Boating 737

[Rwy in Sight]

You can still search/sort the results of a fare request based on aircraft type as you can do about the price. However I feel few would be willing to pay more to avoid the MAX.

[OFSO]

I can't imagine anyone prepared to endure flying the horrors of (eg) FR is going to be concerned at the reputation of the aircraft.

[1DC]

I reckon cabin crew will be forbidden from saying " Welcome aboard this Boeing 737 MAX aircraft"

[Rwy in Sight]

I can't imagine anyone prepared to endure flying the horrors of (eg) FR is going to be concerned at the reputation of the aircraft.

And let's not forget that FR has a tendency to buy a lot of aircraft if the price is right.

[ribrash]

I can't imagine anyone prepared to endure flying the horrors of (eg) FR is going to be concerned at the reputation of the aircraft.

And let's not forget that FR has a tendency to buy a lot of aircraft if the price is right.

And one of the best safety records in aviation.

[Rwy in Sight]

I can't imagine anyone prepared to endure flying the horrors of (eg) FR is going to be concerned at the reputation of the aircraft.

And let's not forget that FR has a tendency to buy a lot of aircraft if the price is right.

And one of the best safety records in aviation.

And I always say that if one chooses an airline on safety only FR must be one of the very top choices.

[OFSO]

Listening to ATC I have to say FRs voice procedures are excellent. Very competent aircrew. And I believe their maintenance standards are second to none. These days
I prefer ground transport which is vastly more comfortable and damn near as fast door-to-door (at twice the price cattle class or three times first class).

[Rwy in Sight]

And their crews are excellent aviators well trained given they fly to some of the most challenging jet accessible airports in Europe.

[barkingmad]

Birdstrike(s) on Late Finals thread may modify that opinion of "excellent" safety record?

And the mass diversion incident in Spain a few years ago must have concentrated minds in the office?

Anyway, the thread is drifting as one does carrying excess bernoullis in a crosswind.

Anyone got thoughts on Vref+20 as a far too frequent occurrence leading to overruns etc?

[Boac]

We had a long discussion about the Spanish 'event' elsewhere.

I would also endorse FR and their crews (and flight management teams) - to fly their sort of schedules as safely as they do is a huge credit to them all, and my hat off to those who train them.

[OFSO]

Just seen a mention that US authorities are attributing one of the 737MAX crashes to a bird strike. What was it Mandy Rice-Davies said.......

[llondel]

Listening to ATC I have to say FRs voice procedures are excellent. Very competent aircrew. And I believe their maintenance standards are second to none. These days
I prefer ground transport which is vastly more comfortable and damn near as fast door-to-door (at twice the price cattle class or three times first class).

That's probably because MOL has beancounters who've done their job properly and figured out that it costs less to keep the fleet in top nick than it does to run them until something breaks and have to deal with the fall-out of having an aircraft grounded at short notice. Same with aircrew, I guess. Better to give them the proper training so they don't break the aircraft. If they're competent and know what they're doing then they're likely to be very efficient on the turn-around, which is what he needs.

[llondel]

Boeing now saying new software will be ready by the end of May. Certification dates, anyone ? I think fears that passengers won't fly the MAX are unfounded. Nobody I know has any idea what aircraft they are about to board as passenger...

I do tend to check the aircraft type when I'm booking. I avoided the MD11/DC10 for the most part by not flying with airlines that were still using them, although I did have the misfortune to fly NorthWorst when they still used them for transatlantic flights (confirmed my resolve to avoid them in future). The DC9/MD80 series was the other one I avoided, and I waited for the 787 to build up some hours before getting on one of those. I might try to avoid the MAX for a bit too, when it comes back into service, see if they've really fixed it.

[barkingmad]

Despite all the experience on the O-N site there has still been no convincing explanation for the topic of my original posting.

At the opposite end of the flight, if it's soooh dangerous operating close to the ground with flap deployed then why are we never advised to add half the steady headwind plus all the gust factor up to +20 knots on takeoff as well?

Yes the engines are at higher thrust level and probably better at spoolup if W/S becomes an issue but the wing still wants its Bernoullis. And in order to please the beancounters the normal takeoff thrust can now be reduced by derating the donks, injecting an assumed temperature and further by improved climb procedures.

By which time the takeoff N1 used starts to appear like a cruise thrust setting. Reminding me of a certain BEA Trident incident aeons ago where cruise thrust was used for takeoff resulting in urgent laundry work for the crew.

So, once again, why Vwotever plus up to 20 knots-it's a lot of extra kinetic energy when least desired if one wants to plant it & stop it within the airfield boundary??!

[Boac]

I refer the 'ono-rabble gentleman to the post I made earlier (#10). The main reason, in my opinion, for many of the over-runs is not bleeding-well bleeding off the excesses (in themselves, not a problem) by the time the threshold arrives AND touching down too long (possibly due to floating with all the extra Bernouillis?).

Q: Why is runway behind you like tits on a nun?

if it's soooh dangerous operating close to the ground with flap deployed then why are we never advised to add half the steady headwind plus all the gust factor up to +20 knots on takeoff as well

- you mean you don't?...................

[barkingmad]

boac, yer asking for skills levels not widely evident worldwide in the 21st century population of flight deck systems management teams. But plus 20 knots?

Apart from the sea wall accident at SFO there are not many accidents nor incidents attributable to lack of Bernoulli's on the aporoach.

But there are many originating in this practice of adding possibly superfluous energy simply because the ASI is oscillating rapidly before the wide eyes of the crew.

Oscillating being the operative term for normal +/- fluctuations in the conditions under discussion and in strong headwinds may not necessarily result in changes in IAS.

I await the next overrun accident which is sure to occur until this anomaly is resolved.

[Boac]

But plus 20 knots

- I don't think I ever saw +20 more than twice, and both those were in the 87 and 93? gales. It was the MAX your runway performance would allow and not a target. But if you have 60kts on the nose +30 would not hurt in terms of stopping!

[CremeEgg]

By which time the takeoff N1 used starts to appear like a cruise thrust setting. Reminding me of a certain BEA Trident incident aeons ago where cruise thrust was used for takeoff resulting in urgent laundry work for the crew.

Curious about the Trident incident - never heard about it - and that with a father that spent many happy hours at the pointy end speeding around the skies of Europe overtaking everything else until they introduced a max of 0.8 Mach or 320 kts for fuel economy reasons in Nov 73.

[Slasher]

The A32O has a thingy called "groundspeed mini" that takes care of speeds flown during approach WRT reported Tower wind on the ground. Basically it's the old "don't let you GS get below Vref" in terms of having enough energy available. It works quite well esp in wild variations in wind during approach.

Too much to explain it here so best to search for it online. For those interested the search term is: A320 groundspeed mini.

And yes even Scarebus adds 1/2 hw + full gust for Vapp up to a max of 20kt, bleeding to Vref + gust over the fence (except for zero Flap landing where nothing is added at all (1.28 Vs v 1.23 when flapped).

Confusing huh? It's hard to explain it clearly to you experienced blokes. You should see how much hair is torn out of my skull trying to explain it to raw cadets!

[TheGreenGoblin]

Obviously one should abide by SOPS, AFM, POH, or aircraft specific guidelines, whatever, but a general rule of thumb might be to add on to the normal approach speed, or VREF, half of the amount that the gusts are exceeding the general headwind speed at the time. Thus if the headwind is 15 knots reported gusting 25 knots then the difference is 10 knots and half of ten knots is 5 knots. Add 5 knots to the approach speed/VREF.

For those with FMS systems that use GPS or INS then at, say, 500 feet the wind speed indications may be accurate enough to use, but as you get closer to the ground these readings become less useful. ATC or the ATIS may be able to give some sort of useful general synopsis. Better to throw it away and go around than arrive far too fast or, worst case, too slow.