United orders 25 more 737-700

Seggy said:
I have a lot of anger towards them based on their design of the Q400 that contributed to the 3407 Accident and more specifically some of the games they played afterwards. They got off way to easily IMHO.

It is directed towards management their, not the blue collar workers.
Click to expand...
Interesting, can you elaborate on that for us or not so much? Very curious as you are definitely someone who would know a lot on the subject.
 
Cessnaflyer said:
I only have personal experience in the baby dash but it seems all other airlines could keep them in the sky. This was mostly pilot error and not an airframe problem like the ATR's
Click to expand...

I will agree it was pilot error, but the Q400 was horrifically designed.


ctab5060X said:
@Seggy

What was the design issue that contributed? (Honest curiosity)

Also, what did Bombardier do in the aftermath that was so bad (Again, honest curiosity)
Click to expand...

The design issue that contributed to the accident was the INCREASE REF SPEED Switch. Basically, it brings up the low speed cue by 20 knots to account for icing on the air frame. The shaker went on at about 130 knots even though the airplane wasn't actually stalling it thought it was stalling because of the INCREASE REF SPEED Switch. Yes, the crew should have caught it, but, horrible, horrible, horrible design.

Then they were leaking information to the media ahead of the NTSB.
 
Last edited:
wheelsup said:
I'd rather have more 50 seaters vs. 76 seaters. Taken to the extreme, would you rather have 400 34 seat SAABs or 100 76 seat EMB175's? I would bet most would choose the SAABs.

It would be difficult to staff more 50 seaters vs. less 76 seaters, plus with a cap on anything above 50 seats at mainline, you'd probably see more and more 100 seaters there.

The 50 seater is a great airplane to bring in people from outstations, but what you see the 175's doing is mainline type flying. Personally I want to get away from the regionals doing mainline type flying and more 30 min-1 hour long legs from smaller outstations like Erie, Roanoke, Melbourne, etc.
Click to expand...

Can I say none? No RJ's, No "B" Scale, no "C" Scale. Just pure main line flying... Thats what gets me hard at night...While were at it bring back the Super Connie, I really want to fly that thing...
 
Seggy said:
The design issue that contributed to the accident was the INCREASE REF SPEED Switch. Basically, it brings up the low speed cue by 20 knots to account for icing on the air frame. The shaker went on at about 130 knots even though the airplane wasn't actually stalling it thought it was stalling because of the INCREASE REF SPEED Switch. Yes, the crew should have caught it, but, horrible, horrible, horrible design.
Click to expand...
If I remember it correctly, I believe the ATR also had that feature. I disagree that it is a horrific design. It's conservative in nature, and rarely is conservative a bad thing. I bet the crew and passengers of Comair 3272 would have loved if that safety feature was on their aircraft.
 
Der_Meister said:
Can I say none? No RJ's, No "B" Scale, no "C" Scale. Just pure main line flying... Thats what gets me hard at night...While were at it bring back the Super Connie, I really want to fly that thing...
Click to expand...
Mainline jet service to Escanaba... An A320 with 3 people on it. ;)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
@Seggy :Better or worse design than ground speed mini? On the bus? Where it does it automatically with no notification?
 
Seggy said:
The design issue that contributed to the accident was the INCREASE REF SPEED Switch. Basically, it brings up the low speed cue by 20 knots to account for icing on the air frame. The shaker went on at about 130 knots even though the airplane wasn't actually stalling it thought it was stalling because of the INCREASE REF SPEED Switch. Yes, the crew should have caught it, but, horrible, horrible, horrible design.
Click to expand...

@Cessnaflyer

Did the smaller Dash 8 aircraft have the same system?
 
ctab5060X said:
@Cessnaflyer

Did the smaller Dash 8 aircraft have the same system?
Click to expand...
Not that I know can recall. I'll have to look in the books. The ATR we manually moved bugs and I can't remember if there was an ice switch or if the icing light was just for when the icing equipment was on.

My books are on my old iPad so when I get home I'll have to check on it.
 
Last edited:
I'm calling it now... republic will fly the C series for Alaska to combat Delta's attack there.


Back on the subject of United's 737-700 order.

Boeing has had a shift in heart with its -700 sized frame that has lead to these two orders. United was seriously looking at the C series, fact. Previously Boeing was actively trying to have 737-7 max customers switch to the -8 so they could get out of the -7 game as airlines are naturally upgauging aircraft size.

However, Boeing has done a come-about and now is actively persuing this size category again because they realized if they didn't it would leave the front door wide open for Bombarier to come right in and establish the C series, just like what happened when they didn't take Airbus seriously. Lufthansa as well as others have already been requesting a CS500 which would be in the A320/737-800 size range...

Boeing gave United a huge discount to secure these orders. Final price for each plane is estimated to be around 20 million a piece! While they do need to sell some more to cover the transition to the Max fully, they are sitting in a pretty good position right now.
 
SmoothLanderJ said:
With that said I don't think for a minute that the company would be bold enough to have a 100 seater at a regional.
Click to expand...

Man I sure hope not, but I wouldn't put it past them. That aside, there is no limit to E175s, they could easily just get 100 of those and retire all the -400s and -700s too. 100 seat jet or not, scope is a HUGE concern.
 
wheelsup said:
I'd rather have more 50 seaters vs. 76 seaters. Taken to the extreme, would you rather have 400 34 seat SAABs or 100 76 seat EMB175's? I would bet most would choose the SAABs.

It would be difficult to staff more 50 seaters vs. less 76 seaters, plus with a cap on anything above 50 seats at mainline, you'd probably see more and more 100 seaters there.

The 50 seater is a great airplane to bring in people from outstations, but what you see the 175's doing is mainline type flying. Personally I want to get away from the regionals doing mainline type flying and more 30 min-1 hour long legs from smaller outstations like Erie, Roanoke, Melbourne, etc.
Click to expand...
I think most people would prefer to keep the smaller RJs.

I am willing to bet that during negotiations management wouldn't entertain the thought of connecting the mainline fleet size to a small inefficient jet. With scope not being a requirement under section 6 a concession had to be made to make the connection possible.
 
CFIscare said:
If I remember it correctly, I believe the ATR also had that feature. I disagree that it is a horrific design. It's conservative in nature, and rarely is conservative a bad thing. I bet the crew and passengers of Comair 3272 would have loved if that safety feature was on their aircraft.
Click to expand...

The thing is the airplane told you if it had ice on it with ice accumulation probes. If it was telling you that it had ice on it then the low speed cue should have been brought up, automatically, without a switch. However, the way the system worked, the INCREASE REF Speed Switch and the ice accumulation annunciation are independent of one another. You can not have ice on the airplane but the low speed cue is still bumped up.

Horrific design.

It was also horrifically trained by Colgan, but horrific design.
 
Last edited:
Cessnaflyer said:
Not that I know can recall. I'll have to look in the books. The ATR we manually moved bugs and I can't remember if there was an ice switch or if the icing light was just for when the icing equipment was on.

My books are on my old iPad so when I get home I'll have to check on it.
Click to expand...
ctab5060X said:
@Cessnaflyer

Did the smaller Dash 8 aircraft have the same system?
Click to expand...

Cessnaflyer said:
Not that I know can recall. I'll have to look in the books. The ATR we manually moved bugs and I can't remember if there was an ice switch or if the icing light was just for when the icing equipment was on.

My books are on my old iPad so when I get home I'll have to check on it.
Click to expand...

The Dash 8 100s/200s do not have this switch.

I believe the Dash 8-300 does have this switch.
 
Seggy said:
The thing is the airplane told you if it had ice on it with ice accumulation probes. If it was telling you that it had ice on it then the low speed cue should have been brought up, automatically, without a switch. However, the way the system worked, the INCREASE REF Speed Switch and the ice accumulation annunciation are independent of one another. You can not have ice on the airplane but the low speed cue is still bumped up.

Horrific design.

It was also horrifically trained by Colgan, but horrific design.
Click to expand...
Room for improvement, namely automation like in and linking the ref increase and accumulation annunciation as you say. Horrific design might be a bit strong though.
 
Seggy said:
I love ground speed mini. You really don't like it?
Click to expand...
Honestly, no.
I manually increase Ref in the perf page, thinking my superior skills will account for the wind.
When I select managed speed, after gear down and flaps full, mini kicks in, and managed speed is now 15+ knots faster than I plan for.

I'm not sure if "Optimized Energy Approachs" were big when you were here, but it is now, for fuel savings. As slick as this bird is, getting fully configured and stable by 1000' is a handful if approach keeps you fast.
In those cases, Vmini helps, because I'm stable. But I feel it's cheating a little.

The 170/175 you could fly 250(ish) to the marker and be stable by 1000'. Definitely not the bus.
 
Dan208B said:
Man I sure hope not, but I wouldn't put it past them. That aside, there is no limit to E175s, they could easily just get 100 of those and retire all the -400s and -700s too. 100 seat jet or not, scope is a HUGE concern.
Click to expand...
This is really concerning to someone who would love to fly for AS someday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top