It’s Christmas Eve and my first officer’s seat has a problem. There is a lever down below his left hip which allows the seat to recline back and forth, and that lever isn’t adjusting to the perfect spot. We discovered this at the beginning of our flying day in Buffalo, NY, a city without company maintenance support.
His seat is stuck at an incline and it will not raise forward again. The plan for that day is for the first officer to fly to St Louis, Missouri, followed by my flight to Detroit and then his short hop over to Chicago’s Midway airport, where maintenance personnel can either fix or replace his seat.
He Said It’s Not a Problem. Let’s Press For Now.
We decide that the seat is safe and usable. We takeoff with our holiday travelers bound for the Midwest. The only challenge to our circumstance is that my first officer is about 5-foot, 4-inches tall and carries a plump belly. He’s what we call a 4 X 4: four feet high and four feet wide.
The flight to St Louis is uneventful and to compensate for the reclined seat, my first officer pulls his seat up a little closer to his control yoke. His landing in St Louis is smooth and as he decelerates, I take over the controls using the tiller to the left of my yoke and taxi the 737 to our assigned gate.
Just One More Leg To Go Before Christmas
Forty-five minutes later we are airborne again with 130 passengers bound for Detroit to begin their Christmas holiday. As the sun begins to set, it’s now my first officer’s “leg” and he takes off with a 737 full flight of holiday-clad travelers and their gifts bound for Grandma’s house. We descend over Lake Michigan and set up for the approach to Runway 22 Left, with the skyline of downtown Chicago brightly lit against the night sky off our right wingtip.
It’s Challenging To Land At Midway Under The Best Of Conditions
Chicago Midway Airport
Chicago Midway is known for its short runways, only a little over one mile long, when most airports boast runways of two miles long. Short runways are a challenge and don’t provide much of an opportunity for a gentle flare and smooth touchdown under the best of conditions.
It can be done, but if the plane can’t be on the ground smoothly in the first 1,500 feet of runway, then it’s time to plop it down and tell the deplaning passengers, “Go Navy!” when they ridicule a firm touchdown.
My first officer is concerned about the short runway. With his seat reclined a bit more than he’d normally have it, he moves his seat even closer to his control column, unbeknownst to me. He’s nicely aligned with Runway 22L and I see the visual glide path lights of two white and two red lights, indicating he is on the correct descent path, not too steep and not too shallow.
On Glide Path
The 737 glides over the runway threshold, pointing at a spot 1000 feet down the runway. In a normal scenario, at 30 feet above the ground the pilot gently raises the nose, known as the flare, to decrease the descent rate and prepare for touchdown.
I only see the 1000 foot aim point looming ahead with no increase in pitch or initiation of a flare. At 10 feet my only thought is, “Oh man!” as we contact the ground like an F/A-18 that grabbed the third cable.
Welcome to Midway
The aircraft landing gear is built to withstand this firm impact and it was safe but it’s not comfortable for those riding in back. We call it a “carrier landing” and have all had that embarrassing moment at one time or another.
Jolly ‘Ole St. Nick Strikes Again
The plane slows and I take over controls at 60 knots, turning slightly left on the high-speed taxiway. My first officer, aka, Santa’s Little Helper that night, sheepishly tells me, “I went to flare and the yoke hit my belly.” Only on Christmas Eve could I laugh about that landing.
Two Modified Civilian C-130s (L-100) Flew With Airline Seats, Overhead Bins, and Even Airline-Style Windows
Lockheed Martin’s C-130 is as American as apple pie. As a military airlifter, the C-130 has plied the skies since 1954. Over 2,600 C-130s have been built. The highly modified C-130J is still in production today. The Lockheed C-130 Hercules is a military workhorse. The Hercules has been a steadfast contributor transporting cargo and personnel to nearly every military conflict, humanitarian effort, and numerous other tasks like firefighting for almost 70 years.
As an avgeek, you might think that you know everything there is to know about the versitile Hercules transport aircraft. But you might be surprised to know that the C-130’s civilian counterpart, the L-100, has also operated as a full-on passenger airliner, complete with airliner seats and real airliner windows.
Rare Air: The Civilian C-130 Airliner Explored
Lockheed L-100-30 N3867X departs the Mojave Spaceport with a Tepper Aviation callsign. Image: Alan Radecki (Akradecki), CC BY-SA 3.0
A few years after the launch of the C-130, Lockheed began to explore other potential markets for their Hercules. Lockheed came up with a modified C-130 and called it the L-100. The L-100 wasn’t that much different than the C-130. It maintained the same exterior profile. There were some notable differences though.
The L-100 was slightly modified for the civilian market. It featured none of the military avionics (lacking a TACAN, UHF radios) and any defensive systems. The L-100 and the C-130 both featured Allison T56 engines. The L-100’s engines feature slight differences to conform with commercial noise and emission standards. The L-100 was designed to carry outsized cargo and personnel to austere airfields.
Big Hopes For The C-130 Airliner That Never Materialized
Lockheed had big hopes for the L-100. Lockheed assumed that the robustness of the Hercules would be attractive to airlines looking to tap into new markets. The thinking at the time was that smaller cities and municipalities with short airfields required an aircraft that could takeoff and move high volumes of cargo.
The L-100 would be able to fly up to 100 passengers with cargo to their destination. With the cargo and fuel capacity of the L-100, the Lockheed ‘airliner’ would be able to connect distant cities.
Jets and Better-Suited Aircraft Made L-100 Less Attractive To Airlines
Unfortunately, for Lockheed this strategy never really paid off. By the mid-1960s, passengers were beginning to become more accustom to the speed and comfort of jet travel. Many smaller airports expanded to accommodate larger jets.
For shorter flights, the DC-6, Convair 580, and other commuter aircraft could accomplish the mission with adequate comfort. Jets like the DC-9 and 737-200 were also hitting the market that could connect regional routes in even greater comfort.
Airlines began to institute a hub and spoke system where smaller airports were connected to a large international or regional airport for follow on travel. This made the capabilities of the L-100 less of a requirement and too much for the typical needs of an airline.
L-100 Did Sell Though In a Limited Capacity
Delta Airlines L-100. The airline operated 3 examples of the L-100 in a cargo configuration during the 1960s. Image: RuthAS CC 3.0
The L-100 did have some limited success though. Pan American World Airways placed an initial order for 12 L-100s in 1962. The airline never took delivery. Delta also operated 3 L-100 aircraft in a cargo configuration.
That Makes This Modified C-130 Airliner Even More Rare
Back in 1990, Lockheed put together a supplemental type certificate for a L-100 to operate in a full passenger configuration. The interior would feature a fully carpeted cabin with overhead bins, full size airline windows added to the fuselage, and 3 by 3 airline seats throughout the cabin.
Indonesian Airline Merpati Nusantara would become the first and only customer of the L-100-30(P). Our friends at LaJeteepress detailed these two aircraft stating “the two aircraft were purchased from Indonesia cargo operator Pelita in 1986- PK-MLS and PK-MLT. Pelita had operated the aircraft in the national transmigration program where settlers were moved to less crowded islands from Java and Bali.
LaJetee Press highlighted the Merpati L-100-30(P) in a post. Only two modified examples of this L-100 ever flew.
Despite flying for Merpati, they flew in Pelita’s colors until modification to passenger configuration at the Lockheed Aeromod Center in Greenville, SC.
PK-MLT was the first modified in 1990, with pallet mounted seats, structural strengthening, and systems modification for passenger services. Twenty-two 727 passenger windows were also fitted along with emergency exits, galleys and lavatories. The cabin was all-coach with a 3-3 and 3-2 abreast seating for 97 passengers. Baggage containers were fitted to the rear loading ramp.
PK-MLS was next to be modified in 1992 with plans for further aircraft being done by IPTN in Indonesia, but Merpati only needed two aircraft modified.”
Airline Service In an L-100-30(P) Only Lasted Five Years
By 1995, the airline began receiving the Fokker F100. The story of the C-130 as an airliner may be a lesser-known chapter in its history, but it’s a testament to the aircraft’s versatility.
General Paul Tibbets was just 30 years old in 1945 when he piloted the B-29 Enola Gay bomber on its mission to drop the atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. As an Air Force Public Affairs Specialist, in 1999, I was fortunate to hear the then 84-year-old Tibbets speak and also shake his hand at a reunion of the 509th Composite Group at Andrews Air Force Base.
Crews of Enola Gay and Other B-29 Bombers Trained for Historic Mission
Tibbets commanded the 509th in 1945 when he and his 12-man crew took off in the Enola Gay from Ushi Point Airfield on Tinian Island in the Pacific Ocean. During the reunion, the Air Force presented the Group with the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (with valor). The Air Force Association hosted the reunion.
The Crew of the B-29 Enola Gay. Col. Paul Tibbets is in center. | Image: U.S. Air Force
Close to 100 veterans from the 509th, all at least 75 years old, were at the reunion. The group had never received medals or other official recognition in all the years since 1945. This was due to security concerns, and some clearances finally lifting. The veterans listened intently as Tibbets stepped up to the podium and began to speak.
Gen. Paul Tibbets Addressed Group 54 Years After Enola Gay Mission
I admit I wondered about what Tibbets might say about the Hiroshima mission and the Enola Gay. I was curious about what he might feel, 54 years later, about dropping the first atomic bomb used in war.
With pride and firmness evident in his voice, Tibbets began by praising his men for the way they performed their duties in 1945. He said they were professional and focused during the months of training in Utah and on Tinian Island before the mission.
He continued, adding that the 509th did what it had to do and ended the war, and that no one should criticize them, despite some negative comments over the years about the destructive force of the atomic bomb. When Tibbets finished speaking, his men, some using canes and walkers, and others in wheelchairs, stood and cheered their commander.
B-29 Enola Gay about to land. | Image: U.S. Air Force
Other Members of 509th Composite Group Expressed Pride in Mission of B-29 Enola Gay
Other members of the Enola Gay crew have expressed similar feelings. Second Lt. Russell Gackenbach served as navigator on “Necessary Evil,” one of the two B-29s that flew as observation planes on the mission. During a 2017 interview with NPR, Gackenbach said, “After 73 years, I do not regret what we did that day. All war’s hell. The Japanese started the war. It was our turn to finish it.”
Mushroom cloud over Hiroshima after detonation of atomic bomb from the B-29 Enola Gay. | Image: Russell Gackenbach
Another airman on the mission was Sgt. Melvin H. Bierman. He served as tail gunner on the “Necessary Evil” and had a clear view of the mushroom cloud. According to his son, Mitchell Bierman, his father didn’t say much about the war but was proud of his service. He was convinced they had saved more lives by forcing Japan to surrender, but did regret the loss of life.”
One crew member on the mission, Capt. Robert A. Lewis, did express some remorse about the destruction from the bomb that struck Hiroshima. Lewis, who was co-pilot on the Enola Gay, wrote, “My God, what have we done?” in his journal as the aircraft flew away from the city.
Still, Lewis acknowledged the seriousness and even the necessity of the mission, later stating, “Today I’m pleased the bomb hasn’t been used again. I hope it has become a deterrent force, and maybe we won’t have so many wars.”
B-29s parked at Tinian Airfield during WWII. | Image: NATIONAL ARCHIVES & RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
For me, the opportunity to meet General Tibbets and listen as he addressed his men was a true privilege and a highlight of my career in the Air Force.
During stall testing of the 717 program (formerly the MD-95), the aircraft departed controlled flight. That’s a nice way to say that the jet stalled, rolled, and went inverted. The test pilots on board masterfully recovered the jet and survived to live another day. Here’s the video proof:
With every new aircraft type, test pilots are tasked to test the limits of aircraft. With great preparation, they meticulous plan every maneuver. The flight testing typically confirms computer analysis and helps ensure that the normal flight envelope is safe. The test pilots also test maneuvers outside of the normal envelope.
The test pilots recovered the aircraft and lived to fly another day.
This video is both fascinating and yet pretty disturbing too. We did some research and put together some details that shed some light on the highly unusual flight.
According to a comment on a similar video posted on Vimeo, the 717 was on a test flight in warning area W-291 over the Pacific off the coast of California. The particular 717 was the first off the line. The aircraft had previously experienced some unusual stall characteristics. This test was an attempt to determine why so that engineers could solve the issue.
In the video above, you can see that the pilots initiated a powered approach to stall in a climbing right bank. As the angle of attack increases, the jet appears to stall, then rapidly rolls left, and snaps inverted over a span of about 1 1/2 seconds. The test pilots were prepared. They pulled the power to idle as the speed rapidly climbed (you can probably hear Bitchin’ Betty scream “overspeed”). The crew then accepts the unusual attitude, and works to reduce the roll (most likely using a combination of rudder and the control tabs). They then pulled on the yoke to recover from the unusual attitude. After congratulating each other that they saved the jet, they gingerly returned the jet to normal flight, returned to base, and then most changed to a fresh pair of underwear.
The test pilots did many things right. While the aircraft most likely exceeded the +2.5G load limit, they limited any asymmetric forces on the jet by not attempting to ‘pull’ on the yoke while the wings were not level. Once they leveled the wings, they had to pull to return to level flight and arrest the very steep descent. They avoided the temptation to pull aggressively in order to minimize altitude loss. An aggressive pull could’ve over-G’d the aircraft further and led to a secondary stall and/or spin.
The flying days for this particular test aircraft were limited. This test aircraft was later retired and broken up. Of the 156 717s built, 99 remain flying today. The last Boeing 717 was produced in 2006.
If you are a MadDog or 717 pilot, we’d love to hear your perspective on this incident. Post your thoughts in the comments below.
Low-cost Turkish airline Pegasus Airlines placed a significant order for at least one hundred Boeing 737-10 MAX jets. After months of slow orders, this latest order is a boost for the manufacturer.
Pegasus has been loyal to the Boeing brand of aircraft since its inception 35 years ago. The reason for the large order of 737-10 jets is so the airline can ‘meet growing travel demand’.
New Wings for Pegasus
Boeing announced on Thursday that Pegasus Airlines had placed an order of at least 100 737-10 MAX aircraft. Pegasus can also exercise an option to order 100 more in the deal, for a potential of 200 aircraft in the entire order.
The 737-10 MAX is the company’s largest jet to date, with up to 230 seats and a range of 3,100 nautical miles (5,740 kilometers). This current-gen aircraft also reduces fuel use and emissions by 20% compared to previous-gen aircraft.
Pegasus Airlines CEO Güliz Öztürk had these encouraging words during the Boeing press release:
“Boeing aircraft have been an integral part of our operations since Pegasus entered the aviation industry in 1990. We are pleased to be expanding our fleet with the new Boeing 737-10 model aircraft. We continue to invest in our fleet in line with our growth targets in Türkiye and globally, and to expand our network by launching new routes.”
Boeing President and CEO Stephanie Pope also expressed her excitement on the airline’s decision to order new 737-10 MAXes.
“We have been a proud partner of Pegasus Airlines since their inception and we are excited to welcome them as the newest 737 MAX customer…We appreciate their trust in the Boeing team and we look forward to delivering on the 737-10 and its promise of greater efficiency, versatility and reliability.”
This new order brings the total number of 737 MAX family jets on order overall to over 1,200.
Where Both Companies Currently Stand
Pegasus is looking to receive new aircraft for connections all over Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Pegasus also has nine Boeing 737-8s currently on order. From Airbus, Pegasus is waiting on six A320-200s, 46 A320-200 neos, and 57 A321-200NXes. All of the A321s on order are scheduled to be delivered to Pegasus by 2029.
In 2023, Pegasus executives claimed the airline would switch to an all-Airbus fleet and would phase out its Boeing jets.
According to Boeing’s Commercial Market Outlook, airlines based in Europe and Asia will acquire nearly 8,000 single-aisle jets by 2055.
As of September 2024, Boeing has outstanding debts of about $57.65 billion. The company has suffered financial losses for six years due to safety issues, production delays, and worker strikes. In late October, the company managed to raise $21 billion through a stock fundraising effort.
India’s most popular airline IndiGo is expanding its network to connect to more US cities beginning 18 December but not with its own metal. These additional connections are made possible thanks to an expanding codeshare partnership .
Indigo is partnering with Turkish Airlines to expand access to the American markets. Turkish airlines flies to nine US cities total, offering one of the most affordable means to travel to international destinations like Istanbul, Turkey, Mumbai, India, and Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
IndiGo To The US Via Turkish Airlines Partner
IndiGo has commenced codeshare service thanks to a growing relationship with Turkish Airlines. The low-cost Indian airline will now offer connections to Houston, Atlanta, Miami, and Los Angeles on Turkish Airlines. Each new route will connect in Istanbul.
These new routes will provide business and leisure travelers in America an affordable way to fly to India via Turkey. They also give Indian, Turkish, and other international travelers access to more American destinations aside from the more frequently connected cities of New York and San Francisco.
Each route will fly at least once daily in both directions. Miami and Houston will have an additional flight every Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday. Each city will get one more additional seasonal route in March.
On Google, these new routes are listed for booking under Turkish Airlines but not IndiGo yet. Leveraging Turkish’ codeshare network, IndiGo now connects to a total of 43 international destinations outside of India.
IndiGo’s Activity in Istanbul
IndiGo Head of Global Sales Vinay Malhotra shared these comments with members of the media regarding the new US cities:
“We are delighted to announce four additional connections to the US…under our codeshare partnership with Turkish Airlines. These new connections further enhance travel options for our customers. As we expand our global network and connect people with favored destinations, we remain committed to delivering on our promise of providing affordable, on-time, courteous, and hassle-free travel experiences across our extensive network.”
IndiGo also manages routes involving New York City, San Francisco, Boston, Chicago, and Washington DC.
On 14 December, IndiGo sent two jets to pick up almost 500 stranded passengers in Istanbul after a flight to Delhi was canceled due to a technical problem.
Retirement is near for the Air Force’s primary transport trainer jet. On Tuesday, the last T-1A Jayhawk departed Laughlin AFB for the boneyard at David Monthan Air Force Base marking completion of the divestiture of the fleet for the base. Now only the T-6A Texan II and T-38 Talon remain at the base. Now Randolph Air Force base (JBSA) and Laughlin AFB have retired their T-1As. By the end of this fiscal year, all remaining T-1A Jayhawks will be retired, marking the end of an era.
A T-1A Jayhawk parked on the flightline for a photo-op at Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas, Sept. 23, 2024. The T-1A is being sunsetted from Air Force service after more than 30 years of flying in pilot training. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Nicholas Larsen)
End of An Era For The T-1A Jayhawk and SUPT Pilot Training
The T-1A Jayhawk first entered service in 1992 at the now closed Reece Air Force Base. The slightly modified Beech 400A jet began training students in 1993 as part of an overhaul of Air Force pilot training. Prior to the introduction of the T-1A, all student pilots flew both the T-37 (later the T-6A Texan II) and T-38 jet before being assigned to a fighter, transport, or helicopter track.
The T-1A Jayhawk became a critical component of the revised Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT) program. In phase III, students tracked to transport aircraft would hone their skills in advanced navigation, crew resource management, heavy formation low levels, and the basics of air refueling. Thousands of pilots flew the T-1A Jayhawk enroute to the cockpit of jets like the C-17A Globemaster III, KC-135 Stratotanker, C-130 Hercules, and C-5 Galaxy.
Students selected for the fighter track will continue to train in the supersonic T-38 Talon. The delayed Boeing T-7 Red Hawk will eventually replace the T-38 later this decade.
T-1A Jayhawks parked on the flightline at Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas, Sept. 23, 2024. The Jayhawk has been in service with the Air Force since 1992, and now is being divested after 32 years. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Nicholas Larsen)
No Replacement for the Trainer Transport Jet
Another transport trainer aircraft will not replace the T-1A Jayhawk. Instead, the Air Force has reworked pilot training for students assigned to transport aircraft.As part of the transition to Pilot Training 2.5, students now utilize advanced virtual reality simulator training and have added transport-focused lesson like crew resource management to the syllabus. All training for transport tracked pilots will take place in the T-6A Texan II.
With hundreds of millions of people all over the world flying, that also makes even more people who are eager to find out the whereabouts of their flights. While loved ones can get phone notifications, however, the best flight-tracking apps are within reach, monitoring flights visually and in real time.
These incredible apps use satellites to track planes, and it’s great to know that most of these apps are either free or very inexpensive to use. Consider one of these six flight-tracking apps to monitor your next flight.
Best Flight-Tracking Apps – #6: PlaneFinder
PlaneFinder is one of the original tools to track flights in real time. This app offers an interactive global map, allowing users to follow flights as they crisscross the skies. The user interface is solid and it offers a number of unique features like AR mode where you can point your app at the sky and see aircraft information of the aircraft above.
PlaneFinder is available oniOS and Android via the Google Play store. The app is free but offers a premium subscription for additional features.
Currently #7 on the App Store paid travel app charts, OpenADSB is a versatile app that can connect to one of many VRS servers — even those that require passwords. Users can look up flights by searching its flight number or tapping on the plane on the radar. Each flight even features a picture of the aircraft and its airline logo.
This app is only available on iPhone and iPad. While it costs $10.99, you pay once and own it forever. To many, the price is worth it given the lack of ads and optimal performance.The real value is that you can track flights that are blocked by the FAA. The app also words with multitasking and split view features on the apple device.
Best Flight-Tracking Apps – #4: FlightStats by Cirium
Users love FlightStats for its clean interface opposed to typical apps that offer only basic menus and maps. It encourages you to simply search the route or flight name, and you can easily find the flight.
Once you select a flight, it presents all the information about the flight neatly on one page, including the flight’s trail and weather radar. Here’s one flight for example with all its details one could need.
FlightStats is available for web browsers and Android and iOS devices. Pay $2.99 monthly to unlock real-time notifications about particular flights on your smart device. Professional accounts cost $24.99 monthly and give users history of any plane, route, and airport.
Best Flight-Tracking Apps – #3: Flighty
Flighty App, available on IOS and Android
This award-winning app touts up-to-the-minute tracking that’s faster than competitor apps. Flighty also comes with ‘industry-first features’ such as explanations for delays, privacy for friends and family who are using the app. Featuring an appealing flight map, this app can also locate grounded planes within the airport and connect with virtual calendars for scheduling.
Flighty is available on iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and Mac computers. The app comes in a monthly subscription, yearly subscription, or one-time payment of $249. A free trial is also available with no credit card required.
An Android version is currently in the works. Those who are eager to have the app on an Android phone can join a waitlist and get updates on the version’s development.
If you’re looking for an affordable option, FlightAware is very popular and contains more data for free than what other apps may charge for. Like FlightStats, you can look up any flight such as this one and get a whole page of details that look clean and easy to navigate. Unlike FlightStats, you can also get data for cancellations and delays by airport or airline.
FlightAware is available on Apple and Android devices as well as web browsers. Signing up is free, while we recommend avoiding paid tiers ranging from $45 to $150 per month. The free offerings suffice for most users.
This award-winning app arguably can track the most flights at a time, even jets taxiing on the ground, smaller aircraft, and helicopters. FlightRadar24 offers a simply interface: One big map along with a search box for tracking particular flights. With a paid subscription, users can also overlay various weather settings such as rain clouds, lightning strikes, and turbulence.
FlightRadar24 is available for web browsers and iOS and Android devices. Though a free version exists, a Silver subscription plan eliminates ads, unlocks weather radars, and saves flights for the past 90 days. Gold comes with even more premium features and saves flights for up to a year. Both premium tiers have free, seven-day trials.
After Spirit Airlines filed for bankruptcy last month, the airline is now making moves to reduce debt and expenditures. This included slashing the payroll budget and selling a part of their Airbus fleet.
The proposed sale of aircraft was first announced shortly after bankruptcy. The plan was recently given legal approval to move forward.
’23 Skidoo’ for 23 Airbuses
Fort Lauderdale, Florida-based aircraft leasing company GA Telesis has announced it has received approval to purchase 23 Airbus aircraft from Spirit Airlines. The decision was made at the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.
The deal was first announced on 24 October, 2024, though a judge had to review it because all major transactions require bankruptcy court approval. The judge approved a sale of the first five aircraft on 7 December. The judge then approved the remaining 18 aircraft yesterday.
A Spirit Airlines Airbus A321-271N at the gate | IMAGE: Spirit Airlines via Facebook
The Airbus aircraft involved in the transaction include 15 A320s and eight A321s. The press release states the sale will close “over a specific period”. This will allow the airline to speed up its restructuring phase and clear its debts faster.
As of this writing, both parties are discussing the timeline for Spirit’s first deliveries to GA Telesis.
GA Telesis Head of Leasing and Trading Marc Cho expressed his excitement on the recent approval of the sale:
“We are thrilled that the court delivered a conclusive decision on such an expedited timeline…This approval underscores the collaborative efforts of all parties involved, and we look forward to closing this transaction swiftly and supporting Spirit as it executes its restructuring plan.”
More on the Airbus Sale from Spirit
Details on the Airbus sale surfaced back in October. The deal is worth $519 million and consists of some of the airline’s older Airbus aircraft.
From this deal, Spirit plans to free up $225 million in liquidity. The airline reportedly has outstanding debts of over $1 billion going into 2025.
A Spirit Airlines A320-271N departs from Harry Reid International Airport (LAS) | IMAGE: Spirit Airlines via Facebook
To further free up money for debt, the airline has also furloughed and demoted hundreds of pilots already and has announced even more furloughs for early next year.
Spirit’s plan is to free up $80 million in labor costs for the upcoming year. The airline will also plan to retire all of its Airbus A319s this January, which will help to reduce ongoing expenses.
Boeing and McDonnell Douglas agreed to a merger in December, 1996. At the time, Phil Condit, then CEO of Boeing, called the acquisition a “historic moment in aviation and aerospace”. The past 28 years have proven that it was definitely a historic moment–just not in the way Boeing originally envisioned.
Boeing’s Merger With McDonnell Douglas Came From a Position of Commercial Strength
The first United 777-200A departs during testing. Photo by Solitude [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Back in the late 1990s, Boeing was a forced to be reckoned with on the commercial side of the business. They had recently introduced the Boeing 777 aircraft that had set records for efficiency in the long haul market. Boeing also introduced a much upgraded 737, the 737 Next Generation (NG).
The upgraded 737NG featured a new wing that turned a single-aisle jet with the range of a few hours into a coast to coast money maker. Boeing also enjoyed continued success with a solid lineup of 757, 767, and the refreshed 747-400. Boeing was the dominant aircraft maker of its time. Airbus was competitive but a clear second to Boeing in the markets where it mattered most, particularly North America and Asia.
McDonnell Douglas Was Flailing
Delta MD-90. Image: Wikipedia CC 2.0
By contrast, McDonnell Douglas was a struggling commercial aircraft maker in the mid-1990s. The airline hadn’t designed a clean-sheet aircraft since the 1970s, some 20 years before its merger with Boeing. Every commercial offering was a derivative of a previous aircraft. Their three-engined MD-11 was a rehash of the DC-10. The MD-90 and forthcoming MD-95 were both double derivatives of the venerable DC-9.
McDonnell Douglas lacked the capital to invest in an upgraded wing that would have made their narrow body offerings more efficient and capable of flying at higher altitudes. Thus, their final offerings of the MD-90 and MD-95 had trouble competing with the more modern and capable 737NG and A320, particularly on longer routes across the country.
Paper Airplanes Abounded at McDonnell Douglas
McDonnell Douglas proposed the MD-12. It was nothing more than a paper proposal. Image: McDonnell Douglas
Due to slower sales and less R&D capital, McDonnell Douglas lacked the financial means to build any new clean sheet aircraft. Instead, McDonnell Douglas focused on incremental improvements and longshot projects like the UDF or unducted fan on an MD-80 that never materialized.
They occasionally pushed press releases for new offerings like the giant double decker MD-12 (that looked suspiciously like the A380 Airbus later released), but none of them panned out either. Each of these ‘Hail Mary’ designs were ambitious but lacked the financial capital and airline interest to make them reality.
Boeing’s McDonnell Douglas Merger: A Strategic Move For McDonnell Douglas
The Boeing logo after a merger with McDonnell Douglas. Image: Boeing
By 1996, McDonnell Douglas’ defense and space divisions were the only profitable segments. These assets were the real prize for Boeing. McDonnell Douglas had built an admirable military portfolio with the C-17, F/A-18 Super Hornet, F-15, and an array of space technology.
Boeing absorbed McDonnell Douglas’ commercial assets, favoring its own stronger portfolio. Yet, following the merger, an unexpected shift occurred: Boeing’s design and innovation approach began to resemble McDonnell Douglas’ playbook.
Post-Merger: Boeing Adopts McDonnell Douglas’ Approach
Something big changed in the years after Boeing made the acquisition/merger. Boeing’s commercial side somehow morphed into operating like McDonnell Douglas, particularly from a design and innovation aspect.
There are many factors to the reasons why Boeing has struggled. Stock buy backs, the brain drain of engineers, and a culture led by accountants are all common areas of focus that describe Boeing’s decline. While there are a number of stories on the internet that focus on the business, culture, and management aspects of Boeing (here, here, here.and here as quality examples) few have delved into the design and commercial roadmap aspect of Boeing’s offerings and compared it to how it mirrors McDonnell Douglas’ playbook from the 1980s and 1990s.
Sonic Cruiser Was Boeing’s First McDonnell Douglas-like Head Scratcher After Merger
Image of Boeing Sonic Cruiser. Image: Boeing
Boeing’s last clean sheet design was the Boeing 787. The Dreamliner was born out of a failed Sonic Cruiser that Boeing proposed in 2001 at the Paris Air Show. The Sonic Cruiser itself was a very un-Boeing-like reveal.
Short on details and long on media hype, the Sonic Cruiser was either a great head-fake by Boeing to its competitors or an early sign that McDonnell Douglas culture was beginning to influence Boeing.
Boeing still had immense industry credibility at the time. So when Boeing made an announcement that speed was what would sell in the future, Wall Street and the media paid attention. Maybe it was Boeing seeing a new market opportunity that analysts had missed. Or maybe the Sonic Cruiser was another paper airplane.
The Sonic Cruiser’s reveal was a flop. It used too much fuel and its canards made ground servicing challenging. Most airlines didn’t want a gas guzzling jet that only flew 15% faster. With its poor fuel efficiency, Boeing shelved the project after airlines rejected the proposal.
Boeing had shared other technology proposals before but this was the first time that they seemed to announce an aircraft without any orders.
Boeing’s 787’s Showed Early Signs Of Trouble Too
A mock up of the Boeing 787-10 and Boeing 737 MAX fly in formation. Image: Boeing
Boeing introduced the more conventional-looking Boeing 7E7 that eventually became the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Unlike the Sonic Cruiser, the 7E7 prioritized efficiency and new materials.
While the 787 looked sleek and had significant efficiency gains, the real game changer was how it would be built. The manufacturing process was very different than its most recent predecessor, the 777. Boeing planned to subcontract parts of the aircraft globally, then assemble it in the United States.
Boeing showed off a hollow shell of a jet to the public
The problems with the manufacturing process were clear before the jet was even revealed. When the jet debuted in 2007 to the public (as seen in the video above), it was really just a hollow shell of an aircraft. The 787 was not even close to being flight ready.
Manufacturing challenges, design flaws, then transportation, and integration issues delayed the first flight of the aircraft until a full two years later. And while the 787 eventually turned into a full-fledged program, quality and manufacturing issues continue to hound it even today.
The Train Went Off the Rails Beginning With The 787
Once Boeing delivered the 787, attention then turned to the midsize airliner market. In the years prior, Boeing had retired its 757 line due to low demand. This left a gap in its offering between the 737NG and the aging 767.
Various clean-sheet aircraft designs were studied and rumored to be in the works. However, an event happened in December of 2011 that forced Boeing to offer a refreshed 737 instead of a clean sheet design. It forever altered the direction of the company.
American Forced Boeing’s Hand on the 737 MAX
A 2012 rendering of an American Airlines Boeing 737 MAX-8. Image: American Airlines Facebook page
In December of 2011, American Airlines – who had recently entered bankruptcy – announced one of the greatest aircraft recapitalization programs of all time. They wanted to completely refresh their fleet with a focus on replacing their aging MD-80 jets as they plotted an exit from Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
The airline sought out the most efficient fleet, even beyond the current offerings of Boeing and Airbus. American had previously been one of Boeing’s best and most loyal customers. Airbus offered American a great deal on current A320s in exchange for equity in the airline. Airbus also sweetened the pot with some of the first available delivery slots to the new A320NEO line.
The NEOs featured significantly more efficient engines, lowering American’s costs even further. At the same time, one manufacturer alone could not deliver all the jets American needed in a reasonable timeframe.
Thus American went to Boeing too for their best offer. Boeing offered their 737-800 and hastily introduced the 737 MAX, promising delivery within six years. The New York Times does a solid job of detailing the business aspects behind this rapid launch of the troubled MAX. From a design standpoint though, it is interesting to look at the choices Boeing made and how it has affected aircraft design for the past 13+ years.
Boeing’s Previous 737 Improvements were Straight Forward and Crisp, But Not The Max
American Airlines 737-800 NG. Image: By Tomás Del Coro from Wikimedia Commons
From a design perspective, the choices Boeing made with the MAX differ from the choices Boeing previously made with their upgrades from the 737-300 Classic series to the 737NG.
On the NG, Boeing made design decision to build an all new supercritical wing that greatly increased the efficiency of the jet and added more efficient engines.
Due to FAA commonality restrictions and customer desires, Boeing only incorporated a moderately updated cockpit. Boeing went for a simple update that modernized the panel (but maintained the common overhead panel) to mirror other more modern Boeing cockpits. This change though was very inline with Boeing’s approach to design iteration.
Changes were straightforward and crisp that went for the biggest gains in efficiency possible on major components. The company avoided unnecessary design changes or ‘hacky’ fixes that made small improvements but drove tradeoffs in commonality and efficiency.
MAX Design Decisions
The 737-9MAX in flight. Photo courtesy of Boeing
The design choices on the MAX have a bit of a McDonnell Douglas flavor to them. If you look at the MAX’s changes closely, they kind of remind you of McDonnell Douglas’ approach. While the -8 and -9 are flying, the the -7 and -10 are still stuck awaiting regulatory approval before deliveries can commence.
Bigger Engines Force MCAS ‘Fix’
On the MD-80, McDonnell Douglas put larger and more efficient engines on an extended DC-9 fuselage. McDonnell Douglas chose not to invest in a new wing for the MD-80 but instead grew the wing in size and strengthened the landing gear on the larger version. The upgrades engines were enough to keep the MD-80 competitive. McDonnell Douglas’ choice of adding a larger engine to the MD-90 required the hacky fix of pylon flaps on the engines to prevent a deep stall.
The MAX also did an engine swap, replacing the NG engine with an even larger diameter engine that required a rework of the nose landing gear and wing attachment points. This forced Boeing to adopt a hacky MCAS system to provide a similar aircraft feel for pilots in certain near stall regimes of flight. Unfortunately, this hacky fix also led to two crashes and grounding of the fleet for two years.
Complex Landing Gear ‘Hack’ For The MAX -10
Boeing 737 MAX-10 Photo: Boeing
The landing gear had to be lengthened to provide the required engine clearance on the jet. On the -7,-8, and -9, Boeing was able to be raise the length of the gear slightly to accommodate the engines.
Many of these design choices seen on the MAX seem to violate Boeing’s previous straightforward philosophy in how they updated and upgraded their product offerings.
Winglets Key To Performance Improvements on the MAX
McDonnell Douglas spent a ton of time on researching and incorporating winglets into their designs in the late 1980s. Both their MD-11 and C-17 featured winglets much earlier than Boeing.
McDonnell Douglas added winglets more by necessity to the MD-11 to improve on a 30 year old wing design whereas Boeing touted their prior winglet offerings as an extra 1-2% on an already efficient aircraft.
MAX7winglet. Image: Boeing
The MAX made winglets a defining feature of the jet. Boeing introduced the 737 MAX AT winglets calling them “the most efficient winglet on any airplane.” It was a way to quickly eek efficiency out of the Boeing 737.
The 737 Would Compete on Price
In the early 1990s, McDonnell Douglas made minor changes to the MD-90 but failed to invest in game changing upgrades that would have made the jet more attractive to top-tier airlines. McDonnell Douglas was forced to compete primarily on price.
Likewise, Boeing believed that a more efficient engine, a lucrative price point, commonality, and a competitive entry date were sufficient to make their 737 competitive with the Airbus A320NEO family for years to come.
Foldable Wings, New Engines, New Wing…Boeing’s Other Jets Adopt McDonnell Douglas’ Incremental Playbook
Boeing 747-8F Image Courtesy Boeing Commercial Airplane Company
The incremental/hacky improvement philosophy with their product offerings are now seen throughout Boeing’s product line. Boeing’s now retired 747-8i and 747-8 freighters also had similar incremental improvements.
Boeing utilized 787 technology to improve the wing, lengthened the fuselage, and added 787 engines to the venerable Queen of the Skies. The aircraft struggled to find its niche though resulting in only 155 aircraft produced including just 48 deliveries of the passenger variant.
777X Continues The Incremental Design Trend
Boeing launched the 777-X project in November of 2013, just two years after the rushed launch of the 737 MAX. The refreshed version of the 777 was intended to ward off customers defecting to Airbus’ A380 and A350XWB product line.
On the 777, Boeing is once again adding more efficient engines to the jet and to their credit have introduced a new super-critical wing similar in approach to the Boeing 747-8 and 737NG.
Boeing lengthened the aircraft and updated the cabin too. They did however add a new concept – foldable wings. This allows the larger jet to fit in existing 777 gate footprints but adds complexity to design and operation.
The 777-9 features foldable wingtips to increase the span of the wings while still fitting in existing 777-sized gates. Photo: Boeing
While the foldable wings have not been a contributing factor to the delays, it is an interesting design choice that echos back to McDonnell Douglas’ more hacky approach to designing a new aircraft. In a way, it might remind you of how McDonnell Douglas made design compromises in the past.
On the MD-11, they shrunk the horizontal stabilizer from the previous DC-10 design. This change was made to save weight on the newer version of the tri-jet and meet performance targets. The smaller stabilizer did make the MD-11 more pitch sensitive though and many consider that change a contributing factor to two MD-11s that crashed on approach during gusty wind conditions.
The Boeing 777-9 has not yet entered service but a foldable wing is a novel design decision previously only attempted on Navy carrier aircraft. It will be interesting to watch whether this design choice succeeds or becomes a liability.
Product Line has Gaps With No Clear Roadmap
Delta 757 Landing at Maho Beach. Image: Avgeekery
Beyond design choices, Boeing’s public commercial roadmap has some large holes in it and you can clearly still see McDonnell Douglas’ influence on it.
Boeing’s lineup is missing a clear replacement for the Boeing 757. Much of the market that it previously owned has been captured by the Airbus A321NEO. Boeing is also lacking a clear replacement for the Boeing 767. While the 787 can do everything the 767 can do and more, the 787 is too large for some routes currently flown by the Boeing 767.
In the battle for single aisle jets, the venerable Boeing 737 has become a liability with no clear replacement yet. The MAX has seen an amazing amount of negative press and delays. Within the MAX family, only two of their four versions are available and will be for some time.
Some airlines have started defecting from Boeing. United made alternative purchases with Airbus after Boeing’s 737 MAX 10 delays to ensure they have enough narrow body jets for the current decade.
Any new clean-sheet offering will be expensive and complex. It will be a challenge to match Airbus’ cockpit and fleet commonality as well.
Boeing’s More Recent R&D Smells Like The Old McD
Livery of the X-66A, unveiled by NASA and Boeing | IMAGE: NASA
While Boeing is publicly committed to the MAX for now, the company unveiled a radical design in the form of the X-66 last year which could evolve into their next narrowbody offering. This test aircraft will attempt to use a transonic truss-braced wing to demonstrate greater efficiency. The test fuselage is, you guessed it, a repurposed MD-90.
While it is exciting that Boeing continues to invest in new technologies, this feels eerily similar to how McDonnell Douglas tested their experimental Unducted Fan on an MD-80 in the late 1980s. Given the radical design and current challenges Boeing is facing, it is difficult to see the X-66 design become reality anytime soon.
You can’t help but wonder if Boeing is once again distracted by the shiny object of long-shot innovations instead of principled design decisions to dig themselves out of their current hole. While the X-66 represents a potential game changer, Boeing may miss out on more near term opportunities to produce a strong, conventional clean sheet design that reestablishes market dominance.
Boeing is at a Design Crossroads With Significant Hurdles
The bottom line is that Boeing stands at a crossroads. Boeing has not announced a clean sheet aircraft in 21 years. Boeing’s new CEO faces significant challenges, including labor unrest, backlogs, and the need for a clear commercial strategy.
While inspiration from the past can be a great motivator for future design, Boeing should approach McDonnell Douglas’ playbook with caution. That playbook already led to defeat once. And success usually only happens if you learn from your past mistakes and chart a different course.
To regain its leadership position, Boeing must find a way to prioritize clean-sheet innovation, quality control, and engineering excellence to avoid the pitfalls of incrementalism that led to McDonnell Douglas’ decline.
The US government is cracking down on airlines that mishandle passenger wheelchairs. The hope is that a new rule will encourage safer and more responsible wheelchair transportation.
The US Department of Transportation (DOT) data reveals that airlines damage or lose one out of every 100 wheelchairs or scooters following a domestic flight. While this might not sound like an excessive amount, the new law recognizes that any damaged wheelchair can result in a total loss of mobility for affected passengers.
Airline Policies Get a Government Mandated Update
File Photo: American Airlines have 737-800
The DOT announced updated protections for passengers with disabilities that travel with airlines in the US. The DOT announced updated protections for passengers with disabilities traveling by air. Under the new rule, airlines operating in the U.S. must:
Provide specialized training for baggage handlers on the correct handling of wheelchairs.
Ensure handlers pass an assessment or exam following their training.
Offer necessary assistance to passengers traveling without their original wheelchairs, both on the plane and within the airport.
Currently, when a wheelchair-bound passenger boards a flight, airlines treat the wheelchair as checked luggage. However, improper handling often results in damage, delays in return, or both.
The new federal rules will work to reduce the number of violations that airlines make when handling wheelchairs. These violations have resulted in damaged wheelchairs and/or delays that significantly impact the passenger experience for individuals with disabilities.
Airlines must also follow a series of protocols in the event an employee reports a damaged or misplaced wheelchair.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg issued a statement to members of the media about the new ruling to airlines Monday:
“We’ve taken unprecedented actions to hold airlines accountable when they do not provide fair treatment to passengers with disabilities…With the new protections we’re announcing today, we’re establishing a new standard for air travel — with clear and thorough guidelines for airlines to ensure that passengers using wheelchairs can travel safely and with dignity.”
American Airlines Takes Brunt of Wheelchair Fines
The new ruling comes off the heels of a historic $50 million fine to American Airlines in 2024. This ruling came after the DOT found American Airlines employees mishandled wheelchairs countless times from 2019 to 2023.
In late 2023, a video went viral of an American Airlines handler dropping a wheelchair down a baggage ramp. A second handler also stood by as the wheelchair crashed at the bottom of the chute.
Wheelchair users have been trying for ages to raise awareness about their wheelchairs being broken so often when they fly, and the devastating impact this has on them. @AmericanAir baggage handlers decided to give a demonstration of how much they enjoy breaking them 😡 pic.twitter.com/jQvILpTRyQ
JetBlue boasts itself as the largest carrier in Puerto Rico, and its presence in San Juan continues to bustle with a new expansion, more flights, and a new crew base.
While JetBlue has hubs in New York City, Boston, and Fort Lauderdale, the airline sees the appeal in expanding its presence in the Caribbeans, being at the forefront of air travel as well as driving job growth.
‘A Celebration of Growth Continues’
JetBlue has posted a press release on Thursday to announce the opening of a new crew base at Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport in San Juan, Puerto Rico. This is the first base that JetBlue has built outside of the mainland United States.
The new crew base allows pilots and attendants to begin and conclude trips from the airport. The airport’s Terminal A is home to the new crew base. JetBlue crews will also report to JetBlue’s Tech Ops team which opened in San Juan four years ago. JetBlue plans to base 100 pilots and 300 flight attendants in Puerto Rico in 2025.
JetBlue A320 departure from SXM. Photo by Brad Hayes.
JetBlue Chief Operating Officer Warren Christie shared comments in the press release about the base opening and recruitment campaign:
“We are proud to celebrate this important milestone in Puerto Rico…The new crew base reinforces our commitment to investing in the communities we serve, creating opportunities for crew members in San Juan and for those who want to return home to the island, while expanding our network to meet the growing demand for travel to the Caribbean and beyond.”
Puerto Rico’s Governor Pedro Pierluisi also chimed in on how the expansion will further help the island’s activity:
“We celebrate that JetBlue continues to bet on Puerto Rico. We are proud of this strategic alliance with Puerto Rico, reinforcing the airline’s commitment to the island and its people. Our tourism had record growth numbers over the past four years, and this is one more sign that good news continues for our people.”
Another Addition to JetBlue’s Caribbean Network
That same afternoon, JetBlue started a new route from San Juan to St. Croix in the US Virgin Islands. According to FlightAware, this route operates once daily in the afternoon local time. The flight uses an Airbus A320 and takes less than an hour.
Google currently has JetBlue round trip fares at $102 per person, though Frontier Airlines currently offers the most economical fare at $72 per person.
JetBlue also flies between San Juan and St. Thomas in the Virgin Islands once daily. The airline also opens a seasonal route every winter from St. Thomas to Boston.
JetBlue also recently announced a new 2025 schedule for Europe, including flights to Madrid, Spain for the first time ever.
![The first United 777-200A departs during testing. Photo by Solitude [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons](https://avgeekery.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/United_Airlines_777_N777UA.jpg "Boeing's Decline in Innovation: The Impact of the McDonnell Douglas Merger 24")
