Very loud cabin in 737-9 Max

[Astro14]

Did it have any of the clunking banging etc. that the 757 had?

Where do you get this stuff? Will you take this opportunity to espouse the superiority of reciprocating propeller engines again?

 

[Cujet]

Where do you get this stuff? Will you take this opportunity to espouse the superiority of reciprocating propeller engines again?

Man, you are not kidding! Jet aircraft "rule". It is funny how everyone sees things differently. True all weather aircraft are nearly always jets, so there is that.

Flying is a powerful tool, a very efficient mode of transportation and a huge time saver. Mankind put enormous effort into aviation technology, and modern equip is well refined.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

Did it have any of the clunking banging etc. that the 757 had?

No, that was an Airbus

Hard to keep up with parts coming off aircraft.

Incident: Jetblue A320 at New York on Jul 2nd 2024, debris fell off aircraft

By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Jul 3rd 2024 17:53Z, last updated Wednesday, Jul 3rd 2024 17:54Z A Jetblue Airbus A320-200, registration N507JT performing flight B6-153 from New York JFK,NY to West Palm Beach,FL (USA), was climbing out of New York's runway 13R when the crew stopped the climb at 5000 feet after ATC advised there had been foreign objects seen falling off the aircraft. Tower in the meantime queried the next departure, already airborne, whether they had encountered any foreign object debris on the runway, the crew had not seen any. A runway inspection was carried out, tower informed the runway inspection that the debris was reported between taxiways L and M. The reporting aircraft, another Jetblue aircraft, advised tower that there had two pieces of debris fallen off that came to rest at the left hand side of the runway outside the edge lights. The ground inspection reported finding three pieces of metal debris medium size. The occurrence Jetblue A320 landed safely back on JFK's runway 22L about 30 minutes after departure. The FAA reported: "AIRCRAFT RETURNED TO AIRPORT AFTER ANOTHER AIRCRAFT REPORTED SEEING DEBRIS FALL FROM JBU153 DURING DEPARTURE, NEW YORK, NY." The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in New York about 16 hours after landing back. A replacement A320-200 registration N636JB reached West Palm Beach with a delay of about 3 hours.​

 

[Exhaustgases]

Where do you get this stuff? Will you take this opportunity to espouse the superiority of reciprocating propeller engines again?

I rode in 2, 757's and both had some bad noises from the landing gear. That is where I got this stuff.
Wasn't it one of the planes where some parts made in US and some in Japan etc? I remember back in the day hearing about some nasty fitment problems with fuselage sections, I think on that series plane.
The superiority of Jet A burning recip engines would be the very high fuel efficiency.

 

[Astro14]

I rode in 2, 757's and both had some bad noises from the landing gear. That is where I got this stuff.
Wasn't it one of the planes where some parts made in US and some in Japan etc? I remember back in the day hearing about some nasty fitment problems with fuselage sections, I think on that series plane.
The superiority of Jet A burning recip engines would be the very high fuel efficiency.

In a thread about noise, pretty ironic that you’re advocating for the noisiest possible engine configuration. A recip diesel powered open fan or propeller aircraft is unbelievably noisy.

It’s also clear from your post that you don’t know much about airplanes. The 757 was built in Renton Washington with an aluminum fuselage. There were no “fitment” issues. And it is no longer in production.

The A380 and the 787 had fuselage fitment issues. The 787 has a composite structure.

The “clunks“ that you heard, during landing gear retraction was just that. Retraction. Normal retraction. Landing gear retraction on every single modern airplane built has those sounds.

What you were hearing is the locking and unlocking of the gear extension and retraction mechanisms. There hydraulically actuated, but they are mechanically locked in place.

Every single airliner built “clunks” when the landing gear reached full extension, or full attraction. It is how they are made.

If you didn’t hear it on a flight, you were either not paying attention, or you were sitting a long way away from the middle of the aircraft where the action occurs.

Finally, if your diesel recip actually saved money (not just fuel, money, because maintenance, time on wing and reliability matter, too) airlines would be all over it.

About 40% of their costs are fuel.

If they could save money with this, they would. I doubt very much that the efficiency numbers you’ve been sold are in comparison to the current generation of jet engines.

But crew costs would double (propellers are slow) as would the actual cost of operating the airplane -
If it goes half the speed,
your new diesel prop plane flies half the miles, half the flights, and makes half the money.

That’s why nobody is buying them.

The passenger response alone for getting to a destination in twice the time would kill that dumb idea.

Who would buy a ticket on an incredibly airplane, that goes really slow, and spend more because the airplane is money loser?

 

[Exhaustgases]

Family members and friends at the lazy B, I know plenty about fitment issues.

 

[wpod]

Maybe the insulation was a lower cost choice.

 

[4WD]

Flew in another Max yesterday - the only thing that was abnormal was having plenty of space in the overhead bins …