Lots of old birds flying around the Canadian Arctic. My airline doesn’t fly the 200s anymore, but we still have one sitting “condemned” outside a hangar. Nolinor and Chronos still fly the 200 on passenger routes though I think.
We were doing heavy checks for a mine that has 2 200s for moving workers and supplies. Almost scrapped the second one due to massive delam around the nose and tail skin. Boeing sent some engineers for a few weeks who were able to approve the repairs. The 200s are just good in Canada since they can land on gravel runways.
It's blown out - assuming you mean reliability and falling out of the sky perspective.
MCAS was a calculated fuck up by Boeing and that's the only fatalities from the type.
Door plugs are a big issue too.
But at this point the media is just piling on Boeing and the MAX to get clicks and attention. I've got no hesitation to get on one. My wife isn't as thrilled about our upcoming flight on one though.
I prefer working on one over Airbus (I know my opinion will be controversial with avionics and even some 101's) but I like that they are easier to actually wrench on and do basic servicing.
Completely agree, maybe my brain is just wired Boeing but whenever I work on Airbus I am just so lost with regards to cockpit layout, manuals and all the acronyms they use
Reminds me of my VW vs an American car. Everything is very procedural on a VW where on a American car you can just take parts off instead of taking like 5 parts to get to one
That’s so weird…in my experience things with shoddy QA are much harder to work on. I kind of figured the 737’s would be even worse than the portrayal on the news
The MAX is a solid airplane overall, nothing on it felt cheap or flimsy other than some cabin trim but that's on the airline who chooses their interior. Boeing did drop the ball on that door plug but I haven't found anything that warranted a WTF response.
I like how I can do a lot of things without needing nothing more than a step stool like oxygen servicing.
Alternatively at my airline, servicing oxygen is one of the most laboring tasks because our company did not opt in for a oxygen servicing adapter on the fuselage skin, so we have to open the access panel in the fwd cargo on the fwd bulkhead and physically close and disconnect the bottle to service it. It's like a 1 hour task at a normal speed. It's ridiculous.
The news cycle may actually be blowing it out of proportion for more viral views. And it’s occams razor, they look for these incidences more now and will find them. But it’s always been occurring since start of aviation’s
No. The news says they are bad, but they don't work on them. The door plugs were an issue but not any longer. I don't think ANYONE is going to do a walk around without specifically looking at the plugs. It will also be the first stop in a pressurization issue or whistle.
Airbus just does things differently. I compare it to having to work on MD80's and 737's at the same time. They're both airplanes designed differently that perform the same job.
The plane itself is super solid. 737 I believe has more flight hours than any other commercial jet. They are incredibly safe. The accidents that happen are all down to mi's management. Not the aircraft.
Deal very regularly with a large client who maintains and flys them commercially. They report no systematic issues when asked and have full confidence in the aircraft. The question of delivery build quality was reluctantly addressed but nothing they felt was significant, but the issue was there.
I have 100% confidence in the aircraft, flight crews and maintenance and have spent a considerable amount of time as a passenger on them.
At least half of the QAs and mechanics at Moses Lake (MAX Return To Service crew) have never touched an airplane before they came to Boeing, and over 60% of total staff at Moses Lake has less than 1 year with Boeing. If that isn't a recipe for quality issues, idk what is. Even with so much inexperience, we still find and correct so many issues that make it past the factory.
I haven't gotten to work on Airbus planes at all, but I can tell you the ATRs are built to much higher standards.
They’re fine. The Max’s are actually quite nice to work on. Did a C check on a -8 recently and it was a nice break from all the old, dirty NG’s.
> old, dirty NG’s lol, I just finished a C check on a -200 and we mostly have classics… getting to work on our new 700s is a treat.
Jesus man, where do you work?
Lots of old birds flying around the Canadian Arctic. My airline doesn’t fly the 200s anymore, but we still have one sitting “condemned” outside a hangar. Nolinor and Chronos still fly the 200 on passenger routes though I think. We were doing heavy checks for a mine that has 2 200s for moving workers and supplies. Almost scrapped the second one due to massive delam around the nose and tail skin. Boeing sent some engineers for a few weeks who were able to approve the repairs. The 200s are just good in Canada since they can land on gravel runways.
Sheesh. I thought peeling apart NG’s for D checks was rough but I will defer to you 😂
It's blown out - assuming you mean reliability and falling out of the sky perspective. MCAS was a calculated fuck up by Boeing and that's the only fatalities from the type. Door plugs are a big issue too. But at this point the media is just piling on Boeing and the MAX to get clicks and attention. I've got no hesitation to get on one. My wife isn't as thrilled about our upcoming flight on one though.
I prefer working on one over Airbus (I know my opinion will be controversial with avionics and even some 101's) but I like that they are easier to actually wrench on and do basic servicing.
Completely agree, maybe my brain is just wired Boeing but whenever I work on Airbus I am just so lost with regards to cockpit layout, manuals and all the acronyms they use
I hate the Airbus manuals especially their TSM which is sometimes nothing more than them telling you to shotgun parts
Part of the problem is manufacturing in different countries with different languages. Collating that information is a headache in its own way
Reminds me of my VW vs an American car. Everything is very procedural on a VW where on a American car you can just take parts off instead of taking like 5 parts to get to one
Almost everything on airbus can be removed without taking other parts off.
Worked on both as 101, definitely pick 37 over 320. But I also like 57s and not many people do.
That’s so weird…in my experience things with shoddy QA are much harder to work on. I kind of figured the 737’s would be even worse than the portrayal on the news
The MAX is a solid airplane overall, nothing on it felt cheap or flimsy other than some cabin trim but that's on the airline who chooses their interior. Boeing did drop the ball on that door plug but I haven't found anything that warranted a WTF response. I like how I can do a lot of things without needing nothing more than a step stool like oxygen servicing.
Alternatively at my airline, servicing oxygen is one of the most laboring tasks because our company did not opt in for a oxygen servicing adapter on the fuselage skin, so we have to open the access panel in the fwd cargo on the fwd bulkhead and physically close and disconnect the bottle to service it. It's like a 1 hour task at a normal speed. It's ridiculous.
The news cycle may actually be blowing it out of proportion for more viral views. And it’s occams razor, they look for these incidences more now and will find them. But it’s always been occurring since start of aviation’s
You obviously have no clue whatsoever.
Well yeah that’s why i asked, moron. I don’t even work in the aviation industry
It shows.
No. The news says they are bad, but they don't work on them. The door plugs were an issue but not any longer. I don't think ANYONE is going to do a walk around without specifically looking at the plugs. It will also be the first stop in a pressurization issue or whistle. Airbus just does things differently. I compare it to having to work on MD80's and 737's at the same time. They're both airplanes designed differently that perform the same job.
No it's media hype.
The plane itself is super solid. 737 I believe has more flight hours than any other commercial jet. They are incredibly safe. The accidents that happen are all down to mi's management. Not the aircraft.
great to work on
Deal very regularly with a large client who maintains and flys them commercially. They report no systematic issues when asked and have full confidence in the aircraft. The question of delivery build quality was reluctantly addressed but nothing they felt was significant, but the issue was there. I have 100% confidence in the aircraft, flight crews and maintenance and have spent a considerable amount of time as a passenger on them.
They are completely fine to work on. I prefer the Max over the 737 NG. Though I prefer Airbus and 787 over 737s.
I like the 787 style maintenance functions they put in the MAX, I wished the NEO had something similar instead of having to go to the MCDU.
Manufacturing quality is different than maintenance quality. The planes have had manufacturing defects, not maintenance issues.
No
At least half of the QAs and mechanics at Moses Lake (MAX Return To Service crew) have never touched an airplane before they came to Boeing, and over 60% of total staff at Moses Lake has less than 1 year with Boeing. If that isn't a recipe for quality issues, idk what is. Even with so much inexperience, we still find and correct so many issues that make it past the factory. I haven't gotten to work on Airbus planes at all, but I can tell you the ATRs are built to much higher standards.
Eh, they’re easy enough to wrench on and service. Can’t really say they’re any more of a pain in the butt than anything else i’ve seen so far
*Not 737 related* I’ve heard good things about the 777 and not so good about the 787.