Sailorman wrote:Do my homework on the 737? I worked on the 737, did you? (and the 727, and the 747) I can't seem to find anything that shows 737 tails falling off during takeoff/landing like the Airbus in NY city did

http://www.sptimes.com/News/091300/Worl ... ce_a.shtml

The key word here is "suspected culprit" in regards to one valve. The government and Boeing have the flight data recorders and still state "suspected culprit. The valve fix may or may not be the answer, but better pilot training is.(as stated by Boeing) In the NY City Airbus crash there were eye witness's that the TAIL FELL OFF!

The NTSB and FAA do extensive research in crash's, like the Alaska Air MD80 that had its tail malfunction due to a jack screw not being lubricated. In the Alaska air/MD80 crash report it was conclusively the jackscrew, and not some "suspected culprit." In the "suspected" valve malfunction in the 737 pilot error was brought up and not denied by the NTSB/FAA.

While working on the early 737's we encountered only one real problem and that was when the plane was put though violent port/starboard and up/down maneuvers the fuel cells leaked, but that was an easy fix. During the violent maneuvers, the 737's TAIL DIDN'T FALL OFF! Probably because it didn't have to fly through a violent Cumulonimbus cloud/storm when Indonesian Air-Traffic controllers second-guessed an on the scene pilot.

Sailorman wrote: Probably because it didn't have to fly through a violent Cumulonimbus cloud/storm when Indonesian Air-Traffic controllers second-guessed an on the scene pilot.

Why do you keep blaming the Air Traffic controller? Clearly, there was traffic and they simply don't allow other aircraft to enter each others air space. That's why they call it "controller". No second guessing the pilot that I've read nor derived from the various stories.

" Indonesian air-traffic, I need to divert due to severe turbulence at this altitude on my radar"
" denied"
Later:
"Airsasia are you there? Unending silence.

That's way. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, its probably a duck. Lazy Indonesian air-traffic screwed up, sent them though a Thunderhead/Cumulonimbus and its being covered up. Got to save Face even though a bunch of people died. Its not like this route was so full that a couple of planes couldn't change altitude/direction to make sure all were safe from catastrophic turbulence. The truth is out there if you only look.

Sailorman wrote:" Indonesian air-traffic, I need to divert due to severe turbulence at this altitude on my radar"
" denied"
Later:
"Airsasia are you there? Unending silence.

That's way. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, its probably a duck. Lazy Indonesian air-traffic screwed up, sent them though a Thunderhead/Cumulonimbus and its being covered up. Got to save Face even though a bunch of people died. Its not like this route was so full that a couple of planes couldn't change altitude/direction to make sure all were safe from catastrophic turbulence. The truth is out there if you only look.

Since at least you and I are interested in this, why don't you post a link or two outlining the "lazy" controllers culpability in the tragedy? I have searched and found nothing. Your conclusion is baseless and not shared by the world at large.

I remembered the Boeing 737 rudder matter, searched it, provided a link which confirmed all the aircraft were re-engineered or fixed or preventive measure taken. I saw a lawyer many years ago, not some ambulance chaser but a real lawyer (in as much as one can exist in the USA) tell the world he would not fly on a 737. Doesn't make him right or an idiot, just stuck with me until this day and now we are discussing it. Ain't life great? Cheers mate. I'm going out for Eggs Benedict which I've not enjoyed in some 20 years. Hope this new place is for real......a good chain outfit has introduced it. I hope they know how to prepare it but it's only money to me.

Sailorman wrote:" Indonesian air-traffic, I need to divert due to severe turbulence at this altitude on my radar"

Just curious....maybe you know....does the turbulence show up on the aircraft's radar(avionics) or as I had assumed, the storms ahead?

The co-pilot was in command and was French so perhaps just a translation issue?

CBs/Cumulonimbus/turbulence shows up on airplane onboard radar and I believe the new airplanes have software built in to bring this to the attention to the on board pilot.

Attorney saying he wouldn't fly in a 737? Sounds like he was part of the litigation, as in vested interest in $$$$$$. In America there is one attorney for every 365 citizens, so they will do/say anything to get press. With attorneys its (in order), money, power, control.

Have flown on many, many 737s and worked on building them for Boeing and never a problem. Its the most popular commercial aircraft model ever built.