10 ms·
737 Max fiasco was the first thing that actually made me look at which plane I might be flying on when booking tickets outside of the flights on the Airbus A380
by bongoman37 6y ago
737 Max fiasco was the first thing that actually made me look at which plane I might be flying on when booking tickets outside of the flights on the Airbus A380.
- jMyles 6y ago> outside of the flights on the Airbus A380 What do you mean by this part?
- jmercouris 6y agoThe A380 has not had a single incident.
- gspr 6y agoI'd say I'm in general biased in favor of Airbus, but what you say just isn't true.
- jhayward 6y agoOh, it's had incidents. Just not any fatal ones. The early Quantas Flight 32 engine failure [1] was quite severe and the plane was lucky to continue to fly, for instance. "a turbine disc in the aircraft's number-two engine (on the port side nearest the fuselage) was found to have disintegrated, causing extensive damage to the nacelle, wing, fuel system, landing gear, flight controls, and engine controls, and a fire in a fuel tank " [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_32 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_32
- bdamm 6y agoIIRC they were unable to shut down the outboard engine after landing, and had to get the fire department to shoot water into the engine. They did not have control over the engine the entire flight, nor did they have full control over the ailerons. Few people can really appreciate how hard it is to land an airplane with partial controls.
- jhayward 6y agoYes, it could have gone bad very rapidly. It helps that they had a 35-year captain in command, and 5 pilots in the cockpit - including 2 check pilots. All accounts are that the decision making of the crew was top-notch.
- 908B64B197 6y agoAnd their instruments were telling them the truth. Nobody had "omitted" documenting flight-altering automation in the training required to dodge certification requirements...
- jMyles 6y agoThis is one of those comments that just does the perfect job of bringing the thread back into the context of the original topic. Indeed it's astonishing to think that one of the tasks that lead to safety and victory for an aircraft which is simple (as opposed to the many which are complex) is the single point of this particular failure.
- 908B64B197 6y ago> the plane was lucky to continue to fly, for instance. It seems that the better a plane is designed, the "luckier" it gets! Strange how that works.
- loktarogar 6y agoI always finding myself adding in a U in Qantas, but it's an acronym: "Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Services"
- mshook 6y agoHe probably wanted to fly on that aircraft so he specifically looked for a flight with that plane?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- gspr 6y agoGuessing: he wanted to fly on the A380, because it's an awesome experience if you're above average interested in planes. Opposite sign of the attention given to the 737max, in other words.
- addicted 6y agoI would imagine so as well. I'm in the same position. Before the 737 Max fiasco, the only plane I would really look out for, and woudl change tickets for, was the A380. For long distance flights it's way more comfortable especially in economy. The seats tend to be more comfortable, and it's significantly quieter, than competing planes on long distance routes.
- gspr 6y agoDitto. That, and the A350. It doesn't look as spectacular as the A380, but it definitely is the most comfortable cattle class plane experience I've ever had (next to the A380).
- dageshi 6y agoWhen I fly I usually fly with emirates so I'm quite often on the A380, they really are wonderful planes.
- bongoman37 6y agoYes, exactly this. Also, I have only flown these on Emirates and they are great with a kid.
- dageshi 6y agoI'm guessing he means he'd prefer to fly on the A380.
- misterbwong 6y agoA380 is a great plane, very fun to fly on. Too bad they're being grounded on most airlines for the foreseeable future due to their economics.
- ipnon 6y agoSo much quieter than the comparable Boeing aircraft. Flying trans-Pacific on the 757 is like mowing the lawn for a day and a half.
- nickff 6y agoYou're comparing a 1982 narrow-body to a 2006 super wide-body aircraft; a better comparison would be between the A380 and 747-8i (which are both supposed to be very comfortable).
- giantrobot 6y agoIt sounds like they're comparing planes they've actually flown on. I've never flown on a 747, so if I fly on a 787 I'm not going to make comments about how much better the 787 is than the 747.
- nickff 6y agoI think you're right that they're comparing planes they've flown on, but they're trying to compare very different designs from very different eras.
- knz 6y ago> comparing planes they've flown on The airline matters too - some have larger seats with more amenities and more space between rows. Those extra inches really matter on long haul flights for those of us who are tall!
- arcticfox 6y agoYou'd have a point if they didn't say "the comparable Boeing aircraft". There is nothing "comparable" about the two given Boeing's other offerings, they're not in the same class or generation.
- koyote 6y agoAs a casual plane nerd I always checked which plane type I am on and have even made ticket decisions based on it (and have been disappointed when the airline changes the plane type last-minute!). That being said, in my experience, airlines very rarely advertise which 'sub-type' of narrow-body you'll be flying on (at least until you've bought the ticket). Finding a flight which is definitely on an A320-neo (as opposed to ceo) for example is very difficult. I would assume that especially now airlines will do their best to hide the fact that they are flying a 737 Max.
- jefftk 6y agoOn the other hand, if this is important to you, it is generally quite practical to choose airlines that do not fly 737s. For example, JetBlue and not SouthWest.
- rootusrootus 6y agoThat really depends on the airport. Portland, for example. If you try to avoid 737s then you just cut yourself out of 75-80% of all available flights. Also, the 737NG is arguably the safest airliner ever produced (by statistics, not speculation), so why would I want to avoid it?
- Fomite 6y agoI always do because I despise exit seats on A320s, at least on Alaska.
- ThePowerOfFuet 6y agoIf you tell the flight crew that you don't want to be seated there, they will reseat you.
- Fomite 6y agoIt's more an issue, in the case of Alaska, that they treat exit row seats as a premium selection, so it's more of a "If 737 then my life is slightly better for a few dollars, if A320, it's slightly worse, so check beforehand."
- vmception 6y agoIt was the first time I looked at my prior tickets to determine if I had ever flown on one. But nope, all Boeing Dreamliners which are phenomenal and fantastic!