# Aircraft & Flying



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

A big interest of mine - anyone else interested??.

G.


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Yes







)

I have around 300 hours mixed between Cessna 172, Piper PA28s and DH82a.

Also around 2 mins on type KWAK GTR-1000 I like to get "big air" as often as possible.

There is a lovely "ramp" by some Traffic lights near where I live. Hitting that a full throttle on the GTR is FUN







)

I love it.....

And yourself ?


----------



## Softiesteve (Feb 23, 2003)

Hi,

Love to but cannot afford it or justifiy it to the wife, had about 6 hours about 28 years ago







but I keep my hand in with MS Flight sim 98









Just a side note are some aviator watches so named because they are designed around the look of aircraft instruments.

Feeling a bit old now









Steve


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Due to job / time, never flown as such. My mate Pete has a piper and I've been up with him a few times. I'm really into the large commercial jets and so have to make do with fs2002. i normally fly the 737 and try to do proper flights from a to b with atc rather than mess around.

I will probably begin lessons towards the end of this year and go for a PPL.

Helicopters are very interesting. The main dealer in the UK for BELL, I used to go there frequently to repair the air conditioning systems on the helicopters, they would then take me up for a while as I got on with their mechanic quite well. They are apparently considerably more difficult to fly than a light aircraft.

G.


----------



## Guest (Apr 8, 2003)

Steve

Aviator watches were designed for pilot usage, easy to read and wear in the cockpit.

Its no coincidence they often look like aeronautical instruments.

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Guest (Apr 8, 2003)

I must admit flying has appealed to me in the past.

I don't live far from Biggin hill and used to watch the small planes flying around.

You must get a much greater sensation of flying in one of those rather than the big commercials.

In the USA they've got flying communities where every house has its own small hangar and they have a runway built into the estate!

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Neil,

If you're Biggin Hill, that's only about 1 1/4 hours from me.

You are right, the small aircraft give a much greater sensation of what's going on. The large commercial jets appeal to me more simply because of their bulk and that they are that much more complicated to fly. Due to the speed an bulk you have think much further ahead. The 737 is not huge, but takes 3 miles or so simply to carry out a 90 deg turn.

G.


----------



## chrisb (Feb 26, 2003)

Did anyone see the TV program- The Dambusters the other night, with modern RAF crew attempting to fly a Lancaster at night using 1940's navigation methods-- not as easy as they thought!!

Fascinating program second part next week


----------



## Andy (Feb 23, 2003)

I live only 30 minutes from Biggin Hill myself.

Quite often go to Bat Bikes on the adjoining industrial estate. Know it Garry.

My Dads mad about aircraft.

Constantly buys little models, mainly of WWII planes.

Years ago I took him to Biggin Hill for an air show.

There was a Jet there that seemed to be warming up it's engines and I have never heard a noise like it.

I don't fly unless I absolutely have to.

Hate it.

I know people say it's the safest form of travel but my God when accidents do happen they are pretty often on a disastrous scale.


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Chris,

Will try to watch the next one, missed the first.

Andy,

Sorry, don't know of Bats Bikes. Yes, aircraft travel is probably the safest, but as you say, when something DOES go wrong, it's normally horrific.

Would you believe that something like 40% of all aircraft accidents are down to TOTAL pilot error. The number caused by non-resolvable systems failure / engine failure is very low.

G.


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

I have never flown but maybe one day if I can overcome the fear, not of flying but leaving the house.


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Try it Roy, you will love it.

Many people when they first fly find it simply awe inspiring - it's a great feeling.

G.


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

I will take you up Roy...

No aeros...

Just a nice flight round Brid. Up to Whitby and back again.

You will love it.

Eric


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Eric,

Can you pick me up on the way?..........









G.


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Its always possible.......

Depends on Landing fees at your nearest airfield







)

Eric


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Blackbushe,

I'm happy to pay the landing fees, no problem.

G.


----------



## Guest (Apr 10, 2003)

Pick me up from Biggin on the way!









Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Looks like I better bring something a bit bigger than a 4 set cessna !!!


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

What's being a passenger in a Jumbo 747 like?

I'm in one on the 22nd to India.


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Griff,

The "jumbo jet" 747 is a fantastic aircraft, one of the safest ever. A single engine failure, the flight may be continued, a second failure - divert to an alternative airport, they can even remain in the air on one engine.

The main thing is the size - unbelievable!, makes most common aircraft like the 737, 757, 767 look utterly mickey mouse, they are bloody huge.

Enjoy your flight mate - you will like it.

G.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2003)

Griff

The only thing about long haul flights is the boredom, you'll soon get used to it.

One tip, I've found as I've got older, on long haul flights I can feel abit queasy after about 8 hours due to the motion of the plane, although you don't feel the plane moving around much.

I buy some Dramamine tablets from the chemist before I go, I think you take one an hour before take off and then one every 4 hours.

They really work, and you can drive while taking them.

BTW the 747 doesn't feel huge on board as the cabins are segmented into sections.

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Eric,

Roy went to Wales for the day when in one of his adventurous moods, so could you arrange to fly him there and land him on Tenby beach, just for the afternoon you understand. Think he could do with a break from all them watches, before he goes completely potty


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Tenby is gorgeous isnt it....

I seem to recall a weird fort like building on the beach as well....

What do you think Roy...

Get yourself a passport and I will take you to Wales







)


----------



## Roy (Feb 23, 2003)

I am too busy to go 19 miles up the road to Scarborough never mind Wales.


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Eric,

A question..........

I am generally into the large cmmercial jets and am not too familiar with the light aircraft.

With something like a 737, you would generally land at an airport equiped with an ILS. Therefore, I would follow the glideslope at the appropriate approach speed ( normally around 140 knts ) to the runway, normally descending around 700 fpm.

How is it with a light aircraft?, which will often land at an airport with no ILS?. Is the approach and landing purely visual, but checking your descent path using the outer and inner markers and using an approximate descent rate of 700 fpm?. Please enlighten me.

Thanks

G.


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Hello,

Many Cessnas, Pipers etc. Are fully equipped to in "Instrument" conditions. This includes the ability to fly an ILS approach. However....Most private pilots fly only in what we call VFR conditions whereby the entire flight from takeoff to landing is flown in sight of the ground, never in cloud.

The procedure for flying a visual approach and landing varies according to many factors (aircraft type, weather etc.etc.etc....), however it usually starts with a circuit of the airfield, typically flown at 1000 ft making left hand turns (although this can vary). You join the circuit at the end of runway flying at 90 degrees to the runway heading. You would then make a left turn to fly what we call the downwind leg parallel with the runway, during this leg I usually carry out pre landing checks and report to local air traffic control that I was downwind at 1000ft.

Having flown sufficiently far downwind, and still parallel with the runway another 90 degree left turn is made onto what is sometimes refered to as the "base leg". During this turn the aircraft will be trimmed up for the descent phase. Now it gets a bit busier in the cockpit. The pilot will be looking for other traffic, setting the aircraft up for the final approach and looking to judge (purely visually) the point at which to initiate the final turn onto "final approach" This process is entirely down to feel....The good pilot will know when to initiate the turn that will bring him nicely onto the runway heading at the right distance from the runway to provide a nice steady descent during the approach. Some local airfields have the VASI system (approach lights) to aid this process but again this is not usually used by private pilots.

When this turn is made hopefully the aircraft will be lined up with an imagined centre line extended from the runway.....The rate of descent is now controlled using the throttle and the airspeed controlled with the elevator (pitch control) This phase of the flight involves constantly assesing the rate of descent (visually) and the airspeed using the instruments and making sure you are still lined up with the runway. The idea being to set the aircraft up to arrive over the numbers on the runway ready to "flare" or "roundout". When the pilot is satisfied he can make a landing on the runway even if the engine fails (i.e. he can glide in) wing flaps may be extended. A quick call to airtraffic should ensure you are cleared to land (this may not happen if other traffic has not vacated the runway etc.)

If it has all gone well our intrepid aviator will arrive over the runway at the right height (varies from aircraft type) to begin his "flare" where the pilot eases back on the control column to arrest the descent and raise the nose. The aircraft should then float for a little while just above the runway and as the airspeed decays it should settle onto the runway. The pilot slows the aircraft with his brakes (usually on the rudder pedals).

The pilot then smiles to himself as he has carried out another "greaser" and taxis back to his hangar, leaps out of the aircraft and into the arms of his gorgeous girlfriend waiting in an open top sports car, her hair blowing in the gentle breeze, her lipstick shining in the summer sun. "Oh, your so brave" she purrs "lets go back to my place and make love all afternoon. " She coos...

"Can I wear your stockings and shoes ?" asks the brave aviator.

To be continued......

Hope this helps.

Cheers.

Eric


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Thankyou Biggles. They were great books them weren't they!!?









Hope you have them bare knuckle gloves and long trailing scarf to catch the wind, and maybe the cigarette holder if you smoke, and the wide toothy grin and air of utter reckless bravado!!


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

I have a collection of Biggles books.....

Fantastic stuff....

full of great lines like ...

"Oh my Hat" exclaimed Biggles as his windscreen was shot out...

"Curses" ejaculated Biggles as he was forced to bail out for the third time that day...

Capt. W. E. Johns (Biggles author) also wrote some pretty wacky science fiction stuff.......

Eric


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

And remarks like.......this is getting a trifle inconvenient.

Used to love the lines off Terry Thomas, when he'd hiss at some bad guys, and say..........." You charrpps are an arrbbbsolutee showweerrrr!"

Great stuff!

Nowadays its all " mother f----rs", and all that. Leaves me cold.

No class, no finesse, no style........just the charisma of slugs.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Thought I would resurrect this thread with a highly relevant joke:

How does a prostitute tell if her customer is a pilot?

Big watch, small dick, no money....









Seriously though I play around with the idea of starting my PPL. I am seriouosly considering what many think is the most cost effective option: save up, go to Florida, and do it there as a sort of residential course thing.

Been out to White Waltham a few times for a general look about...

I can recommend the Pprune site here and the private flying or indeed any of the forums there for any one into flying.

There have also been a few recent threads dealing with a good choice of watch for a pilot - interesting to read what they come up with. I'll post a link to one such discussion - note 1. the person looking for advice is a lady 2. even after she announces she has chosen a watch everyone still carries on recommending huge Breitlings 3. Very little mention of what most posters on RLT would consider a good pilots watch.

Pilots watch thread


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Only one choice....

Breitling B-1...

This watch is ideal and has taken the place of an old stopwatch and flight computer when I fly....

Slide rule funcitons...

Chrono for "dead reckoning" navigation.

Excellent accuracy...

Stylish (but big).

Eric


----------



## Guest (May 12, 2003)

Hello all,

I'm not a pilot myself but my favourite pilots watch is definitely the Breitling Navitimer.

Classic 1952 styling, beautiful to look at.

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

The 747 is indeed a fantastic aircraft. Garry was right about that.

It looks extremely impressive, the wings and engines give a look of sheer class. Huge, but with enormous grace and charisma.

I feel happy now to fly in one anywhere. Lufthansa are super efficient, smack on time to the button, and the service was excellent. There's something about the Germans and their compulsion on efficiency. They don't piss about, were very courteous, and right on the button with everything. When you thought it was time they came round again with the drinks, sure enough, they suddenly appeared with more refreshments. I thought they were smack on!

The Airbus from Manchester to Frankfurt was also top drawer. Impressive aircraft, but not as smooth as the 747. Smaller planes do tend to bob about a bit more than the Jumbo at its 35,000 ft. flight path.

Frankfurt airport is enormous, and even has an indoor train to get you from one end of the terminal to the other. It's a lot more impressive than Manchester, although I've never been to Heathrow.

When I fly again I'm going to make a point of asking for Lufthansa, no mistake!!


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Griff the Boeing 777 is another leap forward.....

Outstanding comfort, excellent in flight entertainment systems.

Very smooth, and very very powefull. The takeoff run in a 747 can sometimes feel like you are going by road







)

In a 777 you will be amazed at the acceleration.

Eric


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Just been speaking to someone re flying. I ponted out I dare not do long haul flights due to having to sit so long. Sounds like you guys have been on all the big 'planes. Are any of them wide enough to let you push a wheelchair up the aisles? Just got the impression 747s & 767s is it? are reall huge.

P


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Eric, you got your own 'plane? What is it?

My friend i've just spoke to - her husband builds Harriers for Indian navy. He doesn't fly though. Apparently (& obviously) a British Aerospace pilot comes & test flies them, then her hubby has to dismantle them & rectify the faults etc. What a cool job...

Paul


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Think I may have found out what you fly Eric - Cessna?

Have you got any IWC watches? If so, I don't like you.

Joke of course.just cos I haven't got one









Paul


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

Hello,

I have flown a Cessna on occasions, and I did around 50% of my training in one. However I prefer to fly a DH82-a (Tiger Moth). Ihave also flown a Piper PA-28 161 and a Piper Cub.

No I dont have any IWC....I do have Breitlings, O&Ws and Omegas, also alot of junk I am steadily thining down.

Eric


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Paul,

Saw several people getting on the 747 in wheelchairs........no problem.

The Lufthansa crew were very helpful with these people, and they were properly assisted into seats etc. The ailes are wide enough for access.

Eric,

Didn't even know there was a 777.

How different is it to the 747


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Great! Cheers Griff. Not going to be cheap obviously, but if I don't have to sit in one position for the duration, my dream of Austraila or Bahamas may come off yet......If I stop buying watches









Paul


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Griff,

The 777 is pretty much the second largest aircraft to the Jumbo. It's twin engined rather than 4, but very powerfull. It is more advanced has has more gizmo's. For example, if an engine fails, the rudder will deflect accordingly to prevent the aircraft trying to turn. It's nearly as stunning as the Jumbo to look at, but not quite. I think the biggest user of them is Cathay Pacific.

I used to do a lot of work at Heathrow, Gatwick and London City airports, had a full security pass and seen most aircraft very close up.

G.


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi Paul,

Be dubious of the Bahamas, my first wife was from there and there was a high crime rate in relation to tourists. Go to Auz and while you're there " Stick another prawn on the barby mate ".

G.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)




----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Nice...but is the 747 THE biggest?


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

I once got details of an organisation, sponsored by RAF benevolent fund or something. They gave sponsorship to teach disabled people to be pilots. I didn't get in









If it had been another world, & I had passed my A-levels(crucial)AND all had gone my way, I would have been a Harrier pilot by now. Or whatever else the RAF has!


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

The 747 is the biggest commercial passenger aircraft. Totally awe inspiring close up!!.

G.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Now I've flown in one, I consider the 747 to be the finest aircraft ever built for passenger use. It's a bloody fantastic aircraft. I love it


----------



## Garry (Feb 25, 2003)

Griff,

You should try one of the flight sims on your computer - mine has a 747 to fly around in.

G.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Thought the following may be of interest:-

I wondered if flying was as safe as they were claiming.

There was one Boeing(737?) that had a very bad crash problem some years ago, if I recall correctly? Does anyone have any knowledge of this?

Posted: Mon May 19, 2003 1:13 pm Post subject: I've got a mate who's a pilot

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

flying out of leeds/bradford for that new budget airline thats just started up there.

There was an interesting doc on Ch4 the other night about the airbus that crashed in new york just after thr 9/11 incident.

It appears the plane flew into the wake of a 747 and to correct the plane the pilot used reverse rudder ie he went left right left right with the rudder. The rudder fell off and down came the bus and all on board!

Airbus say that boeing were training the pilots wrong and you should never reverse rudder but just use the stick. Boeing said they had never been told etc, usual big corporates trying to blame someone else.

Anyway talking to my mate about this he tells me he's off to the sim in 2 weeks to learn how to do it without reverse rudder because they have now been warned that reverse ruddering can cause the tail to fall off on any aircraft (esp jet liners) built not just airbus!

They've been flying these bloody things like that for decades and never knew

I personally love to fly but haven't been up for years. Best experience was in the back of a 2 seater harrier as a payment for fixing a flight leiu MGB! Mind you sick bag was pretty full by the time we got down!

Worst experience flying back from Norway in a Herc!

_________________

You hum it son - I'll play it! Paul G.

jim

Sergeant-Major

Joined: 20 Oct 2002

Posts: 30

Location: Central Scotland

Posted: Mon May 19, 2003 9:20 pm Post subject: There was one Boeing(737?) that had a very bad crash problem

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the 737 problem you refer to is described here

http://www.airlinesafety.com/faq/B-737Rudder.htm

For air accident investigation reports try

UK: Air Accident Investigation Branch

http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/

USA: National Transportation Safety Board

http://www.ntsb.gov/

I have never had any fear of flying, the fear I have is of not flying, as in falling.

Jim

What is the status of the solution to the B-737 rudder design defect? Is the problem solved?

Yes, and no. Redesigned control units are being installed and pilots have been trained to "fly around" the problem in the interim. But, until they completely redesign the rudder so that it is controlled by at least two separate PCUs, like other airliners, I will not be satisfied the "fix" is sufficient to prevent any possible repetitions of previous incidents/accidents.

The Seattle Times has done an outstanding job in reporting the history of the B-737 rudder control problems. That, plus the fact that many other papers and magazines require payment to read their articles, has led me to post links on those written by the Seattle Times, in this FAQ:

1996 February 01: Airlines change how 737 is landed Rudder incidents spark some to revise their flying patterns Some U.S. airlines have begun to voluntarily change the way they fly Boeing 737s during landing approaches to give pilots a better chance of countering potential uncontrolled movements of the aircraft's rudder.

1996, March 01: Crash panel under fire A panel of aviation experts assigned to review investigations of the only two jetliner crashes the National Transportation Safety Board can't solve has come under fire even before it convenes.

1996, June 27: Rudder problems ground Boeing jet An Eastwind Airlines Boeing 737-200 has been grounded for nearly three weeks as officials investigate two recent flights disrupted by rudder problems

1996, August 23: Close-up: FAA's 737 rules omit key change Nine rules proposed by the Federal Aviation Administration to make the flight controls of Boeing 737 jets safer do not include a key change sought by some pilots and federal safety-board officials.

1996, October 02: NTSB delayed introducing 737 proposals Boeing fought Proposed safety measures for the Boeing 737 rudder did not surface publicly until 19 months after they were unveiled because Boeing argued they were unjustified. If implemented, the measures could cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars.

1996, October 27: Safety at issue: the 737 After crashes, near-crashes and hundreds of lesser incidents, federal officials are pressing for changes in the Boeing 737, the most widely used airliner in the world.

1996, October 17: Glossary: the 737 The vertical, hinged panel on the tail of an airplane that controls its left-to-right movement. HARDOVER The swift and forceful movement of an airplane's rudder as far as it can...

1996, October 28: Safety at issue: the 737 - The crash in Colorado Springs A debate over safety has embroiled Boeing's 737. Today, a look at questions about its rudder that grew out of a 1991 disaster; and the role Boeing takes in investigations.

1996, October 29: Pittsburgh disaster adds to 737 doubts A debate over safety has embroiled Boeing's 737. Today, a look at discoveries about the 737's rudder-control system and at Boeing's pressure to blame the pilots after the Pittsburgh crash two years ago.

1996, October 31: Safety at issue: the 737 - Safety agencies struggle over 737 A debate over safety surrounds Boeing's 737. Today, the road to one federal agency's decision to recommend changes in the plane.

1996, November 02: 737 inspections ordered; Boeing cites rudder problem Thousands of Boeing 737s will be inspected within the next 10 days for a jammed valve part that could cause a potentially dangerous uncommanded swing of the plane's tail rudder. The inspections were ordered by the Federal Aviation Administration yesterday after the Seattle-based Boeing Co. acknowledged for the first time a 737 rudder-control problem that could imperil flights.

1996, November 03: Boeing devising limiter for 737 rudder moves The Boeing Co. has developed a safety device to limit the movement of rudders on its 737 jetliners and may ask airlines - perhaps as soon as this week - to begin installing them on all 2,700 737s now in service.

1996, November 22: FAA to order 737 safety changes The Federal Aviation Administration will order U.S. airlines to train pilots of Boeing 737s how to right a 737 that is twisting out of control because of a hard, uncommanded swing of the plane's rudder.

1997, August 17: Expert panel may have key to which 737s are most at risk Air-safety officials are grappling with a new round of questions about whether some Boeing 737s flying today may be particularly prone to serious rudder malfunctions.

1998, June 15: FAA to order checks of all Boeing jets The discovery of a missing rudder-pedal fastener on a Boeing 737 and a loose pedal fastener on another - both during flight - has spurred the Federal Aviation Administration to order the inspection of 1,477 domestic Boeing passenger jets of all types.

1998, June 16: Almost all Boeing jets to be affected by inspection order An inspection order stemming from the in-flight discovery of missing Boeing 737 rudder-pedal fasteners will be more far-reaching than first announced, affecting all Boeing passenger jets except those models out of production.

1998, August 25: Big airlines expect to have 737s upgraded on time Major airlines in the United States and Europe expect to meet an Aug. 4, 1999, deadline set by the Federal Aviation Administration to install new servo valves on the rudder mechanisms...

1998, August 25: Crash analyses point to 737 flaw New computer simulations support a theory that rudder malfunctions could have caused the fatal spin of USAir Flight 427 into the ground near Pittsburgh four years ago, as well as loss of control in two other Boeing 737 flights.

1999, February 26: Incidents raise questions about new rudder-control parts for 737s Two incidents in the past week - one on the ground at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, the other in the air over the Atlantic seaboard - have raised fresh questions about replacement rudder-control parts ordered by the FAA for Boeing 737s.

1999 March 13: Rudder reportedly cited in 2 unsolved Boeing 737 crashes With its staff investigators reportedly citing the rudder as the cause of two unsolved Boeing 737 crashes earlier this decade, the National Transportation Safety Board yesterday said it has no explanation yet for a fresh 737 rudder-system malfunction on the East Coast last month.

1999, March 18: Rudder retrofitting 60 percent completed Nearly 60 percent of the U.S. fleet of Boeing 737s now has redesigned rudder mechanisms intended to prevent a catastrophic malfunction, the Federal Aviation Administration said today.

1999, March 21: Will hearings bring 737 crash investigation to a close? This week, the National Transportation Safety Board will finally rule on why Capt. Germano and his co-pilot, Charles Emmett, were unable to keep USAir Flight 427 from suddenly plunging 6,000 feet in 24 seconds. The 50-ton Boeing 737 jetliner smashed explosively into a wooded ravine just outside Pittsburgh on Sept. 8, 1994, killing all 132 on board.

1999, March 25: Analysis: NTSB's clear findings are a blow to Boeing Short of having the National Transportation Safety Board recommend specific design changes, which some of its staff investigators had proposed, it was the worst-case outcome for Boeing....

USAIR 427 crash: ALPA's submission to the NTSB and the Addendum.

USAIR 427 crash: NTSB Abstract of Final Report.

Wreckage of US Air 427, near Pittsburgh, September 8, 1994.

New AD on the 737 rudder, Effective, November 12, 2002

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737 Series Airplanes

Applicability: All Model 737 series airplanes; certificated in any category.

To prevent an uncommanded rudder hardover event and consequent loss of control of the airplane due to inherent failure modes, including single-jam modes, and certain latent failure or jams combined with a second failure or jam; accomplish the following:

Installation

(a) Within 6 years after the effective date of this AD, do the actions required by paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

(1) Install a new rudder control system that includes new components such as an aft torque tube, hydraulic actuators, and associated control rods, and additional wiring throughout the airplane to support failure annunciation of the rudder control system in the flight deck. The system also must incorporate two separate inputs, each with an override mechanism, to two separate servo valves on the main rudder power control unit (PCU); and an input to the standby PCU that also will include an override mechanism.

(2) Make applicable changes to the adjacent systems to accommodate the new rudder control system.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(







(1) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

(2) Alternative methods of compliance, approved previously in accordance with the ADs listed in the following table, are not considered to be approved as alternative methods of compliance with this AD:

[Excerpts only. For the full text of the New AD, go to:

New AD on the 737 rudder

Boeing Graphic of the New Redundant Rudder PCU Design

Boeing

April, 2002, revised October 8, 2002

Robert J. Boser

Editor-in-Chief

AirlineSafety.Com




























I won't be going in any 737 until they've properly sorted out that rudder problem
















Griff.


----------



## pg tips (May 16, 2003)

Griff

Spoke to my piolt mate again about the 737 shuttle valve for the rudder.

Completley different problem to the reverse ruddering on the airbus but again something he is only to aware of!

He's got to do sim training on that as well cos he'll be flying 737's out of Leeds.

Aparently he knows of 5 incidents in addition to the fatal your picture depicts! All the other 5 landed but were then grounded until new valves were fitted. he says the valves can "have a mind of their own at times".

He talked me trough the way to "fly out" if one does go t/u. Lets just put it this way it involves diving upside down to roll out if you have enough height and if it does happen it will be totaly unexpected so the chances of the passengers having their belts on will be pretty remote!

I think I'm with you. I won't be going up in any 737's either.









BTW have you seen the new 7E7? Now that does look cool!

pg.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)




----------



## Guest (May 21, 2003)

Hello all

Talking of Boeing aircraft, do I have the record here of flying on all the main models of the "7" series except the latest 777 which I will no doubt travel on in the future.

I've flown in:

707

720

727

737

747

757

767

The oldest plane I've flown in was a Vickers Viscount turbo prop, now that is noisy.









The only thing I have against the 747 is that you get a large queue at customs when you disembark if the plane is full.

I usually solve this by running past the dawdling people to get to the front of the queue and first to the car rental desk where it can be even worse!

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

The point is, following my post on the rudder problem, who will be happy to go up in a 737?

NOT ME.........I'd sooner buy another Seiko Kinetic!!!!!


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2003)

Griff

I'd go up in a 737 tomorrow.

I think if you look at any airliner type with heavy general usage you will find some flaw that has developed or been a problem in the past.

The 737 has been flying since the 60's on short haul routes and has probably for the service hours been one of the least troublesome aircraft.

Some time back there was a lot of trouble with DC-10's crashing, I don't know if that was ever sorted out.

The Concorde fleet was recently grounded and remember the Comets breaking up in mid air?

The thing is I've flown on all these planes for many years (Concorde excepted) and never had a hint of trouble.

I'm not a fatalist but you put your life in the pilots hands. If it were that dangerous do you think the crew would still be flying them?

Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Fred (Feb 23, 2003)

Got to agree with you comments Neil, i dont think the pilots would be very happy to fly one that's got major problems, most fun i had was in a small two seater from a grass strip, that was a bumpey ride, plus a flight in a Micro light, terific fun that one. b.f.n. fred.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

The 737 seems to have a built in problem waiting to happen, with a flawed rudder valve design system, as highlighted in my post, and in a similar thread on Eddie's site. I'm well aware that these systems only have spasmodic events of failure, but the evidence of past events points to a potential and acknowledged problem, as outlined in the posts, and is enough to disturb my confidence in that aircraft until the valve problem is properly addressed with a new valve design, and replacement component, rather than relying on pilot techniques, now being included in new training, to avoid yet another possible rudder failure event of a fatal nature.

Part of that training involves rolling the aircraft upside down very suddenly, with the acknowledged fact that there would be no time to warn passengers first to buckle up their seat belts. This is an event I'd prefer not to be at risk of, and I will therefore avoid the 737's until the remedy I have suggested is put in place.

In other words.............I 'aint going to run across a busy road wearing a blindfold!


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2003)

Griff

The 737 has been flying since 1965!!

I think their safety record speaks for itself.

Being a short haul jet they are never up in the air as long as transatlantic models.

There are many acknowledged faults on all airliners and the crews are trained to deal with them, however very occasionally various faults occur at the same time mixed in with a bit of pilot error and its "Goodnight Vienna"

You may well find the 747 has a similar system being part of the Boeing family.

Good job you didn't research all this before your trip to India, you'd still be in the terminal!









Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

I'm more confident about the Airbus, and 747.

I don't have the same confidence with the 737.

The new Next Generation 737's may have eliminated the problem of the valves, I'll find out, but until then, I wont be going in any 737's, and certainly not the older ones!


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2003)

Griff

I don't think you have a lot of choice.

I've been flying for decades now and while you may think you are booked on a certain type of aircraft these can be changed at the last minute if the one for your flight has a maintenance problem (this happens fairly regularly)

I have even been switched to another airline!

If you've ever been stuck in a terminal for a few hours with your original plane unserviceable for whatever reason you'll get on anything to get off!!









Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

My agent uses Lufthansa a lot, and when I'm going Europe way, or further East, I very much doubt that will happen with that particular airline, which I highly rate. But when I do have an option, I will not jump on a 737, and certainly not an older one. Lufthansa seem to quickly sell off their older aircraft, and tend to have the latest in its fleet.


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2003)

Griff,

The original 737-100's from Boeing were all purchased by Lufthansa

The other airlines had the 200 variant.

I think you'll find that Lufthansa are are the biggest operators of the 737 in Europe.

Stay away from Lufthansa on your European jaunts or you'll never get off the ground!









Cheers,

Neil.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

When I book a flight, I will enquire which aircraft it is, as I did for India.

If they say it's a 737, and an older one, I wont book that flight. I will not fly in a 737 where I can possibly avoid it, and certainly not an older one!


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)




----------



## namaste (May 8, 2003)

I love the 747-400. Flown a few times with it, once in business... I thought I would never fly economy or another plane again (Reality hits at the same time as the credit card bill). Maybe next time I may go for this, although it won't be for this year?

http://www.airbus.com/product/a380_flight_deck.asp. Should be plenty of room for a wheelchair too...

Pieter


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Lufthansa to Sell its Boeing 737-400s

As a part of its cost-cutting programme, the Lufthansa fleet is to be rationalized reducing the number of aircraft types. The six B.737-400s 141 seater (D-ABKA,B,C,D,F,K,L), ordered in 1991 and delivered during the following year, will be sold in the second half of 1997.

The Boeing 737-300 and 400 fleet will be retained; the B.737-230s Advanced have been sold to Indonesia and to the US leasing company Jet Ventures for a total of 30 aircraft which are to be replaced by Airbus A 319s.

At the beginning of 1965, Lufthansa was launch customer of the original B.737-100, with an order for 22 aircraft, comprising two (D-ABEL, D-ABEM) used for a short time by the charter subsidiary Condor.

In the picture: Lufthansa's Boeing 737-400 D-ABKC "Straubing" at Turin-Caselle airport in June 1996

(Aeromedia, October 1996)


----------



## Softiesteve (Feb 23, 2003)

Hi,



> I'm more confident about the Airbus, and 747.


I belive there are some issues regarding the software in the Airbus, and the 747 had a rear bulkhead failure over Japan !!

They all have issues if you dig deep enough, but it is still very safe. I would not hesitate to fly on any well maintained airliner.

If you smoke the risk of premature death is much higher than death by flying.

All forms of transport have accidents, busses, trains, cars and ferry boats.

If you worry too much you could always stay at home. Now thats dangerous!

I rather fancy death by chocolate if I have to choose









Steve


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Not buying any of that. You're presenting no argument at all to ignore a serious and accepted design flaw concerning a certain valve affecting the rudder of older 737's in particular, and it's not acceptable to state feeble analogies of a patronising nature that aren't relevant to the issues raised.

You can decide what you like for youself, as can another member, but don't try telling me that I should accept your over simplified analysis, when you've made absolutely no attempt to make an argument on the specifics.


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

p.s.

Chocolate teapots are a waste of time!!


----------



## Softiesteve (Feb 23, 2003)

That was a bit harsh!


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

I will happily board a 737 (and usually do at least once a month)

However you will not get me on a BA 146 !!

The 146 otherwise known as the flying gas chamber by those in the know is an accident waiting to happen.....

Its just a matter of time....

Regards.

-Eric


----------



## Griff (Feb 23, 2003)

Eric,

I know nothing of that aircraft, but respect your reservations about it, and your decision about not getting on one, which is what I'm trying to get understood regards my concerns about the rudder valve on certain 737's. I'm still not convinced about that, and I am only asking people to understand that is my view/opinion, and until all those valves have been corrected/replaced, there is no one going to convince me otherwise except by detailed and technical information/evidence. It's as simple as that. But I don't accept I should be happy boarding one just because someone else is happy to do so. I'm clearly not. I'd be glad if the problem I've described has been addressed other than by evasive pilot techniques, but that will remain my position till then.


----------



## ericp (Feb 23, 2003)

The 146 has a nasty habit (extensivley documented and routinely denied) of leaking Organo Phosphates into the cabin.

On at least one occasion both the Captain and Co-pilot were "knocked out" by the fumes...

I will try and find the relevant stories and post a link.

Eric


----------

