There’s nothing in the squawked airlinerwatch.com article specifically identifying their source for the Boeing comments. The article only relies on “comments first reported to EASA by Flightglobal”. I looked in the boeing.com news releases, found nothing on concerns about the A321XLR. It’s a stretch to contend that Boeing went public regarding their view of a competitor’s product.

(Written on 06/03/2021)(Permalink)

Way down the stream of article comments on the onemileatatime.com site, is this one, posted March 4 12:03pm by Levi: “I operated that flight and the story is a little inaccurate. The real story is we were cleared for takeoff. I had briefed a dead-heading first officer at the gate before we left that I would ask him to check the wings before takeoff. So we took the runway and I called back to get a thumbs up from him, he said he couldn’t see the wings they were covered in ice. That’s when I opened the cockpit window and leaned out to get a better look and saw all the snow and ice. I never had a flight attendant call me to tell me there was still ice on the wings. One of the flight attendants took that picture but none of them called me.”

(Written on 04/03/2021)(Permalink)

So it appears that, per the contract with the USPS, United Airlines, not the postal service or some third party, had to produce the “data” that showed it met the terms of the contract. Sounds a bit like letting the fox self-certify that he stayed out of the chicken coop! The USPS needs to write better contracts. In any case, doesn’t look like United flight crews, dispatchers, or maintenance were involved, so not a safety-of-flight issue.

(Written on 01/03/2021)(Permalink)

“warned” is not the best word choice to describe what’s going on. If you click through from this AirwaysMag article to the AD, you’ll see that Boeing issued an Alert Requirements Bulletin about this issue on January 24. I think it likely that the problem has already been dealt with on most if not all affected planes. The AD itself takes effect March 29 and will then require compliance before further flight.

(Written on 26/02/2021)(Permalink)

News reports and photos mostly zero in on failed fan blades, but the AD calls out failed 1st-stage LPC blade. ??

(Written on 23/02/2021)(Permalink)

mary susan watkins: no need to shout, please check your caps lock

(Written on 23/02/2021)(Permalink)

According to the article ‘hoteling’ means working at various offices, presumably in the Boeing Renton complex, or working from home, not working in actual hotel rooms. “Commercial Airplanes CEO Stan Deal...wants himself and his leadership team to be mobile and to work closer to the airplane assembly lines instead of in an isolated corporate tower.”

(Written on 20/02/2021)(Permalink)

The 757 was a successful program, until it wasn’t. Order volume tailed off. According to Wikipedia, it got only 7 orders over the last four years it was offered, as customers opted for the 737NG or the A320 from that other manufacturer. A revived 757 with new wings, new engines, new cockpit would essentially be a new airplane in the view of the certification authorities. After the 737MAX debacle, I suspect they won’t easily approve adding a derivative design onto an existing type certificate.

(Written on 18/02/2021)(Permalink)

Reports like this just unnecessarily alarm the nervous flying public, and could erode pilot trust in confidentiality of ASRS reports. To report a mistake through ASRS you’d first need to recognize the mistake, and then you’d correct the mistake. I’d worry more about mistakes that aren’t noticed.

(Written on 01/02/2021)(Permalink)

Yep, straight ahead, wings level, as you sink into the trees. ;)

(Written on 30/01/2021)(Permalink)