Jordan Aviation's Airbus A320 JY-JAC, 29th on the line, ex-Ansett Airlines, BH Air & Greece Airways, first flight January 5th, 1989, just became the first A320 to reach 30 years in service last week.
According to FR24, it is currently flying segments around Ammann almost every day.

What kind of flights does it operate? Scheduled? Charter? Wet lease flights for another carrier? Wikipedia in english indicates that Jordan Aviation also operates flights for the UN peacekeeping forces...

Next aircraft to break the 30 years mark will be Kulula's ZS-GAR & ZS-GAW in Johannesburg (April 25th and June 6th this year), then Lufthansa's D-AIPA (August 2nd). Does anyone know if the date of the next major maintenance of Lufthansa and Air Canada's 1989 A320s is still far enough away to allow these aircraft to bite into their 31st year, or will they be withdrawn before the end of this year?

Amazing for these workhorses. How many flight cycles does it have? And how many hours?

Doesn't have Air France a few very early A320's flying?

Dutchy wrote:

Doesn't have Air France a few very early A320's flying?

No, they retired/scrapped all their oldest Frames - their current oldest A320 is a 2001 build.

That's pretty wild how old some of them are now. I think DL has some older NW A320s in their fleet that were delivered in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Those may have a chance at reaching 30 years old, despite the fact that I think DL is retiring some of their A320s pretty soon.

Dutchy wrote:

Amazing for these workhorses. How many flight cycles does it have? And how many hours?

Doesn't have Air France a few very early A320's flying?

Lufthansa have some early birds probably not far behind the ones mentioned in the original post. 28 years or so springs to mind.

N292UX wrote:

That's pretty wild how old some of them are now. I think DL has some older NW A320s in their fleet that were delivered in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Those may have a chance at reaching 30 years old, despite the fact that I think DL is retiring some of their A320s pretty soon.

Delta's oldest active frame is N309US (MSN 118), which was delivered in October 1990, so still a way to go to reach 30 years of service. (And it spent 15 months parked up in Marana in 05/06)

Arion640 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Amazing for these workhorses. How many flight cycles does it have? And how many hours?

Doesn't have Air France a few very early A320's flying?

Lufthansa have some early birds probably not far behind the ones mentioned in the original post. 28 years or so springs to mind.

The original post mentions Lufthansa's D-AIPA that will turn 30 on August 2 this year.

https://sites.google.com/site/lhgroupfleet/lufthansa
for the age of the LH fleet including D-AIPA and his workmates.

I am old enough to remember when A320s started replacing 727-200s. The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Air Canada's first A320 will hit 30 years old at the end of this year ... the 727-200s it replaced lasted roughly half that at Air Canada!

So much for the a.net reputation that Airbus aircraft are throw-away POS's...

longhauler wrote:

I am old enough to remember when A320s started replacing 727-200s. The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Air Canada's first A320 will hit 30 years old at the end of this year ... the 727-200s it replaced lasted roughly half that at Air Canada!

I'm guessing AC's DC-9-32s went for about 30 years as well? I remember flying one YVR-SFO late spring of 1996.

longhauler wrote:

The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Indeed! I read a very old topic on airliners.net some times ago. Almost all posters were saying that A300 and A320 were built to serve around 20 years, at a maximum!

sergegva wrote:

longhauler wrote:

The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Indeed! I read a very old topic on airliners.net some times ago. Almost all posters were saying that A300 and A320 were built to serve around 20 years, at a maximum!

The fact of the matter is that almost any aircraft will last as long as you are willing to maintain it. They do have certification limits now, which did not exist in 1989, but those are in terms of hours and cycles, not years. How many hours and cycles does this one have?

sergegva wrote:

Jordan Aviation's Airbus A320 JY-JAC, 29th on the line, ex-Ansett Airlines, BH Air & Greece Airways, first flight January 5th, 1989, just became the first A320 to reach 30 years in service last week.
According to FR24, it is currently flying segments around Ammann almost every day.

What kind of flights does it operate? Scheduled? Charter? Wet lease flights for another carrier? Wikipedia in english indicates that Jordan Aviation also operates flights for the UN peacekeeping forces...

Next aircraft to break the 30 years mark will be Kulula's ZS-GAR & ZS-GAW in Johannesburg (April 25th and June 6th this year), then Lufthansa's D-AIPA (August 2nd). Does anyone know if the date of the next major maintenance of Lufthansa and Air Canada's 1989 A320s is still far enough away to allow these aircraft to bite into their 31st year, or will they be withdrawn before the end of this year?

I wonder what the hours and cycles are on these airframes? Would be interesting to see how they compare to the oldest examples in mainline fleets such as DL, UA and LH.

ACCS300 wrote:

longhauler wrote:

I am old enough to remember when A320s started replacing 727-200s. The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Air Canada's first A320 will hit 30 years old at the end of this year ... the 727-200s it replaced lasted roughly half that at Air Canada!

I'm guessing AC's DC-9-32s went for about 30 years as well? I remember flying one YVR-SFO late spring of 1996.

The last Air Canada DC-9 made its final trip January 18, 2002.

So, yes, 30-35 years of lifespan, depending on airframe.

longhauler wrote:

Air Canada's first A320 will hit 30 years old at the end of this year ... the 727-200s it replaced lasted roughly half that at Air Canada!

Interesting how at the old Crown Corp. they were modern. I remember how in a rather short matter of time the 727s were retired.

C-FDQQ is still going strong.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/c-fdqq



Along with C-GPWG, CP's first A320.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/c-gpwg

That's nice

-Signed-
A lot of Douglas/McDonnell-Douglas planes

Has there been any cargo modifications done so the senior birds can keep flying or is this not possible and or cost effective ?

SEPilot wrote:

sergegva wrote:

longhauler wrote:

The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Indeed! I read a very old topic on airliners.net some times ago. Almost all posters were saying that A300 and A320 were built to serve around 20 years, at a maximum!

The fact of the matter is that almost any aircraft will last as long as you are willing to maintain it. They do have certification limits now, which did not exist in 1989, but those are in terms of hours and cycles, not years.

True.

However, the suitability of certain aircraft lends them to much longer lifespans, especially under hard-use conditions. We can all think of a few aircraft types that have been retired much earlier than their serviceability would require them to be.

The A320 was a slam-dunk for Airbus. Efficient, reliable over the long-term, well-suited to its mission and profitable leading to an updated version. Airlines who got in early took a big risk (as most do with a new aircraft program), but the proof is in the pudding 30 years later.

Air Canada got their money's worth out of those planes.

Arion640 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Amazing for these workhorses. How many flight cycles does it have? And how many hours?

Doesn't have Air France a few very early A320's flying?

Lufthansa have some early birds probably not far behind the ones mentioned in the original post. 28 years or so springs to mind.

Lufthansa sure knows how to get value out of its planes! What did a new 320 cost in 1989?

SEPilot wrote:

sergegva wrote:

longhauler wrote:

The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Indeed! I read a very old topic on airliners.net some times ago. Almost all posters were saying that A300 and A320 were built to serve around 20 years, at a maximum!

The fact of the matter is that almost any aircraft will last as long as you are willing to maintain it. They do have certification limits now, which did not exist in 1989, but those are in terms of hours and cycles, not years. How many hours and cycles does this one have?

It is a testament to many things. Maintenance, and the manufacturer's willingness and ability to support the type. And the now obvious integrity of the original design. And its commerciality, which continues TO THIS DAY. remarkable.

AWACSooner wrote:

That's nice

-Signed-
A lot of Douglas/McDonnell-Douglas planes

..........Priceless.

A big KUDOS to Airbus and the A320, as some have stated many thought it would have the build quality to last thirty years, but it has put those generalizations in the trash.

wave46 wrote:

The A320 was a slam-dunk for Airbus. Efficient, reliable over the long-term, well-suited to its mission and profitable leading to an updated version. Airlines who got in early took a big risk (as most do with a new aircraft program), but the proof is in the pudding 30 years later.

Agreed. Backbone of tons of fleets Worldwide. And it has aged well too, with the 321 stretch being the market leader in that segment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRSkuCFdvgY
the plane

dmg626 wrote:

Has there been any cargo modifications done so the senior birds can keep flying or is this not possible and or cost effective ?

The first Passenger to Freigght (P2F) conversions are happening now, however none have been finished/rolled out/flown. P2F only for A320/321, with the newer A321s being most desireable because of payload and performance increases over newer builds.

wave46 wrote:

Air Canada got their money's worth out of those planes.

Good thing, since their purchase caused so much controversy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_affair

Sorry to drift off-topic, but what is Greece Airways? I can't seem to find anything online...

Arion640 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Amazing for these workhorses. How many flight cycles does it have? And how many hours?

Doesn't have Air France a few very early A320's flying?

Lufthansa have some early birds probably not far behind the ones mentioned in the original post. 28 years or so springs to mind.

D-AIPA A320-211 69 16.10.1989
D-AIPB A320-211 70 20.10.1989
D-AIPC A320-211 71 21.11.1989
D-AIPD A320-211 72 24.11.1989
D-AIPE A320-211 78 15.12.1989
D-AIPF A320-211 83 10.01.1990
D-AIPH A320-211 86 26.01.1990
D-AIPK A320-211 93 08.02.1990
D-AIPL A320-211 94 20.02.1990
D-AIPM A320-211 104 29.03.1990
D-AIPP A320-211 110 10.08.1990 
D-AIPR A320-211 111 30.08.1990
D-AIPS A320-211 116 13.09.1990
D-AIPT A320-211 117 25.09.1990


+ 6 delivered in 1991

Airbus did work on a lifespan extension program for the A320 family over 10 years ago which may explain the discrepancy over what was widely thought to be a shorter life cycle, and airframes we now see exceeding 30 years of service.

I assume one of the Lufthansa ones are leading with regards to number of cycles?

Anyone seen any number on cycles and hours?

From a thread approx. 9 months ago:

"What is the highest cycle and hour A320 and 737?"

"In-service A320 fleet leaders (both are still in service):
A320 hours leader: 87,011 FH. Air Canada A320 MSN 68 C-FDQV
A320 cycles leader: 53,997 FC. Lufthansa A320 MSN 72 D-AIPD"

Sorry, I can't figure out how to post links from one post to another.

SEPilot wrote:

sergegva wrote:

longhauler wrote:

The feeling among "experts" (like us) was that this "disposable French airplane would never last as long as a Boeing".

Indeed! I read a very old topic on airliners.net some times ago. Almost all posters were saying that A300 and A320 were built to serve around 20 years, at a maximum!

The fact of the matter is that almost any aircraft will last as long as you are willing to maintain it. They do have certification limits now, which did not exist in 1989, but those are in terms of hours and cycles, not years. How many hours and cycles does this one have?

Actually, certain joints are problems in certain aircraft, namely A320-100. It is the A320-200 that is so durable. The -100 was designed for 48,000FC and 60,000FH and that was it. The E-jets are having issues, they won't be well used for 30 years IMHO.

It is the companies that adopted or improved upon Douglas joints who produce very durable aircraft. A Cessna or Gulfstream pressed into high frequency service would be a service nightmare before 15 years. But since they fly less in a year than an A320 in a month, they are built correctly for their market.

Much credit goes to the continuous improvement effort Airbus put into the A320.

Lightsaber

sergegva wrote:

Jordan Aviation's Airbus A320 JY-JAC, 29th on the line, ex-Ansett Airlines, BH Air & Greece Airways, first flight January 5th, 1989, just became the first A320 to reach 30 years in service last week.
According to FR24, it is currently flying segments around Ammann almost every day.

What kind of flights does it operate? Scheduled? Charter? Wet lease flights for another carrier? Wikipedia in english indicates that Jordan Aviation also operates flights for the UN peacekeeping forces...

Next aircraft to break the 30 years mark will be Kulula's ZS-GAR & ZS-GAW in Johannesburg (April 25th and June 6th this year), then Lufthansa's D-AIPA (August 2nd). Does anyone know if the date of the next major maintenance of Lufthansa and Air Canada's 1989 A320s is still far enough away to allow these aircraft to bite into their 31st year, or will they be withdrawn before the end of this year?

First revenue service was AN11 Melbourne to Hobart on 23 June 1989. So a little way until 30 years in service, but 30 years from first test flight. Nice to see an old Ansett "Skystar" as they were branded still in service.

WayexTDI wrote:

So much for the a.net reputation that Airbus aircraft are throw-away POS's...

It's a function of hours and cycles, not chron age. Want to compare A320 longevity to MD-80/83/88? I didn't think so. Want to look at how many early-build 320s didn't make it to 25 with their original operators?

Ryanair01 wrote:

First revenue service was AN11 Melbourne to Hobart on 23 June 1989. So a little way until 30 years in service, but 30 years from first test flight. Nice to see an old Ansett "Skystar" as they were branded still in service.

While checking for dates of deliveries, it seemed odd that seven months lapsed between these and first revenue service you mentioned. While digging a little deaper, I've found that the first three A320s arrived Down Under in November or December 1988 and that VH-HYB "Operated first revenue service Melbourne (Tullamarine) - Sydney (Kingsford Smith) as AN12 - February 02, 1989"

Are they wrong?

http://www.aussieairliners.org/a320/vh-hyb/vhhyb.html

Also, AN was the first airline to get a -200 with VH-HYA.

http://www.aussieairliners.org/a320/vh-hya/vhhya.html

WayexTDI wrote:

So much for the a.net reputation that Airbus aircraft are throw-away POS's...

MIflyer12 wrote:

Want to compare A320 longevity to MD-80/83/88? I didn't think so.
Want to look at how many early-build 320s didn't make it to 25 with their original operators?

And so it starts.... {yawn}. The pair of you are as bad as each other.
Q.1) Does Airbus still have a reputation for throw-away a/c?
No. Not these days. I suspect that has been overtaken by a reputation for making white elephants (A340, A380).
But that's not what this thread is about.

Q.2) Do I want to acknowledge that McDonnell-Douglas built a stonking good well-engineered a/c with a proven long life. Hell yeah!
But that's not what this thread is about either, so how about some consideration for Airbus and what they have achieved.

Q.3) Do I want to look at how many early-build 320s didn't make it to 25 with their original operators?
Only if you are prepared to do the same for your beloved MD-80s..... I'll start you off.

Swissair (launch customer); MD-81 1980-1998 (also DC-9-32 1967 - 1988; DC-9-51 1975-1988)
Other early customers...
PSA MD-81 1981 - 2002
Austrian Airlines; MD-81 1980 - 1999; MD-82/83/87 1983 - 2005 (also DC-9-32 1971-1990)
AA - famous for flying something over 370 examples, and whilst a handful of them are setting service records, the majority are falling way short.
(by all means do some research of your own)

So... not so many early-build MD-80s made it to 25 with their original operator either.
What was your point exactly?

Or we could simply accept that this is a great milestone for Airbus.

Worth noting that Airbus has a program to extend the original design life of all but the earliest A320 series aircraft, from the original 60,000 FH/48,000 FC to the current 90,000 FH/60,000 FC. Airlines such as LH, DL, and AC that are flying early A320s have almost certainly taken advantage of this program. Airbus originally wanted to do a further extension to 120,000 FH/75,000 FC, but apparently that proved uneconomic.

Also looks like AC will need to retire some A320s pretty soon for reaching flight hours limits, if the numbers reported upthread are accurate. Presumably they are being replaced by 737 MAX 8. DL's have a bit more headroom (I don't know about LH's).

ZS-GAR(LN# 53) and GAW(LN# 54) are still active. LN# 49 is in storage, by July '19 it will be 30.

smallmj wrote:

wave46 wrote:

Air Canada got their money's worth out of those planes.

Good thing, since their purchase caused so much controversy.

Indeed, Air Canada is lucky they went with (or were forced into) the A320 series and not the 737-300 and 737-400 as was rumoured internally. Those airframes would have long since been retired.

seabosdca wrote:

Also looks like AC will need to retire some A320s pretty soon for reaching flight hours limits, if the numbers reported upthread are accurate. Presumably they are being replaced by 737 MAX 8.

The earliest AC A320s are a bit of an anomaly. Lighter, than the rest, it appears they are the first to go, or have gone. Other than the 737s, there are also 4 A321s and 2 A320s entering the fleet as replacements this year.

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

WayexTDI wrote:

So much for the a.net reputation that Airbus aircraft are throw-away POS's...

MIflyer12 wrote:

Want to compare A320 longevity to MD-80/83/88? I didn't think so.
Want to look at how many early-build 320s didn't make it to 25 with their original operators?

And so it starts.... {yawn}. The pair of you are as bad as each other.
Q.1) Does Airbus still have a reputation for throw-away a/c?
No. Not these days. I suspect that has been overtaken by a reputation for making white elephants (A340, A380).
But that's not what this thread is about.

Q.2) Do I want to acknowledge that McDonnell-Douglas built a stonking good well-engineered a/c with a proven long life. Hell yeah!
But that's not what this thread is about either, so how about some consideration for Airbus and what they have achieved.

Q.3) Do I want to look at how many early-build 320s didn't make it to 25 with their original operators?
Only if you are prepared to do the same for your beloved MD-80s..... I'll start you off.

Swissair (launch customer); MD-81 1980-1998 (also DC-9-32 1967 - 1988; DC-9-51 1975-1988)
Other early customers...
PSA MD-81 1981 - 2002
Austrian Airlines; MD-81 1980 - 1999; MD-82/83/87 1983 - 2005 (also DC-9-32 1971-1990)
AA - famous for flying something over 370 examples, and whilst a handful of them are setting service records, the majority are falling way short.
(by all means do some research of your own)

So... not so many early-build MD-80s made it to 25 with their original operator either.
What was your point exactly?

Or we could simply accept that this is a great milestone for Airbus.

This is a great milestone.

While I was harsh on FC, the A320 is certified for more FH.

Does anyone know what the A220 and E2 jets are certified for?

Lightsaber

I remember flying on this aircraft in 2016 with BL (Pacific Airlines - now Jetstar Pacific - on lease from BH Air). Despite being 4 years since it was acquired from Ansett, it was still in full Ansett config/colours inside, and the boarding music was still the Ansett tape that had never been changed (very, very Australian music). I suspect the aircraft had a very easily life between Ansett going broke (the first time 11/2001) and its life with Jordan - 7 years of limited FH/cycles, which would have helped with longevity.

longhauler wrote:

smallmj wrote:

wave46 wrote:

Air Canada got their money's worth out of those planes.

Good thing, since their purchase caused so much controversy.

Indeed, Air Canada is lucky they went with (or were forced into) the A320 series and not the 737-300 and 737-400 as was rumoured internally. Those airframes would have long since been retired.

seabosdca wrote:

Also looks like AC will need to retire some A320s pretty soon for reaching flight hours limits, if the numbers reported upthread are accurate. Presumably they are being replaced by 737 MAX 8.

The earliest AC A320s are a bit of an anomaly. Lighter, than the rest, it appears they are the first to go, or have gone. Other than the 737s, there are also 4 A321s and 2 A320s entering the fleet as replacements this year.

Haven’t gone yet... in January alone I’ve been on FINs 201 and 205 and seen 202-204 in the last few days. I avoid the max flights on my commutes to make a point of experiencing nostalgia.

lightsaber wrote:

SEPilot wrote:

sergegva wrote:

Indeed! I read a very old topic on airliners.net some times ago. Almost all posters were saying that A300 and A320 were built to serve around 20 years, at a maximum!

The fact of the matter is that almost any aircraft will last as long as you are willing to maintain it. They do have certification limits now, which did not exist in 1989, but those are in terms of hours and cycles, not years. How many hours and cycles does this one have?

Actually, certain joints are problems in certain aircraft, namely A320-100. It is the A320-200 that is so durable. The -100 was designed for 48,000FC and 60,000FH and that was it. The E-jets are having issues, they won't be well used for 30 years IMHO.

It is the companies that adopted or improved upon Douglas joints who produce very durable aircraft. A Cessna or Gulfstream pressed into high frequency service would be a service nightmare before 15 years. But since they fly less in a year than an A320 in a month, they are built correctly for their market.

Much credit goes to the continuous improvement effort Airbus put into the A320.

Lightsaber

I see 3 distinct generations of the A320:

1) 1987-1988: A320-100
2) 11/1988 - onwards: A320-200CEO
3) 2015 - onwards: -200NEO

I certainly don't see it being discontinued within my lifetime either.

1989worstyear wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

SEPilot wrote:

The fact of the matter is that almost any aircraft will last as long as you are willing to maintain it. They do have certification limits now, which did not exist in 1989, but those are in terms of hours and cycles, not years. How many hours and cycles does this one have?

Actually, certain joints are problems in certain aircraft, namely A320-100. It is the A320-200 that is so durable. The -100 was designed for 48,000FC and 60,000FH and that was it. The E-jets are having issues, they won't be well used for 30 years IMHO.

It is the companies that adopted or improved upon Douglas joints who produce very durable aircraft. A Cessna or Gulfstream pressed into high frequency service would be a service nightmare before 15 years. But since they fly less in a year than an A320 in a month, they are built correctly for their market.

Much credit goes to the continuous improvement effort Airbus put into the A320.

Lightsaber

I see 3 distinct generations of the A320:

1) 1987-1988: A320-100
2) 11/1988 - onwards: A320-200CEO
3) 2015 - onwards: -200NEO

I certainly don't see it being discontinued within my lifetime either.

Your list needs to be broken down further
1) 1987-1988 A320-100, limited to 48,000 FC and 60,000 FH.
2) 11/1988 A320-200 with wing structure not appropriate for sharklets. Still possible to extend life to 60,000 FC/120,000 FH.
3) From LN2500 possible to retrofit with 13 days of work (original plan was 40). Able to extend life to 60,000 FC/120,000 FH at C-checks.
4) 10/2012 A320-200 built with sharklet structure. Some in Q2 2012 too.
a) From ~LN4500 some quick work.
b) By LN 6500 are plug and play for Sharklet install. Built for 60,000 FC and 120,000 FH at the factory.
5.) CEO with NEO avionics and actuators with the maintenance feedback, about LN 6800 (blended for a while)
6) Then NEO

viewtopic.php?t=564039
viewtopic.php?t=775965


I do not know when the CEO avionics were updated, but there were subsystem improvements.
Airbus will eventually extend the life. To what, I do not know, but there will be a structural change.

Lightsaber

WayexTDI wrote:

So much for the a.net reputation that Airbus aircraft are throw-away POS's...

They are the reason duct tape was invented..

OA940 wrote:

Sorry to drift off-topic, but what is Greece Airways? I can't seem to find anything online...

Never really existed, was a "letter-box" company in Greece - operating a/c for AIR SCOTLAND:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Scotland

dtw2hyd wrote:

ZS-GAR(LN# 53) and GAW(LN# 54) are still active.

As the a/c's were taken over American Airlines, per 2013 (!!!):
LN053: 76086hrs 34451cycles
LN054: 74770hrs 33679cycles

d8s wrote:

WayexTDI wrote:

So much for the a.net reputation that Airbus aircraft are throw-away POS's...

They are the reason duct tape was invented..

I rest my case...

And the developments keep on coming for this family of aircaft.
Perhaps more now than at any time since inception.
Obviously we have the 'LR' which has opened up many new routes inc of course translantic.
Strongly rumoured on the back of the success of the 'LR' is the 'XLR' with integrated tankage.
Then the 'plus' simple stretch of 321 ( and 320?)
And the 'plus plus' new wing/engine etc.But placed on back burner.
There has even been journo' talk of a Mk2 sharklet with 'downlets'.
It's around now ( I believe) that the new even larger overhead bins are being introduced as part of the interior upgrade.
Not to mention the new door arrangements that can allow for up to 250 pax ( not that there's enough room for 250 pax at the mo'!)

So plenty to come,she's just getting into her stride! As above ,the programme will outlive me.

WayexTDI wrote:

d8s wrote:

WayexTDI wrote:

So much for the a.net reputation that Airbus aircraft are throw-away POS's...

They are the reason duct tape was invented..

I rest my case...

Well, of course one needs a sturdy basic frame to start with before the duct tape is useful; just check out the amount of duct tape on the average DC-3 . . .