I haven't seen it yet but are there any confirmed reports of FTers on board?
Originally Posted by
mfirst
for landing this "heavy" (i.e. full of fuel - and thank you for not dumping it over my house - and the urban denver suburbs... which is another question....why not dump?) 777.....
-m
dumping fuel takes time, when there is a fire the priority is to get the plane on the ground. Overweight landings are completely safe, however they do require additional maintenance checks after they occur (which shouldn't be a consideration the pilots think about)
Originally Posted by
jbeechen2
N772UA is 26.3 years old. Isn't it time to think about retiring some of these old 772's? I'm a United regular and these planes seem beat up and very tired when you get on them or look at them on the ground. I know maintenance is great but after a few of the same types of failures wouldnt it be advisable to retire these? I for one and going to avoid jumping on these and see if I can find a seat on the 737-Max's when they start coming back online.
Aircraft are aged in cycles not years, a 10 year old WN 737 probably has more cycles than this aircraft. In addition, as many have pointed out this was an engine issue and we don't yet know the age of the engine.
I actually disagree on them looking tired, if I out a brand new 777 and a 25 year old one just out of a D-Check next to each other you couldn't tell the difference
Originally Posted by
socalflying
I would think there would be scant opportunity to move from a 777 to a MAX on any given route, as I imagine the total number of routes that use both types is approaching zero.
IAH-DEN may the the one route where this is possible. Possibly also SFO-HNL in the near future
Originally Posted by
ORDnHKG
The A350 was ordered by PMUA to replace 744 but not 772, since it didn't happen, UA really have no intention to take any but just push back and push back the delivery date
UA has used the 77W as a good replacement for the 744 (350 seats vs 374 seats and more cargo capacity on the 77W). I do agree that UA won't take delivery of the A350 but that doesn't mean they didn't find a replacement.
Originally Posted by
entropy
I don't think there's a problem (per se) with an older frame, exterior or interior. In this case, it seems that one or more of the fan blades had subsurface cracks that weren't detected. Delta maintains old planes just fine, in fact they are often better equipped and more comfortable than newer aircraft.
The AD that the FAA put out makes sense ... but these kinds of problems happen, intermittently, so its not something new or unique.
If the frame itself was damaged, I think they ought to part the rest of her out, not like they'll need full capacity any time soon.
N773UA had the same issue going into HNL in 2018 and the aircraft was repaired, I don't think 3 years later UA would change their opinion, especially if they expect to get 5 more years out of this bird.