>Have we lost our minds (again)?Everybody here has :-lolAndr

Real pilots all act crazy when they're on the ground. We can't cope with the "high pressure" at sea level. At least Bob's got the advantage of going up into the Andes for relief. Besides, I'd rather have him at the controls than some "wire":+

777 (MSN 27109) being scrapped. read it on Anet a few months ago. ex british airways then Khalifa Airways then Varig.here is an article -http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/...first-time.htmlyou can also search the pictures and forums at Anet.--

"I also use the term US Scareways, Scare America, and US Scare Force. As well as Humana HealthScare and KinderScare."Boy, we could launch a long thread on this one. I often use "Southwurst" (one of my favorite airlines actually) and "Northworst". But my favorite is a local one, the "Tempe Tweets", which is what we used to call the AZ Cardinals before their move to Glendale. Even though they escaped that title, their new stadium was adopted by the University of Phoenix. Now the stadium has the cute little nickname "U.....P" stadium. Anyway, just adding levity to the thread. Bob, if you ever fly a Gulfstream into Glendale, AZ I'd love to see it :)-John

>777 (MSN 27109) being scrapped. read it on Anet a few months>ago. ex british airways then Khalifa Airways then Varig.>>here is an article ->>http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/...first-time.html>>you can also search the pictures and forums at Anet.>>-->The 772A in question is being scrapped, not becuase of its condition but becuase it's a 777-200. The 772A is not as desirable in the lease/re-sale 777 market and therefore is worth more in parts than as a whole. Using it as an analogue to the worn out A320's being scrapped is not really comparing the situations of each type. That being said, as more 772A's become surplus, they too will probably see the same fate. Once the 772ER's and up start getting the axe, then you know they are being scrapped due to condition.Cheers,JohnBoeing 727/737 & Lockheed C-130/L-100 Mechanichttp://www.sstsim.com/images/team/JR.jpgwww.SSTSIM.com

>The 772A in question is being scrapped, not becuase of its>condition but becuase it's a 777-200. The 772A is not as>desirable in the lease/re-sale 777 market and therefore is>worth more in parts than as a whole. Using it as an analogue>to the worn out A320's being scrapped is not really comparing>the situations of each type. That being said, as more 772A's>become surplus, they too will probably see the same fate. Once>the 772ER's and up start getting the axe, then you know they>are being scrapped due to condition.>>>Cheers,>>John>>Boeing 727/737 & Lockheed C-130/L-100 Mechanic>http://www.sstsim.com/images/team/JR.jpg>www.SSTSIM.comthe statement is almost true.I friend of mine, give me the information that, VRD was so problematic that the cost of the fix (or like he said, if they TRY to fix) will be a lot more than the possible return of this kind of investment. So, the owner decide to scrape the plane.During the time the VRD was in VARIG fleet, it was the most problematic aircraft in the entire operational fleet (during the time it was operational, of course)Is a sad view and a sad info, but in the actual world, profit is more important.

>>or the 11 year old 777 (MSN 27109) being scrapped.>>Really? That's gotta be an interesting story. Do tell us.Maybe he was referring to this sad topic: http://www.airliners.net/discussions/gener...d.main/3172780/As far as I understand though, it has only been scrapped because no other than a scrap yard wanted to buy that plane.

Amen, Andr

...>But then again, if one takes life too seriously, one misses>out all the fun. I'll be rather out of my mind, thank you very>much. Flying airbusses, boeings, mad dogs and whatnot with>that silly TIR hat on my head, squinting at coloured pixels on>the screen. Do I look silly? To most, yes. But who cares......>regards,>JureMy sentiments exactly, great post!Roll on that warm, fuzzy feeling, be it in a simulated Airbus, Boeing, or whatever!Andrew

Wasn`t the first Triple 7 scrapped just the other day? That`ll be 12 years! {Edited - just read further down the thread and noticed this has been well covered - I`ll get me coat!}Seriously, the A320 (real world not FS) has proven to be a worthy competitor to the 737. Given the demands placed on both in terms of reliability/utilisation rates and operating costs they are both stunningly effective pieces of engineering. CheersJames

>>>or the 11 year old 777 (MSN 27109) being scrapped.>>>>Really? That's gotta be an interesting story. Do tell us.>>Maybe he was referring to this sad topic:>http://www.airliners.net/discussions/gener...d.main/3172780/>>As far as I understand though, it has only been scrapped>because no other than a scrap yard wanted to buy that plane.And that's because it's a 777-200 non-ER version and airlines don't want it when they can get ER versions.A.net can be an interesting and informative place but one has to pick through the uninformed and irrelevant junk in a lot of threads, including that one.Cheers,JohnBoeing 727/737 & Lockheed C-130/L-100 Mechanichttp://www.sstsim.com/images/team/JR.jpgwww.SSTSIM.com

>>The 772A in question is being scrapped, not becuase of its>>condition but becuase it's a 777-200. The 772A is not as>>desirable in the lease/re-sale 777 market and therefore is>>worth more in parts than as a whole. Using it as an analogue>>to the worn out A320's being scrapped is not really>comparing>>the situations of each type. That being said, as more 772A's>>become surplus, they too will probably see the same fate.>Once>>the 772ER's and up start getting the axe, then you know they>>are being scrapped due to condition.>>>>>>Cheers,>>>>John>the statement is almost true.>>I friend of mine, give me the information that, VRD was so>problematic that the cost of the fix (or like he said, if they>TRY to fix) will be a lot more than the possible return of>this kind of investment. So, the owner decide to scrape the>plane.>>During the time the VRD was in VARIG fleet, it was the most>problematic aircraft in the entire operational fleet (during>the time it was operational, of course)>>Is a sad view and a sad info, but in the actual world, profit>is more important.I find it difficult to comprehend that an aircraft that's only 11 years old has had that much beat out of it. That's a conveinient excuse for those that don't understand the economics of why an airliner gets parted out. I can see if it's due for a major 'C' or heavy 'D' check, it's worth more in parts than the cost of the check. This is probably why people think that it's too costly to fix when in fact it's the cost of the major check behind this decision.Anyway, this topic isn't relevant to this thread so that's the last I'll say.Cheers,JohnBoeing 727/737 & Lockheed C-130/L-100 Mechanichttp://www.sstsim.com/images/team/JR.jpgwww.SSTSIM.com

Bob,I agree completely. There does seem to be a bit of aggression in the industry with this one.The other thing that really irritates me is the 'designed for the training industry' type comments that often find their way into marketing blurb. Yeah right!As bit of a cheap shot, RealityXP still haven't managed to provide a realistic Turn Coordinator nor a proper ADF! Their stuff is by and large good, but the devil (realism) is in the detail and the detail is often omitted.

Yes, this never ceases to amaze me....Airbus use composite materials for years and get accused of building plastic aircraft.Boeing launch the 787 citing composite materials as the way forward and it's the greatest thing since sliced bread?Not sure I understand the logic there.......

>Real pilots all act crazy when they're on the ground. We>can't cope with the "high pressure" at sea level. At least>Bob's got the advantage of going up into the Andes for relief.>Besides, I'd rather have him at the controls than some>"wire":+ At this point in time, FBW systems still require a pilot to be present so don't worry too much..;-)