![[Breeze] Airways](/iconimages/breeze/breeze-airways_ltr.gif)
[Breeze] Airways
09-24-2021, 08:11 AM
#1592
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by Halon1211
I am. according to jaxsurf the Airbus is 1980’s technology (which it is), therefore it’s a POS.
so I am, actually, flying the old school way.
so I am, actually, flying the old school way.
09-24-2021, 08:56 AM
#1594
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by Halon1211
you are right that was David Puddy that said that. My apologies...But, then you did call the other plane a POS.
09-24-2021, 04:51 PM
#1595
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Position: usually middle seat on 737
Posts: 44
link to a positive review of Breeze by (who knows what kind of) journalist:
https://www.airlinereporter.com/2021...-airways-2021/
https://www.airlinereporter.com/2021...-airways-2021/
09-24-2021, 08:04 PM
#1596
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,181
Originally Posted by jaxsurf
I do in fact think the 737 is a POS, for myriad reasons, and hope to never fly it!
I was in a UA jumpseat on a fully loaded -800
maybe -900 DEN-LAX a 3-4 years ago. Early October day mid 70s no wind. 100% full as I was in the JS. Calm winds. This F’n thing used at least 10k of runway to get airborne. FO even looked a bit concerned. He and the CA talked about it a bit at cruise. FO (his leg) thinks it may have switched to a few kt tailwind during TO hence the even $hittier perf than he’s used to (assuming).
I could absolutely care less whatever Aerodata or Boeing says. I witnessed how atrocious climb perf was that day with 2 engines. Without any doubt we would
have been a smoking hole in the ground had we blown one at V1.
If Boeing had re-engined (NEO) and update glass/avionics of the 75, they would have killed it. As god awful as Boeing is with the 73, they have, in fact made some of the most badass high performing airplanes in history. Just embarrassing and pathetic they sucked so much WN and legacy delta icks instead of manning up for a clean sheet design/replacement.
09-24-2021, 08:13 PM
#1597
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2020
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by CAirBear
It is beyond pathetic and pitiful this BS is now carrying more/same amount of pax as the 757 with 1000000% less performance. Fml.
I was in a UA jumpseat on a fully loaded -800
maybe -900 DEN-LAX a 3-4 years ago. Early October day mid 70s no wind. 100% full as I was in the JS. Calm winds. This F’n thing used at least 10k of runway to get airborne. FO even looked a bit concerned. He and the CA talked about it a bit at cruise. FO (his leg) thinks it may have switched to a few kt tailwind during TO hence the even $hittier perf than he’s used to (assuming).
I could absolutely care less whatever Aerodata or Boeing says. I witnessed how atrocious climb perf was that day with 2 engines. Without any doubt we would
have been a smoking hole in the ground had we blown one at V1.
If Boeing had re-engined (NEO) and update glass/avionics of the 75, they would have killed it. As god awful as Boeing is with the 73, they have, in fact made some of the most badass high performing airplanes in history. Just embarrassing and pathetic they sucked so much WN and legacy delta icks instead of manning up for a clean sheet design/replacement.
I was in a UA jumpseat on a fully loaded -800
maybe -900 DEN-LAX a 3-4 years ago. Early October day mid 70s no wind. 100% full as I was in the JS. Calm winds. This F’n thing used at least 10k of runway to get airborne. FO even looked a bit concerned. He and the CA talked about it a bit at cruise. FO (his leg) thinks it may have switched to a few kt tailwind during TO hence the even $hittier perf than he’s used to (assuming).
I could absolutely care less whatever Aerodata or Boeing says. I witnessed how atrocious climb perf was that day with 2 engines. Without any doubt we would
have been a smoking hole in the ground had we blown one at V1.
If Boeing had re-engined (NEO) and update glass/avionics of the 75, they would have killed it. As god awful as Boeing is with the 73, they have, in fact made some of the most badass high performing airplanes in history. Just embarrassing and pathetic they sucked so much WN and legacy delta icks instead of manning up for a clean sheet design/replacement.
09-25-2021, 06:29 AM
#1598
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Position: B747 FO
Posts: 1,110
Originally Posted by ElCaribe
What is United and Southwest Airlines thinking! I can’t believe they fly all the 737 variants out of DEN 365 days/year. The humanity!
so many aerospace engineers and test pilots on APC.
09-25-2021, 07:12 AM
#1599
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 414
Originally Posted by CRJJ
exactly! so many aerospace engineers and test pilots on APC.
so many aerospace engineers and test pilots on APC.
09-25-2021, 10:01 AM
#1600
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 611
Originally Posted by CAirBear
It is beyond pathetic and pitiful this BS is now carrying more/same amount of pax as the 757 with 1000000% less performance. Fml.
I was in a UA jumpseat on a fully loaded -800
maybe -900 DEN-LAX a 3-4 years ago. Early October day mid 70s no wind. 100% full as I was in the JS. Calm winds. This F’n thing used at least 10k of runway to get airborne. FO even looked a bit concerned. He and the CA talked about it a bit at cruise. FO (his leg) thinks it may have switched to a few kt tailwind during TO hence the even $hittier perf than he’s used to (assuming).
I could absolutely care less whatever Aerodata or Boeing says. I witnessed how atrocious climb perf was that day with 2 engines. Without any doubt we would
have been a smoking hole in the ground had we blown one at V1.
If Boeing had re-engined (NEO) and update glass/avionics of the 75, they would have killed it. As god awful as Boeing is with the 73, they have, in fact made some of the most badass high performing airplanes in history. Just embarrassing and pathetic they sucked so much WN and legacy delta icks instead of manning up for a clean sheet design/replacement.
I was in a UA jumpseat on a fully loaded -800
maybe -900 DEN-LAX a 3-4 years ago. Early October day mid 70s no wind. 100% full as I was in the JS. Calm winds. This F’n thing used at least 10k of runway to get airborne. FO even looked a bit concerned. He and the CA talked about it a bit at cruise. FO (his leg) thinks it may have switched to a few kt tailwind during TO hence the even $hittier perf than he’s used to (assuming).
I could absolutely care less whatever Aerodata or Boeing says. I witnessed how atrocious climb perf was that day with 2 engines. Without any doubt we would
have been a smoking hole in the ground had we blown one at V1.
If Boeing had re-engined (NEO) and update glass/avionics of the 75, they would have killed it. As god awful as Boeing is with the 73, they have, in fact made some of the most badass high performing airplanes in history. Just embarrassing and pathetic they sucked so much WN and legacy delta icks instead of manning up for a clean sheet design/replacement.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Frisky Pilot
Regional
20
01-01-2022 05:02 PM
