FlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 600 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2875 times:
folks, here is the list of planes i've had the opportunity to fly on so far:
of all those planes, i feel safest on the 757. why? well, while waiting out a nearly 5 hour layover in MSP some time ago, i decided to check out the observation deck. it was interesting to see all different types of planes land and takeoff. but what i found really interesting is that NW 757s almost always took less runway length to get in the air vs even the DC9 or A320 which are considerably smaller aircraft! i'd always thought the 757 seemed to have a powerful takeoff. i guess that sorta confirmed it. anyway, for those reasons i feel very comfortable flying on the 757. the other aircraft just don't seem to have the "KICK" the 57 does...! anyone think i'm crazy? bee nice!
Canadi>nBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2764 times:
For me, it's not so much the aircraft type/equipment I fly on, it's the maintenance procedures and guidelines that the respective carrier has in place and adheres to. With that said, I always feel very secure flying Air Canada, most of the Euro carriers and some of the Asian based ones. Unfortunately, and I hate saying this, but I don't feel as secure flying on the American carriers. I try and avoid them at all costs.
I must say that I do have a quasi-phobia of small, lightweight aircraft, ie Beechcraft, Cessna, etc. Again, these aircraft may be well maintained, but my hesitancy to fly them is still present. Illogical, yes, but as I stated, it's a phobia of mine....kind of a "Buddy Holly Syndrome", if you will.
IflyORL From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 159 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2741 times:
I think I feel safest on the MD-88. I can't really tell you while but they just feel much safer. I feel least safe on the MD-11 out of pure amount of incidents they have had and also the 777. They are just so big and powerful I feel like we are going to use up the whole runway.
FlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 600 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2693 times:
the only real phobia or superstition i have is that i absolutely try to avoid sitting way in the back on planes that have rear fuselage mounted engines (ie...727...DC9...CRJ). i'm always afraid one of those fan blades might pierce the fuselage! and i don't like sitting in the aisle where if you look out the window you see the prop right there, like on say a saab 340. i guess we all have our idiosyncracies don't we...
DC-10 Levo From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 3432 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2616 times:
For some reason, I always feel safer flying Boeing. I just think that with all the new technology in Airbus jets, fly-by-wire rubbish, something could happen etc. Boeing's feel much safer. Unfortunately, I've only been on 2 Boeings.
TrnsWrld From United States of America, joined May 1999, 769 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2445 times:
I know we are entitled to our own points and opinions, but some of the points that were made dont make much sense. Or cant be backed up by real facts For example..
"for one, like a long takeoff roll only because everytime someone takes off using half the runway I just pray that there is no tail impact!!"
Why would an aircraft using only half the runway tailstrike where as one using 3/4 wouldnt?!??!? do you not realize pilots takeoff at certain speeds? If an aircraft has the power to get to that certain V speed only half way down the runway why would it have a greater chance of a tailstrike? I dunno you lost me on that one.
I feel perfectly comfortable flying any airline in the U.S. whether it be a Boeing or Airbus aircraft. As stated before it all comes down to how well the aircraft are maintained and how well the crew is trained. I for one know for a fact that pilots in the U.S. are trained VERY well.
Jafa From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 782 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2441 times:
I don't have any compelling reasons, but I feel safest on Boeing aircraft. I have confidence in airbus, but I don't like the loud snap, crackle, & pop sounds the airbus makes on takeoff and landing. I am talking about the interior plastic door panels that snap, crackle and pop when the aircraft is being pressurized. It is most noticable when sitting in the FA jumpseats next to the doors. I feel less safe on widebodies due to the reasoning that they would be a more likely terrorist target than a narrowbody. If I had to pick one airplane I would say the 727. Since those are gone, I will go with the 757.
FlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 600 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2390 times:
as you all can tell, i'm certainly no aviation expert...
right or wrong, i guess i'm equating short takeoff distances to having lots of reserve power. the kinda power you might need to avoid something like smashing into the ground during a thunderstorm downburst.
of course maybe the 757 wing allows it to takeoff at a lower speed vs say the much smaller DC9 or even the A320? i don't know...
just seems odd that such a big aircraft (757-200) seems to take less runway than some smaller planes...?
OB1783P From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 325 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2387 times:
Mr. FlyABR's question is an interesting one, almost purely subjective. Obviously, the operator makes the biggest difference. But I myself feel safer when the engines are under the wings. Just the idea of being "pushed" by the engines of an MD80 as opposed to "carried" by the engines of a 767 is less comfortable. And personally, I feel incomparably safe in 777s and 744s. But I just flew in a series of decrepit 737s and 727s in Peru, and I still felt safe.
I would very much like to make a transpacific journey on China Airlines or on KAL too by the way
I've flown thousands of miles and I can tell you it's a lot safer than crossing the street!
CitationX From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 110 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2341 times:
Those who mention feeling safest in a 747 might want to check the accident rate by aircraft type statistics on www.airsafe.com. The 747 appears to have one of the poorest safety records among mainline air transports.
The 777 and the A330/340 series have not had any fatal accidents since their introductions. The 737NGs have also not had any fatal accidents.
The 777 and A330/340 series represents the state-of-the-art in air transport design and technology integration, so it stands to reason they would be the safest planes to fly.
These planes have benefited most by improved computers and better software integration, allowing for automatic monitoring of systems and flight controls. For instance, the FADEC systems controlling the engines can give pilots and mechanics both real-time and historical performance data, allowing nearly all potential engine failure modes to be accurately predicted and prevented.
FlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 600 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2326 times:
one thing that i've noticed on NW airbus aircraft is alot of undercarriage clanking and clunking during taxi. don't know what that is, but i've never noticed so much noise on other brand aircraft. doesn't make me feel unsafe...just sounds odd...
Gamps From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 469 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (9 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2256 times:
It was not a technical statement, just my opinion! Just like how some fellow posters have mentioned about how they don't feel comfortable sitting at the back in planes with backmounted engines. I guess my reasoning was in addition to the phobia about tail strike, the uneasiness the short take off brings - to the ears, pressed against the seat hard etc. Just my opinion and I did not mean to say that short take off means tail strikes.