dark light

rdc1000

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 1,226 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Virgin signs for the A330 #489184
    rdc1000
    Participant

    I should have said new “Cheap leases on NEW BUILD quads” Granted there are 747 parked up but they are all used.
    close to the same.

    Rgds Cking

    This still doesn’t stack up. The original announcement regarding the order was in June 2009, at which time VS said they had ordered 10x A330’s, of which 4 would be leased, and they would buy the remaining 6 themselves. They have since gone on to arrange sale and leaseback deals on the remaining 6 aircraft.

    If they’d wanted A430s, they’d have ordered them and gone through the same process. However, the fact that they cancelled 6 remaining A340-600 orders once they firmed up the A330 deal in January this year would suggest their preference is for the twin over the quad.

    in reply to: Ryanair ground accident #489185
    rdc1000
    Participant

    RyanAir outdoes itself again!

    In WHAT way? This incident has happened on many occasions to many other airlines, including some of the most “highly regarded” flag carriers. What a ridiculous comment!

    It does, and has happened to other airlines but I can’t recall many where 2 a/c from the same company have collided 😉

    Pakistan International, 2xB777s 13th April 2007
    Alitalia 2x Md-82s 26th August 2006
    I’m sure there will be more, particulalry in the USA where many airports don’t have common user gates, and consequently aircraft moving around each other are likely to be of the same airline, just as at GRO where at this time of year, many of the operations are dominated by RYR.

    “A collision between two Ryanair planes” doesn’t necessarily imply or state both were at fault, in which case I see no difference whatsoever whether they’re from the same airline or not as far as slagging the airline off is concerned. 😉

    Paul

    Exactly.

    If we can’t slag off ryanair who can we slag off? 😀

    FlyMayBe????

    Or Lufthansa who have a bad habit of bumping into other people’s aircraft, such as at LCY where they decided to nudge a BA Avro (21st April 2008), or at MAN where they decided to brush up against a Futura B737-800 (5th Aug 2008)

    in reply to: The risks of body scanners. #489412
    rdc1000
    Participant

    Hello,

    …… It really take the fun out of flying.

    Yeh, I’m with you, it was always more fun when it was a lottery as to whether you’d get hijacked or blown up! I blame the litigious society that we live in :diablo:

    in reply to: The risks of body scanners. #489423
    rdc1000
    Participant

    I’ve been scanned twice by these machines but it’s ok, I eat an apple everyday.

    in reply to: Virgin signs for the A330 #489708
    rdc1000
    Participant

    I think another reason that he had ordered the 330 is the lack of cheap leases on quad jets.
    The lease companies proberbly won’t order the 747-800 due to the poor resale value after beardy has finished with them. The A340 is in the same boat. They are a slow seller compared to the 330 with a lot of the present operators being un happy withthem any way.
    EROPS will dominate the wold compleatly before too long

    Rgds Cking

    I actually think it has more to do with the fact that the A330 is cheaper to operate than it’s four engined compatriates on equivelant routes. If he wanted cheap leases then there is a deluge of 744’s sitting in the desert.

    The A330’s are an interim measure due to delays in the 787 program, there wasn’t any original intent to order them, so for interim solutions they could have leased 744’s, but the operating costs are too high.

    in reply to: Single pilot certified commercial aircraft #490048
    rdc1000
    Participant

    Hi all
    I’m looking for information/list on commercial aircraft capable of operating with only one certified pilot. i.e Britten Norman Islander

    It varies from country to country and in some ways is dependent on the type of operation/licence held, but obviously in addition to the Islander, you can count it’s big brother, the Trislander. Also the Cessna Caravan. Most small “corporate aircraft” when used as airliners would be included.

    in reply to: Virgin signs for the A330 #490058
    rdc1000
    Participant

    That seems obvious. Twice the engines, twice the potential for an engine shutdown. The thing is, with a quad you still got 75% of power left, with a twin you are down to 50%.

    Yeh, sorry I think from memory it was on an engine by engine basis, rather than an aircraft basis, but given that I cannot remember what report it was part of then I cannot be certain on this.

    in reply to: Dear, oh dear, a media mistake again…. #490065
    rdc1000
    Participant

    The aircraft shown in the clip are stored on the scrapping area and are not going anywhere in the short term.

    Surely only those aircraft to the left of the image, I think those shown infront of the hangars may not be, but I don’t know operations at Lasham well enough to be certain of this, it is about 6 years since I was last there.

    in reply to: Virgin signs for the A330 #490096
    rdc1000
    Participant

    ………..and I still refuse to fly the pond on two engines.

    My requirement has always been, and always will be for three engines burning and turning at take-off.

    ETOPS – Engines Turning Or Passengers Swimming.
    EROPS – Engines Running Or Passengers Swimming. Same thing.

    Please keep the four-engine option open, Richard.

    It may not be too long before you have to swim the pond then! Even VS has quietly conceded that the 4-engined aircraft are not economically viable compared to the equivelant sized twins. Furthermore, I’m fairly certain I read somewhere that statistically there were more engine shut downs per million flying hours on 4-engined long haul aircraft than twins.

    After 35 years of EROPS/ETOPS I think it is safe to start thinking about flying on twins.

    in reply to: Dear, oh dear, a media mistake again…. #490280
    rdc1000
    Participant

    I’m a bit confused by this, why is that an error, planes fly into and out of Lasham, so why is it an error that they’re grounded by snow. There is a fair chance it disturbed some flying and therefore correctly it grounded aircraft at Lasham. :confused:

    in reply to: Taser bracelets for passengers #490494
    rdc1000
    Participant

    Well, if you’re a Nigerian with intentions of trying to detonate a bomb on a plane, surely you’d just remove the bracelet anyway before your misdemina? The only benefit they’d bring would be the ability to spot trouble makers at the point they remove their bracelet!

    in reply to: Time for rethink ? #494016
    rdc1000
    Participant

    It’s 2010, I’ve been posting here for a long, long time, and yes I do realise that most of my views don’t mean very much to the vast amount of clever types that do indeed have day to day experience of the commercial aviation world that some of us mortals ‘aspire’ too. 😉 But, that for me is very much part of the charm…:)

    I cannot decide what this means, are you saying you don’t like those with industry experience chipping in, or that you like the mix. I suppose I fall into the category of being one of those “clever types”, though don’t really consider myself a “clever” type, no more so than anyone is in their chosen field of work. I like this forum because of the mix, it generates some interesting discussions. Would you rather we didn’t share our knowledge and experience?

    I’ve got a tremendous amount of respect for anyone who agrees to ‘mod’ this stuff, I’ve been there and done it after all. I think however that recent statements about it not being a “democratic” process will only contribute to this being an even more sparsely populated set of discussions…

    IMHO…:)

    To be fair, I was a member when I was still at university too. In my view I’ve got more bored of the site because there are a lack of interesting topics to get my teeth into, which was not the case 5 years ago, rather then over-zealous moderation.

    However, perhaps you feel that I am one of those who is on Mount Olympus with my views?

    in reply to: Ryanair – the angels of all european airports #497753
    rdc1000
    Participant

    Yeah right, tell that to all of the airports where he’s gone in all guns blazing and then pulled out or reduced capacity! :rolleyes:

    Andy

    Ah yes, just like British Airways across the UK.

    rdc1000
    Participant

    You mention that oil prices over the recent times have been volatile and I agree, however you miss the point that I made about fuel hedging. That is the whole point of having a team of so called analysts who can pin point the best time to buy fuel in bulk, something which they have been very unsuccessful with, while other carriers have been more successful.

    I think it’s a little harsh to lay the fuel hedging out as a fault of BA’s, because all fuel analysts were predicting it to stay high for longer than it did, and furthermore almost every airline which hedges made significant losses as a result. We undertook analysis at that time for one client and had to rely on significant amounts of fuel price data from ‘the professionals’ outside of the airlines, it was all wrong.

    in reply to: 787 First Flight (Merged) #502028
    rdc1000
    Participant

    I’m having to watch it on BBC, but guessing it’s the same feed..

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7927052.stm

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 1,226 total)