TriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4695 posts, RR: 42
Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2001 times:
If it is well maintained, I'd fly with every aircraft type, especially the "rare" Russian types. That's an experience I am still lacking.
Anyway, it is really hard for me to understand why people are so prejudiced against some manufacturers, like e.g. Tupolev or Ilyushin. Just because these aircraft are less advanced comparent to contemporary Western types it doesn't make them unsafe or anything.
But I have to admit that logical thinking is sometimes inferior to fears and rumors. This phenomenon sometimes also applies to me concerning other topics, so please don't take any offense by above remarks.
Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
Positive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1993 times:
It's not the type of aircraft it's the airline that operates it. Even Ilyushin/Tupolev planes are ok if they are maintained properly. It's the ones operated by 3rd world countries that you should be worried about. The DC-10 aint that bad c'mon! The DC-9 is even older
Flyboy36y From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3039 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1994 times:
I try to avoid older Russian planes and BAC 111s. I also prefer not flying on DC-9s. I'm not a fan of the Shorts 330 either. I don't like the DC-10 because of it's 3-5-3 config. Same goes for the MD-11.
OH, and if at all posible I stay away from 737-800/900 because the windows are so low that I have to crane my neck to see.
Hkg82 From Hong Kong, joined Apr 2002, 1297 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1989 times:
There isn't an aircraft that I wouldn't want to fly on. Equating hours or age of an aircraft with questionable safety shouldn't be issue. A newer aircraft that is not properly maintained and managed could even be more problematic than its older counterpart. Adhering to a high standard of maintenance is very important, as it'll allow an airline to operate a fleet of aircraft for as long as its lifespan allows, until the time comes when it's becoming too expensive to maintain & a replacement is required. Northwest Airlines is a good example of this.
I would love to fly on older aircraft that I haven't been on before, like the 732, 727, DC-9 & DC-10 as well as some of the Russian-made planes, such as the TU-154 & II-86.
Ammunition From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 1065 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1968 times:
I would fly any aircraft and any airline. Even 'unsafe' ( or those percieved as uunsafe by some) airlines can be exciting and adventurous, i recently flew on the IL-62 and it was aan excellent experience, even thought it was very turbulant and shaked and rattled during take-off. It can really get the heart going and i love that. I would love to fly on the TU-154 and the TU-204 and the IL-96 which is a plane which i have not yet flown and i know that some people dont trust russian engineering.
If i could afford it i wud have flown on all the aircraft out there, and if anyone wants me to accomplish it- i would never say no to a free ticket... any offers????? :'(.... guess not .
P.S. i miss u .........
Saint Augustine- 'The world is a book and those who do not travel, read only 1 page'
GD727 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 925 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1844 times:
I will fly on any type of aircraft. Why do people say the DC-10 is a death cruiser? Because of that cargo door thing? Well, get with the times, they fixed that problem 20 years ago! The DC-10 is a great aircraft and I would gladly fly on one any day (unless it's on Biman!).
Drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1825 times:
I don't like: CRJs-windows too low,
Won't Fly: Any commuter non-jet smaller than an ATR-42. I will absolutely not fly EMB120 Brasilias. I've flown them a couple of times HOU-IAH, IAH-HOU on Coex. Happily the EFD flights are flown with ATRs now that the Brasilias are gone-and the route will go ERJ in '03.
Jmc757 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2000, 1298 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1821 times:
For me, the DC10 or death cruiser. (btw.... not only people here refer to them as death cruiser, within monarch Airline who (did) operate one, their staff knew it as that as well, and i think Airtours (or MyTravel) know it as that also!!!)
There is a reason, i had an awful experience on one in the past, so bad that passengers demanded the aircraft was taxied back and we deplaned. now i know, this is probably a one off incedent, down to the airline, and that the -10 has been a great aircraft and workhorse to many across the world, but that one incedent has stuck in my mind, and i would only ever fly one if it was essential, i would be repared to pay MORE for a ticket on another airline using another aircraft, thats just the way it is.
One bad experience should not make people judge things like this forever more, but unfortunately does, hence why i wouldn't fly another DC10.
Acidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1874 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1815 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
I believe that every different type of machine is a feather in your hat. There are some kinds of machines that my parents and grandparents got to fly on regularly that don't exist anymore, or at least in a passenger-type capacity. I'll probably never get to fly on a DC8 or a 707. But I've been on countless DC9's and 727's, which are going the way of the dodo soon.