N471WN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1369 posts, RR: 2 Posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1963 times:
Unless there is one that has not been reported, we are all witnessing a remarkable achievement of the 737NG. I see no hull losses since its first flight in February of 1997. This is a truly amazing record for this aircraft. While we all know that the age of a well maintained aircraft is not a statistical indicator of an increased probability of an accident, the fact of the matter is that the 737NG is setting new records on the length it has been in airline service with no hull losses (due to any cause).
The 737 Next Generation as many modern airplanes has the next features:
- Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (reduce CFITs)
- Predictive Windshear System and Automatic Radar (avoid bad weather)
- EECs (overspeed engine protection)
- Advanced FMS (reduce high workloads)
Most 737-NG operators have good maintenance records and they give extensive training to the flight crews. If you have the money to buy a 737NG of course you have the money for training and maintenance. You have to take care of an investment of 40-50 millions USD.
TheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 30 Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1461 times:
While I sometimes think these statistics can change from one day to another (like the many 737-200 crashes this year which didn't really help the 737s accident statistic which doesn't change that it is a very safe airplane), especially visible with Concorde, I think it is a great achievement. The same applies for the A330 (I crash during flight tests), 777, A340 (it was close, but no fatalities, which is great), A319 and A321 (some of those had hull losses, but none had fatal accidents).
But the real safety improvement are to be seen as soon as these airplanes are sold to Africa as 2nd hand airframes. I fear that we will see crashes of A320s and 737s then, as well, even though I don't hope it will happen. Nevertheless, I guess avionics are much better and more ergonomical than 30 years ago, so its fair to say that a 777 is safer than a 747-100 (which is safe, already)
TheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3381 posts, RR: 30 Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1332 times:
Quoting Dkny (Reply 11): is that the reasons for the crashes in certain countries are because of them not following the rules.
Exactly, I didn't want to bash Africa at all, but lets look at the facts: If you see how many accidents are happening in Africa and other "poor" regions and compare to how many flights there are taking place, and if you compare the European, Australian, US-American or Asian accident statistics, you will unfortunately see that the accident rate is extremely high, although Europe had some accidents this year, as well (Air France, even if it happened in Canada, Helios, the crash at sicily, much more than we usually see).
So most accidents happen in regions where there is not spent nearly as much money on crew training, maintenance and other safety features, and these areas use older airplanes as they are cheaper. So when the A320s and 737s get affordable there in 10 or so years, I expect higher accident rates, even though I hope that this will not be the case. But a 40 year old 737NG without maintenance (in the year 2038) is likely to crash, as well.
So as good as the accident rates for modern airliners are, also considering that air traffic today has grown extremely compared to the 70s, it is still to be seen how the accident rate will be over 20 or 30 years. I am sure it will be better than for the already safe MD80s, 737classics, A300s or 747classics, but its too early to judge the safety.
D5DBY From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1316 times:
about that AF crash....beacuse the bad weather the flight crew landed a little far down the runway....and it was a very close call about if they would go-around or not, and they was thinking about that for some time...like 1 sec or something..and then they decided to late that they would try to stop the AC on the rainy runway.....speculation
but the investigation will just ask the flight crews about it....so its just to sit back and wait for the canadian report....