Delta flight 339, 3/28/22

Same, well sort of. We were driving across the GW bridge and it went right over us while crossing back into the city. Not being from there we just thought, huh that plane looks low... We saw the news 30 minutes later. Turns out that was rather low.

 

Agreed. Depends on the definition of "better". The B52 is the Swiss army knife of bombers. It does a lotta missions. We definitely don't have anything better than that for that use.

 

The problem with the “relic” is there is nothing offered by any manufacturer that can perform like the 757 for its market.

 

First time I flew a 757, they stood that thing on it's tail like it was on full afterburner (think it was out of MDW). Couldn't believe a passenger plane could be that quick.

 

@Yzasserina Hell yeah we want to hear it.....spill da beans!

 

If I knew I'd survive, hell yeah, I'm with you.

 

I want nothing to do with flights where something goes wrong if I’m not sitting in an ejection seat.

 

It's kind of like saying I wouldn't mind having a Marquezesque highside as long as I walk away from it.

 

Most of the airplanes with ejection seats tends to glide like bricks when the power is off. And since I'm not sure I would have ever voluntarily bailed out of an airplane, I think I would have rather taken my chances with the kinds that don't have ejection seats.

 

An airliner doesn’t glide well enough to land most places. Much prefer Martin Baker, though that is not a guarantee either.

 

Wait, what? I think you are underestimating how far they can glide. Now it's entirely possible that depending on where you are, you might still be too far away from a suitable landing spot but the gliding isn't the problem.

 

It's always been my understanding that most pressurized craft get retired due to concerns over stress fatigue from so many cycles of pressurization. I have no idea if that translates into mucho maintenance for the BUFF, or if they have a better ratio of pressure cycles to hours flown.

 

Huge pucker factor but it sounds like everyone is OK.

 

I agree they can glide a long ways. They’ll likely glide right to the scene of the accident! They are not meant to land on places other than nice smooth runways! And, we are assuming that whatever goes wrong it can still glide and remain control. I’ll take my NACES!

 

It's more about the number of cycles then the years or hours flown. Airliners take off and land all the time because they lose money while on the ground.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TACA_Flight_110

 

Touche’! But good thing that same thing didn’t happen on departure with a full load of fuel!

 

Right, because ejecting close to the ground is so much more attractive.

 

With the 6000' runways at MDW, they HAVE to do that. Otherwise they end up on a house.
I don't think they allow 57's to fly out of there any more. I've been on a few that have, but those takeoffs were always thrilling.

 

That sounds more like a noise abatement procedure than a safety issue.