My first instinct is to look at where this story came from. The New York Slimes is good at trumpeting the headline, and the real story is buried eight paragraphs down. No manufacturer is going to deliberately build a faulty aircraft. Where were the American pilots when the tail fell off an A-300 over New York a few years ago? The American media hacks are very polished at slamming a US company, while ignoring the faults of other companies abroad.

(Written on 15.05.2019)(Permalink)

I am always stunned by how journalists set themselves up as aviation "experts". Just as Scott Glenn said as Chuck Yeager in the movie "The Right Stuff", Half of the engineers have never been off the ground." You can let the classroom override "real world" experience to the point you miss what is right in front of you. As one pilot I know said, "You still have to fly the damn airplane". I see nothing wrong with the 737 MAX that cannot be solved with proper training. If there was any flaw it would be not enough experience with a new airplane. Of course with journalists, too often ratings and newspaper sales bloom on fresh graves.

(Written on 14.05.2019)(Permalink)

It sounds like the dwellers of their parents basements are in fine form today. Airbus apologists are quick to forget the American Airlines A-300 that had the tail fall off over NYC a few years ago. Where were the rabid kennel dwellers then with torch and pitchfork in hand? I guess mad conspiracy theorists have nothing better to do with their time. A person takes a chance everyday when they venture out of their home and face the odds of someone driving while being on their phone TOTALLY distracted from the task at hand. I will take my chances in the air anyday over the highway. Meanwhile, remain in your caverns if you feel safer there and troll the web 24/7.

(Written on 03.04.2019)(Permalink)

I posted a similar comment about the same event a few days ago. True, many pilots were transitioning from older airliners like the DC-3, and surprise! you couldn't fly by the seat of your pants so to speak. Far to many in the mainstream media have become aviation experts overnight, when they know about as much about flying as the dark side of the moon. Let the investigation go forward and not speculate too soon.

(Written on 27.03.2019)(Permalink)

You are right on the mark! Remember the Colgan Air Q400 that went down outside Buffalo a few years ago? Same deal, incorrect inputs,crew fatigue, as well as incorrect crew inputs to a stall. The 'holes in the layers of swiss cheese' lined up.

(Written on 13.03.2019)(Permalink)

So let us get serious here...Remember that statement? The 737MAX makes roughly 8,400 flights a week and only TWO incidents? This sounds eerily similar to the early days of the 727 when some hull losses and fatalities were the result of insufficient training, and not following the book. My other question is why is not CRM coming into play here? No one has raised that question. What Lester Holt "reported" on NBC Mar 12th was more on the order of "tabloid Journalism" and not dealing fair and square with facts. Of course, that is to be expected of the American mainstream media today.

(Written on 13.03.2019)(Permalink)

What does not help is when AP spews out a headline of "Another 737MAX crash, does Boeing have a problem?" That is NOT, repeat NOT journalism, but sensationalism. Of course, the media thrive on fresh graves instead of factual reporting. It would seem that speculation has replaced truth in journalism In recent years. Let the investigations go forward w/o media interference.

(Written on 12.03.2019)(Permalink)

I knew that when Airbus said the breakeven point was 120 units sold, that was wishful thinking. Also, foregoing a cargo version was a huge mistake as well. When FedEx and UPS ordered 777F & 747-8F units respectively, the handwriting was on the wall. I saw a Korean Air A380 being pushed back at ATL, and they had to hold ground traffic for it. There is such a parameter as being TOO big. Many have said the 747 is the "sweet spot" for large-size airliners. Witness Boeing producing the 777X with folding wingtips to fit existing large airliner gates!

(Written on 12.02.2019)(Permalink)

Even with a re-engine option,(which UPS did by the way). The sad reality of having to meet Stage III noise rules was one factor. Also, when you consider that consumption of fuel on the order of several hundred gallons per hour as opposed to the newer generation engines, it was simple economics. I am sure there will be a few that will soldier on in the cargo world for a few years to come. As Ed Norton said, "Time and tide wait for no man!"

(Written on 16.01.2019)(Permalink)

When I was stationed there in 1978-1979, we had two RC-135S aircraft there. Although hangars were not large enough for a wide-body, Shemya was designated as an emergency field when 767 and 777 airliners started flying that route. We could accept aircraft as large as a C-5 Galaxy, albeit a tight fit on taxiways. As a matter of fact, we had one land with a load of service members, and their families while I was there. The base C.O. had the dining hall open for lunch for all of them. We had a great time with all of them, and the whole base turned out to wish them farewell. Many of them told us they had not had as good a treatment since leaving Kadena AFB. A great memory for sure.

(Written on 28.12.2018)(Permalink)