, yes it had some nice LCD-screens. But that's it. Almost nothing has changed to the '60's technology.
After flying with it I discovered that the cockpit was extreme noisy due to the lack of isolation. Pilots at our company were flying with ANR headsets !!
The approach speeds are higher : it's a Cat. D aircraft (even the Airbus A330 is a Cat. C). Strange for such a small aircraft.
And then the AD's came; No speedbrake above 300 knots,... !!
Also due to the fact that the wings are thinner, we had several cases of de-icing the wingsurface at 10°C OAT after a long flight and with eco-fuel in the tanks. Never saw this in my life and I must say that it is very difficult to understand !!
When you come from the 737EFIS, the 737NG is a great aircraft but when you come from another modern aircraft, the 737NG is a dissapointment. But unsafe ??? It's on the limit I think....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EXCIN,
Thanks for that. Good info here.
I'd also forgotten about the problem of asking for a de-icing rig down in the Med. You get some strange looks! And you never get one. Normally the warm fuel going on melts the ice, but I've incurred half hour delays waiting for ice to melt, if the fuel has, for instance not been too warm (from underground storage, for example).
Thanks for that. Good info here.
I'd also forgotten about the problem of asking for a de-icing rig down in the Med. You get some strange looks! And you never get one. Normally the warm fuel going on melts the ice, but I've incurred half hour delays waiting for ice to melt, if the fuel has, for instance not been too warm (from underground storage, for example).
