Page 1 of 1

Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:43 pm
by JohanTally
Has anyone else read articles from the website Simple Flying? Every article I have read seems to be wildly inaccurate and I can't figure out if the authors have any aviation background or possibly English is not their primary language and something is lost in translation. Yesterday they published an article about a hypothetical 757X claiming Boeing could put modern engines on it and have it flying in 1-2 years. Last I checked their aren't any state of the art 40-45k thrust engines readily available and the retooling alone would take years.

Today they wrote an article on the A321XLR and to me it seems they are under the impression that it's currently flying. I love reading aviation articles but it seems that most of their articles are erroneous and I was wondering if anyone else had noticed the same issues.

https://simpleflying.com/could-boeing-build-a-757x/

https://simpleflying.com/why-has-airbus ... e-a321xlr/

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:49 pm
by Softaero
Agreed, they somehow popped out of nowhere a year or two ago and their articles have the quality of a content farm.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:06 pm
by Sokes
You picked a not so fortunate article. Try "What if the Airbus A380 had been released 50 years ago?"
https://simpleflying.com/airbus-a380-50 ... ce=Bibblio

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:08 pm
by Williamsb747
Agreed. Most of their titles are clickbait and most of their articles have completely inaccurate information.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:16 pm
by Pudelhund
It’s a website written by robots, what do you expect? It’s clickbait for children.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:17 pm
by Tugger
Sokes wrote:
You picked a not so fortunate article. Try "What if the Airbus A380 had been released 50 years ago?"
https://simpleflying.com/airbus-a380-50 ... ce=Bibblio

My brain hurts.... wrong on so many levels... simplistic and unresearched and no critical thought. Just pablum.
Ow.

Tugg

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:20 pm
by KlimaBXsst
Sokes wrote:
You picked a not so fortunate article. Try "What if the Airbus A380 had been released 50 years ago?"
https://simpleflying.com/airbus-a380-50 ... ce=Bibblio


I must have missed this one! Thanks.

The journalism, of the last 15-25 years has really deteriorated if we can call this Journalism, rather than a clickbait ad or blog.

My go to has traditionally been Aviation Week and Space Technology for years. However it seems increasingly only “online” at the libraries now.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:37 pm
by usflyer msp
That is the state of journalism nowadays. Very little research or verification of information is done -- it has become a race to beat the blogs for scoops and it is mandatory to write headlines in a salacious/inaccurate way to attract clicks.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:44 pm
by Ishrion
I had to e-mail them to correct this article because there were TONS of incorrect things:
https://simpleflying.com/american-airli ... mesterdam/

This is what I e-mailed them:
Correction needed:
A few things incorrect in this:

1. The title makes it sound like this is the first time American Airlines will use the 787 to Amsterdam. However, the first 787 flight to Amsterdam will be this month on the Philadelphia to Amsterdam route.

2. The image of “ Reverse herringbone seats on American Airlines 787-9. Photo: American Airlines” is incorrect. That image shows the 787-8 or “Zodiac Concept D” business class NOT found on American’s Boeing 787-9. American’s 787-9 features the Collins Aerospace Super Diamond seat.

3. “ Both aircraft have the new American Airlines premium economy seats. These are in a 2-4-2 configuration that lets couples sit together on the sides and families all in one in the middle.”
The 777-200ER’s PE is arranged in a 2-4-2. However, the 787-9’s is arranged in a 2-3-2.

“ Every seat on both planes has power ports, but only the 777-200ER has USB power at every seat.”
...No... Every seat in American’s 787-9 features USB power ports. In Business, it’s found in a storage compartment. In Economy Class, it’s found under the personal entertainment screen.


A few hours later there will still inaccuracies so I e-mailed them again with this:

"There are 24 seats on both aircrafts seat maps, but for some reason, 3 seats are unlisted on the Boeing 787 seat maps online."
- No... there are only 21 Premium Economy seats on the Boeing 787-9. They are not "unlisted".

2. "whilst the Boeing 787 has them in a 3-3-3 configuration with 32 inches of pitch."
- It's 31 inches, not 32.

3. Once again - not sure if you're still editing it - the title "American Airlines Schedules The Boeing 787 To Amsterdam" makes it sound like this is the first time American is scheduling the 787 to Amsterdam, which it is not the first time as the first American 787 flight to Amsterdam begins this month from Philadelphia. Title should be changed to something like "American Airlines Schedules The Boeing 787 From Dallas/Fort Worth To Amsterdam" to avoid confusion


If you look at the article, they ignored my second e-mail.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:50 pm
by hagela
I've just made it a point to ignore their articles. If a title grabs my attention, I'll search it and pull up a better source for the news.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 6:08 pm
by MIflyer12
Pudelhund wrote:
It’s a website written by robots, what do you expect? It’s clickbait for children.


I don't know how their articles are brought to your attention but I see them on Google News feeds. Google really could do a lot better in this. Simple Flying's stuff is worthless - it's not just that pieces are written for reading levels at a USA Today standard, they are poorly researched, uninformed, and generally add nothing on the clickbait topic.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 6:37 pm
by whywhytee
Yeah, I’ve noticed this too! Some authors are better than others but most of the time the articles are just garbage.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:13 pm
by JohanTally
MIflyer12 wrote:
Pudelhund wrote:
It’s a website written by robots, what do you expect? It’s clickbait for children.


I don't know how their articles are brought to your attention but I see them on Google News feeds. Google really could do a lot better in this. Simple Flying's stuff is worthless - it's not just that pieces are written for reading levels at a USA Today standard, they are poorly researched, uninformed, and generally add nothing on the clickbait topic.


Google News Feed is where I typically see them and clearly they are not being vetted to say the least

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:16 pm
by airportugal310
Wouldn't be shocked at all if the author was a user on here, taking whatever random ideas show up in some of these threads, and then making them into articles on that site. Stranger things have happened

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:29 pm
by aemoreira1981
That is why I generally would need to have at least Leeham News confirmation.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:23 pm
by CV990A
airportugal310 wrote:
Wouldn't be shocked at all if the author was a user on here, taking whatever random ideas show up in some of these threads, and then making them into articles on that site. Stranger things have happened


They read like some of the thread starters I've seen here. I'm also a fan of their 'What happened to XYZ Airlines Airbus 737 fleet?' articles.

Their stuff shows up in my internal corporate news feed almost every day at work. I usually click and read them to start my day off with a laugh...

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:23 pm
by CostaDelSol90
Also, and I know this isn’t a big issue, but often their reporting is filled with grammatical errors. I’m no grammar nazi, and I certainly am no writer, but even I find it jarring at times.

To be honest I use it like twitter, find out something’s happened via the website then look it up somewhere else.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:42 pm
by Breathe
In the era of battling "fake news" I'm surprised Google allow them to be indexed as a news source on their news feed. Perhaps nobody has complained about them and their constant inaccuracies?

The whole site looks like its run by a bunch of Aviation enthusiasts

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:46 pm
by jbs2886
I've also been frustrated with their articles - largely the hyperbole and drama in every article. I think its a few aviation enthusiasts that started a website, not professionals.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:51 pm
by berari
One of the worst sources.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:03 pm
by T4thH
Oh, I have to say, I really like them...and I really like to read especially the comment section. So often, I do not read the article, just only the comments. And come on, not all of the articles are bad...most are even worse. But I want to laugh...and this is a good joke page.

Regular, I just use a Simple Flying story as start and than I try to find the original sources. Or I use the links in the article.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:03 pm
by FiscAutTecGarte
Mark my word... Some day the Discovery Channel is going to launch an Aviation News Hour or some such thing... and we will all cringe...

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:15 pm
by ITSTours
Well, look at the title of the website. It is indeed Simple Flying. Easy reads.
I do see too much oversimplification and baseless predictions though.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:12 pm
by usflyer msp
This is the worst one yet.
https://simpleflying.com/american-airli ... ican-crew/

It starts off well and then goes far off the rails. Somehow AA gets bashed for taking 43 years to get an all Jamaican flight crew on a flight. Hello, it's called American Airlines for a reason. I would not expect that Jamaican national crews are particularly common at AA and even then they don't roster flights based upon ethnicity.

Dumb article.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:35 pm
by Runway28L
airportugal310 wrote:
Wouldn't be shocked at all if the author was a user on here, taking whatever random ideas show up in some of these threads, and then making them into articles on that site. Stranger things have happened

That, or a bunch of aviation enthusiasts on Instagram (which has become a more toxic place that some of the threads on here).

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:56 pm
by boeingbus
PEOPLE, it's a free site lol. You want quality reporting you need to pay it. I have a theory, Airbus is supporting these folks...lol because I find their articles very biased to favor Airbus. Even the comments are so over the top anti-boeing and are not accurate.

Re: Simple Flying's inaccurate aviation articles

Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:15 pm
by A320FlyGuy
Someone published an article about the A380 being special because it has 2 galley lifts. Somewhere, my grandfather is spinning in his grave as his beloved L-1011 had 2...long before the White Elephant of Toulouse.