[biker1]

I have been on one. It was very noisy with a lot of vibration. Yes, the plane is beautiful but it's passenger experience was poor compared with the jet powered airliners that replaced it, particularly the airliners with high by-pass engines that are pretty quiet compared to the early low by-pass jet engines.

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Jealous, I am! I'm of the opinion that the Connie was the most beautiful passenger-carrying airplane ever built. Did the experience match the look?

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

If Jet Blue is facing financial problems, I would also be concerned about their engine and electronics reliability. Have they cut corners on MAINTENANCE?????

Great question. It was motivation to do some research on the topic. Unfortunately the statistics regarding causes of aircraft damage are all over the board, but in GENERAL (roughly speaking) the majority of incidents resulting in commercial aircraft damage or destruction are in the end attributable to pilot error, with a substantial minority attributable to maintenance errors. How much "general" is rolled into the statistical information seems to be attributable in large part just what entity is presenting them--a problem all too common in "information" presented today.

The FAA touts it's oversight of maintenance practices (and I shudder to think what commercial flying would be without them) but with human nature being what it is, there are possibly quite a few ways to "save" money on maintenance. I checked the FAA regulations regarding aircraft mechanic qualifications (Runtime Error interesting for several reasons. The first two requirements state that any aircraft mechanic MUST A) be 18 years old or over, and B) be able to read, write, speak, and understand English language, with the third "must" addressing "X" number of months pertinent experience.

After that it gets a little fuzzy. A prospective mechanic MAY establish eligibility for his/her A&P (Airframe and Powerplant) certification "if he/she by graduating from an FAA-approved Aviation Maintenance Technician School (AMTS) or by completing the Joint Service Aviation Maintenance Technician Certification Council (JSAMTCC) training course for military personnel" (quoted from the FAA article), but nowhere in the regulations could I find a requirement that an applicant MUST have a certain amount of required coursework. Instead the focus appears to be on the experience part, with appropriate testing that must be taken and passed before the applicant is granted the A&P ticket. But...an 18-year-old with the requisite experience and demonstrated proficiency may be competent to work on a Boeing 777, but a 22-year-old with the same experience and demonstrated proficiency plus a diploma from an accredited training school seems to be, in my mind, a bit more able to perform the maintenance duties proficiently. The difference, of course, is that the 18 year old costs less.

Pilot error? Again, stats are pretty general, but a lot of that seems to be attributable to overwork, with a lack of training in some areas contributing as well: both are issues that could be lessened in severity by more specific training and/or employing more qualified pilots.
Again, the claim is not being made that this IS happening, but instead pointing out situations where it COULD--especially with airlines where the bottom line is the most important thing.

Conclusion? I don't know if there really is one, but a valid inference can certainly be that less money spent on issues of safety can result in more incidents where a lack of that safety can endanger customers. For myself, that is enough reason not to fly with airlines that operate close to the bone, because you just never know.

[CosmicTrucker]

I expect this type of poor service from Breeze, but not JetBlue. So sad.