Amazon has that. Called “Amazon Locker”.
Some condos and apartment complexes have them. When I was condo prez we investigated getting one for our two buildings.
They have many of these set up in grocery stores, convenience markets, etc.
They don’t (yet) offer any discount for using them versus front door delivery, but for people w porch piracy problems or who are receiving things they don’t want left outdoors exposed to heat, cold, rain, snow, etc., the locker system solves that neatly.
Spirit is a supplier for everyone, not just Boeing. They bought the plant in Belfast that used to be Shorts, and it builds fuselages for Bombardier, if I’m not mistaken.
There just aren’t that many players in the game and few contract to only one OEM. A problem for one creates problems for the others, because why would you believe only “their” parts are affected and not “yours”?
I knew Spirit was not merely the 737 fuselage factory. But I didn’t know specifically what else they did. Thanks for more of the story.
My deeper point was that outfits like Spirit build structures that are not designed to be disassembled and have big hunks replaced in the field after delivery.
If the contamination has bad enough consequences on longevity or absolute strength then any airplane by any manufacturer containing that material may quickly become a total writeoff.
Per the article, Airbus also bought counterfeit parts.
Yes, but if you’re Bombardier or Embraer or anyone else buying parts from Spirit, you’re triggering a supplier audit if you know what’s good for you.
I suspect Spirit disclosed the questionable parts to Boeing and Airbus once it was discovered (which is as it should be in a good quality system). But it calls into question the entire supply chain, and if I were involved in procurement I’d want an audit of all titanium parts I get from them to be damn certain they weren’t “overlooked” in whatever triggered the initial disclosures.
I enjoy what I do, but I’m cynical as fuck.
Aren’t they the company that built the fuselage of the 737 that had the door plug fly off?
ETA: or is that like asking: “Hmm… Boeing, you say. Isn’t that the company that built the 737 that had the door plug fly off?”
Yes and no.
Spirit is the company that built all the 737 fuselages that have those door plugs. Many dozen of which have not flown off during the few years now that they’ve been in service.
Boeing is the company who disassembled one of those door plugs at their factory, put it back together wrong, and pencil-whipped the paperwork to cover up the fact they’d ever taken it apart. So their own QC folks never checked that work since they didn’t know it had occurred.
Then after Boeing finished building the airplane and delivered it to the customer the door plug it fell off in flight.
I have a very hard time placing any fault for that on Spirit.
Why don’t GA jet planes use high-bypass engines?
High-bypass seems all the rage for commercial jets. But, when I look at private (small) jet planes they all seem to have no by-pass at all (or very little).
Why wouldn’t they be falling over themselves to make high-bypass (read more fuel efficient) small jet engines?
Modern GA jets are fairly high bypass. The actual core of the engine is comparatively tiny.
But overall you’re right that the highest bypass numbers in big jet designs are much higher than in bizjet-scale airplanes. As in 4-6:1 in bizjets and 8-9:1 in bigger jets.
Some of the apparent difference in bypass just by looking at the airplanes is that generally in GA designs the cowling around the whole engine extends all the way to the back end, rather than the pronounced difference between the forward fan case and the much smaller core exhaust.
Some of that difference in cowlings is that thrust reversers are a bit rare on bizjets. Not absent, but well short of universal. Unlike the case on airline-sized jets.
One other factor is the huge fans required by the huge bypass ratios put a speed limit on the airplane due to the drag of that monster frontal area. A 787 is fast, but a Global Express or Gulfstream V are a bunch faster. Up close to Mach 1.0 small increases in speed map to huge increases in drag. Shrinking the fan buys you another WAG 0.05 Mach.
As well, corporations are not quite as fuel cost conscious about transporting their bigwigs as airlines are about transporting their multitudes.
I would guess size. The earlier turbofan engines such as the Pratt & Whitney JT3D weren’t as large as the high bypass engines seen today.
FWIW my question was prompted while watching a video about the Honda Business Jet. A very modern and recent GA jet plane. This is what its engine looks like…I can see no bypass (which is not to say there is none, it is just not apparent).
LSL can probably explain it better. The Honda Jet uses a turbofan engine but it’s not a high bypass engine.
As said, that engine has significant bypass. It’s just taking place inside the outer cowling. And that is most likely done for cabin noise reasons. The engine on any bizjet is real close to the cabin.
I’m on my phone so won’t chase cites for you but for any bizjet you care to name the wiki article on the plane has a crossref to the article on the engine. Which has, in the specifications section, a line item for bypass ratio.
The last pure turbojet bizjet was one of the early Lears. So late 1960s production. Which sounded like a fighter taking off: painful. Any bizjet still flying has turbofans; the only question is how much bypass.
| Manufacturer / Model | GE Honda / HF120 | GE Honda / HF120 |
|---|---|---|
| Output (Uninstalled Thrust) | 2050 lbf each derated from 2095 lbf each | 2050 lbf each derated from 2095 lbf each |
| Bypass ratio | 2.9 | 2.9 |
In comparison, a CFM-56 engine used on an airliner would have a bypass ratio of 5 or 6 to 1.
Seems like this might affect the service ceiling as well. A bunch of bizjets are happy to fly at >45kft or even >50kft. Commercial jets tend not to go much above 40kft. Bizjet owners that like to fly above the plebes might have to stick with low-bypass engines.
Pretty much. The A320 will autoland by default if it’s flying an ILS or GLS approach and you don’t disconnect the autopilot. Not all airports are certified for it but the aircraft doesn’t know that.
In New Zealand today, a Virgin Australia B737 suffered an engine failure after taking off from Queenstown and diverted to Invercargill. Not a big deal in and of itself but Queenstown is an interesting place to have an engine failure.
The normal departure makes a climbing turn within the Queenstown basin then tracks down the southern arm of the lake until gaining enough height to turn west towards Australia. If an engine fails early in the departure the escape path diverges and continues south towards Invercargill.
My scanner just alerted for this small plane crash at Albany, NY airport; doesn’t sound good.
Those are were always great fun. Not. Especially if the failure occurs just after or worse yet just before the point of divergence.
Also a crash at Chico, CA of a vintage twin.
“The Federal Aviation Administration said the twin-engine Lockheed 12A crashed shortly after 12:30 p.m. Saturday, just west of Chino Airport in San Bernardino County.”