Boeings are wonderfull planes indeed. But so are Airbus. Remember the total losses of 747 tank blowing up or 737 losing its rudder control? Those planes are insanely complex machines, and require expert pedantic technicians to make and maintain them. Otherwise there will come a day when they fail. And even to pedantic technicians tragedies happened.
Hate these my dad is bigger than your dad type arguments. The fact of the matter is competition is good and it has driven the aviation technology further faster especially now where Boeing is the only civil US air plane manufacture. If anyone think a monopoly is a good thing they should look at NASA as a worst case scenario, how slow technology and cost reduction innovation progress without proper competition and as a result how woefully costly limited result becomes.
aviation lovers, if you're interested I just uploaded a summary of a flight with air arabia, cockpit view. Very nice if you ask me, check out it out if you're interested.
All this Euro vs America bickering is ridiculous. First off, lets look at the facts. America is one nation. Europe is comprised of dozens. America is a baby country, Europe is ancient. But its still funny how America is the country that put the world in the air and into space. So before this stupid Boeing vs Airbus crap gets out of control, just remember what country has been doing this for so long, and what region of the world is playing catch-up. ;-)
The wheels on the Airbus go "SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH" "SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH" " SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH"... The wheels on the Airbus go "SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH" All the way down... BOOM
@zapster53 You're 53 and all you can do is talk in empty-headed cliché rhymes? It's silly comments like yours that give Americans the bad name abroad.
i dont get it? I didnt see any spoilers/reverse thrust, which made the aircraft land faster than its supposed to land, which whould increase the chance of gear collapsing. Well, or safety procedure or pilot mistake i think
i dont get it? I didnt see any spoilers/reverse thrust, which made the aircraft land faster than its supposed to land, which whould increase the chance of gear collapsing. Well, or safety procedure or pilot mistake
@1singleSh0t 9/21Jet Blue A320, flight 292 for NYC got off the ground, nose gear turned 90 degrees, a problem they could not clear.Pilot flew for hours to burn off fuel cuz Airbus could not dump fuel. At 1ST, nobody had ever heard of such a thing. Later it came out that Airbus knew A320 nosewheel problem had happened at least 6 times B4 and the cause had not been corrected. Aibus A320 is a piece of shit with 2 wings + has has 17 hull-loss accidents with 795 fatalities as of 7/ 201.
@1singleSh0t Structurally, this is pretty much a non-event. A maximum braking condition puts more load on the nosewheel than this. The reason you didn't see spoilers or reversers is that would put more load on the nosegear. The runway at LAX is about 10000 ft long which is almost three times more than needed to stop. Best procedure is to let the A/C roll to a stop and accept the damage to the tire/rim. Also, it didn't land faster. It just took longer to stop because of light braking.
@Padarom With a situation like this you want to keep as little stress on the gear as possible. Spoilers kill the airlift in the wing, in this case that's the opposite of what you want to do. Reverse thrusters would force the nose of the plane into the ground. Same concept as the spoilers there.
wtf?! What happened to the front landing gear? Did it get jammed while Coming out? What turned it sideways? Odd... Really odd... There was no way the wheels could of turned side ways like Tht..
I sure that moronic cunt LottoWinner999 would be pleased to know that the Airbus A350 is being built to rival both the 787 and 747. The largest version of the A350 (A350-1000) will be the world's largest two engine plane carrying 440 passengers. The A350 is the fastest selling aircraft in aviation history. Last I heard Boeing was considering pulling the plug on the smallest version of the 787. Some airlines have confirmed that they're replacing their 747's with the A350-1000.
@nwlondoner9 I do believe the A350 was a knee-jerk reaction to the 787. Airlines wanted a rival and Airbus didn't think it needed to build one. Well, the consumer is always right and Airbus rushed the A350 program. Boeing was smart not to get caught up in the hype surrounding the A380, they kept it simple and went with an airframe that 90% of the worlds airlines can find practical.
@nwlondoner9 NO WAY!! The A350 is a very good airplane, but it's NOT going to be the largest twin engine ...the 777 is goin to keep the record ( just for few cm , to be true) The 777-300 can accomodate 451 passengers in a 2 class configuration and up to 500 in a hig density config. Something that the A 350 doesen't achieve. If you take a look at the websites of the manufaturers, you will understand that they're very similar in basic dimensions with the 777 being a very little bit bigger.
@derrinirl Airfags Jet Blue A320, flight 292 for NYC got off the ground, nose gear turned 90 degrees, a problem they could not clear.Pilot flew for hours to burn off fuel cuz Airbus could not dump fuel. At 1ST, nobody had ever heard of such a thing. Later it came out that Airbus knew A320 nosewheel problem had happened at least 6 times B4 and the cause had not been corrected. Aibus A320 is a piece of shit with 2 wings + has has 17 hull-loss accidents with 795 fatalities as of 7/ 201.
Its very easy to compare the comet and the 707.... since many of the lessons learned from the comet were applied to all airliners afterwards. As to Airbus's history, please check the facts... it wasnt a plane company out of no-where but from existing companies with long heritages in aircraft design and manufacture.
There are ways to fly the flag and this isn't it. Both companies make excellent aircraft which, on very rare occasions, develop faults. It's the nature of the beast... ^^
It's quite purile for anyone to use these failures in an attempt to instigate an argument, even worse to do it in the name of national pride. Shame on you...
@sgtgrash I'd say that the reliability of both companies aircraft are about the same. And I'm discarding a lot of the recent B737/A320 indents, as they are definitely due to maintenance negligence.
I see it as a major problem that major airlines sell off their old aircraft to minor ones, once the maintenance cost makes them unprofitable, and bear in mind that these smaller outfits fly on even tighter budgets, and if the major airlines can't maintain them properly within their budget...
@AGrandt Well let me tell U that this airplane was manufactured by Aibuse AKA Airfags. Every one in the aviation industry knows that Aibus aka Airfags is second rate dangerous airplane. Next time you think of flying make sure the plane is Boeing. Boeing is better plane has more saftey feaures + is easier to fly because its Air-Freiendly were the Airfags planes are cheaply built + do not offer Boeings training courses for foreign pilots which increases the pilots saftey factor + abiliites
@AGrandt U refuse to accept the truth Boeing leads the way while Airfags steals its designs + technolgy advances. Take a look at Boeing 707, 727, 737, 747,757, 767, 777 + new Boeing Dreamliner+ than look at Airfags planes U will see + they R cheap copies. The Boeing B-52 + KC-135 military technology spawned American Aircraft Industry with Yankee Know-how + technology being the 1ST swept wing commerical jets. Every thing Airfags build is stolen from Boeing technology, saftey + innovation!
@AGrandt Your a great liar the Comet crahsed because of decompressive explosions and the fact the aluminum shell aka the skin was to thin whiched weakened + cracked every time the cabin was pressurized. The windows were to big + cheaply built. The Boeing 707 was the best a look how every 1 coppied with mounting the engines in the same configuaration as Boeing 707. Boeing 707 was faster, safe + had best radar US military aircraft. Boeing knew better than to build a cheap plane like the Comet..
@Pvjinflight What we have an Airfags Dicksucking Fan-boy??
Every 1 know s Airfags subsides keep their cheap planes flying + Airfags cry cuz they lost 40 Billion Dollar Refueler 2 Boeing. Airfags cannot understand US Citizens do not want foreigners building USAF Military Aircraft. Can USA trust France after Nato snubbing + Germany a former enemy + U want the USA to buy foreign made hunks of junk + cheap copies of USA millitray planes. What U really wanted access to USA military technology!
@Pvjinflight What we have an Airfags Dicksucking Fan-boy??
Every 1 know s Airfags subsides keep their cheap planes flying + Airfags cry cuz they lost 40 Billion Dollar Refueler 2 Boeing. Airfags cannot understand US Citizens do not want foreigners building USAF Military Aircraft. USAcannot trust France after Nato snubbing + Germany a former enemy + U want the USA to buy foreign made hunks of junk + cheap copies of USA millitray planes. What U really wanted access to USA military technology!
@sgtgrash I gotta agree with you on this issue. Both companies make a safe product. My main beef (as you well know) is the way EADS conducts its financial affairs.
Boeing's been around longer and therefore more crashes, but thay have more time to learn and build from them. Scarebus on the other hand only has 9 a/c types. Also the A380 is a blunder it's too big for the times
@AGrandt Gee I hope U have a sewer suit with a mask because the shit your spewing is going to choke every one to death. The Comet was a piece of shit that should have been grounded but because of amount invested they kept on flying them, Boeing KC-135 was USAF military tanker-mid-air-refuerler that become the Boeing 707. That plane wa flown + tesedt over years before became the Boeing 707. The Comet was a rush job with below par testing rushed in to compete with USA.
@LottoWinner999 I don't think we need to continue this...discussion. You clearly have nothing useful to say, or in a useful manner
The Comet was anything but a rush job. It was a completely new design, made to operate in an environment where no plane had gone before. And as a result they discovered something not previously seen in aircraft: Metal fatigue. A problem that was poorly understood at the time. They also learned that square windows were a bad thing. Lessons the British gave to Boeing
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@AGrandt The KC-135 had been flyying for years before it becamse the Boeing 707 and no matter you do ro say the Comet was a complete failure and no designs could be more opposite than the Boeing 707 and the Comet. The better planes Boeing 707 won DC-8 putthe little Comet out of business.
@LottoWinner999 "America entered the age of the jet transport on July 15, 1954, when the Boeing 707 prototype, the model 367-80, made its maiden flight from Renton Field, south of Seattle."
"In 1956, when the first KC-135 -- nicknamed "The City of Renton" -- rolled out of the plant.."
These facts were lifted from Boeing's website. Thus, the 707 preceded the KC135.
@sgtgrash No, the 367-80 preceded the KC-135. The actual 707 differed quite a lot from the dash 80. In fact, the KC-135 is structurally closer to the 367-80 than the 707 is. The most accurate statement would be that both the 707 and the KC-135 were based on the 367-80, with the KC-135 being the first to fly and enter service.
@LottoWinner999 The De Havilland Comet was a fine aircraft utterly compromised by the installation into the airframe of large, square windows and frames. After several disastrous crashes due to explosive decompression, metal fatigue around the corners of the frames was identified as the culprit. The airframe was completely redesigned to accommodate smaller, round windows but it was too late. The introduction of the 707 and damage to the Comet's reputation ended the aircrafts career.
@AGrandt Every U claim is bulshit + its take three little countries to build an Airfags excuse for an airliner run of the mill copy cat and Boeing wannabe. Without you subsidies Airfags could not compete with Boeing. By the way when when Danes, Krauts and Limeys come to America and they get lost I always give them the wrong directions!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@AGrandt You can convince me the Comet was a safe aircraft that was rushed into production. U know thats the truth and you claim Airfags had as much expereince building planes was a lie. In fact every thing you said was a lie. Did your Gramps work for Goebbells in the Propganda Department. Was he a Danish Nazi and member of the SS?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Agrant 1916, Boeing went into business in 1916 with George Conrad Westervelt as B & W and founded the Pacific Aero Products Co. Airfags was not founded until 1970 + built little shit planes. The Boeing Model 247 early United States airliner with round windows. However the Comet windows were cheaply built + workmanship wa cheap + shoddy + the fuselages was to thin to save money. Boeing has 96 years of expereince building airplanes cannot compare to Boeings world famous + best quality airliners
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@derrinirl Yes because the 737 series is only one of the most successful jets in history. Besides you don't fly them so you can't really say if they are shit or not.
The fatigue failure of two anti-rotation lugs due to repeated cyclic pre-landing tests, which allowed the nosewheels to deviate from the 0-degree position on landing gear retraction. A contributing factor was the design of the Brake Steering Control Unit (BSCU) system logic, which prevented the nosewheels from centering. Also contributing was the lack of a procedure to attempt to reset the BSCU system under these conditions. (Me: This is only the preliminary report. You can read the Final.)
Failure of the nosewheels to center initiated a WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT caution message on the ECAM. There were no approved procedures that allowed the flight crew to attempt to reset the BSCU system, which would have re-enabled the hydraulic system and could have resulted in the system recentering the nose wheels. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident as follows:
The Brake Steering Control Unit (BSCU) detected this off center condition and attempted to re-center the nose wheel; due to the sequencing of the nose and main landing gear and their respective doors, hydraulic pressure was shut off to the NLG steering valve. This lack of hydraulic power resulted in a lack of position feedback. After a 0.5-second monitoring time period, the BSCU deactivated the steering system so that the BSCU could not return the nose wheels to center.
@aaadream: This teardown revealed the upper centering cam had been rotated 20 - 30 degrees when it was installed in the inner cylinder.
JM: That is NOT true of this incident. Mechanics were NOT faulted in this incident. The centering lugs were BROKEN in this incident, not poorly positioned. You are wrong.
@aaadream You've gone off the deep end. I posted the facts, but you are obsessed with repeating misinformation. You can do that till you're blue in the face man. Have at it.
@aaadream You're trying to blame mechanics, but that's not true in this case. It may not have been true in previous cases. If they had the procedure to re-set the BSCU they could have averted the other incidents as well. This was a rare instance of it being a factory design inadequacy. I won't call it a fault, but it was an inadequate design that they fixed after this incident.
@aaadream: The investigation into this incident revealed the same findings as were found on other 320 Aircraft.
JM: That is NOT true. You are putting out misinformation. I posted the official report that has the correct information in THIS case. What's wrong with you....this isn't a contest.
The failed lugs allowed the NLG to deviate from its 0-degree position in the landing gear bay upon gear retraction on takeoff. This resulted in the L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT error message on the ECAM system. When the pilots extended the incident airplane's landing gear, the nose gear achieved the down and locked position 1.5 seconds before the main gear and/or all of the landing gear doors closed. The nose wheel assembly was not centered at this time.
After determining that the nose landing gear was cocked 90 degrees, the crew landed at an alternate airport, and the NLG tires and both wheels were worn down into the axle. Post incident examination of the nose gear assembly found that two of the four anti-rotation lugs on the NLG upper support assembly fractured and separated due to induced fatigue from the stearing system's programed pre-landing dynamic steering tests that repeatedly cycles pressure to the stearing cylinders.
Shortly after the landing gear handle was positioned to the up position in the initial climb, the flight crew noted an error message on the Electric Centralized Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM) system listing a fault (L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT) message for the nose landing gear (NLG) shock absorber. The gear handle was then moved to the down position and the crew received an error message of a fault for the nose wheel steering (WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT).
@aaadream While what you describe has happened before, not in this case. The steering computer software caused this malfunction and both the software and the nose gear hardware were updated on the world wide fleet of A320 family to prevent future occurances.
@aaadream Examining the nose gear on the spot wouldn't have told you a thing about the situation. Look, this isn't a contest, I read the report from the NTSB. You can too. In this case it was not mechanics fault, it was steering computer software and nose gear hardware that could have been built stronger. They fixed both with an AD. I was factory trained at the Airbus training center in Miami, but factory training doesn't break down to the landing gear strut level. You should know that.
@aaadream I have 13 years of experience on the A320. The steering computer used to do a continuous self test after gear extention before touchdown. On average they say it did a test turn of the gear 57 times before touch down. Yes. This wore out the internal components and caused the problem in THIS case. They updated the software TWICE to eventually eliminate the steering test movement in flight. They also updated the internal components to make them more robust to reduce chance of reoccurance.
@aaadream I don't care how many years you got it don't mean squat if you didn't read the official report. Maintenance isn't to blame in every case...and it was NOT to blame in this case. Like I said, it might not have been to blame in previous cases. The only reason the factory couldn't deny THIS one was because the entire nation watched LIVE on television.
@thumper49802 You're with Southwest?...that would explain your answer. You don't know about A320s. The NLG don't turn sideways when they retract. In this case the steering computer software was a faulty programming from the factory. The computer does a steering test and it repeated the steering movement test so many times that it fractured the stop inside the cylinder....which jammed the gear at the extreme of movement as we saw it. All A320 family software and steering hardware was updated.
today on 28th of july 152 people died in a plane crash in pakistan Islamabad it was airbus airblue A320 . having 20 women and 7 children.. it is the major plane crash that killed all of the passengers on board in pakistan's plane crash history. and i am very sad about that newly wedded couple which was going to their honeymoon and they died, they just got married 4 days before they died.
@Mav1843 Bullshit, actually planes with highest death toll are B707 and 747 classic (747-100,200,300).
Dont you remember turkish airlines DC-10 that was made in USA, crashed because of design error that led to cargo door fail and lose of all controls. Also 747 nearly crashed because same kind of design error in cargo door, few people died when they sucked out from plane.
@Pvjinflight You are also completely oblivious to the fact that you are comparing a 40 year old aircraft to brand new A340's and A330's. I'm actually quite surprised you are comparing these aircraft because it proves that Boeing's aircraft will stay in service WAY longer than any Airbus A340 and A330 could.
@Pvjinflight The 747 death toll is a bit skewed by the 1977 Tenerife disaster which killed 583 people on two different aircraft. That was purely pilot error and nothing to do with the aircraft itself.
The correct way to interpret safety of different aircraft types is number of fatalities per passenger mile.
@Mav1843 Or MD-11 that is pretty unstable aircraft to fly because of its design, today Lufthansa MD-11 crashed, many of them have crashed in few years.
@Pvjinflight You have done no research in regards to crashes. You forget to understand that a: Boeing is way older than Airbus allowing for the increased number of incidents, and b: Hijackings and Pilot error have contributed to most of the boeing crashes. For you to say that a 747 is an unstable aircraft is preposterous because it IS the safest and longest running production aircraft in the WORLD!
Airbus 380, built using excessive and untested cf materials, the same cf that Boeing said it will limit until proven safe. Fly the newest Deathplane 380 at your own risk! The other airbus, 310, 330, 340, have dismal service records and there have been numerous allegations over how design flaw caused accidents were blamed on pilot error, then the designs revised, in order to protect Airbus.
@Mav1843 A340 doesnt have any fatalities, Air France A330 crashed because faulty pitot tubes ( Air france fault, they didnt change them like many other airlines.) Libyan crash was pilot error.
B707 and 747-100 classic have higher death toll than A310.
@Mav1843 Bullshit, A340 actually doesnt have any fatal accident. You are just stupid idiot that is brainwashed to believe that USA is best in everything.
Comet was over 50 years ago. 2 Boeing 737´s crashed less than 20 years ago because DESIGN FAULT that caused rudder problems.
@Pvjinflight Yeah, well, I don't see any evidence in your argument that states anything close to the truth as well. So why don't you go back to making those flight sim videos and stop making biased arguments against a topic you know nothing about!
Well, of course, the Airbus safety record is going to be better, because Boeing has been making planes for way longer than Airbus, thus allowing for more accidents. That's like saying not as many Hyundais have been involved in as many wrecks as Mercedes'. Hyundai is a newer car company, and Mercedes has multi-decade jump on them.
Boeings are wonderfull planes indeed. But so are Airbus. Remember the total losses of 747 tank blowing up or 737 losing its rudder control? Those planes are insanely complex machines, and require expert pedantic technicians to make and maintain them. Otherwise there will come a day when they fail. And even to pedantic technicians tragedies happened.
eotunun 2 months ago in playlist 380
Airbus is DANGEROUS! I'd rather fly a 50 year old Tupolev or Antonov than set foot in an Airbus!
louchobbema 3 months ago
Hate these my dad is bigger than your dad type arguments. The fact of the matter is competition is good and it has driven the aviation technology further faster especially now where Boeing is the only civil US air plane manufacture. If anyone think a monopoly is a good thing they should look at NASA as a worst case scenario, how slow technology and cost reduction innovation progress without proper competition and as a result how woefully costly limited result becomes.
juuls26 4 months ago
aviation lovers, if you're interested I just uploaded a summary of a flight with air arabia, cockpit view. Very nice if you ask me, check out it out if you're interested.
MichaelNewmann 6 months ago
All this Euro vs America bickering is ridiculous. First off, lets look at the facts. America is one nation. Europe is comprised of dozens. America is a baby country, Europe is ancient. But its still funny how America is the country that put the world in the air and into space. So before this stupid Boeing vs Airbus crap gets out of control, just remember what country has been doing this for so long, and what region of the world is playing catch-up. ;-)
03focussvt943 7 months ago
@03focussvt943 But soviets were first to put human into space, which is more important than sending piece of metal there.
Pvjinflight 7 months ago
@03focussvt943
Actually America is the child of Europe.
That's why you started from the same point and used the
technological, social, economical and cultural attainments.
I have to admit though that the people who leaved and worked
in the states although they were of DIFFERENT nationalities
they did it very good.But they had the backup of Europe.
The American rocket space program was based on German
technology btw..
flyer203 7 months ago
@03focussvt943
Actually America is the child of Europe.
That's why you started from the same point and used the
technological, social, economical and cultural attainments of Europe.
I have to admit though that the people who leaved and worked
in the states although they were of DIFFERENT nationalities
they did it very good.But they had the backup of Europe.
The American rocket space program was based on German
technology btw..
flyer203 7 months ago
How come this doesnt happen in fsx!
McWeslyF1 7 months ago
HAHAHA! DANGEROUS THOUGHTS!
specialdelivery2k6 7 months ago
The wheels on the Airbus go "SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH" "SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH" " SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH"... The wheels on the Airbus go "SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH" All the way down... BOOM
SAMCAMJAIK1 8 months ago
@SAMCAMJAIK1 hahaha
mgftw132 7 months ago
I KNOW THIS!!! I believe when the pilot was landing the plane the parking brakes was on! BAD MISTAKE!
GamingAirlines 8 months ago
@GamingAirlines no. thats a completely different occasion.
NickPwnsUTube 8 months ago
@NickPwnsUTube Yah...Now i just remember is not this one..
GamingAirlines 8 months ago
@GamingAirlines I believe that you are dumbass.
Pvjinflight 7 months ago
@Pvjinflight Hey chill out man....just saying. I saw an aircraft landed like that and the parking breaks were on.
GamingAirlines 6 months ago
@GamingAirlines Parking brakes were off
Pvjinflight 6 months ago
@Pvjinflight Thx You coulda said that before...
GamingAirlines 6 months ago
Good job for pilot
sonicgearHD 9 months ago
fantastic landing.
arsenalfeet 9 months ago
If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!
If it's from France, you're taking a chance!
zapster53 10 months ago
@zapster53 You're 53 and all you can do is talk in empty-headed cliché rhymes? It's silly comments like yours that give Americans the bad name abroad.
Smoznizjev 9 months ago
@zapster53 stupid comment
jamesgreen456 5 months ago
@jamesgreen456 Glad you liked it!
zapster53 5 months ago
Wow, 100% center line.
itstheniceguyme 10 months ago
is he died?
106QSDAVE 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i dont get it? I didnt see any spoilers/reverse thrust, which made the aircraft land faster than its supposed to land, which whould increase the chance of gear collapsing. Well, or safety procedure or pilot mistake i think
1singleSh0t 10 months ago
i dont get it? I didnt see any spoilers/reverse thrust, which made the aircraft land faster than its supposed to land, which whould increase the chance of gear collapsing. Well, or safety procedure or pilot mistake
1singleSh0t 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1singleSh0t 9/21Jet Blue A320, flight 292 for NYC got off the ground, nose gear turned 90 degrees, a problem they could not clear.Pilot flew for hours to burn off fuel cuz Airbus could not dump fuel. At 1ST, nobody had ever heard of such a thing. Later it came out that Airbus knew A320 nosewheel problem had happened at least 6 times B4 and the cause had not been corrected. Aibus A320 is a piece of shit with 2 wings + has has 17 hull-loss accidents with 795 fatalities as of 7/ 201.
LottoWinner999 10 months ago
@1singleSh0t Structurally, this is pretty much a non-event. A maximum braking condition puts more load on the nosewheel than this. The reason you didn't see spoilers or reversers is that would put more load on the nosegear. The runway at LAX is about 10000 ft long which is almost three times more than needed to stop. Best procedure is to let the A/C roll to a stop and accept the damage to the tire/rim. Also, it didn't land faster. It just took longer to stop because of light braking.
zapster53 10 months ago
did they die?
pinochet222 11 months ago 5
i can tell that was a ground crew fuck up form the other airport they forgot the pin when pushing it out and did tell anyone
s69dropkick 11 months ago
They should clap the tyre, it did pretty well!
artoganasaurus 11 months ago
The pilots are amazingly professional !
Krot4u 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You are just amaz
Sunnyway79 11 months ago
that pilot is fucking amazing. 'nuff said
EricWT13 11 months ago
wow how did that happen?
MrPaki1996 11 months ago
Am I looking false or why reverse and spoilers aren't deployed?
Padarom 1 year ago
@Padarom With a situation like this you want to keep as little stress on the gear as possible. Spoilers kill the airlift in the wing, in this case that's the opposite of what you want to do. Reverse thrusters would force the nose of the plane into the ground. Same concept as the spoilers there.
fergiy89 1 year ago
Tell me, the spoilers nor the R/T were deployed. Is that to avoid putting any weight on the front gear of the aircraft in fear of it's collapse?
NA734 1 year ago
Why revers is off and spoilers too?
qtuu89 1 year ago
well done pilots, not Airbus. Sure, not this time.
deimos2k6 1 year ago
wtf?! What happened to the front landing gear? Did it get jammed while Coming out? What turned it sideways? Odd... Really odd... There was no way the wheels could of turned side ways like Tht..
Airplane299 1 year ago
scarebus
roryj123ok 1 year ago
if i was in that flgith i piss my pants at the landing=o
sammerftw 1 year ago
lol who turned the gear sideways?
jamie101021 1 year ago
@jamie101021 the gear failed when it opend up.
Rcrby525 1 year ago
I sure that moronic cunt LottoWinner999 would be pleased to know that the Airbus A350 is being built to rival both the 787 and 747. The largest version of the A350 (A350-1000) will be the world's largest two engine plane carrying 440 passengers. The A350 is the fastest selling aircraft in aviation history. Last I heard Boeing was considering pulling the plug on the smallest version of the 787. Some airlines have confirmed that they're replacing their 747's with the A350-1000.
nwlondoner9 1 year ago 8
@nwlondoner9 I do believe the A350 was a knee-jerk reaction to the 787. Airlines wanted a rival and Airbus didn't think it needed to build one. Well, the consumer is always right and Airbus rushed the A350 program. Boeing was smart not to get caught up in the hype surrounding the A380, they kept it simple and went with an airframe that 90% of the worlds airlines can find practical.
phillyslasher 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nwlondoner9 A350 fastest selling aircraft in history? Are you shitting me?
03Wale 5 months ago
@nwlondoner9 NO WAY!! The A350 is a very good airplane, but it's NOT going to be the largest twin engine ...the 777 is goin to keep the record ( just for few cm , to be true) The 777-300 can accomodate 451 passengers in a 2 class configuration and up to 500 in a hig density config. Something that the A 350 doesen't achieve. If you take a look at the websites of the manufaturers, you will understand that they're very similar in basic dimensions with the 777 being a very little bit bigger.
elaboratithai 4 months ago
The wheels on the nose gear were facing sideways. I expected the nose gear to snap off when it touched the ground. Well done Airbus.
derrinirl 1 year ago 45
@derrinirl me to
demeandr121 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@derrinirl Airfags Jet Blue A320, flight 292 for NYC got off the ground, nose gear turned 90 degrees, a problem they could not clear.Pilot flew for hours to burn off fuel cuz Airbus could not dump fuel. At 1ST, nobody had ever heard of such a thing. Later it came out that Airbus knew A320 nosewheel problem had happened at least 6 times B4 and the cause had not been corrected. Aibus A320 is a piece of shit with 2 wings + has has 17 hull-loss accidents with 795 fatalities as of 7/ 201.
LottoWinner999 10 months ago
@LottoWinner999 Screw you, Jetblue is an awesome airline, regardless of what aircraft they use.
airplanegod 8 months ago
@derrinirl Well done? If they did a good job then the gear won't be facing sideways in the first place
mgftw132 7 months ago
@mgftw132 Thats just american maintenance which caused it to go like that.
Pvjinflight 7 months ago
@Pvjinflight yeah yeah EVERYTHING has to be the american's fault!
mgftw132 7 months ago
@mgftw132 You got it, good!
Pvjinflight 7 months ago
@Pvjinflight im assuming ur european who works for airbus lol
mgftw132 7 months ago
@mgftw132 No, just european who likes to argue with american Boeing fans :)
Pvjinflight 7 months ago
@Pvjinflight in that case then lets argue!
mgftw132 7 months ago
Comment removed
mgftw132 7 months ago
safe airbus me thinks
czdavid1 1 year ago
@czdavid1 No it American pilot that saved every ones ass!
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
I love how the pilot eases the front gear down so nicely, what a great landing!
formber 1 year ago
Its very easy to compare the comet and the 707.... since many of the lessons learned from the comet were applied to all airliners afterwards. As to Airbus's history, please check the facts... it wasnt a plane company out of no-where but from existing companies with long heritages in aircraft design and manufacture.
Batmanlvr1980 1 year ago
why didn't the spoilers come up after touchdown?
okturus 1 year ago
@okturus maybe because it pushes the plane to the ground and you don't want extra forces on the wheels.
belgianhorst 1 year ago
Now thats a pro landing
MandalorianKnight 1 year ago 2
question? how can you not notice that?
ealvarou111 1 year ago
Well, shit.
aidler2 1 year ago
Wow JetMech owned aaadream. Youtube battles are just as entertaining, if not more, than the actual videos itself :D
NoobsAreUsh 1 year ago
i bet the tyres were a bit worn after that
torngr4a 1 year ago
Wow Jetblue you let us down...
clubpenguin489 1 year ago
If it's not boeing I'm not going :D
DeadlyInertia 1 year ago
scare bus
Aviationnation10 1 year ago
BOOM rubber gone :D
xxmrbloodxx 1 year ago
how is that happend ?"XD
franklin612 1 year ago
1)Totaly imprecise title for the video.
2) I 'm sure that the reporter describing live is wishing "Dear God make this to be a catastrophic & deadly accident and me rich and famous!"
lawrenceworkgrave 1 year ago
awesome piloting skills , centre line landing all the way !!
AKENOXTRM 1 year ago
There are ways to fly the flag and this isn't it. Both companies make excellent aircraft which, on very rare occasions, develop faults. It's the nature of the beast... ^^
It's quite purile for anyone to use these failures in an attempt to instigate an argument, even worse to do it in the name of national pride. Shame on you...
sgtgrash 1 year ago 20
@sgtgrash I'd say that the reliability of both companies aircraft are about the same. And I'm discarding a lot of the recent B737/A320 indents, as they are definitely due to maintenance negligence.
I see it as a major problem that major airlines sell off their old aircraft to minor ones, once the maintenance cost makes them unprofitable, and bear in mind that these smaller outfits fly on even tighter budgets, and if the major airlines can't maintain them properly within their budget...
AGrandt 1 year ago
@AGrandt Well let me tell U that this airplane was manufactured by Aibuse AKA Airfags. Every one in the aviation industry knows that Aibus aka Airfags is second rate dangerous airplane. Next time you think of flying make sure the plane is Boeing. Boeing is better plane has more saftey feaures + is easier to fly because its Air-Freiendly were the Airfags planes are cheaply built + do not offer Boeings training courses for foreign pilots which increases the pilots saftey factor + abiliites
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 What do we have here? A Boeing fanboy?
If everyone "knows" that Airbus is as insecure as you claim, why does anyone buy them? No airline want to see their planes crash, for any reason.
AGrandt 1 year ago
@AGrandt U refuse to accept the truth Boeing leads the way while Airfags steals its designs + technolgy advances. Take a look at Boeing 707, 727, 737, 747,757, 767, 777 + new Boeing Dreamliner+ than look at Airfags planes U will see + they R cheap copies. The Boeing B-52 + KC-135 military technology spawned American Aircraft Industry with Yankee Know-how + technology being the 1ST swept wing commerical jets. Every thing Airfags build is stolen from Boeing technology, saftey + innovation!
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 So you are saying that the Europeans stole the idea about swept wings from the US?
The swept wings are a natural development in order to achieve the higher speeds needed
What did the US get from Europe?
The JET engine.
The Jet airliner.
VITAL information about materials and design learned from the Comet disasters.
Crash investigation.
Radar.
Electro Hydraulic Actuators in planes. Sorry, Boeing don't have that one yet. Pity, as they probably just saved an Airbus in Singapore.
AGrandt 1 year ago
@AGrandt Your a great liar the Comet crahsed because of decompressive explosions and the fact the aluminum shell aka the skin was to thin whiched weakened + cracked every time the cabin was pressurized. The windows were to big + cheaply built. The Boeing 707 was the best a look how every 1 coppied with mounting the engines in the same configuaration as Boeing 707. Boeing 707 was faster, safe + had best radar US military aircraft. Boeing knew better than to build a cheap plane like the Comet..
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 Stupid Boeing fanboy.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight What we have an Airfags Dicksucking Fan-boy??
Every 1 know s Airfags subsides keep their cheap planes flying + Airfags cry cuz they lost 40 Billion Dollar Refueler 2 Boeing. Airfags cannot understand US Citizens do not want foreigners building USAF Military Aircraft. Can USA trust France after Nato snubbing + Germany a former enemy + U want the USA to buy foreign made hunks of junk + cheap copies of USA millitray planes. What U really wanted access to USA military technology!
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight What we have an Airfags Dicksucking Fan-boy??
Every 1 know s Airfags subsides keep their cheap planes flying + Airfags cry cuz they lost 40 Billion Dollar Refueler 2 Boeing. Airfags cannot understand US Citizens do not want foreigners building USAF Military Aircraft. USAcannot trust France after Nato snubbing + Germany a former enemy + U want the USA to buy foreign made hunks of junk + cheap copies of USA millitray planes. What U really wanted access to USA military technology!
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 Bullshit. Go to eat hamburgers stupid american clown. If Airbus is so bad why airlines buy them more thab Boeings nowadays?
I dont know if u are trolling, i dont care really.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight What are you another Nazi from Finland?
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 No im not nazi
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Pvjinflight What are you another Nasy Nazi from Finland?
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@sgtgrash I gotta agree with you on this issue. Both companies make a safe product. My main beef (as you well know) is the way EADS conducts its financial affairs.
zapster53 10 months ago
Boeing's been around longer and therefore more crashes, but thay have more time to learn and build from them. Scarebus on the other hand only has 9 a/c types. Also the A380 is a blunder it's too big for the times
VFA103JollyRogers 1 year ago
@VFA103JollyRogers Boeing learn from crashes. Airbus learns from testing.
Well, neither is entirely true, but then again, being truthful probably aren't your forte anyway.
Airbus have been around for about as long as Boeing has. Probably longer if you look at the companies that make up it's foundation.
AGrandt 1 year ago
@AGrandt Gee I hope U have a sewer suit with a mask because the shit your spewing is going to choke every one to death. The Comet was a piece of shit that should have been grounded but because of amount invested they kept on flying them, Boeing KC-135 was USAF military tanker-mid-air-refuerler that become the Boeing 707. That plane wa flown + tesedt over years before became the Boeing 707. The Comet was a rush job with below par testing rushed in to compete with USA.
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 I don't think we need to continue this...discussion. You clearly have nothing useful to say, or in a useful manner
The Comet was anything but a rush job. It was a completely new design, made to operate in an environment where no plane had gone before. And as a result they discovered something not previously seen in aircraft: Metal fatigue. A problem that was poorly understood at the time. They also learned that square windows were a bad thing. Lessons the British gave to Boeing
AGrandt 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@AGrandt The KC-135 had been flyying for years before it becamse the Boeing 707 and no matter you do ro say the Comet was a complete failure and no designs could be more opposite than the Boeing 707 and the Comet. The better planes Boeing 707 won DC-8 putthe little Comet out of business.
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 "America entered the age of the jet transport on July 15, 1954, when the Boeing 707 prototype, the model 367-80, made its maiden flight from Renton Field, south of Seattle."
"In 1956, when the first KC-135 -- nicknamed "The City of Renton" -- rolled out of the plant.."
These facts were lifted from Boeing's website. Thus, the 707 preceded the KC135.
sgtgrash 10 months ago
@sgtgrash No, the 367-80 preceded the KC-135. The actual 707 differed quite a lot from the dash 80. In fact, the KC-135 is structurally closer to the 367-80 than the 707 is. The most accurate statement would be that both the 707 and the KC-135 were based on the 367-80, with the KC-135 being the first to fly and enter service.
Smoznizjev 9 months ago
@LottoWinner999 The De Havilland Comet was a fine aircraft utterly compromised by the installation into the airframe of large, square windows and frames. After several disastrous crashes due to explosive decompression, metal fatigue around the corners of the frames was identified as the culprit. The airframe was completely redesigned to accommodate smaller, round windows but it was too late. The introduction of the 707 and damage to the Comet's reputation ended the aircrafts career.
sgtgrash 10 months ago
@AGrandt Every U claim is bulshit + its take three little countries to build an Airfags excuse for an airliner run of the mill copy cat and Boeing wannabe. Without you subsidies Airfags could not compete with Boeing. By the way when when Danes, Krauts and Limeys come to America and they get lost I always give them the wrong directions!
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@LottoWinner999 End of "discussion", as I said, you obviously have nothing to contribute beyond lies and abuse.
AGrandt 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@AGrandt You can convince me the Comet was a safe aircraft that was rushed into production. U know thats the truth and you claim Airfags had as much expereince building planes was a lie. In fact every thing you said was a lie. Did your Gramps work for Goebbells in the Propganda Department. Was he a Danish Nazi and member of the SS?
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Agrant 1916, Boeing went into business in 1916 with George Conrad Westervelt as B & W and founded the Pacific Aero Products Co. Airfags was not founded until 1970 + built little shit planes. The Boeing Model 247 early United States airliner with round windows. However the Comet windows were cheaply built + workmanship wa cheap + shoddy + the fuselages was to thin to save money. Boeing has 96 years of expereince building airplanes cannot compare to Boeings world famous + best quality airliners
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LottoWinner999 I'm a regular flyer. I fly on the A320, A321 and B737-800. Which plane do I think is shit? B737-800. Fuck Boeing!
derrinirl 1 year ago 17
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@derrinirl Thats fine with me and cool form of Darwinian Population Control when you fly Airfags!
LottoWinner999 1 year ago
@derrinirl Are you a pilot? The A318/19/20/21 and the 737 series are both excellent.
phillyslasher 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@derrinirl oh i didnt realize it wa s a boeing that crashed into the hudson.
lugeman221 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@derrinirl Yes because the 737 series is only one of the most successful jets in history. Besides you don't fly them so you can't really say if they are shit or not.
Sting3733 1 year ago
@derrinirl I like all of them.
TTDMFfreaknew 1 year ago
The fatigue failure of two anti-rotation lugs due to repeated cyclic pre-landing tests, which allowed the nosewheels to deviate from the 0-degree position on landing gear retraction. A contributing factor was the design of the Brake Steering Control Unit (BSCU) system logic, which prevented the nosewheels from centering. Also contributing was the lack of a procedure to attempt to reset the BSCU system under these conditions. (Me: This is only the preliminary report. You can read the Final.)
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Failure of the nosewheels to center initiated a WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT caution message on the ECAM. There were no approved procedures that allowed the flight crew to attempt to reset the BSCU system, which would have re-enabled the hydraulic system and could have resulted in the system recentering the nose wheels. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident as follows:
JetMechMA 1 year ago
The Brake Steering Control Unit (BSCU) detected this off center condition and attempted to re-center the nose wheel; due to the sequencing of the nose and main landing gear and their respective doors, hydraulic pressure was shut off to the NLG steering valve. This lack of hydraulic power resulted in a lack of position feedback. After a 0.5-second monitoring time period, the BSCU deactivated the steering system so that the BSCU could not return the nose wheels to center.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream: This teardown revealed the upper centering cam had been rotated 20 - 30 degrees when it was installed in the inner cylinder.
JM: That is NOT true of this incident. Mechanics were NOT faulted in this incident. The centering lugs were BROKEN in this incident, not poorly positioned. You are wrong.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream You've gone off the deep end. I posted the facts, but you are obsessed with repeating misinformation. You can do that till you're blue in the face man. Have at it.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream You're trying to blame mechanics, but that's not true in this case. It may not have been true in previous cases. If they had the procedure to re-set the BSCU they could have averted the other incidents as well. This was a rare instance of it being a factory design inadequacy. I won't call it a fault, but it was an inadequate design that they fixed after this incident.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream This was Sept 22 2005 at LAX...not New York.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream: The investigation into this incident revealed the same findings as were found on other 320 Aircraft.
JM: That is NOT true. You are putting out misinformation. I posted the official report that has the correct information in THIS case. What's wrong with you....this isn't a contest.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
The failed lugs allowed the NLG to deviate from its 0-degree position in the landing gear bay upon gear retraction on takeoff. This resulted in the L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT error message on the ECAM system. When the pilots extended the incident airplane's landing gear, the nose gear achieved the down and locked position 1.5 seconds before the main gear and/or all of the landing gear doors closed. The nose wheel assembly was not centered at this time.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
After determining that the nose landing gear was cocked 90 degrees, the crew landed at an alternate airport, and the NLG tires and both wheels were worn down into the axle. Post incident examination of the nose gear assembly found that two of the four anti-rotation lugs on the NLG upper support assembly fractured and separated due to induced fatigue from the stearing system's programed pre-landing dynamic steering tests that repeatedly cycles pressure to the stearing cylinders.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Shortly after the landing gear handle was positioned to the up position in the initial climb, the flight crew noted an error message on the Electric Centralized Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM) system listing a fault (L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT) message for the nose landing gear (NLG) shock absorber. The gear handle was then moved to the down position and the crew received an error message of a fault for the nose wheel steering (WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT).
JetMechMA 1 year ago
@aaadream While what you describe has happened before, not in this case. The steering computer software caused this malfunction and both the software and the nose gear hardware were updated on the world wide fleet of A320 family to prevent future occurances.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream Examining the nose gear on the spot wouldn't have told you a thing about the situation. Look, this isn't a contest, I read the report from the NTSB. You can too. In this case it was not mechanics fault, it was steering computer software and nose gear hardware that could have been built stronger. They fixed both with an AD. I was factory trained at the Airbus training center in Miami, but factory training doesn't break down to the landing gear strut level. You should know that.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream I have 13 years of experience on the A320. The steering computer used to do a continuous self test after gear extention before touchdown. On average they say it did a test turn of the gear 57 times before touch down. Yes. This wore out the internal components and caused the problem in THIS case. They updated the software TWICE to eventually eliminate the steering test movement in flight. They also updated the internal components to make them more robust to reduce chance of reoccurance.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream: will not turn 90deg with normal steering
JM: This was not normal stering. The pre-landing self test wore out the centering lugs and fatigue cracked them as the report says.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@aaadream I don't care how many years you got it don't mean squat if you didn't read the official report. Maintenance isn't to blame in every case...and it was NOT to blame in this case. Like I said, it might not have been to blame in previous cases. The only reason the factory couldn't deny THIS one was because the entire nation watched LIVE on television.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
@thumper49802 You're with Southwest?...that would explain your answer. You don't know about A320s. The NLG don't turn sideways when they retract. In this case the steering computer software was a faulty programming from the factory. The computer does a steering test and it repeated the steering movement test so many times that it fractured the stop inside the cylinder....which jammed the gear at the extreme of movement as we saw it. All A320 family software and steering hardware was updated.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaadream 1 year ago
WHY DID U SWITCH OFF THE HOT CHICKS!?!?!?!
MCStudios65 1 year ago
Personally I think the undercarriage held up well given the amount of stress that must have been going through it, at least it didn't collapse.
OELSteve 1 year ago
wheelie
coolblah243 1 year ago
airbus is dangerous...airbus has more crashes than boeing
fartbender09 1 year ago
there r no thrust reverser??? hun!!!
jainish007 1 year ago
today on 28th of july 152 people died in a plane crash in pakistan Islamabad it was airbus airblue A320 . having 20 women and 7 children.. it is the major plane crash that killed all of the passengers on board in pakistan's plane crash history. and i am very sad about that newly wedded couple which was going to their honeymoon and they died, they just got married 4 days before they died.
High2Tension 1 year ago
Design flaws are labeled "features", as though it was a huge joke. Pilots are blamed for maldesigned equipment, data recorders are
modified by French authorities.
Airbus aircraft have "incident rates" ie crashes, three to five times that of Boeing aircraft. That is a huge difference.
Stay out of the Euro Deathplanes!
Mav1843 1 year ago
@Mav1843 Bullshit, actually planes with highest death toll are B707 and 747 classic (747-100,200,300).
Dont you remember turkish airlines DC-10 that was made in USA, crashed because of design error that led to cargo door fail and lose of all controls. Also 747 nearly crashed because same kind of design error in cargo door, few people died when they sucked out from plane.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight You are also completely oblivious to the fact that you are comparing a 40 year old aircraft to brand new A340's and A330's. I'm actually quite surprised you are comparing these aircraft because it proves that Boeing's aircraft will stay in service WAY longer than any Airbus A340 and A330 could.
Mav1843 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight The 747 death toll is a bit skewed by the 1977 Tenerife disaster which killed 583 people on two different aircraft. That was purely pilot error and nothing to do with the aircraft itself.
The correct way to interpret safety of different aircraft types is number of fatalities per passenger mile.
zapster53 10 months ago
@zapster53 I know, from Boeing and Airbus 707 has most fatalities per passenger mile, and 747 Classic is not much behind.
Pvjinflight 10 months ago
@Mav1843 Or MD-11 that is pretty unstable aircraft to fly because of its design, today Lufthansa MD-11 crashed, many of them have crashed in few years.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight You have done no research in regards to crashes. You forget to understand that a: Boeing is way older than Airbus allowing for the increased number of incidents, and b: Hijackings and Pilot error have contributed to most of the boeing crashes. For you to say that a 747 is an unstable aircraft is preposterous because it IS the safest and longest running production aircraft in the WORLD!
Mav1843 1 year ago
Airbus 380, built using excessive and untested cf materials, the same cf that Boeing said it will limit until proven safe. Fly the newest Deathplane 380 at your own risk! The other airbus, 310, 330, 340, have dismal service records and there have been numerous allegations over how design flaw caused accidents were blamed on pilot error, then the designs revised, in order to protect Airbus.
Mav1843 1 year ago
@Mav1843 A340 doesnt have any fatalities, Air France A330 crashed because faulty pitot tubes ( Air france fault, they didnt change them like many other airlines.) Libyan crash was pilot error.
B707 and 747-100 classic have higher death toll than A310.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
Another Euro-Death Plane!
Here's why I hate you morons that think Airbus has a better safety record than Boeing:
In socialist Europe the government pushes faulty designed planes on the public, then they whine about how Boeing takes the time to learn.
For example: The Comet, rushed into the air to beat out Boeing then discontinued when testing revealed the design screwups. Fly first, test later?
Mav1843 1 year ago
@Mav1843 Bullshit, A340 actually doesnt have any fatal accident. You are just stupid idiot that is brainwashed to believe that USA is best in everything.
Comet was over 50 years ago. 2 Boeing 737´s crashed less than 20 years ago because DESIGN FAULT that caused rudder problems.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight I apologize that you are too braindead to realize that Boeing makes a better aircraft.
Mav1843 1 year ago
@Mav1843 I apologize that you are too braindead to realise that actually everything that you write is bullshit.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight Yeah, well, I don't see any evidence in your argument that states anything close to the truth as well. So why don't you go back to making those flight sim videos and stop making biased arguments against a topic you know nothing about!
Mav1843 1 year ago
@Mav1843 You know nothing about safety record of these two manufacturers if you say that there is big difference beetween them.
Pvjinflight 1 year ago
@Pvjinflight Ok. You have your right to your opinion. I'm glad to share with you the correct information. Let's consider this argument over!!
Mav1843 1 year ago
why is he not using spoilers?
MightyMadMax1 1 year ago
Hats off to the pilot, I couldn't even do that on a skateboard.
kaferere 1 year ago
Its a jet blue come on... lol
jdm27ef 1 year ago
Comment removed
wyattnoahliko 1 year ago
Well, of course, the Airbus safety record is going to be better, because Boeing has been making planes for way longer than Airbus, thus allowing for more accidents. That's like saying not as many Hyundais have been involved in as many wrecks as Mercedes'. Hyundai is a newer car company, and Mercedes has multi-decade jump on them.
jakfuki 1 year ago
NICE DRIFT !
tatercito 1 year ago
How come it takes so long before emergency crew are attending?
Way to fucking slow
HighSerrias 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How much of this is Airbus and how much of this is low paid American maintenence?
yourm2 1 year ago 26