Re: JAA certification of Boeing 737NG

Date:         17 May 98 00:43:04 
From:         jtarver@tminet.com (Tarver Engineering)
Organization: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com
References:   1 2 3
View raw article
  or MIME structure

On 04 May 98 02:20:34 , malc@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir) wrote:

>On 26 Apr 98 03:44:25 , jtarver@tminet.com (Tarver Engineering) caused to
>appear as if it was written:
>
>>>As a follow-up to the recent discussion of JAA certification of the Next
>>>Generation Boeing 737s, in which accusations that the JAA had refused to
>>>certify the 737-700 were refuted, readers may wish to note that the JAA has
>>>now certified the 737-800 as well. See
>
>>Why are you changing the subject?
>
>Given that the subject is the certification of B737NGs, I find it hard to
>agree that a statement that both the -700 and -800 have been certified is a
>different subject!

As this thread has taken a month to get three posts in I can not blame
you for not seeing the subject change.

In the WSJ Woodard claimed that the doors would not change and that 12
feet could be cut off the fuselage to fix the problem.

>>It is now obvious that Boeing has
>>no intention of making larger over wing exit doors.
>
>True.  They instead created a exit system that opened significantly faster
>than the traditional mechanism, and persuaded the JAA that what counts is
>not some numbers on a requirements document, but how quickly you can
>evacuate the aircraft...

I think that in service experience with the common cross section of
the Boeing single aisle should have counted for far more than a
computer simulation.

The original post centered around the drop in sales of 737s in Europe
during the JAA/FAA certification process.  I see the two as related
and the other poster did not.

John