fave passenger jets

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support AutomaticWasher.org:

Thats a RyanAir plane in Reply #84.
Their 737-200's were altitude restricted in the end, due to super-high cycle numbers, and were apparently patched more than an old bike tire. I believe the aircraft affected included the Hertz logo jet and one or two others. From what I've read, I'm pretty sure that a DC-9 can survive over 150K cycles, with modifications to the pressure bulkhead.

Also, in regards to Delta and the MD-80s, its only a rumor I've read. However, it would (apparently) be likely for them to retrofit the cockpits and upgrade to MD-88 standard. Some SAS models would apparently be used simply as spare parts (surprisingly), if they were bought.

Also, I believe the DC-9 was actually built for more cycles than the 737. That Aloha Airlines aircraft was basically on its limit, or over, if my memory of Wikipedia is correct.
I do know Northwest's DC9-10's were basically at their max at retirement (With the -10 series being the favourite for rural "Round-Robin" runs)
 
Northwest Airlines Flight 255, which ended badly just after takeoff from Detroit Metro, 1987.

What happened in this incident is that earlier in the day the flap configuration warning horn had been going off on it's own for no valid reason. So the pilot pulled the circuit breaker to stop this from happening.

Also the captain was a low time MD80 pilot originally from NW. The first officer was from Republic Airlines. The MD80 was a new airplane to NW as they acquired this MD80 from Republic. For some reason or another they forgot to put the flaps down and when takeoff power was applied the takeoff configuration warning horn didn't go off like it should have because the circuit breaker was pulled.

Now normally this would have been ok if someone had placarded the panel that the circuit breaker was pulled, but nobody did.

Now an MD-80 can take off without flaps, but your Vspeeds wil be much higher and require a higher power setting than taking off with flaps. So since the flaps weren't deployed the aircraft lifted off below stall speen due to the no flap condition. Once the aircraft left ground effect it stalled and crashed.

Another interesting note was that NW only received 4 MD-80s from Republic. So that was a total number in of them in the entire NW fleet. Soon after the accident NW disposed of the other MD-80's. It's very expensive to maintain a small subfleet of aircraft like that.

That's a good photo of the fuselage showing all the patches & doublers as they are called to correct any weak spots in the fuselage. I remember flying in a Southwest 727-200 that when you got up close to it had patches and doublers all over the fuselage. As aircraft age and during the major inspections the paint is removed so the mechanics can see the areas that need attention. After the plane is finished with a major maintenance check it's repainted again.
 
I guess I missed the mention of the C-5 sounding different in the future.  The flight path to Moffet Field isn't that far from us and the distinctive sound of the C-5 is quite familiar, though the military traffic into Moffet is only a tiny fraction of what it used to be since Moffet transitioned from Naval Air Station to Federal Airfield. 

 

Moffet was the base for the P-3 Orion submarine chasers for decades.  I enjoyed the sound of the P-3's as they continued to operate long after their commercial counterpart, the Electra, had been phased out by passenger airlines.  There are rows and rows of decommissioned P-3's parked in Tucson now. 

 

The C-130's (or whatever their suffix is these days) also have a distinctive sound to them.  Several times this past year we've been buzzed by such planes doing touch-and-go runs at SJC.  They were on the tight approach that normally small private aircraft use, and were low enough to make the cat consider running for cover, until she noticed that Dave and I weren't doing likewise, but instead were marveling at the close-up view.
 
too bad I didn't know Ralph way, way, way back then...

How well I remember those P-3 Orion sub hunters while growing up in the Santa Clara Valley. I doubt they found many submarines in the rapidly disappearing apricot and prune orchards they seemed to be cruising over. I remember too when Moffet Field was a busy place. I understand they determined that chemicals in the paint covering the huge Hanger One at Moffet were polluting the bay. The panels covering the hanger have been removed leaving only the frame. It must look very strange. Do you remember that gigantic rotating radar antenna at the top of Mt. Umunhum. That thing moved pretty fast. An elderly neighbor said she was sure it caused earthquakes.

the antenna made at least one phone book cover

twintubdexter++11-18-2012-16-39-45.jpg
 
Oh yeah, everybody knew the radar dish.  The giant box it sat atop is still there, and since the open space district recently purchased the property, there has been a heated debate on whether to demolish it or save it, the argument for saving it being that it has historical -- if definitely not architectural -- significance.

 

Interesting that you provided that phone book cover picture.  I used to have a 1967 book with an airport shot on the cover that included a brand new Pacific Airlines 727, a PSA Super Electra, an SFO Helicopter and the tiny Holiday Airlines plane I mentioned further up.

 

Hangar One at Moffet Field is in a similar situation to that of the radar tower.  The Navy paid to have the toxic (PCB's and asbestos) skin removed, but funds haven't been secured to re-skin it, so currently it's just a skeleton.  The longer it stays that way, the more difficult and expensive restoration efforts become.  Google has proposed to re-skin the hangar in exchange for using part of it for their corporate aircraft, but they've received no response.  A western Smithsonian has also been suggested. 

 

It has been stated that Hangar One is so large that it has its own climate zone inside.  I've been in it a couple of times and it's difficult to convey its size through photos.  I've attached a picture here with a large NASA plane next to the hangar (skin still on) for scale.

rp2813++11-18-2012-18-20-57.jpg
 
Hangar One's Initial Purpose

Parking garage for the USS Macon.  This is a shot of the Macon pulling out of Hangar One in 1933.  You can sort of get a feel for the Macon's size if you can make out the ant-like people on the ground below it.

 

The Macon went down off the Monterey coast in bad weather not long after this shot was taken.  Its sister ship, The Akron, met a similar fate off the New Jersey coast, and the Navy's airship program went down with them.

 

 

rp2813++11-18-2012-18-31-58.jpg
 
@whirlcool:

"Northwest Airlines Flight 255, which ended badly just after takeoff from Detroit Metro, 1987.

What happened in this incident is that earlier in the day the flap configuration warning horn had been going off on it's own for no valid reason. So the pilot pulled the circuit breaker to stop this from happening.

Also the captain was a low time MD80 pilot originally from NW. The first officer was from Republic Airlines. The MD80 was a new airplane to NW as they acquired this MD80 from Republic. For some reason or another they forgot to put the flaps down and when takeoff power was applied the takeoff configuration warning horn didn't go off like it should have because the circuit breaker was pulled.

Now normally this would have been ok if someone had placarded the panel that the circuit breaker was pulled, but nobody did.

Now an MD-80 can take off without flaps, but your Vspeeds wil be much higher and require a higher power setting than taking off with flaps. So since the flaps weren't deployed the aircraft lifted off below stall speen due to the no flap condition. Once the aircraft left ground effect it stalled and crashed.

Another interesting note was that NW only received 4 MD-80s from Republic. So that was a total number in of them in the entire NW fleet. Soon after the accident NW disposed of the other MD-80's. It's very expensive to maintain a small subfleet of aircraft like that. "

At the end of the day, that crash was due to a crew that defeated useful safety systems and didn't have their heads screwed on straight. It took an intentional action to pull a circuit breaker that was located behind and to the left of the Captain's seat.

I learned to fly from an former military pilot. Even with a simple Cessna, he expected me to check the "killer items" upon turning onto the runway - fuel, flaps and trim.

Why that crew didn't have that kind of thinking welded into their brains, I don't know. But a lot of people paid the price.
 
The pilot did intentionally pull the breaker and ever wrote it up in the aircraft maintenance log. But the flap configuration horn in not on the MEL list (Minimum Equipment List) so off they went. Clearly pilot error. What I wanted to know is why the F/O didn't remind the captain of the lack of flaps?

I was with Northwest at the time. They had a lot of "Sky God's" working for them.
Maybe the Captain of 255 was one of those? They can make life miserable for a F/O as they come off pretty pompous sometimes.

There was a LOT of animosity between the original NW people vs the Republic people.
This happened at all levels. And it went on for years! But you should have seen them sweat when we merged with Delta. They were expecting the same treatment from Delta employees that they gave the Republic employees. But in this case it was a different story. Delta was very nice while integrating the Northwest people into it's fold. But we did have a few former people from NW that couldn't adapt.
 
As much as company animosity may have created a bad work environment, I'm not buying.

Like I said, I learned to fly from an ex-military guy.

We can all be thankful that when I depart in my Cessna, I probably won't take anyone out with me.

But the Military was always big on things like the "Law of Primacy" and other stuff.

I know how I learned to fly a Cessna and survive - 25 years ago.

There are plenty of guys with epaulets that were better flyers than me until they killed people.

I guess you win.
 
THIS THREAD . . .

. . . was, I believe, intended to be a source of entertainment for airline and aircraft enthusiasts and not an arena for divisive sparring matches over who knows best.

 

For those who find the knowledge and insights of a retired airline pilot with many years/hours of experience at the helm of jumbo jets questionable, spare the rest of us here and reserve the confrontational exchanges for e-mail, or fork over the lousy $12 for upgraded membership and then move your discussion to the instant messaging system.
 
Long about 1973 I mis-operated the flaps of a Piper on takeoff. I could feel in my butt something was wrong and shoved the stick in from where it would have been at that point. Had I not, I wouldn't be here to tell the story. Potentially fatal error, absolutely successful recovery.

Thing is, yer butt tells you a lot more in a 4-seat single engine than it does in a transport jet where you're expecting everything to go like it always did before when you DIDN'T mis-operate it.

Now American 965 in Cali, Columbia, that was pretty inexcusable. Even *I* never just kept flying without knowing where the hell I was.
 
On the merits of shorter haul planes from a passenger perspective I really like the DC-9 and derivatives more than the 727/737 simply because of the five abreast seating in coach. You get noticeably more seat width, enough to make it a lot more comfortable.

Airbus seems to have made its narrow body fuselage wider than the 727 series so it can give more seat width even with 6 abreast seating.

I'm thrilled Delta has the ex-AirTran 717s. I've never been on one and now have a chance. As I recall they have 100% fresh air ventilation, which should be a heck of a lot better than the completely recirculating systems on those regional jets.
 
Regarding whirlcool's comments in reply 91

I was in the jump seat on a Challenger 601 flying out of the Bombardier Tucson service center a number of years ago. It was a windy day with some substantial gusts that were messing with our AOA probes(angle of attack) so we were struggling with an AOA miss-compare warning. The pilot had hoped that once we were taxiing the problem would correct itself. Well it didn't, and we got airborne with no reliable AOA data. Both pilot and copilot were so involved in sorting it out that normal procedures were overlooked until it was resolved. This resolution came fairly early during climb out, but once the issue was finally settled we discovered another problem.The cabin altitude was climbing along with the aircraft. To make a long story short, the problem with the AOA probes so completely dominated everyone's attention that the engine bleed air switches were never selected and the APU was never shut down, meaning we had climbed up to an altitude were the APU(auxiliary power unit)was struggling to operate, let alone provide enough bleed air to pressurize the aircraft. Once we realized what had happened it was quickly corrected, but it was a rare opportunity for me to witness how even a well trained crew can make mistakes and overlook things when they become distracted. Unfortunately, quite a few crashes where pilot error is blamed, involve the same sorts of distractions and overlooked procedures. I used to wonder how it could happen, but not anymore.

As for certain pilots creating dangerous cockpits through their domineering management style, I was on board another Challenger 601 out of Van Nuys on a routine maintenance flight(to perform an air driven generator drop check)when I witnessed a truly arrogant little dork in the left seat mess with the copilot to point were I'd almost swear I saw smoke coming out of his ears. We were simply supposed to fly out over the Antelope Valley, make several small turns while performing our check and return to the airport. The pilot was busy doing the check as we came up to the first scheduled turn, so the copilot called the tower to let them know we'd be changing course. At this point the pilot laid into him for contacting the tower without checking with him first, after all he was the captain and nothing should be happening in his cockpit without his knowledge. Five minutes later the pilot is still involved in the drop check as we approach the next turn. Not wishing to step on his toes again, the copilot asked for permission to call the tower and alert them about the next change of course. The pilot was very involved in what he was doing and didn't respond, so the copilot asked again. Now the pilot came unglued, accused the copilot of being incompetent, asked him if he needed permission to wipe his nose, and basically told him that "a good copilot wouldn't be pestering him for permission to do every little thing! Can't you see I'm busy? You know what needs to be done, just do it!" At this point the tower contacted us and let us know that we'd failed to contact them at the correct time and we'd missed our turn. Frankly, the entire situation was so ridiculous I could hardly believe what I'd actually seen. The copilot and I had a long talk about the situation after we landed, and he ended up taking another job soon after that. The pilot in this case was a complete freaking nightmare, and there's no doubt in my mind that any aircraft where he's flying left seat is a dangerous place to be.
 
To try to correct the situation the airlines got involved in a program we call "CRM" that's "Cockpit Resource Management". It teaches that the cockpit is teamwork and that there is no room for "prima donnas" in the daily procedure of flying the aircraft. Nobody should ever be reprimanded for reminding another about something they should or should not be doing.

And from the first time I took a flying lesson way back in 1968 we were taught "Never mind what is going on inside the aircraft, FLY THE AIRCRAFT FIRST!". There have been so many crashes due to the crew fixating on a relatively small problem they forget to fly the airplane. Eastern Flight 401 was one of these incidents.
And D-Jones provided another excellent example of these "Sky Gods". What gets me is that they forgot that they weren't "born with the knowledge" and that they too had to learn the ropes through training and experience. But fortunately due to open policies at most airlines nowadays the era of the Sky God is just about over with.

The area I live in used to have a huge hangar for the Goodyear blimp but it was torn down over 10 years ago. For a year or two they were deciding what the best way to tear it down was as it was built to withstand 150mph hurricane winds and was made of cast concrete! Hangar one definitely is huge!
 
Braking

As there a lot of knowledgable guys on here I would like to ask something,

A Jet plane as far as i know uses engine thrust reversers to assist slowing down on landing.
What to do propeller driven aircraft use, is it just brakes?

Gary
 
pitch reverse

on modern larger prop planes the propellers can be put in "reverse pitch" as i understand turboprops run at a pretty constant speed and thrust is varied by changing the propeller pitch
 
Here's a VERY cool video

Or a link to it.

The poster, Ryan Bomar, has some of the better youtube videos in my opinion, as a buddy of his did lots of VHS 'filming' in the late 1980s and early 1990s. This one is full of outstanding classics, even the comments are fun to read.

If you like 707s, 727s, DC-9s, etc. this video is for you!

I have spent hours watching this guy's videos. They are almost like a transporter back in time. I myself took about 30 minutes of Betacam video at Denver Stapleton in Fall, 1982. I should have it transferred to DVD so I can upload it. It would be a hoot to hear the airplane fans, after watching my video, ask what the heck all those washer videos are on my channel!

Gordon

 
Some Questions I missed,

I never realised airplanes had their engines CHANGED every few years. I just thought they kept rebuilding/fixing them! Well, was I wrong!
Where do they keep the engines, especially for types like the DC-9 where the original JT8D's are (from what I know) no longer produced.

You can only rebuild a jet engine so many times before the major parts will no longer be able to meet tolerances. And then they are sent off to specialized companies to scrap. The engines were replaced every 28,000 hours of operation.
Airlines have maintenance programs in place that they created using the guidance of the engine manufacturer to extend the life as much as possible.

Someone said they have an old advert for the L-1011 they could locate and put up here. I think everyone would enjoy that!


That e Havilland D.H. 91 Albatross reminds me of the Lockheed Lodestar which airlines used in the late 30's early 40's. After the was a bunch of them were converted into private business aircraft. Our museum has one. But before if flies again it will need a complete overhaul including checking for corrosion inside the wings. BTW compared to the Lodestar, the Albatross had a neat design for the engine nacelles. The Lodestar had those huge radial engines and there is only so much you can do to cover them.

And after the merger that created Republic airlines it was a few years before the crews and aircraft became integrated. This was due to contract differences between North Central, Southern and later Hughes Airwest the member airlines of Republic.
Everyone would fly the routes that came from their original airlines. It took awhile before all the Republic training was completed for all inflight crews. Then after everyone was trained and new union contracts signed they started to integrate crews.

North Central was an airline that followed the rule "If you come to work and do a good job, we'll take care of you". NW had the attitude "Get over it, you're just a number". One thing they did in their headquarters one time was to remove all the doors off the stall's in the men's rooms. This happened because NW thought too many people were "lingering" in there too long. [this post was last edited: 11/19/2012-19:04]
 
@Whilcool

Well, if my assumptions are correct, most DC-9's would be on their 2nd or 3rd set of engines, although I'm sure that because of maitenance and such, most would have had 100's of different engines installed (esp. NW/DL birds).

I'll try and dig up my L-1011 advert. No promises on that though!
 
Great Advert!

The first time I flew on an L-1011 was when I was a senior in college. It was on an Eastern bird. They had only had the TriStar for about 6 months at the time.

My impressions:

Absolutely beautiful! The seats had this heavy brocade type of fabric on them in gold & navy blue. One of the advertised features were "You Are Never More Than One Seat Away From An Aisle" this was because the seats were 2-4-2 and in the middle of the 4 in the middle there was a divider with a closet in it. On the top of this divider were real plants in a planter!

The windows were polarized instead of having a window shade. You turned a dial and this in turn turned a plastic window pane between the two windows thereby darkening or lightening the view.

After badgering one of the flight attendants telling her I was an Aviation Student with plans to fly for an airline she let me go down to the lower galley. I was amazed at how spacious it was down there. There were even two flight attendant seats in case of turbulence while preparing meals. All the meals were pre-prepared by Dobbs House and only needed to be heated. So they were heated and loaded into the serving cart and sent upstairs via the elevator.

I had heard from somebody that PSA had 3 or 4 L-1011's and what they did was turn the lower deck galley into a lounge for passengers. They even had a special entrance where you could board the aircraft by air stairs directly into the lounge.
If I remember correctly PSA was the only airline to have this option installed.

And PSA didn't hold on to their L-1011s very long as it was too much aircraft for their route system.

But like most things in the industry the airlines soon discovered that by ripping out the center divider they could add one more seat in it's place. About a year after being in service the polarized windows started to disappear and conventional window shades appeared in the window. I was told by a EA employee that they were too much trouble to maintain. Then the upper bins over the center seats appeared. The original "closets" in the divider between the center seats couldn't hold more than a raincoat or two. So there wasn't enough upper bin space, so the additional bins had to be installed over the center seats.

But in the end as discussed above while the L-1011 was touted as "The most advanced airliner in the skies" Lockheed made several errors in it's design.
One was that the aircraft couldn't be easily stretched like the DC-10 could without completely redesigning the wing. The DC-10 was designed from inception to be stretched later on in the program with no fuss or muss.

The Rolls Royce engine fiasco delayed deliveries of the L-1011. Airlines were not happy about this and no other engine manufacturer made an RB211 equivalent.

Rumor has it that the L-1011 program almost bankrupted Lockheed and they have vowed never to return to building commercial airliners ever again.
 
Funny, because all of the searching on airliners.net seems to suggest that there never were any cupboards/closets or pot plants aboard the L-1011.

Although, many of the pics were post reconfig. to 2-5-2, but pre-overhead bins. I personally say that they should've kept it open on all airliners (I believe IL-92's have that interior) - carry on belongs under seats/in side lockers. Otherwise, it all goes in the hold!

I recall seeing a video on YouTube, and it seems that Northwest's DC-10's were in the "widebody interior" configuration till the very end. That would've been COOL!

However, all that extra "air" would probably place a significant load on the A/C system...
 
Funny, because all of the searching on airliners.net seems to suggest that there never were any cupboards/closets or pot plants aboard the L-1011.

If you look at the photo with the flight attendant laying across the center divider where the mini closets are her armpit is in one of the holes where the plants were placed. On each side of the divider is a door that allows access to a mini-storage area. Most people put their coats in there.

I only saw the plants in there on my very first L1011 ride a few months after Eastern got the L-1011. Like a lot of special features on the L-1011 they were probably removed. I never saw this on any TWA or Delta TriStars. And by about 1975 all the center dividers were removed and a extra seat installed in it's place.
So it would be safe to assume that the plants didn't last too long on the L-1011.

As far as the overhead bins went, Delta had them.

whirlcool++11-20-2012-10-58-14.jpg
 

Latest posts

Back
Top