Jet Blue -scary!

In article <omnks11pfmv7hdgvd2ch6dvflkfacek8po@>, AB.
<annREMOVE@pipeline.com> wrote:

> I flew Jet Blue for the 1st time recently. I did a round trip from JFK
> to BOS...
> [horror story snipped; stories of returns to gate & computer problems]
> Obviously, Jet Blue is not servicing their planes as well as they
> should.

It's not JetBlue, it's Embraer, who built the plane you flew on. Since
the 170/190 model was introduced to the world, it's been *plagued* by
computer problems. We had one sit for FIVE DAYS waiting for a part,
because the computer malfunctioned.

The problem isn't JetBlue. Fly planes from another manufacturer (like
Boeing or, if you must, Airbus) and you'll have better reliability;
simple as that. Embraer builds a mediocre airplane.

"beavis" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote ...

AB <annREMOVE@pipeline.com> wrote:
>
>> I flew Jet Blue for the 1st time recently. I did a round trip from JFK
>> to BOS...
>> [horror story snipped; stories of returns to gate & computer problems]
>> Obviously, Jet Blue is not servicing their planes as well as they
>> should.
>
> It's not JetBlue, it's Embraer, who built the plane you flew on. Since
> the 170/190 model was introduced to the world, it's been *plagued* by
> computer problems. We had one sit for FIVE DAYS waiting for a part,
> because the computer malfunctioned.
>
> The problem isn't JetBlue. Fly planes from another manufacturer (like
> Boeing or, if you must, Airbus) and you'll have better reliability;
> simple as that. Embraer builds a mediocre airplane.

Well the choices are few....

There's Embraers from the land of Taurus and Rossi, once famuz for shoes
that didn't fit, or Bombardungs from frozen Canuckistan. Would you have
them buying used Yakolevs?

Better you should blame the maintenance problems on the manufacturer of the
troubled avionics ("Computer"). Actually, some folks Embraers have been
relatively trouble free. JetBlue's must be from a bad batch...

beavis schrieb:

>>[horror story snipped; stories of returns to gate & computer problems]
>>Obviously, Jet Blue is not servicing their planes as well as they
>>should.
>
>
> It's not JetBlue, it's Embraer, who built the plane you flew on. Since
> the 170/190 model was introduced to the world, it's been *plagued* by
> computer problems. We had one sit for FIVE DAYS waiting for a part,
> because the computer malfunctioned.
>
> The problem isn't JetBlue. Fly planes from another manufacturer (like
> Boeing or, if you must, Airbus) and you'll have better reliability;
> simple as that.

Isn't that the carrier's choice, for which the carrier should be
responsible?

In article <dqo17c$kjl$1@news1.zdv.uni-mainz.de>, Ulf Kutzner
<kutzu000@mail.uni-mainz.de> wrote:

> beavis schrieb:
>
> >>[horror story snipped; stories of returns to gate & computer problems]
> >>Obviously, Jet Blue is not servicing their planes as well as they
> >>should.
> >>
> >> It's not JetBlue, it's Embraer, who built the plane you flew on. Since
> > the 170/190 model was introduced to the world, it's been *plagued* by
> > computer problems....

> Isn't that the carrier's choice, for which the carrier should be
> responsible?

Responsible? Of course. But the OP's suggestion that the problem were
because the airline "is not servicing their planes as well as they
should" is simply incorrect. Even excellent maintenance cannot change
design flaws in the product.