AvTalk Episode 252: Let’s inspect more 737s

AVT 252 Transcript
EPISODE 252
[EPISODE]
[0:00:07] IP: Hello, and welcome to Episode 252 of AvTalk. I am Ian Petchenik here, as always
with –
[0:00:15] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Ian, how's it going? It’s Tuesday, a bit unusual for us, but yes,
here we are.
[0:00:23] IP: It's an unusual day. And this is going to be a slightly unusual podcast, at least the
first part. Dear listeners, if you'll allow me some license here, I'm going to take the first part of
the podcast to remember my father, who passed away this week. So, we're recording on
Tuesday, because I'm about to go get on a plane and fly to New York, and deal with all of the
things that need to be dealt with there, where my father lived. So, after we record, I'm getting on
a plane and heading there.
But what I did want to talk about today was, my dad is a huge, huge part of why I'm sitting in this
chair speaking into this microphone. He is the one who got me into aviation, not because he
was into aviation, specifically. But when I was five, we moved into a house at the end of the
runway at O'Hare. And so, it was there. I grew up with planes coming over the house at all
hours, and being in the backyard playing ball with Dad. We would stop and look at the planes
coming over a few 100 feet, and marvel at those, what were then, extremely loud planes. And I
learned how to tell time, because we would count how long it was in between the aircraft. I
learned how to identify the aircraft, just looking at things and the interesting stuff, and he
encouraged that so very much. He's originally from New York and from the Brighton Beach
area. So, not far from JFK.
Whenever I would go and visit him, we would sit out on the beach and watch the planes coming
into JFK. He was also a tech marketing pioneer, I should say. He started working with AOL when
AOL was developing their channels. If you're old enough and listening to the podcast, you know
what AOL is. Actually, it wasn't AOL then. It was America Online, and know what a channel was
on America Online. I'm sorry. But also, he started working on the Internet when it was very
© 2024 AvTalk 1
AVT 252 Transcript
young, and was always interested in things. One of the things that popped into my head today
was Microsoft TerraServer. Jason, do you remember that?
[0:02:32] JR: I don't. I'm very familiar with AOL, keyword, airline. But maybe not so much that.
[0:02:40] IP: So, Microsoft TerraServer was like the precursor to Google Maps. It was the first
time, satellite imagery had been put on the Internet writ large and available just by going to a
website, and we were fascinated by it. It was all black-and-white imagery, at least at first. We
would just spend a ton of time and airports were always a big thing, because they were so big,
and they stood out on the satellite imagery. You could look at them. It was just so much fun to
do. Some of the best travel memories I have, as a kid, are with my dad. We would fly to New
York all the time on United 727s, and there's a DC-10 thrown in there for good measure, not to
New York, but I remember being on a DC-10 with him.
I wanted to tell this one story. I don't want to go on for too long. But I wanted to tell this one
story.
[0:03:29] JR: You can go on for as long as you want. This podcast episode is just purely for
story time in the beginning. And for those wondering, yes, I did offer Ian, the day off, the week
off to do whatever he wants to do and – but we think of this podcast, for us, at least. I think of it
as therapy, almost.
[0:03:47] IP: It absolutely is. I hope that a lot of people listening use it that way, as well, is
enjoying roughly an hour of things that mean a lot to them each week, and maybe you’ll learn
something along the way. But the one story about my dad that I wanted to tell because I know a
lot of people that listen to the podcast, listen to it while traveling, while flying.
My dad did a lot of traveling when he worked for a travel newsletter publishing company back
when they've published like actual paper newsletters way back in the mid-90s. The thing you
have to know about my dad is he kind of looks like if you know who Dennis Farina is, he was a
detective on NYPD Blue amongst other things. Think across between like Dennis Farina and
Danny DeVito. Not a tall guy, spot balding. Cops thought he was a bad guy. Bad guys thought
he was a cop, because he wore this leather jacket for like three years. He looked like he
© 2024 AvTalk 2
AVT 252 Transcript
belonged, I'm not really sure where, but he looked like he belonged somewhere where you
would need a leather jacket.
So, he's flying to London, and he's walking through the airport. This is at O'Hare. He's flying to
London and he's in the terminal and these two gentlemen, come up to him and introduced
themselves and as United States Customs officers. Plainclothes guys. They show their badges
and they introduce himself. And he goes, “How's it going?” They go, “Sir, do you have more than
$10,000 on your person, or in your luggage?” And my dad just starts dying. He just starts
cracking up and laughing in their faces. That was maybe not the correct move, because they
invited him to follow them into a secure screening area, where he was thoroughly investigated.
He did not have more than $10,000 on him. But he was the kind of guy where cops would look
at him and go, like, “That guy looks fishy.” And then people who were fishy would go, “That guy
looks like a cop.” It happened more times than I can count where it would go one way or the
other, I guess. That’s just kind of the encapsulation of my dad and his travels, who got me into
this, kind of got me interested, not because he was super interested. But because he kind of
planted that seed and then just encouraged me at every step of the way. So, Dad, I hope
wherever you are, now, you are carrying more than $10,000 on your person, and they let you on
the plane.
[0:06:06] JR: That's a great story. For some background there, if you happen to be flying in or
out of the US and you have over $10,000, literally $10,000.01, you need to declare it, I think for
tax purposes. If you don't, they will take that money from you. They will take the entire sum of it.
This does happen occasionally. I have also been asked that and I maybe didn't laugh at the
officials asking me that, but I always would think inside my head like, “I wish.”
[0:06:31] IP: Right. That would be great.
[0:06:34] JR: I have never come close to that. I usually walk around with $8 in my wallet.
[0:06:38] IP: That would be great.
© 2024 AvTalk 3
AVT 252 Transcript
[0:06:40] JR: But yes, your dad definitely, probably should have picked another avenue for that.
I mean, what a story.
[0:06:46] IP: He’s just like, “I just started cracking up and they didn't appreciate that.”
[0:06:49] JR: I mean, if you don't know that rule, and someone just randomly asks you, “Hey,
Ian, are you carrying more than $10,000?” It's just a very odd question if you don't know why
you shouldn't be doing that.
[0:06:58] IP: So good. But as they say, on with the show, because there's actually a lot of stuff
to talk about this week in a shortened period. I mean, we're a day early, but we're still like a day
– it's like a day and a half because this is Tuesday morning. Let's dive in, because the FAA
issued its revised airworthiness directive on the 18th of January, so the day after we stopped
recording last week. The FAA issued its revised Airworthiness Directive, which is a verbatim
copy of the emergency Airworthiness Directive. But this one allows for public comment which
Jason and I are thoroughly going to enjoy reading, and it reintroduces the four to eight-hour, or
up to eight hours’ worth of work, a cost of $12,000 on airlines.
So, the one of the things that we are learning through the Airworthiness Directive is basically
there's no rework involved to the aircraft, or at least the FAA saying, “Here's our Airworthiness
Directive, there's no rework involved to the aircraft.” It's just making sure that the bolts are on
and the bolts are tight.
[0:08:00] JR: Yes. And that inspection will cost about $12,000.
[0:08:05] IP: So, we thought to ourselves. Okay, with the Airworthiness Directive out, that
means that the FAA has approved a method of compliance for the airlines to perform the
inspections, and to begin work. Because the day before the FAA had announced that the 40
preliminary inspections, the United Aircraft 20 last aircraft had been completed. So, we thought,
“Okay, preliminary inspections are done. We're reviewing the data. Oh, look, here comes the
revised Airworthiness Directive”, which is not an EAD anymore. It's not an Emergency
Airworthiness Directive. It's just a straight-up Airworthiness Directive. That means mean things
© 2024 AvTalk 4
AVT 252 Transcript
are moving forward. Well, here we are on Tuesday, the 23rd of January, and there's no method
of compliance yet.
[0:08:47] JR: No, we were wrong. Anyone who would justifiably read that and think, “Oh, this is
probably good news. Airlines are going to start conducting the inspections and putting the
aircraft back in service”, which is harder to tell because the public is not actually able to see the
method of compliance that the airlines have to do, basically, the guidelines and the instructions
for the inspections. Those are classified. We can't see those.
But a day later, somebody at one of the affected airlines, let's just say, someone who I trust and
to provide me accurate information said, “Whoa, hold on. This actually, isn't what you think it is.
This is just a formalization of the prior emergency Airworthiness Directive. Nothing has actually
changed. The FAA and Boeing are still reviewing the data from those 40 aircraft, and they still
have yet to propose revisions to the multi-operator memorandum.
[0:09:40] IP: It is kind of a mopey operator memorandum. They are definitely mopey at this
point. Although, we'll get to that in a minute.
[0:09:46] JR: Yes, but that still has not happened. We're recording early in the morning,
January 23rd.
[0:09:50] IP: Who knows? By Friday, this could all be changed. But we thought with the
Airworthiness Directive out, we would see sooner rather than later. Her inspections beginning in
the aircraft starting to be returned to service.
[0:10:05] JR: Has not happened, unfortunately. Nothing publicly, at least, has moved forward at
this point. Airlines are still waiting, preparing that they have torn down the aircraft that they do
need to inspect, at least, the area around the door plug they are waiting for the go-ahead. But
that still has not happened. At this point, United has just confirmed that it has removed, or at
least canceled the Max 9 from its schedule through the end of January. So, I guess it's possible
that if right now, they're given the go-ahead to do the inspection. It takes eight hours, they could
put these aircraft back into service as extra segments. But United is not happy at the moment.
© 2024 AvTalk 5
AVT 252 Transcript
[0:10:45] IP: Not a huge vote of confidence right there.
[0:10:46] JR: No. I guess we could just skip forward to that right now or come back to some
other implications. But United, hosted or we'll host its fourth quarter 2023 earnings report, and of
course, the Max 9 is going to have a great impact on the next quarter, which we're currently in
right now, and they expect actually, maybe they won't turn profit because of this. But some very,
let's call it, pointed commentary coming from a major customer of Boeing, excuse me, you don't
typically see such strong commentary coming from an airline. But United CEO, Scott Kirby is
calling this, “The straw that broke the camel's back.” And another quote from CFO of United
says, “It's a great aircraft, but we cannot count on it.” This is not great. Really, I don't think we've
ever seen in the modern-day an airline outright call an aircraft that it is a customer of just
something we can't count on.
[0:11:46] IP: And not only are they a customer of the Max 9, but they have the 10 on order as
well, and they're basically discounting that that is going to be in their fleet when they were
expecting it.
[0:11:59] JR: Yes. So, United had big buttons for the Max 10. That was supposed to be its new
domestic premium aircraft replacing the 757, and it would have an actual full business class on
board like the 757s do. Those plans are so in question now that United is actually having to
draw up at least on paper, alternate plans, of what would we do?
[0:12:18] IP: What do you do?
[0:12:20] JR: What do we do if the Max 10 can never be delivered? Or can't be delivered for
such a long time that we need to do something because our 757s are 30 years old, and they
need to go. None of those are slated for retirement this year, nor any of the 767s. But United
has got to start thinking about a future where maybe the Max 10 isn't a part of its fleet plan,
which is just wild.
[0:12:43] IP: I mean, I made the kind of tongue-in-cheek comment on Twitter this morning. But
kind of after reading these statements, Scott Kirby calling up Airbus and saying, “Hey, can you
© 2024 AvTalk 6
AVT 252 Transcript
open a third final assembly line in mobile?” It will take a 321LRs as many as you can give us, as
fast as you can give them.
[0:13:02] JR: Yes. Well, United has I think 50 A321neo XLRs, that's a mouthful, on order with
delivery starting this year. Hypothetically, again, Airbus not exactly knocking delivery dates out
of the park, just like Boeing. But they do also have a ton of A350s on order that nobody expects
them to ever take, but maybe they convert them to 321neos. I don't know. There's a lot of
questions. A lot of opportunity for Airbus to gain what Boeing is losing here, at least with United.
[0:13:36] IP: Yes. I mean, there's been a lot of talk about market share in the past few weeks as
both Boeing and Airbus announced their final year-end tallies of orders and deliveries, and the
comment about that Airbus, or that an analyst man, I forget exactly what channels it was. But a
few years ago, how they saw Airbus going to 60% market share. Randy Tinseth at the time, who
was Boeing's chief, I forget his exact title, but basically, chief airplane salesperson said that was
ridiculous. And sure enough, here we are with Airbus at – for [inaudible 0:14:08], 60% market
share.
It's a duopoly, but at some point, and certainly this is not where airlines want to be. I mean,
United doesn't want to be sitting here going, “We can't count on the airplanes that we ordered.
We can't trust that we're going to be able to operate them when we say they're going to operate
them.” And that's an incredibly difficult position to be in.
[0:14:30] JR: Well, that has also, we're long past that point, reading CNBC article this morning
from Leslie Josephs, who's been on the show before. She points out that in August 2018, Scott
Kirby, that then United's President announced the 100 order for the 737 Max 10. Those were
supposed to be flying in 2020. We're four years down the road and we still don't know when or if
those aircraft will be certified, entering service at United. So, forget that you can't count on them
being delivered on time. We're all about half a decade beyond that original point.
[0:15:05] IP: That's crazy. The other thing here is that the inspection regime has expanded kind
of, to the 737-900ER. So, the FAA announced and this is a fun thing, like 10:30 at night on a
Sunday, sent out a Safety Alert for Operators. So, a SAFO is a recommended. It's not an
Airworthiness Directive. They don't have to do this. But it's recommended that airlines operating
© 2024 AvTalk 7
AVT 252 Transcript
737-900ERs, which is the generational precursor to the 737-9 Max. Those operators, which in
the United States include Alaska Airlines, with 79 aircraft. Delta with 170 and United with 136.
So, not a small number of aircraft. Those operators inspect their mid-cabin exit door plugs,
because the FAA says that – well, let's back up a second.
Airlines had already started doing this because it's the exact same door. It's the exact same
door plug, as on the 900ER, as is on the 9 Max. So, airlines have already started inspecting
those. The FAA says that some operators have conducted additional inspections on the 737
900ER mid-exit door plugs and, quote, “Have noted findings with bolts during the maintenance
inspections.”
[0:16:33] JR: Man, if that isn't the most ambiguous –
[0:16:36] IP: Heavy lifting phrase.
[0:16:36] JR: – unhelpful sentence the FAA can possibly put out, it is absolutely meaningless.
[0:16:44] IP: They have noted findings with bolts.
[0:16:48] JR: That could mean, literally, anything from the bolts were there and they were tight,
to we can't find the airplane. So, we assume the bolts are missing. I don't know. It's a ridiculous
statement. But you have to read between the lines there. I don't think they would be saying
anything here if airlines hadn't reported something. But we don't know, that they are not
answering, they are not clarifying what they meant there. I spoke to someone at Boeing
yesterday, off record. And again, there's no clarification of what if anything was discovered here.
So, we can only assume that nothing was discovered. I think if Airlines said, “Hey, we're looking
at the 900ER, and then there's some missing or loose bolts”, I think the FAA would probably do
something at this point, say something, at least, I hope. But we truly don't know that this point.
[0:17:35] IP: Yes. I mean, what the SAFO says to me is that there were something that wasn't
exactly right. Not that the bolts were missing, because all of these, the 737-900ERs have been
through heavy checks. I think most of them have been through at least one D check. So, not
that the bolts are missing, necessarily, but perhaps they're not as tight as they should be. Or
© 2024 AvTalk 8
AVT 252 Transcript
maybe the cotter pin was missing or something like that. Not where there was a risk of the
aircraft experiencing a similar event to the Alaska 737-9. But where something wasn't exactly as
it should have been. That's what the Southwest says to me.
[0:18:10] JR: Yes. We still don't know the range of any of the results from the inspections at
United and Alaska have done to see what's the range of dates these aircraft were produced that
have this issue. Is it something they can identify as every Max 9 off the line before September
5th, 2022 is fine. The ones after that are the ones we're having an issue with. I think that would
be interesting to know, because we ran the numbers, we looked at the dates, and there is
overlap of the 737-900ER And Max 9 production. I think there were about two years where they
were mixed on the assembly line. So, there are actually some 300ERs of the NG family that are
newer than the oldest Max 9. So, these are essentially the same aircraft, as far as the door plug
is concerned. FAA says it's an identical door plug design. So, it stands to reason that if there
was an issue with assembly on the max, it is very likely that that same assembly issue is
present on the NG. But we have no information to prove that, or no airline has said anything to
that degree. So, we sit and we wait and we just have to live with the fact that we know that they
have noted findings.
[0:19:24] IP: They have noted findings. You know who is still, I would say incredibly enthusiastic
about taking some Max aircraft?
[0:19:35] JR: Not United. We know that for sure.
[0:19:35] IP: Not United. India's Akasa Air, not only are they saying, “Yes, give us what we've
already ordered.” But they want more and not a few more, a lot more. Jason, how many more?
[0:19:48] JR: Hundred and fifty?
[0:19:50] IP: That's a lot of airplanes.
[0:19:52] JR: That is. So, this was an interesting case where Akasa Air announced that it was
ordering 150 more Max admits all of this chaos at Boeing, with the grounding of the Max 9. It's
not great timing, but there is some detail to it, that it is not as if they ordered it right now, and
© 2024 AvTalk 9
AVT 252 Transcript
announced it right now for no reason. They actually finalized this order back in December of last
year, and held on to that announcement, I believe, until one of the major air shows in India. So,
it's not as if they pounced on an opportunity right now and said, “Oh, Boeing's in trouble.” Let's
turn the screws and get a really good deal. The deal was already done last year. So, they're
probably not getting any discounts or anything because the paperwork is already signed.
[0:20:37] IP: I don’t know. I'd be going back and ask him for a price adjustment.
[0:20:39] JR: Sure, they wouldn't be asking. But the deal was already finalized. I don't know if
he could go back and adjust that.
[0:20:45] IP: You can always go back.
[0:20:47] JR: You can. But it is not as if they signed it amid the ground and decided, or we're
going to get a great deal, and now the deal is already done. But a rare bit of good news during
the grounding, and this is something we saw before, I think, when the original Max grounding
was occurring. IAG ordered like a buttload of Maxs at the time. So, it is good for Boeing to have
some sort of vote of confidence during adverse impacts to its manufacturing capability. But yes,
seemingly came out of nowhere. But it was an unidentified order that just became identified.
[0:21:20] IP: Yes, they announced it during the Wings Air Show at Hyderabad where Air India
also debuted its A350 for the first time to the public, and just sticking with India real quick,
slipping this in here. They have now begun passenger service with their first A350. Remember,
this is not the first Air India cabined and A350. But this is their first aircraft. I believe it's the
Aeroflot. Was it originally for Aeroflot, that their cabin was for. So, it's not a brand-new,
grandiose Air India A350 cabin, but it is their first A350.
[0:21:57] JR: I mean, it's still pretty great.
[0:21:59] IP: Oh, it's great. I mean, yes, don't get me wrong.
[0:22:01] JR: Back before Aeroflot was restricted from taking any new aircraft, because of the
sanctions against Russia. The Aeroflot actually had a fantastic cabin on its A350s. I think they
© 2024 AvTalk 10
AVT 252 Transcript
stuck a few out before things went sideways and Turkish somehow ended up with a few of them
as well.
[0:22:16] IP: [inaudible 0:22:16], yes.
[0:22:18] JR: [inaudible 0:22:18]. But now Air India has a few as well. And these are very nice
aircraft. I don't think anyone will mind being on these, because they’re very nice.
[0:22:25] IP: No, no, no, no. I’m just saying that I'm still looking forward to seeing what looks like
an incredible cabin on their A350s.
[0:22:32] JR: This is in addition to Air India taking the ex-Delta 777s or the 200LRs which are
also fantastic aircrafts. So yes, Air India's, I would say, it's multiple faces of Air India right now.
You've got the old Air India fleet, which you do not want to be on because they are gross, and
they are disgusting, and they are being refurbished eventually very soon. But then there's the
other Air India, with all these aircraft that they've accumulated from other airlines. Like, the
Aeroflot A350s and the Delta 777s. Those are the ones you want to be on, because they are
super nice. Book carefully if you're booking Air India flights. Let's just say that.
[0:23:11] IP: They're headed in the right direction, but they're not quite there yet.
[0:23:14] JR: Yes.
[0:23:15] IP: Who knows if these two are headed in the right direction. Last week, we talked
about the ruling by the federal judge saying that Spirit and JetBlue could not continue with their
merger agreement. Spirit and JetBlue have appealed that ruling or have filed to appeal that
ruling and they did it in such an exciting way that reading between the lines, it seems like they're
really hoping that this appeal is just quickly dismissed.
[0:23:42] JR: Yes. I’m going to –
[0:23:45] IP: Go ahead. Yes, please read the thing.
© 2024 AvTalk 11
AVT 252 Transcript
[0:23:45] JR: I'm going to read the release in its entirety. “JetBlue Airways Corporation, and
Spirit Airlines Incorporated, today reported that they have filed a notice of appeal to the US
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit consistent with the requirements of the merger agreement.”
Okay, there's no editorialization there. They're not saying, “We will vigorously fight this because
we believe the Court ruled in error or anything.” It's just, “We're going to do it because the
lawyers tell us we have to do it.”
[0:24:13] IP: Exactly.
[0:24:14] JR: Okay. Okay.
[0:24:15] IP: All right.
[0:24:16] JR: Ian, I have breaking news.
[0:24:16] IP: Yes, give it to me.
[0:24:19] JR: Breaking news, we’re just one topic away from having a really nice segue. But
WestJet just announced today the acquisition of five brand new Boeing 737 Max 8 to its fleet for
delivery in 2025. So, it is not just one Indian Airline announcing 737 Max orders right now. We
have a Canadian airline in the mix.
[0:24:39] IP: There you go. Let's talk about the Cessna 208 that landed on the highway this
week, because that was quite the event. A Southern Airways Express Cessna 208 shortly, and I
mean shortly after takeoff from Washington Dulles Airport, landed on the parkway basically next
to the airport. They hooked left turn and landed. It did not get far. It did not make their way away
from the airport in any way, shape, or form. But quickly came down on the parkway, landed
safely. Two crew, five passengers, everyone walked away. As always, a fantastic job by the
crew, getting the aircraft down safely and communicating. My favorite thing about this is one of
the pilots is calling Dulles tower saying, “Hey, mayday, mayday, mayday, we're on the ground.”
Control was like, “You're on the ground? Where are you on the ground?” And they go between
the Wendy's and the Aldi.
© 2024 AvTalk 12
AVT 252 Transcript
[0:25:34] JR: Oh, yes. I know exactly where that is.
[0:25:37] IP: They were close enough that the controller could turn around in the tower and go,
“Okay, I see.”
[0:25:42] JR: Yes. I mean, if you're from that area, you know exactly where this is. This is right
on the perimeter of Dulles. I've probably been here myself, at least passing through, maybe on
a bus going to the Udvar-Hazy Center. I don't know. But this is more complicated than you
would think. This is a very built-up area around Dulles, or it has become a very built-up area,
and they would have to contend with all sorts of things like very tall, high-voltage, high-tension,
power lines, and traffic lights, and roadway signs, and all sorts of things. So, it's not as easy as
identifying the Loudoun County Parkway and saying, “I'm going to set it down there.” No, there's
a lot of crap in the way on that road. And thankfully, they were able to get it on the ground
without hitting anything. I think they may have ended up leaning against the guardrail, which is
exactly what it's supposed to do.
[0:26:32] IP: I mean, kind of what's incredible to me is they came down along the parkway runs
south, what are my directions here. It kind of jogs around the airport perimeter where it turns
from south to kind of southwest a little bit, before turning back due south. And they kind of took
the turn, right around [inaudible 0:26:50] Ridge Drive. There's kind of a sweeping left turn if
you're headed in the southbound direction. And they did a nice job setting it down right off the
approach. So, the parkway that they landed on is the border to the airport prop. I mean, there's
like a forested area off the airport property, but it's basically the border of the airport. So, they
did not make it far.
[0:27:10] JR: Yes, that airport is massive. If you've ever seen Die Hard 2, you know how big it
is.
[0:27:14] IP: You know how big it is.
[0:27:15] JR: You don't have to go, but there's a massive forested area around that airport. So,
thankfully they were able to get beyond that, because it would have been a very, very different
story.
© 2024 AvTalk 13
AVT 252 Transcript
[0:27:23] IP: A different story.
[0:27:25] JR: We don't know what happened, why it happened, how it happened, but the NTSB
is investigating. And as soon as they know, we’ll relay that.
[0:27:35] IP: The NTSB is also investigating the air return of an Atlas Air 747-8F to Miami earlier
this week. Atlas flight 95 was scheduled to fly from Miami to San Juan. They departed. Shortly
after departure, the number two engine, so the inboard left engine began emitting sparks and
flames. They returned to the airport very quickly. And upon landing, it was discovered that there
was a softball size hole in the top of the number two engine. So, something came out of it. The
NTSB is investigating and will hopefully find out what came out of it.
[0:28:20] JR: Yes, if you find, I don't know, an engine fan blade somewhere around the airport,
let the NTSB know.
[0:28:25] IP: It’ll be good to understand what came out of that particular engine. Sticking with
cargo. This is becoming an interesting theme, because we've got certain airlines saying what
Cargojet is saying and saying, “Forget it. We don't want these airplanes.” And then there are
other cargo airlines, “Yes. Keep them coming.” So, Cargojet has said they were contracted for
777 converted freighters, and now they're saying, “No, never mind.”
[0:28:51] JR: Yes. They ordered a few of these conversions, I believe of 200LRs and some
300LRs in the aftermath of COVID.
[0:29:00] IP: 300ERs.
[0:29:01] JR: 300ERs, yes.
[0:29:04] IP: The big twin.
[0:29:05] JR: The big twin were freight operations during COVID, and in the years after was just
an exploding segment of the market. But that has cooled down tremendously to the point where
© 2024 AvTalk 14
AVT 252 Transcript
Cargojet says, “Maybe we don't want any of these anymore.” And to quote, they say, “It is a
result of slowing global air cargo demand.” So, I don't know what the status of some of these
aircraft are. I think some of them are in process of being converted or already have and they will
figure out how to place those elsewhere. But they might have some trouble doing that,
especially with other airlines, like FedEx, I think has a big chunk of its fleet parked right now,
because there just isn't demand for it.
[0:29:44] IP: So, we'll keep on that one because I'm sure it'll swing back the other way
eventually.
To close out the show, I thought we could talk a little bit about some interesting things that
happened over the weekend. Storm, I don't know when we started naming storms that weren't
hurricanes, but apparently that's a thing now, so I'm just bleeding into it. I'm just going to go with
it. So, storm Isha hit Ireland and the UK over the weekend. Super strong winds. I think there
were winds over 99 miles an hour, which I guess would make it winds of 100 miles an hour, and
some points. And that led to a number of interesting diversions, because the nearby airports
filled up rather quickly, said we're closed for diversions, so you're going to have to go further
afield.
So, there was a Ryanair flight from Lanzarote to Dublin that diverted to Bordeaux. There was
one which is just kind of a really egregious example. A Ryanair flight from Copenhagen to
Dublin, flew to Dublin, did a couple of missed approaches, diverted to Manchester. Four hours
later, took off from Manchester, circled near Dublin waiting for the weather to clear. That wasn't
going to work out. They tried an approach at Belfast, that didn't work out for them. So, they
diverted not back to Manchester, but this time they went to Liverpool. Three hours after they
landed at Liverpool, we got a tweet from someone on the plane said, “We're still on the plane.”
So, to this day, don't know if they ever made it off the plane.
[0:31:10] JR: Yes. That's not something you'll want to be involved in, especially if you're flying a
rocket there. But it happens. I mean, we saw recently in New York, when one of our snowstorms
came through, I think there was a flight from somewhere down south going to LaGuardia and
they said, “Ah, we can't do it. We're going to divert to Bradley up in Connecticut.” And a little
while later, they took off again to go to, I think it was LaGuardia, maybe Newark and said, “Crap,
© 2024 AvTalk 15
AVT 252 Transcript
we can't do it again.” They went back to Bradley. So, they diverted twice. It happens. It can
happen to any airline. It's just when the weather doesn't cooperate and it's worse than expected,
you got to go somewhere.
[0:31:44] IP: I'm not picking on Ryanair here. They were diversions. KLM all sorts of diversions,
so definitely not just a Ryanair thing. But that, I think, was the most egregious. But good job to
everybody for handling that as best they could. I hope those passengers eventually landed in
Dublin. Or maybe back in Copenhagen. We will never know.
This has been episode 252 of AvTalk. Thank you all so much for making it to the end of the
episode, and indulging me a little bit at the beginning. We do appreciate you listening and we
hope that you're enjoying the podcast. We'll be back next week with a regular episode on a
regular day, and hopefully just talking about airplanes. I am Ian Petchenik here, as always with –
[0:32:29] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Thanks for listening
[END]
© 2024 AvTalk 16