The General Airplane Thread
- Thread starter Crash
- 2,744 comments
- 191,877 views
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
So for the second time in recent memory, I have spotted another 737 landing at the Airport just down the street from me. However it seems abit different:Usually, it's the small private jets and countless turbo prop stuff (Pipers and Cessnas mostly, can't go one day without seeing at least one). But every once in a while, something like THIS shows up:
Did abit of digging as I am not at all familiar with this variant and this popped up:
Not sure if this is the specific plane (though this photo is apparently from Addison Airport last year so it could be), but it doesn't look all that different from the current 737 MAX 8.
Last edited:
Joey D
Premium
- 47,364
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
I believe it's the Boeing Business Jet version of the MAX 7. Basically, it's someone with a ton of money that feels a Gulfstream is too basic for them, or it belongs to a company.
Here's some more info about it:
Showcasing Boeing's 737 Max BBJ private jets costing upwards of $90 million
The Boeing 737 Max BBJ (Boeing Business Jet) is an ultra-long-range business jet family based on the highly successful 737 commercial airliners.
aircraftbuyer.net
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
Huh, interesting. Explains the "BBJ" portion of the name.I believe it's the Boeing Business Jet version of the MAX 7. Basically, it's someone with a ton of money that feels a Gulfstream is too basic for them, or it belongs to a company.
Here's some more info about it:
Showcasing Boeing's 737 Max BBJ private jets costing upwards of $90 million
The Boeing 737 Max BBJ (Boeing Business Jet) is an ultra-long-range business jet family based on the highly successful 737 commercial airliners.
- 16,094
- Melbourne
- ScottPuss20
- CheetahsMeow
The 737 BBJ is based on the regular -700 series, not the MAX 7. This particular aircraft may have the same kind of winglets but the engines are different and the APU exhuast port at the back is smaller.I believe it's the Boeing Business Jet version of the MAX 7. Basically, it's someone with a ton of money that feels a Gulfstream is too basic for them, or it belongs to a company.
Here's some more info about it:
Showcasing Boeing's 737 Max BBJ private jets costing upwards of $90 million
The Boeing 737 Max BBJ (Boeing Business Jet) is an ultra-long-range business jet family based on the highly successful 737 commercial airliners.
Last edited:
- 13,143
- Seattle-ish
That’s incorrect. Boeing currently offers three different 737 BBJ models, based on the Max 7, Max 8, and Max 9. The original BBJ was based on the 737-700 but has been discontinued. Other discontinued 737-based BBJ models were the -800, -900ER, and the 700 C. BBJs are also available based on the 777 and 787. Even the 747-8 was available as a BBJ.
- 19,627
- Alabamamania
Airbus A380s don't come around too often, but I caught one as I was filling up in San Francisco last week.
Last of the big boppers; last time I was going through SFO was nine years ago, and I swear there were at least 6-7 747s all lined up. Now just one.
Last of the big boppers; last time I was going through SFO was nine years ago, and I swear there were at least 6-7 747s all lined up. Now just one.
Last edited:
Barra333
Premium
- 6,522
- London, ON
- barra333
These days it is definitely a case of happening to be in a place where the local airline still has a few. I saw a couple of QANTAS 747s in Sydney in February, and a pile of A380s (QANTAS, Emirates) - apparently QANTAS were (are) in the process of doing the maintenance required to get them back in service after being mothballed for COVID.
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
So as mentioned here, I have gotten a new phone and managed to have basically everything from my previous one carried over. One of those was the flightradar24 app and upon opening it, I had a message prompting me to try the AR feature. So after trying to figure out screen shots and using it, here's my first pic with it:
Kinda trippy, but cool to have while outside.
Kinda trippy, but cool to have while outside.
Last edited:
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
Went on abit of a stroll earlier and took some shots of the Airport I live down the street from.
And using the AR feature on the app, manage to capture this on my way back home:
Edit: Just occured to me that in that 3rd photo, its that exact 737-200 from Last year:
And using the AR feature on the app, manage to capture this on my way back home:
Edit: Just occured to me that in that 3rd photo, its that exact 737-200 from Last year:
Last edited:
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
Now that I am back to walking regularly AND have a phone with a working camera, I can finally post stuff I see from the local airport starting with last week:
And two interesting ones from this week (Well, today really):
And two interesting ones from this week (Well, today really):
Last edited:
- 2,685
- Knoxville, Tennessee
Dat Embraer Lineage 1000 tho... 🔥
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
That was quite the shock of the day for me. Despite seeing the 737-200 in person, all I could think was "They allow something this huge?". Feels somehow bigger, though that might be purely skewed by the Pipers and and smaller jets there at the time.
Last edited:
- 16,094
- Melbourne
- ScottPuss20
- CheetahsMeow
Yes that caught my attention too.
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
Nothing from Tuesday as I didn't walk due to the heavy rain (and lightning).
Today I got two decent ones:
I don't normally take pics of these planes as I feel like they are everywhere so I hardly am missing anything. However, this one having the familiar Air Force Roundel caught my eye.
Have Weirdly seen less of these lately.
But as I was walking back, along comes THE show stealer of the day:
I have wanted so long to not just see this in person but to actually get a picture of one in the flesh and I finally did.
Today I got two decent ones:
I don't normally take pics of these planes as I feel like they are everywhere so I hardly am missing anything. However, this one having the familiar Air Force Roundel caught my eye.
Have Weirdly seen less of these lately.
But as I was walking back, along comes THE show stealer of the day:
I have wanted so long to not just see this in person but to actually get a picture of one in the flesh and I finally did.
Last edited:
Keef
Premium
- 25,020
- Dayton, OH
- GTP_KeefRacer
- GTP Keef
Surprised nobody has brought up the sad but intruiging plane crash that happened on Sunday. Unfortunately seems like another Payne Stewart hypoxia/depressurization situation.
Reddit thread.
Blancolirio breakdown:
A big sticking point that non-jet-pilot people are getting stuck on is why the airplane turned and then continued straight, seemingly back toward its destination. That's just a geographic coincidence. The flight path itself is a consequence of the plane's speed, autopilot limitations, and FMS programming.
Basically when we program a flight plan into the plane's FMS, we type in various named points or named routes along the way. Sometimes we can program a procedure which includes numerous points, for example arrival procedures which can span hundreds of miles, dozens of waypoints, and are designed to get jets down from high altitudes and high speeds into the terminal area like a highway exit ramp. But sometimes, for smaller airports, no arrival procedure exists so our cleared flight plan will end in a slightly different manner.
This plane was supposed to land at KISP, Islip New York, and there aren't any arrivals for KISP. In a case like this, we program the various flight plan waypoints like normal but the final point in the FMS will actually be the airport itself. After that, we'll program an approach into whatever runway. This is the normal technique. Another trick to the FMS is that typically, in 98% of situations, the arrival and/or flight plan is not actually connected to the approach down to the runway. Virtually all arrivals have a final point/altitude/speed, and from there ATC will vector planes toward the approach which requires the pilots to switch autopilot modes and start following instructions. It also requires the pilots to reprogram the FMS, or "sequence" the approach, i.e. get rid of all the nonsense before it that we don't need anymore and program the approach to be the next thing the autopilot captures. This is key because if we don't sequence the approach then the FMS never knows how to connect the dots and will simply continue doing whatever its last assignment was.
In this case, the approach was never sequenced. That's obvious because usually the approach is sequenced at low altitude and low speed, only minutes before the pilots turn to intercept the approach and land. This Citation never even descended from 34,000 feet which tells me that the pilots were incapacitated probably 30+ minutes before sequencing would've normally occurred because New York controllers typically drag jets down low and slow for an annoyingly long time and distance, part of how they manage the huge amount of traffic in the area. Normally this plane probably would've started descending around the time it reached New Jersey on its way north.
What happened next was a consequence of its flight plan. The plane never descended and continued at about 400 knots over the ground, following the basic flight plan at its cruise altitude. All autopilots conduct lateral navigation by default, turning left and right, but many of them aren't equipped with vertical naviation at all. Even if they are, it needs to be engaged at the right time by the pilots, which tells me that this pilot was incapacitated even before any initial descent occurred. The final tight turn and resulting final heading toward DC is a quirk caused by the flight plan combined with the speed. I checked my charts and KISP has an approach to runway 24 with an initial fix at Calverton VOR, CCC. Neither the intercept course from CCC (278) nor the final approach course (239) result in a path leading to DC. But if you consider typical flight plan FMS programming it makes sense.
I mentioned before that there isn't any arrival into this airport which means KISP, the airport itself, would've been the last waypoint on the plan. Normally the pilots would never actually fly directly to the airport because obviously they want to land there, not overfly it. That's where sequencing the FMS comes in. As the pilots are maybe 10-15 miles from the airport ATC would starting giving them vectors to fly, and at this point they'd sequence the approach in the FMS, deleting their final waypoints including the airport, and make the approach itself the next task for the FMS to follow. But none of that ever happened. Instead, the plane simply followed the plan, and I can assume what it was. The last two points on the flight plan would've been CCC followed by KISP. If you draw a straight line course from CCC to KISP you get a 255 heading which tracks directly over DC, almost the exact same line the plane actually followed. The FMS was simply doing what it was told - its last instructions where to go from CCC to KISP, and it did that, and kept on going in a straight line.
The autopilot obviously has speed data for the plane too so the reason the turn radius was so large is because the plane was going 400 knots, at least twice as fast as it would normally make this turn at low altitude. The plane's track never actually crossed CCC because it had to anticipate the turn toward KISP, so it turned very early, a nice smooth arc, which resulted in crossing KISP on a 255 course and then continuing on until it ran out of fuel.
So that explains why the plane continued southwest in a straight line on that course. No, it wasn't programmed to go back to its destination, that's not how we program an FMS. No it wasn't flying the IAF because we don't fly IAFs or procedure turns in jets if we don't have to, and no it wasn't attempting an approach because it was never sequenced. No it wasn't some sort of failsafe and no it wasn't anything nefarious that had to do with Washington DC. It was simply an FMS doing what an FMS does, interpolating a high speed turn and then tracking the course between its final two flight plan points. Total geographic coincidence that it pointed to DC.
So the flight part is all about numbers and procedure, pretty easy to figure out. Why everybody died is another story but because pressurization loss events - like the Payne Stewart crash in 1999 - have happened multiple times in the past. Radio records will give us a better idea of when loss of communication occurred but we can assume everybody in the plane - or at least the pilot which is an even scarier thought - was dead at least 30 minutes before their planned arrival time.
Reddit thread.
Blancolirio breakdown:
A big sticking point that non-jet-pilot people are getting stuck on is why the airplane turned and then continued straight, seemingly back toward its destination. That's just a geographic coincidence. The flight path itself is a consequence of the plane's speed, autopilot limitations, and FMS programming.
Basically when we program a flight plan into the plane's FMS, we type in various named points or named routes along the way. Sometimes we can program a procedure which includes numerous points, for example arrival procedures which can span hundreds of miles, dozens of waypoints, and are designed to get jets down from high altitudes and high speeds into the terminal area like a highway exit ramp. But sometimes, for smaller airports, no arrival procedure exists so our cleared flight plan will end in a slightly different manner.
This plane was supposed to land at KISP, Islip New York, and there aren't any arrivals for KISP. In a case like this, we program the various flight plan waypoints like normal but the final point in the FMS will actually be the airport itself. After that, we'll program an approach into whatever runway. This is the normal technique. Another trick to the FMS is that typically, in 98% of situations, the arrival and/or flight plan is not actually connected to the approach down to the runway. Virtually all arrivals have a final point/altitude/speed, and from there ATC will vector planes toward the approach which requires the pilots to switch autopilot modes and start following instructions. It also requires the pilots to reprogram the FMS, or "sequence" the approach, i.e. get rid of all the nonsense before it that we don't need anymore and program the approach to be the next thing the autopilot captures. This is key because if we don't sequence the approach then the FMS never knows how to connect the dots and will simply continue doing whatever its last assignment was.
In this case, the approach was never sequenced. That's obvious because usually the approach is sequenced at low altitude and low speed, only minutes before the pilots turn to intercept the approach and land. This Citation never even descended from 34,000 feet which tells me that the pilots were incapacitated probably 30+ minutes before sequencing would've normally occurred because New York controllers typically drag jets down low and slow for an annoyingly long time and distance, part of how they manage the huge amount of traffic in the area. Normally this plane probably would've started descending around the time it reached New Jersey on its way north.
What happened next was a consequence of its flight plan. The plane never descended and continued at about 400 knots over the ground, following the basic flight plan at its cruise altitude. All autopilots conduct lateral navigation by default, turning left and right, but many of them aren't equipped with vertical naviation at all. Even if they are, it needs to be engaged at the right time by the pilots, which tells me that this pilot was incapacitated even before any initial descent occurred. The final tight turn and resulting final heading toward DC is a quirk caused by the flight plan combined with the speed. I checked my charts and KISP has an approach to runway 24 with an initial fix at Calverton VOR, CCC. Neither the intercept course from CCC (278) nor the final approach course (239) result in a path leading to DC. But if you consider typical flight plan FMS programming it makes sense.
I mentioned before that there isn't any arrival into this airport which means KISP, the airport itself, would've been the last waypoint on the plan. Normally the pilots would never actually fly directly to the airport because obviously they want to land there, not overfly it. That's where sequencing the FMS comes in. As the pilots are maybe 10-15 miles from the airport ATC would starting giving them vectors to fly, and at this point they'd sequence the approach in the FMS, deleting their final waypoints including the airport, and make the approach itself the next task for the FMS to follow. But none of that ever happened. Instead, the plane simply followed the plan, and I can assume what it was. The last two points on the flight plan would've been CCC followed by KISP. If you draw a straight line course from CCC to KISP you get a 255 heading which tracks directly over DC, almost the exact same line the plane actually followed. The FMS was simply doing what it was told - its last instructions where to go from CCC to KISP, and it did that, and kept on going in a straight line.
The autopilot obviously has speed data for the plane too so the reason the turn radius was so large is because the plane was going 400 knots, at least twice as fast as it would normally make this turn at low altitude. The plane's track never actually crossed CCC because it had to anticipate the turn toward KISP, so it turned very early, a nice smooth arc, which resulted in crossing KISP on a 255 course and then continuing on until it ran out of fuel.
So that explains why the plane continued southwest in a straight line on that course. No, it wasn't programmed to go back to its destination, that's not how we program an FMS. No it wasn't flying the IAF because we don't fly IAFs or procedure turns in jets if we don't have to, and no it wasn't attempting an approach because it was never sequenced. No it wasn't some sort of failsafe and no it wasn't anything nefarious that had to do with Washington DC. It was simply an FMS doing what an FMS does, interpolating a high speed turn and then tracking the course between its final two flight plan points. Total geographic coincidence that it pointed to DC.
So the flight part is all about numbers and procedure, pretty easy to figure out. Why everybody died is another story but because pressurization loss events - like the Payne Stewart crash in 1999 - have happened multiple times in the past. Radio records will give us a better idea of when loss of communication occurred but we can assume everybody in the plane - or at least the pilot which is an even scarier thought - was dead at least 30 minutes before their planned arrival time.
- 35,166
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
While I didn't walk last Thursday (was not feeling well), I did see this:
And then Friday, took these:
With this being the highlight of that Friday
I have now seen both the Starship AND Avanti in the flesh.
And then Friday, took these:
With this being the highlight of that Friday
I have now seen both the Starship AND Avanti in the flesh.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Similar threads
