Thread: Airline News

Judge: JetBlue pilot who left cockpit, disrupted flight is mentally competent to stand trial

What possible benefit to society can come out of prosecuting this poor bastard. He obviously has mental problems and has already lost his career.
The absolute loss of common sense in America is frightening

Originally Posted by S Landreth

This bit of news might put a dent in United Airlines business,………

"We are now boarding those with special needs, and we here at United consider children your blessing, not a special need, so we ask that you board according to your boarding number."

New airline policies anger family fliers

Excellent news, lets start by having a separate cabin for those travelling with children with extra soundproofing.

Originally Posted by BobR

The absolute loss of common sense in America is frightening

Agreed. It's been getting worse year on year.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Excellent news, lets start by having a separate cabin for those travelling with children with extra soundproofing.

Couldn't they just use the hold? Give then a coat and a mug of hot soup.

Originally Posted by BobR

Judge: JetBlue pilot who left cockpit, disrupted flight is mentally competent to stand trial

What possible benefit to society can come out of prosecuting this poor bastard. He obviously has mental problems and has already lost his career.
The absolute loss of common sense in America is frightening

I guess they have to go through the due process. One would hope that a jury would see your reasoning and leave it at that. I'll send you a PM about something similar.

^Its hard to see how a prosecution of this pilot is in the public interest. Its not like if they let this crime go unpunished its going to encourage more pilots to wreck their careers in the same way. But then as western contries become more and more compliance orientated, common sense is something people start leaving at home when they set off to work.

Originally Posted by S Landreth

This bit of news might put a dent in United Airlines business,………

"We are now boarding those with special needs, and we here at United consider children your blessing, not a special need, so we ask that you board according to your boarding number."

New airline policies anger family fliers

Given the crum that economy class can become during boarding and the seriously heavy cases that some people, laughably, regard as hand luggage. Its only going to be a matter of time before someones little jonny is going to get seriously trodden on or crushed and Unighted get lumbered with on of those stupid multi million injury claims.

What they need is one of those outdoor lavatories that yorkshire airlines use. stuff the howlers in there.

^

Shits me when they let some tosser board with heaps of hand luggage or a friggin bag that one must cut in half to get in the overhead bin.

Jeez, why don't they tell them to fok off.

Originally Posted by terry57

^

Shits me when they let some tosser board with heaps of hand luggage or a friggin bag that one must cut in half to get in the overhead bin.

Jeez, why don't they tell them to fok off.

A number of international carriers are doing just that, Ter.
Becoming more stringent towards carry-ons.

Yet, most don't practice what they preach.
Too many travelling cnuts defy all decent decorum with these over-sized bags.

They should be hung.
No questions asked.

Yeah well what to do? They cut the check-in bags down to 20 or even 15 kilos on the real cheapos, so we hoof them onto our carry-on bags.

I flew on a bkk-lhr flight that had a complete ban on hand luggage. not even a book. They managed to empty a full 747 in less than 3 minutes, the only good bit of the flight.

one the taking the piss side, on my last flight to the uk, some old indian lady asked me to put her bag into the overhead. I swear it was over 20kg, told her it was to heavy, suggested she ask the cabin crew and I asked was she carrying gold or drugs.

^I went to use the lavatory on a long Cathay Pacific flight - opened the door to find some older Indian woman with Sari hiked up as she was using the facility. No idea how to lock the door, never mind wash her hands - or use an overhead compartment.

Every airport I have transited in has had a security check between the arrivals area and departures. is this something on top of this?

I was in dubai last year for the first time, the gap between the gates is impressive, gyms charge for less.

^ You've never CIQ'd in Bangkok then?

Sorry, I can be a bit thick at times, CIQ? If you mean have I transited at BKK, no. Ive only started and terminated journeys there.

Customs, Immigration, Quarantine. It's the little sticker you get when you are connecting from Domestic to International, but you've cleared immigration, etc. at the airport at which you boarded.

Photograph by Tony Rodgers
With prices for used 747-400s at record lows, some are being stripped for parts

Aviation

Boeing's 747-400, a Faded Queen of the Skies


Back in the late ’80s, global airlines scrambled to place orders for Boeing’s (BA) 747-400 widebody, then the industry’s most coveted aircraft for its sheer size, high-tech cockpit, and creature comforts. Now, ten-year-old passenger 747-400s are worth a record-low $36 million, about 10 percent less than similarly aged planes last year, according to London-based aviation consultancy Ascend, as carriers seek more fuel-efficient models. There’s even little interest in converting the passenger jets into air freighters because of a slump in air cargo demand.
Some 48 of the humpbacked passenger 747-400s worldwide have also been placed in storage, according to Ascend. The onetime “Queen of the Skies” has been shunned in favor of Boeing’s smaller 777 widebody (which has two fewer engines sucking fuel) or Airbus’s mammoth A380 double-decker. “There’s not a lot of demand for the 747,” says Paul Sheridan, Ascend’s head of consultancy Asia. “They’re mostly being broken up for parts.”
The decline in prices contributed to Singapore Airlines (SIA2) having a surprise loss in the quarter ended March after the sale of the carrier’s last 747-400 brought in less than it expected. Japan Airlines has stopped using the planes, and operators including Cathay Pacific Airways, Korean Air Lines, and Malaysian Airline System (MAS) are following suit to help counter jet fuel prices that have jumped about 30 percent in two years. “When oil prices are high,” explains Cathay Pacific Chief Executive Officer John Slosar, “the last thing you want to do is hold on to your older planes.”
The Hong Kong-based airline said last month that it’s speeding up the retirement of its 21 passenger 747-400s. The carrier will shed nine through early 2014 as it adds more 777-300ERs for long-haul flights. Cathay is also retiring three 400-series freighters this year due to the arrival of new 747-8 cargo planes that are slightly larger and more fuel-efficient.
Although the original 747 was developed in the 1960s, the first 400 variant—which was more fuel-efficient and required one fewer cockpit crew member—was delivered to Northwest Airlines in 1989. The standard version can fly as far as 7,260 nautical miles (13,450 kilometers), carrying 416 passengers in three classes. Boeing delivered the last of the 400s series jets—all told, some 694 were sold—in 2009.

Newer aircraft use less fuel because of the development of more efficient engines and of lightweight materials. Boeing’s new 787, for instance, has a fuselage built from reinforced plastics, compared with the 747’s heavier aluminum shell. “We’re seeing a lot of airlines understanding that they need more fuel-efficient planes, and that bodes very well for us,” says Jim Albaugh, the head of Boeing’s commercial-plane business.
But such changes also can provide rivals an opening. Thai Airways International (THAI) is in the process of selling four 747-400s and it will begin phasing out the model in 2013. The carrier will begin receiving six of the A380s it has on order later this year. Flying 747-400s now “doesn’t make sense,” Amranand says. “It’s obvious that with this sort of fuel price that it will cost you.”
Simple math tells the story. Malaysian Airline System, which received its first A380 last month, will consume 1,181 barrels of fuel flying the 494-seat aircraft to London from Kuala Lumpur, according to Maybank Kim Eng Securities (MAY) analyst Wong Chew Hann. The carrier’s 359-seat 747-400s use about 999 barrels of fuel on the same route, he says. Fuel accounts for about a third of airlines’ costs, according to the International Air Transport Association, so the Airbus jumbo’s 16 percent edge in per-passenger efficiency is a big selling point.
The A380, which surpassed the 747-400 as the world’s largest commercial plane when it entered service in 2007, has become the flagship for carriers including Singapore Air and Qantas Airways (QUBSF). That’s left rivals still reliant on the 400 series at a disadvantage in terms of costs and prestige, says Maybank’s Wong. “It takes an A380 to beat an A380,” he wrote in a June 8 research note.
European carriers, operating in slower-growth markets, are replacing 747-400s less quickly. British Airways, the biggest 747-400 operator with its fleet of 55, according to Ascend, will retire the last of its fleet in about 10 years. “It’s a great aircraft. Customers love it,” says Willie Walsh, chief executive of BA’s parent, International Consolidated Airlines Group (IAG). “We could replace some of them with 777-300ERs, which we are doing, but we are not looking to replace all of them.” Nonetheless, BA has also ordered 12 Airbus A380s, which will start arriving in about a year.
Although Deutsche Lufthansa (LHA) is already flying A380s and has ordered some 747-8s, it will still continue using its 400 series planes. “We will use it for quite a number of years,” says CEO Christoph Franz. One reason for the loyalty: Lufthansa owns them outright and their costs have long been accounted for.
The bottom line: Prices for used 747-400s, the world’s most popular widebody plane, have dropped 10 percent in the past year. Blame it on costly fuel.

It's a shame about the 747 -- it still remains the most comfortable, and safe, wide-body intercontinental plane. Airbus' are noisy and cramped, and the new Boeing planes, made of composite materials, aren't as safe in my opinion.

I will always vastly prefer a 747 for transportation, over any alternative.

Pretty big news. Don Muang will be reopening as a low cost carrier airport in Oct. I am not sure why the picture is of terminal 2. The article from the BKK Post says only terminal 1 will be used for the time being.

Don Mueang to be city's budget air hub

AirAsia agrees to move, incentives for 13 more

• Published: 26/06/2012 at 10:05 AM
• Newspaper section: News

8Share




Don Mueang Airport is to be repackaged as Bangkok's low-cost regional airport after leading budget carrier AirAsia agreed to shift its base there.
A worker paints the Terminal 2 building at Don Mueang airport, which will serve more low-cost carriers and point-to-point domestic and international flights. APICHIT JINAKUL

AirAsia yesterday clinched a memorandum of understanding with Airports of Thailand (AoT) to operate its Bangkok flights in and out of Don Mueang from Oct 1. It currently flies out of Suvarnabhumi International Airport, the city's main gateway.
The airline became the first of 14 scheduled airlines, operating under the basis of discounted fares and point-to-point flights, to accept AoT's incentives for relocation, which were endorsed by the cabinet last Tuesday.
The incentives package, accented primarily on reduction of landing/parking fees, space rental and service charges, forms part of an overall policy change to officially turn Don Mueang into Bangkok's second airport to ease congestion at Suvarnabhumi.
AoT president Anirut Thanomkulbutra yesterday said no preferential treatment was given to AirAsia.
He affirmed the incentives rendered to the airline are standard and are the same as those which will be offered to the 13 other airlines targeted by AoT for relocation from Suvarnabhumi.
It also means AirAsia did not pursue its earlier request for AoT to turn over the whole of Terminal 1 (T1), one of Don Mueang's three passenger terminals, for its own exclusive use.
Tassapon Bijleveld, chief executive of Thai AirAsia, the local offshoot of Malaysia-based AirAsia, said yesterday that Don Mueang will be the airline's "permanent" base.
He said the agreement will continue well beyond his tenure as the airline's leader.
All the flights operated by the 14 airlines, as well as chartered flights, will be bundled at Don Mueang's T1, which has the capacity to handle up to 16 million passengers a year.
AoT would consider reopening Terminal 2, capable of accommodating 9 million passengers a year, only if T1 is used to capacity and requires easing of congestion, Mr Anirut said.
Don Mueang's overall capacity is 36.5 million passengers a year.
If all 14 airlines agree to come back, Don Mueang _ which was replaced by Suvarnabhumi as the country's main airport in 2006 _ could see up to 14 million passengers pass through each year.
The AoT chief said three or four other airlines besides the targeted 14, including Orient Thai, also planned to shift their bases to Don Mueang.
However, Orient Thai Airlines executive Udom Tantiprasongchai complained yesterday that his airline, together with Nok Air and N-Jet (a chartered airline), which was earlier based at Don Mueang until moving to Suvarnabhumi after last year's flooding, is not entitled to the incentives.
He said Mr Anirut had earlier encouraged Orient Thai to move back to Don Mueang and the airlines had prepared to move from today.
But he said Orient Thai was then informed that it would not receive the same incentives as the other 14 airlines, which had been based at Suvarnabhumi since the new airport's outset.
He will meet executives of the two other airlines today before deciding his next move.
Mr Anirut said that Don Mueang will be officially up and running on Oct 1, when further renovation of T1 will be completed.
He said Don Mueang airport must earn at least 500 million baht a year if it wants to write off asset impairment costs, Mr Anirut said.
AoT expects the airport will break even in three years, as the rising number of passengers at Suvarnabhumi will make for an increasing overspill to Don Mueang.
Passengers will be a major source of revenue for Don Mueang airport as they are required to pay a passenger service charge, which is also known as the airport tax, an AoT source said.
Domestic passengers must pay 100 baht a person while international passengers pay 700 baht.
Revenues from duty free shops will be less than at Suvarnabhumi because shopping is not as popular among most passengers of budget carriers, the source added.
AoT will nevertheless call for bids for duty free shops, but it will not grant a concession to the King Power Group, which already has the rights to Suvarnabhumi, AoT chairman Sumet Photimanee said.
He added that AoT has allocated 154 million baht for the Don Mueang plans, topping off the 1.64-billion-baht budget for recovery from last year's floods.
AoT will arrange shuttle buses and other public transport for passengers transferring from Suvarnabhumi to Don Mueang, ACM Sumet said.

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

It's a shame about the 747 -- it still remains the most comfortable, and safe, wide-body intercontinental plane. Airbus' are noisy and cramped, and the new Boeing planes, made of composite materials, aren't as safe in my opinion.

I will always vastly prefer a 747 for transportation, over any alternative.

You obviously haven't flown the A380.

I flew back from Sydney yesterday on the best 747 I have ever had in Thai's fleet.

I didn't feel like I had to peddle.

As for the A380, nice, but fuck it's take off is so flat you wonder if it won't clip the perimeter fence....

For those that travel economy class, the Thai airways 747's have generally a 44" seat pitch, the Airbus 360's and their proposed 380's go back to industry standard 32".

What is this "economy class" of which you speak?

Oh, and by the way the pitch and the spacing are up to the airline.

As are showers, a bar, and fully enclosed First Class cabins.