Boeing has had a real tough go over the past few months (and really, the past few years), and it makes me sad because Boeing has such a large presence in the PNW. At one time it really was a great company. You can trace where it all went wrong though, and that was when the bean counters took charge from the engineers. Nothing has been the same since.
While there certainly have been some high profile incidents (the door plug over Beaverton being the craziest), it’s still much, much safer to fly in a Boeing jet than it is to drive to the airport.
This is a much more positive story about Avelo than I’ve heard in the past, when it seemed they were better known for cutting service than expanding it. In terms of profitability, should this still be a concern for potential longevity of commercial air service in Salem?
As for 737 MAX safety improvements, I don’t think there are any (nor was improving safety an intent, which is now infamously apparent). MCAS is probably the most misunderstood aspect of this. Its sole purpose was world over)to satisfy the FAA that the MAX was just yet another 737 version that handled like all the rest (despite, if you turned off MCAS, the plane behaved differently from other 737s). Very important, because if 737 pilots would have to be retrained to fly the MAX (and there are a HUGE number of them as the 737 is the most popular airliner the world over), the whole economic justification of the program would be severely harmed. Tragically, Boeing bungled how MCAS was originally designed and documented, and over 200 passengers died in two crashes as a result before Boeing finally got it right. It’s what happens when you replace an engineering and safety focused company with one prioritizing profits and stock price over everything else. Unclear how or if Boeing will be able to salvage its reputation after its internal cultural rot is now so obvious.
Also, the MAX debacle illustrates how in aviation, old, well maintained and inspected planes can end up being more safe than flashy new ones. It’s not that Avelo is doing anything unusual to “fix up” old airplane lanes; they are just following well-established paths to take advantage of older airplane models.
Great information - thanks! It does seem like Avelo is finding commercial success in Salem - at least for now. Based on their short history of managing service, if a particular set of routes makes it past 6 months Avelo seems more likely to stick with that service. But they have pulled out of certain locations after 6 months for reasons typically chalked up to "economic factors" and "lack of demand."
What I am NOT seeing is any indication that the investment of millions in public funds (with more being considered) into the airport and in the form of Avelo subsidies is actually doing anything for the regional economy - which is pretty much the basis of the pitch made to spend public dollars on boosting a privately owned start-up. I haven't even seen any plans or discussion on how Salem plans to measure ROI on that investment. Avelo can find all the success in the world in Salem, but if we're not seeing substantial positive regional economic impact...I wouldn't call that success for residents in this region.
'The age of the Avelo fleet is reported to be anywhere from 11-20 years old, with an average of about 16 years.'
I do mean this in good faith, but that is normal in the aviation world. Planes get overhauled all the time so air-frame age does not matter as much. Overall, the 737 NG is a solid plane. Airbus, Bombardier, and other manufacturers also have similar overhauls of air-frames. it's also why GA planes like the Cessna 172 are still being used despite being decades old.
This doesn't excuse the QC nightmare of Boeing/Spirit Aero systems, or the insanity of doing commercial passenger out of Salem at the expense of other local services. Airlines should absolutely be nationalised.
Boeing has had a real tough go over the past few months (and really, the past few years), and it makes me sad because Boeing has such a large presence in the PNW. At one time it really was a great company. You can trace where it all went wrong though, and that was when the bean counters took charge from the engineers. Nothing has been the same since.
While there certainly have been some high profile incidents (the door plug over Beaverton being the craziest), it’s still much, much safer to fly in a Boeing jet than it is to drive to the airport.
This is a much more positive story about Avelo than I’ve heard in the past, when it seemed they were better known for cutting service than expanding it. In terms of profitability, should this still be a concern for potential longevity of commercial air service in Salem?
As for 737 MAX safety improvements, I don’t think there are any (nor was improving safety an intent, which is now infamously apparent). MCAS is probably the most misunderstood aspect of this. Its sole purpose was world over)to satisfy the FAA that the MAX was just yet another 737 version that handled like all the rest (despite, if you turned off MCAS, the plane behaved differently from other 737s). Very important, because if 737 pilots would have to be retrained to fly the MAX (and there are a HUGE number of them as the 737 is the most popular airliner the world over), the whole economic justification of the program would be severely harmed. Tragically, Boeing bungled how MCAS was originally designed and documented, and over 200 passengers died in two crashes as a result before Boeing finally got it right. It’s what happens when you replace an engineering and safety focused company with one prioritizing profits and stock price over everything else. Unclear how or if Boeing will be able to salvage its reputation after its internal cultural rot is now so obvious.
Also, the MAX debacle illustrates how in aviation, old, well maintained and inspected planes can end up being more safe than flashy new ones. It’s not that Avelo is doing anything unusual to “fix up” old airplane lanes; they are just following well-established paths to take advantage of older airplane models.
Great information - thanks! It does seem like Avelo is finding commercial success in Salem - at least for now. Based on their short history of managing service, if a particular set of routes makes it past 6 months Avelo seems more likely to stick with that service. But they have pulled out of certain locations after 6 months for reasons typically chalked up to "economic factors" and "lack of demand."
What I am NOT seeing is any indication that the investment of millions in public funds (with more being considered) into the airport and in the form of Avelo subsidies is actually doing anything for the regional economy - which is pretty much the basis of the pitch made to spend public dollars on boosting a privately owned start-up. I haven't even seen any plans or discussion on how Salem plans to measure ROI on that investment. Avelo can find all the success in the world in Salem, but if we're not seeing substantial positive regional economic impact...I wouldn't call that success for residents in this region.
'The age of the Avelo fleet is reported to be anywhere from 11-20 years old, with an average of about 16 years.'
I do mean this in good faith, but that is normal in the aviation world. Planes get overhauled all the time so air-frame age does not matter as much. Overall, the 737 NG is a solid plane. Airbus, Bombardier, and other manufacturers also have similar overhauls of air-frames. it's also why GA planes like the Cessna 172 are still being used despite being decades old.
This doesn't excuse the QC nightmare of Boeing/Spirit Aero systems, or the insanity of doing commercial passenger out of Salem at the expense of other local services. Airlines should absolutely be nationalised.