Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 220

Thread: 737 MAX

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Posts
    5,130

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    3,862

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,834
    Quote Originally Posted by k2skier112 View Post
    Wow. That was well worth the watch! (assuming it is completely accurate). Answered a lot of questions.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Wow. That was well worth the watch! (assuming it is completely accurate). Answered a lot of questions.
    Juan Browne is usually pretty accurate about things.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    19,974
    Aren't they still grounded?
    That sounds expensive.
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    3,026
    That was fascinating.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I rip the groomed on tele gear

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    4,287
    Worst new product launch since New Coke..
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,834
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    Worst new product launch since New Coke..
    Maybe. The public will forget soon enough. Average person has no idea what they are flying on. Knowledge is power. I think the A380 debacle, where Airbus executives decided to swing dicks rather than play the long game, might end up being the bigger long term disaster. The MAX might still have a long and bright future, albeit probably rolling with a different handle.

    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757. Best takeoffs ever and long term demand seems almost certain. The A380 and Max debacles should at least have some pencil pushers rethinking business plans.

    Lastly, I have a flight (my first) on a 787 dash 9 coming up. Upgraded to bulkhead seats. Wife and kids on a 747 dash 8 on Lufthansa of course. Kind of jealous of them.
    Last edited by uglymoney; 09-01-2019 at 03:03 PM.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    4,287
    Let's take a perfectly good airliner... Put bigger engines on it to eek out a little more payload and a few more pennies per flight. Never mind the fact that the bigger engines tip the balance point so badly we have to run special software to keep it in the air.. Oh, and let's not tell the pilots how the new software the plane can't fly without works or how to use it! Yep, right there's some good shit..
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,834
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    Let's take a perfectly good airliner... Put bigger engines on it to eek out a little more payload and a few more pennies per flight. Never mind the fact that the bigger engines tip the balance point so badly we have to run special software to keep it in the air.. Oh, and let's not tell the pilots how the new software the plane can't fly without works or how to use it! Yep, right there's some good shit..
    Didn't watch the video eh?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    4,287
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Didn't watch the video eh?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Umm check out 15 minute mark of the video
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,834
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    Umm check out 15 minute mark of the video
    ? The part where he talks about how the plane is actually inherently stable but the software was needed to provide proper stick feedback that falls within FAA requirements, which yes, is a result of the engine placement?

    Obviously a series of bad decisions were made which resulted in these crashes but it doesn't seem to be because the plane is inherently built to fall out of the sky. More that it has flight characteristics that differ slightly from other 737's and for regulatory (pilot training, stick feedback) reasons the software was added and then modified later as they went down the wormhole.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    4,287
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    ? The part where he talks about how the plane is actually inherently stable but the software was needed to provide proper stick feedback that falls within FAA requirements, which yes, is a result of the engine placement?

    Obviously a series of bad decisions were made which resulted in these crashes but it doesn't seem to be because the plane is inherently built to fall out of the sky. More that it has flight characteristics that differ slightly from other 737's and for regulatory (pilot training, stick feedback) reasons the software was added and then modified later as they went down the wormhole.
    It all started to go bad with the idea to add bigger engines which admittedly fucked up the balance because the air frame and wings were designed for different engines. How did that idea work out?
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,958
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    More that it has flight characteristics that differ slightly from other 737's and for regulatory (pilot training, stick feedback) reasons the software was added and then modified later as they went down the wormhole.
    Money reasons. The airlines wanted a plane that was operationally mostly interchangeable with their other 737s, but with better economics. That's what Boeing promised, that's why the airlines bought the plane. To deliver on that promise they went down a wormhole of engineering compromises.

    Anyways, this won't make any fucking difference. Because you are conflating the utter IT fuckup of the A380 - where they lost design control, and years -with executive swinging to wave the flag. USA! USA! USA!

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,834
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    It all started to go bad with the idea to add bigger engines which admittedly fucked up the balance because the air frame and wings were designed for different engines. How did that idea work out?


    So far, not great and only time will tell if it was a good long term business decision. As I said, some rethinking is almost certainly taking place with the benefit of hindsight. But, according to the man on the video at least, the software wasn't needed to "keep the plane in the air".

    Should they have gone with a new 757ish design (bigger wings/higher stance/short runway capable)? Why, why not.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,958
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Should they have gone with a new 757ish design (bigger wings/higher stance/short runway capable)? Why, why not.
    Because it'd cost too much to make them money. it's really fucking simple economics.

    and it's the same reason if they'd been honest about the 787 costs they'd never have approved it. and that's before the fuckups that cost $. Same with teh A380.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,036
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757..
    Only if they restrict them to no family travel and fly them on predominately business routes. Got stuck on the back of one for a cross country trip around xmas time and it took 45 minutes to get everyone off. The Boeing NMA is aimed at that market however, but some talk of it being a dual aisle and sitting in-between narrow and wide body fuselage.

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    19,974
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Maybe. The public will forget soon enough. Average person has no idea what they are flying on. Knowledge is power. I think the A380 debacle, where Airbus executives decided to swing dicks rather than play the long game, might end up being the bigger long term disaster. The MAX might still have a long and bright future, albeit probably rolling with a different handle.

    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757. Best takeoffs ever and long term demand seems almost certain. The A380 and Max debacles should at least have some pencil pushers rethinking business plans.

    Lastly, I have a flight (my first) on a 787 dash 9 coming up. Upgraded to bulkhead seats. Wife and kids on a 747 dash 8 on Lufthansa of course. Kind of jealous of them.
    Don't the bigger 737's and A321 essentially replace the 757?
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    6,251
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757. Best takeoffs ever and long term demand seems almost certain. The A380 and Max debacles should at least have some pencil pushers rethinking business plans.
    About one out of every six 757s still flying belongs to Delta. That's a big fleet to replace, plus the operational advantage of the 767 being considered the same type leaves little financial incentive to do so without a major increase in fuel price.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Don't the bigger 737's and A321 essentially replace the 757?
    pretty much.

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    3,862

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,036
    Many Delta 757 routes have 7373-900s in the rotation.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,834
    The 757 has bigger wings so it can take off at slower speeds with more payload. 737's need more speed and longer runways to get airborne.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    19,974
    I don't think there are many commercial airports not fit for a 737. Takeoff run from one plane to another also is a lot more complicated than just wingspan from 1 to the other.
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    19,974
    Wow, Wikipedia says 757-200 takes off quite a bit shorter than a 737-800 at a higher max takeoff weight. How dey do dat?
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    4,852
    Aerodynamics’n’shit probly


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •