USVI-On-Line

Sounds like alls well that ends well..always pretty scary though.... this is the flight we take..

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP1707bc9 ... f014a.html

Yikes! Our favorite flight as well - thankfully there were no injuries and everyone made it to STT eventually!

That kind of thing can happen on any flight. That is why they make us listen to that safety briefing before every flight. The reason they were able to manage that incident so well is the training and equipment they have in place.

JIM

There were a lot of unhappy people in the terminal at STT yesterday because this caused the return leg, from STT to Boston to be delayed - as of three hours or so by the time we boarded our flight to MIA.

Just an unfortunate luck of the draw you get with traveling sometimes...

Its been a few years since we've taken it, but the equipment AA runs on that JFK - STT morning NS flight always seemed older than dirt and in fact we have sat on the tarmac while "repairs" were made.

You know the kind of plane I am talking about - looks kinda worn inside, has the big old video monitors, and kind of creaks and groans a lot during take off and landing - the kind of aircraft that makes you count and memorize the number of rows to the exits lol.

Ditto! That's the flight we usually take also. I guess we'll have to see what the inspection results are and hope general inspections are increased, if needed. Glad the passengers all are okay and continued on to STT. Sorry for the delay on the STT -Boston return but understandable.

jmq wrote:Its been a few years since we've taken it, but the equipment AA runs on that JFK - STT morning NS flight always seemed older than dirt and in fact we have sat on the tarmac while "repairs" were made.

You know the kind of plane I am talking about - looks kinda worn inside, has the big old video monitors, and kind of creaks and groans a lot during take off and landing - the kind of aircraft that makes you count and memorize the number of rows to the exits lol.

I think Delta takes the planes that AA no longer thinks meet that criteria and runs them to STT for several more years.


JIM

It was a 757, there are a lot of old ones still flying, they definitely moan and groan alot but I don't recall too many accidents with them?

I know this Boston - STT flight was AA and different equipment, but just a few comments about the 737s that Southwest flys.

I saw quotes from industry people about how SW "really pounds their eguipment" referring to how they are famous for their extremely lean logistics i.e. running the min amount of planes the max amount of time and very quick (industry leading) turn around time so that their planes spend very little time sitting idle. This makes their planes rack up "cycles" (# of takeoffs and landings) very quickly.

It must be a challenge for the preventive maintainence (PM) to keep up. But it also makes you wonder if THAT level of high cycle logistics and the wear and tear associated with that (frequency of expansion and contraction of the fuselage etc.) were considered when the 737 was designed and PM schedule was drawn up.

I mean you and I putting X miles on a car is different than a police car or NYC cab running 24/7 putting X miles on a car, even if the manufacturers PM is followed to a T. I think cars sold to police and cab fleets have heavier duty components to accomodate the heavier use patterns and I suppose you have to assume that the short range 737s that SW uses were built for this.

Indulgent/rambling thoughts over now...