Date: 03 Mar 98 03:13:15 From: Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) Organization: Concentric Internet Services References: 1 2 3 4
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1998.367@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Niels Sampath <email@example.com> wrote: >In article <airliners.1998.276@ohare.Chicago.COM> firstname.lastname@example.org "C. Marin Faure" writes: >>I was told today that as of right now, the dispatch reliability of >>Southwest's 737-700s is 100 percent. This won't last, of course, but it's >>an impressive way to introduce a new plane. > >Not -quite- as impressive as your company memo may make it seem. If it >were a -completely- `new' plane , yes. But you can't sell it by >promoting its commonalities with older 737s and ease of fitting in with >older 737 ops and maint. and then claim it as being an impressive `new' >plane. A new wing and derivatives of a proven engine are unlikely to be >the cause of any problems or bugs when attached to many proven systems >not mention the 30 year old general airframe design. Plus, it was >delayed into service entry by a factor of months allowing plenty of time >to prepare. So a perfectly smooth, if delayed, entry, but not that >`impressive'. Being a derivative does not mean it will have few introduction problems. For example, it wasn't a very smooth introduction for the B747-400. Also, you may want to check R-R's Trent 700 and 800 in-service data. Both are derivative engines. Yet, both have, I believe, the highest inflight shutdown rate, lowest dispatch reliability rate, and the most unscheduled engine removals.