And yet you take the time to go this article and post about it?

(Written on 2021年09月10日)(Permalink)

"For myself , it is a sad day when a Company ,such as Boeing ,that has had such a stellar reputation , has been dragged into the same muck as others." I think you have been naive or simply not listening (reading) to say this. Boeing has been accused of this for years and does not have a "stellar reputation" when it comes to covering up issues of safety, putting undo pressure on regulators, politicians, and playing fairly with other companies. They are indeed like other companies that are trying to make a profit.

(Written on 2021年08月27日)(Permalink)

You can, and they do. Look at all the NEO (new engine option) AB's. The issue is that they can make airframes and wings that are more efficient regardless of the engines, that they find it hard to put the genie back in the bottle.

(Written on 2021年07月02日)(Permalink)

Form follows function. Birds don't have to carry a load of packages or persons. An albatross isn't the same shape as a falcon. We can certainly take cues from nature (which designers have always done), but it has it's limits.

(Written on 2021年05月21日)(Permalink)

WTF is wrong with people? I'm pretty sure the prison guards are not going to pick up the trash for you either.

(Written on 2021年05月07日)(Permalink)

If I was the judge, I would have added the cost of the crew and hourly cost of operating this bird as a penalty. I'm pretty sure paying the cost out of his pocket would hit him like a ton of bricks.

(Written on 2021年05月07日)(Permalink)

Well, it also be the case that manufacturers over promise and under deliver when selling.

(Written on 2021年04月23日)(Permalink)

I think I left the stove on...

(Written on 2021年04月02日)(Permalink)

Yes, but those examples are changes or physically doing something. They simply crunched the numbers and said, the airframe can have a higher MTOW so we can add more fuel for better range. The range is there whether the customer wants it or not, and now they all know it. My guess is that AB will have to change the certification en mass or this becomes a give away that they throw in when selling to a customer.

(Written on 2021年03月26日)(Permalink)

Read the article and found it's simply a paper change. No physical change to the aircraft, but AB will offer this "option" to their customers. Why wouldn't they just make this better range a feature of the plane? I presume they will also charge for this? Seems like an unfair money grab if all they did is rework the numbers and said, we can take more fuel on board.

(Written on 2021年03月26日)(Permalink)