Thread: Airline News

Originally Posted by gusG

^ what site are you using?

FlightBoard

On a separate issue I was told Air Canada has stopped flying A340 on trans-Atlantic routes (e.g. Toronto to London) and replaced them with A330s. No wonder it's a 3* airline..

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by gusG

^ what site are you using?

FlightBoard

Try Flightstats and see if it is any better.

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

On a separate issue I was told Air Canada has stopped flying A340 on trans-Atlantic routes (e.g. Toronto to London) and replaced them with A330s. No wonder it's a 3* airline..

What is wrong with that? Route is ETOPS so twin engine is allowed...Air Canada have got rid of all their A340's and Airbus have ceased production of them. A330 has same fuselage and wings, more economical and shares same avionic fit...so easy to X-Train. Why would you want to fly the A-340 when you have a more economical alternative for the same route?

^"Four legs good, two legs better!"

Orwell, Animal Farm

I haven't flown the Dreamliner or the A380 - have done Boeing since the 707 - but Airbus anything always seems to have a smoother take off and landing than the equivalent Boeing 99% of the time.

^
I haven,t flown in the Dreamliner 787 either. Although I have been told by a friend who has flown on it with ANA on a few occasions that it seems very roomy inside due to the bigger windows ie. more light etc. Its certainly a nice looking aeroplane.

It will certainly be a lot lighter due to its composite material build, and its fuel consumption will be well up the savings scale for an airliner.
New aeroplanes always have teething problems, the problem for manufacturers is to find the problems before any incidents or events.Then modify and prevent.

Lets hope Airbus, Boeing and all other aircraft makers continue to find these problems and glitches before there are any serious accidents.

Originally Posted by thehighlander959

It will certainly be a lot lighter due to its composite material build, and its fuel consumption will be well up the savings scale for an airliner.

Well that's the point of both the A380 and the 787 isn't it? (And the A350).

Lower fuel costs per tonne basically, whether it's cargo or passengers.

First question. How did he get into the cockpit?
As far as I am aware all cockpit doors are supposed to be locked to prevent unauthorized personnel entering the flightdeck. My niece is a Flight Purser with Virgin,they have bullet proof doors and the only entry to the cockpit is via the combination security lock on the cockpit door.
I thought this was the safety procedure for all international airlines....

Originally Posted by thehighlander959

First question. How did he get into the cockpit?
As far as I am aware all cockpit doors are supposed to be locked to prevent unauthorized personnel entering the flightdeck. My niece is a Flight Purser with Virgin,they have bullet proof doors and the only entry to the cockpit is via the combination security lock on the cockpit door.
I thought this was the safety procedure for all international airlines....

I thought it was, too, and there will probably be questions asked of the flight and cabin crew.

a man who some passengers said was wearing a TAM identification badge got into the cockpit because the door was open.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by thehighlander959

First question. How did he get into the cockpit?
As far as I am aware all cockpit doors are supposed to be locked to prevent unauthorized personnel entering the flightdeck. My niece is a Flight Purser with Virgin,they have bullet proof doors and the only entry to the cockpit is via the combination security lock on the cockpit door.
I thought this was the safety procedure for all international airlines....

I thought it was, too, and there will probably be questions asked of the flight and cabin crew.

a man who some passengers said was wearing a TAM identification badge got into the cockpit because the door was open.

Last time I flew Air Asia, I decided to use the front toilet (old 737-300) at the exact same time as the co-pilot came out of the cockpit. I stopped and motioned her into the bathroom and waited for her to come out, but had I been so inclined, access to the cockpit would not have been difficult.
Nothing is fool proof, if someone wants in badly enough they can wait for the door to open and charge in so long as they can hide their intent.

I miss the good old days when you could show the flight attendant your private pilots license and the Captain would call you up to the cockpit for a tour when he had time. Funny, it was not that long ago. Last did it on Virgin Atlantic around 1999, it was quite interesting and the pilots were very polite and proud of their 747-400. Probably unthinkable now.

[quote=BobR;2016885]

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I miss the good old days when you could show the flight attendant your private pilots license and the Captain would call you up to the cockpit for a tour when he had time. Funny, it was not that long ago. Last did it on Virgin Atlantic around 1999, it was quite interesting and the pilots were very polite and proud of their 747-400. Probably unthinkable now.

Never even needed that, if you had a kid. Many pilots would be more than willing to let you take your kids up to the cockpit in the old days.

Another thing ruined by the miserable fucking mussies.

^ That article about Qantas and their hidden key is interesting, and they probably had a good idea. The fortified door can be a lifesaver but certainly could backfire for the obvious reason that once someone with bad intent accessed the cockpit the door would serve to protect them.

Those doors may have been an over-reaction anyway. Prior to 9-11 the accepted conduct was to go along with a hijacker and not to risk a confrontation. The 2 planes that crashed into the WTF changed that so quickly that even on the same morning the passengers on the United flight that later crashed in Pennsylvania were bravely and correctly trying to access the cockpit to take control of the plane from the hijackers.

The 787 while it was here in Bangkok.

I was talking with our infield helicopter pilot this morning as we had a chopper shutdown on the platform this morning.

The pilot is from Columbia, he was saying to me that only certain countries have a locked cockpit door policy and it doesn,t extend to an agreement wordwide.
The US and the EU have enforced it,however in other countries it is at the airlines discretion whether they want to follow the guidelines and procedures set by other carriers concerning cockpit safety and security.
Maybe the door wasn,t locked after all....

Originally Posted by BobR

That article about Qantas and their hidden key is interesting, and they probably had a good idea.

Maybe it was a good idea. But once it is in the open it is no longer practical. I doubt that a stewardess with a knife at her throat will refuse to give that key away.

I'm on 737-300 and airbus 319 regular and for me the 319 is better on take off , landing, and stopping, but it dont seem as stable as the 737 on approach.

Originally Posted by BobR

^ That article about Qantas and their hidden key is interesting, and they probably had a good idea. The fortified door can be a lifesaver but certainly could backfire for the obvious reason that once someone with bad intent accessed the cockpit the door would serve to protect them.

Those doors may have been an over-reaction anyway. Prior to 9-11 the accepted conduct was to go along with a hijacker and not to risk a confrontation. The 2 planes that crashed into the WTF changed that so quickly that even on the same morning the passengers on the United flight that later crashed in Pennsylvania were bravely and correctly trying to access the cockpit to take control of the plane from the hijackers.

I think you have hit the nail on the head there. A team of 10-20 hyjackers can only take control of and aircraft if the other passangers let them. Now that we all know that the death is almost a certanty if they get control, they can be sure that a decent percentage of the passangers will have decided before they got on the aircraft they would rather die atempting to rip the hyjackers apart with their bare hands, than wait for the eneviable end.

Dream on, they would sit there and the "hostess" would give then liquor.

Potentially hundreds of Australians are stranded in Thailand as budget carrier Air Australia goes under

Thousands stranded overseas as Air Australia placed in administration

I dont even think the new paint job's have had a chance to dry yet.

^ One would need to be quite stupid to travel this far without either access to sufficient funds for such an emergency or travel insurance. Phuket if not exactly like being stranded on Gilligan's Island.
I like your avatar, Alan Hale used to run a restaurant in Los Angeles after his TV career. He was an interesting and quite personable man.