Yes, but the flight crew has Ipeco seats. I'm the Service Engineer who answers questions related to them and works with Ipeco as needed.As an engineer for Recaro, I have to say you also have amazing seats!
So glad to see the MAX taking off again.
As an engineer for Recaro, I have to say you also have amazing seats!
So glad to see the MAX taking off again.
Thank you! Alaska has been our favorite customer for years.
This, and having crappy coworkers, is sometimes called the Total Cost of A**holesThe best part of my current job is that the owner wants to pursue good clients. If someone's a cheapskate or a complete jerk, he doesn't want the business because it's not worth the time, effort, and writeoffs that it takes to keep them slightly less unhappy. That's probably true in other industries as well.
I don't know anything about seats except that Southwest must not be one of their customers. Sure, the tickets are cheap, but I've sat in wooden church pews and steel folding chairs that were more comfortable.
The company I work for puts lots of effort in when hiring. We get people in the top 5% of just about everything. I makes for a really pleasant work environment, Almost no politics and everyone works well together. Very few abrasive personalities. I am sure this is money in the bank for the company.
I'm not sure it's really relevant, or anyone cares, But I finally flew the MAX on the line yesterday.
A Seattle San Fran turn. About 5 hours of flying for 2 legs.
1st impressions are all very positive. It flew very nice and the flight controls are very balanced. As a longtime
737 driver I was comfortable in the cockpit, a few secondary controls/switches have been moved but everything is logical. The biggest gripe is they moved the rudder trim knob about 1/2 an inch forward on the center panel. I never look for it, i just reach back for it and because of muscle memory I kept just missing it.
No big deal, just a minor "Doh".
The displays are beautiful, and the information is very well presented.
I don't normally do the walk around, but I did to get a handle on the outside changes. It's one thing to see photo's or look at it from a distance....Oh, who am I kidding I just wanted to check it out!
It has.... huge tracts of open land! Check out the Leap! Massive for a single aisle aircraft.
And the blades are a work of art.
The new winglets sick out farther than on the NG, I'll have to be carful on the ground.
Taxiing is interesting, the Leap's have so much idle thrust it scoots along, and the carbon brakes really
work good! That takes some getting used to.
The sound the engines make on take off is just cool! The kind of growl rather than buzz.
But the cruise fuel burn was incredible! At Mach .78 and 37,000ft, with a full (170 passengers) aircraft our fuel burn was 2320 pounds of fuel per hour for each engine!
To give a comparison, the 737-900NG would be burning about 3100# per side.
We have A-321NEO's also, they are incredible also on the fuel burn but still higher than the MAX. I'll have to ask around, but I think the Airbus runs around 2500 Pounds per hour per side.
Airliners are revenue generation machines, as such the MAX is very, very good. As a pilot it was very pleasant fly, and our passengers seem to like riding in it.
I was going to say what a work of art the blades are on that engine, but then I scrolled down and you already had
.I think this is the way it has been done for years. The generators run off a gear pickup on the turbine shafts. This means they are turning quite fast. In earlier days they would use a hydraulic speed compensator (variable-volume pump and a motor) to control the speed into the alternators within a relatively small range, giving the approximately 400Hz power. From what I can recall it is not really stable in frequency, just a nominal 400Hz.
Is this engine considered high bypass?
400 Hz power has been a standard on aircraft for decades, going back to at least the 1970's.
The semiconductors have improved in reliability over the years, especially the last 20 for things like power conversion. That makes the old mechanical way of doing CSG outdated, since the electronics reliability is now acceptable for the mass savings of removing the mechanical speed conversion.
Hmm. I always found SW seats perfectly fine; of course, I'm only 5'9"I don't know anything about seats except that Southwest must not be one of their customers. Sure, the tickets are cheap, but I've sat in wooden church pews and steel folding chairs that were more comfortable.
Does the Max have a RAT or use other means for emergency power/hydraulics?I'm not sure it's really relevant, or anyone cares, But I finally flew the MAX on the line yesterday.
A Seattle San Fran turn. About 5 hours of flying for 2 legs.
1st impressions are all very positive. It flew very nice and the flight controls are very balanced. As a longtime
737 driver I was comfortable in the cockpit, a few secondary controls/switches have been moved but everything is logical. The biggest gripe is they moved the rudder trim knob about 1/2 an inch forward on the center panel. I never look for it, i just reach back for it and because of muscle memory I kept just missing it.
No big deal, just a minor "Doh".
The displays are beautiful, and the information is very well presented.
I don't normally do the walk around, but I did to get a handle on the outside changes. It's one thing to see photo's or look at it from a distance....Oh, who am I kidding I just wanted to check it out!
It has.... huge tracts of open land! Check out the Leap! Massive for a single aisle aircraft.
And the blades are a work of art.
The new winglets sick out farther than on the NG, I'll have to be carful on the ground.
Taxiing is interesting, the Leap's have so much idle thrust it scoots along, and the carbon brakes really
work good! That takes some getting used to.
The sound the engines make on take off is just cool! The kind of growl rather than buzz.
But the cruise fuel burn was incredible! At Mach .78 and 37,000ft, with a full (170 passengers) aircraft our fuel burn was 2320 pounds of fuel per hour for each engine!
To give a comparison, the 737-900NG would be burning about 3100# per side.
We have A-321NEO's also, they are incredible also on the fuel burn but still higher than the MAX. I'll have to ask around, but I think the Airbus runs around 2500 Pounds per hour per side.
Airliners are revenue generation machines, as such the MAX is very, very good. As a pilot it was very pleasant fly, and our passengers seem to like riding in it.
No member of the 737 family has a RAT. It has a manual-reversion flight control system—it can be flown without benefit of hydraulics, though I expect it's not much fun. The gear can be dropped without power as well. Preserving this capability as the airplane has grown over the years has been one of the key design constraints.
