A Ukrainian Boeing-737 crashes killing all onboard

[vwdan]

Tell that to the families of the dead passengers of the three recent 737 crashes.

What point are you trying to make - we all know the MAX was a disaster, that's why they're all grounded. But outside of that, Boeings safety record is excellent - and in particular the 737NG has a great record and reputation.

For the purposes of the discussion, the MAX is immaterial

And it was two MAX crashes which I assume you were trying to reference.

[scooterscot]

Uhm, pretty sure the 737NG has a fantastic safety record.

What do you mean "another one"?

Another Boeing aircraft.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[scooterscot]

The "engine failure" hypothesis is also unlikely. Planes don't fall out of the sky due to a single engine failure - they're designed to cope with that.

Who said it was a single engine failure? Dual inflight shutdowns do happen. In my safety cases we’d call them ‘red tops’.

What ever the reason for the failure it’ll be human error if not otherwise proven to be an attack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[scooterscot]

Untrue at take off. If one engine (or one set of engines) fails at full throttle just after take off, it's very difficult to cope with. e.g. AF4590

Or indeed a single engine reverse thrust is activated. Horrific event.

[vwdan]

Another Boeing aircraft.

So you were just being silly then. There's a shock.

[vwdan]

Or indeed a single engine reverse thrust is activated. Horrific event.

Why on *earth* would you compare an engine failure with an uncommanded thrust reverser deployment?

One *should* be a routine emergency that is well known, understood, rehearsed and highly survivable. The other, not so much. A 737 with a contained engine failure, being operated properly will take off just fine on one engine. It's literally a regulatory requirement. But you knew that, which just makes you even more of a troll...

[scooterscot]

You mean the engine exploding in such a way that it causes a problem with hull integrity and/or controls. Possible I suppose, but rare, surely?

A engine fire would be automatically extinguished and the fuel engine cut off valve engaged.

A disc burst is possible, high energy debris release into fuel tanks. Catastrophic.

[scooterscot]

Why on *earth* would you compare an engine failure with an uncommanded thrust reverser deployment?

One *should* be a routine emergency that is well known, understood, rehearsed and highly survivable. The other, not so much. A 737 with a contained engine failure, being operated properly will take off just fine on one engine. It's literally a regulatory requirement. But you knew that, which just makes you even more of a troll...

Because we’re still waiting to see if engine failure is confirmed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vwdan]

Because we’re still waiting to see if engine failure is confirmed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure, we're barely even discussing the flight at this point. But in relation to "engine failures", WTFH's point was fundamentally wrong.

[scooterscot]

Why on *earth* would you compare an engine failure with an uncommanded thrust reverser deployment?

One *should* be a routine emergency that is well known, understood, rehearsed and highly survivable. The other, not so much. A 737 with a contained engine failure, being operated properly will take off just fine on one engine. It's literally a regulatory requirement. But you knew that, which just makes you even more of a troll...

Temperature set to guns blazing was it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk