-900/-900ER, -9, and -10 have them. Not sure about the shorter variants. Keep in mind the -10 is nearly twice the length of the original 737-100, and there are quite a few other transport-size planes that will do this if loaded or unloaded improperly.I have never seen a B 737 with a tail stand.
Surely you can't be serious.Tailwheel didn't deploy,
Likely a computer glitch.
Yip, had a 737 under go a freighter convertion and C Checked in the USA, ended up with a half a dozen bags of FOD removed from under floor panels (in the areas they actually lifted the panels to inspect rather than just signed off), much the same as an aircraft C checked in Romania (gear checks all signed off, but there were no jacks aviable to actaully do the checks).it all depends on the standards of your maintenance,when it comes to deep overhauls. Our airlines used several different firms for C checks, citing cost savings and the results were rags found in the fuel tanks, items not wirelocked or sealed, lifed items not changed out and a litany of other snags. You get what you pay for.
Don't call him Shirley.Surely you can't be serious.
"I am not Surely and I am serious!" now for VB to come in with his great movie history-900/-900ER, -9, and -10 have them. Not sure about the shorter variants. Keep in mind the -10 is nearly twice the length of the original 737-100, and there are quite a few other transport-size planes that will do this if loaded or unloaded improperly.
The company certainly has its issues at the moment, but to bash them over this and imply that it is a design problem is beyond silly.
Surely you can't be serious.
This is a Boeing-Seattle problem.
After approximately 1000 airplanes, the "new airplane growing pains" argument doesn't hold up.There's a mistake in the first paragraph of that article.
"Boeing (BA) on Tuesday disclosed a new issue with the 787 Dreamliner widebody jet, which has been dogged with problems since August."
It should read:
"Boeing (BA) on Tuesday disclosed a new issue with the 787 Dreamliner widebody jet, which has been dogged by excessive media reporting of problems since August."
Seriously, there has never been an aircraft development program without numerous problems. And with the increasing complexity of commercial aircraft, it's perfectly logical for such problems to increase. I'm not saying Boeing is not without problems, but much of the concern over their development efforts the past couple of years is as much attributable to increased media attention, sometimes to the point of near hysteria, as it is to their own mistakes.
Read the 117 page transcript of the email and IM traffic, it's available on the internet. Forkner is the scapegoat.I'm gonna respectfully ask that you never do that again without fair warning i.e. send me to a link that goes to CNBC. Almost burnt my eyes before I could get that "news source" off of my screen.
Yes, I seen that on a different "news site" (can you tell I don't like any news sites?) here:
Boeing's former 737 MAX pilot, Mark Forkner, was indicted for fraud Thursday for allegedly misleading regulators about problems tied to the aircraft's two fatal crashes.abcnews.go.com
My thought was that someone was going under the bus. Maybe he deserved it and maybe not. A lot that we don't know ..
Thirty-five years at Boeing, and I neither saw or heard about any "social justice warfare" aspects affecting day-to-day operations.The problems at Boeing shoot through the management and engineering structure from top to bottom. Embracing social justice warfare and kowtowing to the various groups organized to shake down corporations has destroyed morale.
March 2017When did you leave?
How, exactly, does this count as "social justice warrior"...and how did if affect the development of the 737 Max? The accusation is that managers and engineers hid flaws in the aircraft. Where does race enter into this?What I wrote is fact. Here's publicly disclosed evidence -
Boeing Co <BA.N> is seeking to increase Black U.S. employees throughout the company by 20% and mandate benchmarks for hiring people of color, Chief Executive Dave Calhoun told employees in a memo on Friday reviewed by Reuters.www.google.com
But it's not only race, that is a tiny part of the culture shift.
Edit: As soon as HBA.com becomes a place for discussing aviation in terms of race, this forum is a powder keg ready to destroy itself. Can we please talk about airplanes instead of skin color? We all know where to find and discuss inflammatory issues, should we choose to.(It also means that Mexico gets highlighted as foreign origin despite NAFTA, which seems somewhat...racist.)
Rubbish.The point is that Boeing has a major initiative that detracts from designing, building, and selling aircraft. It's not about race, it's about setting quotas of "diverse" hiring that sets technical merit aside.
This goes to the root causes of the internal issues that have resulted in the 747-8, 787, KC-47A, and less obvious or expensive problems in fighter production and support. But it's not the only cause, and it is inseparable from a discussion about the company.
Reading the corporate (propaganda) releases might be best if you can't tolerate the grit.