Plane Videos From POP

Being as I have not heard of a single Air Berlin airliner going down on a flight between the DR and Germany, I would say that it is as safe as any other flight in a two-engine plane anywhere else, which is pretty safe. I have made two round trip flights to Europe in three engine planes with no difficulty. Air travel is really very safe.

The need for four engines has been eliminated by airframes made with lighter yet just as durable material, and more efficient engines over the years. All but the largest aircraft have two engines, and they are only used on routes that have the revenue to justify the extra fuel costs. (used on routes with very large first and business class cabins, with lots of high fare paying passengers) The 767 was hugely successful in the 1980's because it was the first aircraft at the time that could go cross country and over the Atlantic with only 2 engines. When the 737's first came out in the 1960's they were primarily for flights of 2-3 hours tops. They couldn't make it across the US. New 737-800's today can easily cross the USA. Copa airlines flies them from Panama all the way to Buenos Aires. (3300 miles and 7 hours flying time) The new 787 is about the same size as a 767 as far as passenger capacity, but it can travel much farther, making routes like Houston-Aukland New Zealand possible with only 2 engines.

i think air berlin has a great record in terms of safety. there has been no fatal accidents on this airline so far.

Whenever any passenger airplane goes down, it is on the news. International flights that go down over the ocean get much more publicity than that. I would not hesitate to fly a twin engine commercial flight anywhere on most airlines.

Modern jest simply don’t need 4 engines. Newer engines are far more reliable an provide greater thrust

Take the Boeing B 52, developed in the 1950’s and still going strong it required 8 engines of that time period

A joke among pilots regarding the B 52

A Air Force F 15 (Twin Engine) contacts the tower at Offutt air Force Base: “, Air Force 53 low fuel request immediate entry” “Air Force 53, are you declaring emergency?” AF 53, negative Offutt, request expedited landing only at this time” Air Force 53, be advised you are number two behind the Boeing B 52 with engine out” “ The Eagle replies “Oh the dreaded 7 engine approach, poor guys”

Xavier_Onassis said:

I would not hesitate to fly a twin engine commercial flight anywhere on most airlines.

Click to expand...

Not that many options these day unless you still insist on that Ford Tri Motor you like so much:cheeky:

I was on planes with lots of engines for many years but since the fat twins came in, they seem to be doing pretty well so far..

My first twin trans-Atlantic flight was as a passenger on a 757 many years ago and I wasn't too confident but it certainly doesn't bother me now. A few million flights seem to be a good reference.

Wasn't it one of the founders of Rolls Royce who, when asked why he preferred 4-engined aircraft replied "Because there are no 5-engined ones'?

Whoever it was would be surprised by today's planes.

There's only the 747 and the A340 currently in the civilian 4-engine intercontinental range I can think of and a few MD11s with 3.
Any more?

(I don't count the Russians,.......... they made the Lada.)

wrecksum said:

I was on planes with lots of engines for many years but since the fat twins came in, they seem to be doing pretty well so far..

My first twin trans-Atlantic flight was as a passenger on a 757 many years ago and I wasn't too confident but it certainly doesn't bother me now. A few million flights seem to be a good reference.

Wasn't it one of the founders of Rolls Royce who, when asked why he preferred 4-engined aircraft replied "Because there are no 5-engined ones'?

Whoever it was would be surprised by today's planes.

There's only the 747 and the A340 currently in the civilian 4-engine intercontinental range I can think of and a few MD11s with 3.
Any more?

(I don't count the Russians,.......... they made the Lada.)

Click to expand...

Airbus A380 has 4 engines.

wrecksum said:

I was on planes with lots of engines for many years but since the fat twins came in, they seem to be doing pretty well so far..

My first twin trans-Atlantic flight was as a passenger on a 757 many years ago and I wasn't too confident but it certainly doesn't bother me now. A few million flights seem to be a good reference.

Wasn't it one of the founders of Rolls Royce who, when asked why he preferred 4-engined aircraft replied "Because there are no 5-engined ones'?

Whoever it was would be surprised by today's planes.

There's only the 747 and the A340 currently in the civilian 4-engine intercontinental range I can think of and a few MD11s with 3.
Any more?

(I don't count the Russians,.......... they made the Lada.)

Click to expand...

I see 72’s , DC 10’s, hauling trash, a Fokker 4 engine (At least I think it’s a Fokker, high wing 4 engine 30 or so passenger Maybe it’s a Short) but that’s about all I have seen in past year

The General Electric GE115 engine on the Boeing 777 produces 115,000 pounds of thrust.
The Pratt & Whitney JT3D engine on the Boeing 707 produces 17,000 pounds of thrust.

So if you wanted to produce the same amount of thrust for a B777 using older technology, you would need to bolt SIX 707 engines on each wing!

IslandDreaming said:

Not that many options these day unless you still insist on that Ford Tri Motor you like so much:cheeky:

Click to expand...

======================================
The three engine plane I flew to Europe was not a Ford Trimotor, It was a Boeing 727 I think. I was fond of it because it delivered me in Europe safely.

Xavier_Onassis said:

======================================
The three engine plane I flew to Europe was not a Ford Trimotor, It was a Boeing 727 I think. I was fond of it because it delivered me in Europe safely.

Click to expand...

Atlantic in a 727 would rot, I don't know of anyone that flew them but. I don't think they would satisfy ETOPS

Maybe it was tri engine DC 10 or MD 11?

Derfish said:

I prefer a 140 cherokee. Single engine.

Click to expand...

Never flown one but it has it's advantage like being to land about anywheres

So many unique older birds outthere would love to fly a Storch Sat in Ant Colt for run up, could just imagine flying the thing Cross between DC 3 and cement mixer

mido said:

Airbus A380 has 4 engines.

Click to expand...

Ah Yes!. Too new for me I guess.

Forgot about that little thing........

wrecksum said:

Ah Yes!. Too new for me I guess.

Forgot about that little thing........

Click to expand...

You know how those 380's are, you just seem to overlook them :cheeky: Actually you probbaly mistake them for a terminal or hangar

IslandDreaming said:

Atlantic in a 727 would rot, I don't know of anyone that flew them but. I don't think they would satisfy ETOPS

Maybe it was tri engine DC 10 or MD 11?

Click to expand...

The B727 wouldn't satisfy ETOPS as ETOPS stands for Extended range Twin engine OPerationS. The B727 has three engines.

I think in addition to AirBerlin, another German charter carrier, Condor, flies quite frequent Transatlantic flights, and they have only two-engine planes in their fleet. Having flown countless times with both of these, haven?t felt insecure, and as already mentioned, a two-engine plane if fully capable to fly with only one engine. 8 hours is nothing long actually, on some occasions these flights with 2-engine planes (when I have flown) have taken almost 11 hours.

Not an expert here, but I do follow the industry somewhat, and I think recently the direction is to utilize more than 2 engines only on the larges air crafts (A380 etc.) + I have seen some small Boeing planes (short-haul) with four really tiny engines.

The principle lies in the fact that each take-off is calculated to succeed with the failure of a critical engine just as the plane is getting into the air. The plane must remain controllable to within a fine degree and able to fly with the remaining engine(s) enough to make an emergency landing which will involve a period of climb ans level flight.

A 2-engined aircraft loses 50% of its thrust after an engine failure and up to 80% of its aerodynamic efficiency. This makes it tricky to fly manually.
Computers have made this much easier.

A 4-engined-plane only loses 25% of its power and maintains better flying characteristics which is why you'll often see them used in difficult airports where approach and take-offs are restricted. (Dash7 and Avro Regional jet are good examples).
(The military like lots of engines because you can fly them on less than the full quota to get them to somewhere you can fix them or out of harm's way. Not for passengers though.)

If a big, fat jet has an engine shut down during the cruise sector at altitude, the critical condition relates to endurance on one engine, fuel and altitudes will have to re-calculated and are often not optimum,the possible but highly unlikely possibility of further failure and the fact that certain critical systems are now running 'bootstrapped' to the other engine. Air supply, hydraulics, electrics, etc. are normally supplied by self-redundant systems so the loss of one does not affect the ability to fly and all this has been thought out by very clever chaps with slide rules and brown coats over many years.
But they fly quite fine on one good engine.

The ETOPS Beeza refers to is the minimum requirements neccessary for the twin to carry out these duties and if one item is not perfectly up to scratch, then they have to fly closer to diversion airports instead of going in a straight (actually curved) line to their nest.

Airlines don't like this 'cos it costs money so you can be assured, those planes are seriously well looked after and your chances of being in an accident are by far mostly on the way to and from the airport.

For Island Dreaming and Xavier........... I used to fly a B727 between NYC and Santo Domingo. It has a range of around 2500 miles. If you were to take off from NYC headed to London you would run out of fuel about two thousand miles short of your destination. The 727 was replaced with the 757 which had only two engines but was probably safer along with being far more efficient. (and much easier to fly) The four engine high wing plane referred to in an earlier post was probably the BAe-146.