Globalization. "Flag Carrier" is more of a Branding than any affiliation with a Govt.'s ownership in 2019.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Aircraft Thread!
- Thread starter PracticalMac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Globalization. "Flag Carrier" is more of a Branding than any affiliation with a Govt.'s ownership in 2019.
It’s not globalisation. It’s fake.Globalization. "Flag Carrier" is more of a Branding than any affiliation with a Govt.'s ownership in 2019.
Other airlines would match the branding better.Most Branding is deceiving in today’s world. It is what it is Cube. It’s not changing.
Qantas' Project Sunrise..... Direct flights from Sydney to London, or Sydney to New York. Effectively covering the globe in a single hop. At roughly ~19 hours.... ugh. My longest direct flight was Sydney to Dallas on Qantas, and i think the flight clocked in at about 16 hours, which i'm not too keen on repeating.
Still waiting on the sub-orbital passenger rockets I was promised as a kid.
In general...
Tough to say. I’d say it’s fairly obvious that the NMA needs to become the NSA even with the Max returning to service early 2020. I don’t see a 767 NEO being realistic to bridge putting off the NMA. The 779X is starting to loose it’s desirability even if you disregard the GE9X issues. The 779X and A350-10 don’t seen to be filling in spots as carriers retire their 744’s. Boeing would be in better shape if the 778X were the first in the series IMO.
I see some good changes taking place in Boeing Leadership and chain of command especially with engineering. Muilenburg still needs to be removed if confidence is to return Lindblad leaving as head of the 737 program was a nice announcement last week.
It also depends how aggressive Airbus is during this period. They want Boeing to survive. The 321 XLR is a winner, but the 338 NEO and 350-10 have stalled. The 339 NEO is selling well now.
I‘d say let’s see where things are in 5-8 years. If the engineers can retake control of the product they will be fine. I don’t foresee China or Russia moving into these markets in the next decade. Russia can barely keep the grass on their taxiways trimmed, and the C919 is a joke.
Engine development will also be a large factor going forward. Technology is not maturing as fast as manufacturers claims. Precisely why we are seeing all the premature wear issues showing up on many of the NEO units.
Pressure to “Under Test” is the most dangerous trend in aviation today IMO.
Unless that stops everything else will be moot.
Considering A380 scrapping is well under way with the first being completed last week at Tarbes Lourdes I’d say, yup.
Great plane introduced at the wrong time. PAX want point to point.
Last edited:
The A320 is an outstanding aircraft. I preferred it because it did not squat.
Never piloted a 737, but rode in the flight deck. I piloted and loved the A320.
This is just my opinion.... Boeing made some bad/horrible decisions. However for me, I’m most disappointed in, and have lost trust in the FAA. IMHO Cronyism; can’t stand it.
And I still think the 787 is a great aircraft.
Yes it is. Can’t fault Boeing for the **** design issues with the Trent 1000.
Perfect example of engines manufacturers promising on numbers they can’t deliver. Materials Technology is not maturing as fast as their claims. Wear issues are the common feature today. Let’s hope GE is on the mark with the new stator vane design in the 9X. These NEO’s need more testing on the frame flying IMO. The industry is too dependent on test stand data. While I acknowledge it’s benefits with cost savings nothing recreates real world better than putting it on the wing and flying it. The GE 90 was the early success it was due to “the old Boeing” insisting on extensive flight time complementing the test stand.
Initial issue solved by changing the build of the battery by its manufacturer using an enhanced cell build process. The manufacturer redesigned their packs in a narrower voltage range to reduce thermal signatures. A new charging system was developed by Boeing and the battery manufacturer to more effectively prevent overcharging of the battery manufacturers design. Problem solved. The general understanding as to the initial causes in the incidents is still unclear to this day.
Boeing established teams to retrofit the new battery design. This was 7 years ago.
Li-ion design has progressed significantly since 2013, and they are used in the A350 as of 2016 after Airbus initially dropped them for NiCd after the 787 drama.
Today it is a non issue.
The question was not whether the problem was solved but whose fault it was.Initial issue solved by changing the build of the battery by its manufacturer using an enhanced cell build process. The manufacturer redesigned their packs in a narrower voltage range to reduce thermal signatures. A new charging system was developed by Boeing and the battery manufacturer to more effectively prevent overcharging of the battery manufacturers design. Problem solved. The general understanding as to the initial causes in the incidents is still unclear to this day.
Boeing established teams to retrofit the new battery design. This was 7 years ago.
Li-ion design has progressed significantly since 2013, and they are used in the A350 as of 2016 after Airbus initially dropped them for NiCd after the 787 drama.
Today it is a non issue.
I clearly stated that to this day the general understanding as to the genesis of the problem is not fully understood past Li-ion manufacturing processes. I understand where your going on this, but I have no interest in that anymore rehashing wing cracks in the A380 that were initially found and easily corrected. There is no parallel track between this and the 737 MCAS debacle. Have a cup of tea and relax.
Last edited:
Never piloted a 737, but rode in the flight deck.
Feels like just yesterday that I moved over to the 737, but I'm up to about 2500 hours in the -800 (a couple hundred of those in the MAX8) and I've been enjoying it. Certainly not as comfortable as the Airbus, but it's been a reliable, nice handling airplane. Jumpseat still sucks though - sorry about that!
I have always loved planes. One of my favorite trips was on a A380 flying Business Class. If I could go back being 20 years Youngers I would have chosen to be a pilot just for the fun of flying and visiting different countries.