dark light

wysiwyg

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,716 through 2,730 (of 3,331 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Indian Airlines chooses Airbus #690098
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Indian Airlines chooses Airbus

    Kabir – wasn’t it Indian airlines that had the 320? I seem to remember that they were the first (perhaps the only ones) to take up the 4 wheel bogey undercarriage option on the 320 for operation into rough strips.

    Regards
    Wys

    in reply to: General Discussion #387087
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: That ship in the Channel has been hit again!

    There is also a glider in its trailer on the Tricolor. It is/was worth about £40,000 and was in the process of being exported from Europe to the USA.

    in reply to: That ship in the Channel has been hit again! #1967851
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: That ship in the Channel has been hit again!

    There is also a glider in its trailer on the Tricolor. It is/was worth about £40,000 and was in the process of being exported from Europe to the USA.

    in reply to: General Discussion #387091
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Who’s having login problems?

    Test to see if I can log on again.

    in reply to: Who's having login problems? #1967854
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Who’s having login problems?

    Test to see if I can log on again.

    in reply to: Flightreport AMS ARN AMS with KL1109 and KL1114 #690643
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flightreport AMS ARN AMS with KL1109 and KL1114

    Nice one Fokker. I’m really surprised to hear that both flight crew individually made a trip to the back of the plane during the outbound flight. We are only allowed to leave the flightdeck for the purpose of personal relief (whatever that is supposed to mean!). The only thing I can suggest is that maybe the front toilet was unserviceable so they had to use the one at the rear? Eben so I would have thought that it would be unlikely that neither pilot can hold jis bladder for an hour and a half. I can usually do London to Tenerife (4 hours) without a pee!

    Also, on the subject of safety demo’s there are certain criteria under which they are not technically required at all, although I can’t remember the criteria off the top of my head! I’m fairly sure that this flight does not meet those criteria though. I know that if you don’t go over water for more than a certain time from land (10 minutes I think) you don’t need to demonstrate life jackets. All good reputable airlines will do a demo regardless of these rules.

    in reply to: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B #690719
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B

    [updated:LAST EDITED ON 30-12-02 AT 08:19 PM (GMT)]Sorry 777 but winter sports is one of many things I know almost nothing about. How’s the healing process coming on? I should think that typing on the keyboard is a bit of a slow process. Good report though.

    Regards
    Wys
    (skiing/snowboarding incompetant)

    Ren – lol, how true!

    in reply to: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B #690731
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B

    Fairly well back on the center console so you have to reach back slightly behind you. On the 300 there is still one in that position but they have included another on the outside edge of the glareshield so your hand only had to move about six inches to reach it. There is of course another PTT on the control wheel but when you fly 2 crew the non-handling pilot for that sector does the radio and it is considered bad practice to touch the wheel when the other guy is flying.

    in reply to: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B #690850
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B

    The conversion (you have to have 200 hours on the 757-200 before flying the 757-300, company rule not CAA) consisted of half a days ground school followed by 2 online sectors (I went to Paphos and back) with a training captain and that’s it.

    We operate it in exactly the same way that we fly the 200 but it really does feel quite different. The main differences are –
    1- it’s bloooooooody long (178 feet 3 inches) but still a narrow body so it flexes a lot in turbulence
    2- the extra length makes it even easier to hit the tail on the tarmac
    3- although the engines are uprated it doesn’t climb as well
    4- in our config we get 280 passengers on board as opposed to the 200’s 235
    5- 1 extra toilet
    6- with the extra weight the brakes get very hot on landing needing longer turn around times to cool down and much more use of reverse thrust
    7- eats up a lot of runway on take off and landing and takes off at a very high speed (typically crossing the hedge after take off at about 180 knots, nearly 200 mph)
    8- although certified to FL420 at typical charter weights it rarely gets as high as FL370
    9- overwing exits for use in an emergency
    10- a retractable tailskid which has an indicator that pops out if you’ve lightly scraped it. If you’ve heavily scraped it you’ll find it in the middle of the runway!
    11- GPS updating to the flight management system as standard rather than being a £1million upgrade

    but best of all…

    12- Boeing have finally put the press to talk button for the radio in a place where you can easily reach it!

    in reply to: General Discussion #387393
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: OK, so what did Santa bring?

    J33Nelson – make sure you park your car with it out of gear!!!

    in reply to: OK, so what did Santa bring? #1968045
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: OK, so what did Santa bring?

    J33Nelson – make sure you park your car with it out of gear!!!

    in reply to: Flightdeck security #690866
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flightdeck security

    I have previously worked on the 747-100, 200 & 400 and all of them shared the staircase to the upper deck with the passengers. In my outfit (and presumably all UK airlines) we are just in the process of installing CCTV which will help but so many aitcraft have a toilet just outside the flightdeck that you cannot stop the public from using. This will mean that there will be unknowns in the area. Even if you keep people away from the area there is never going to be enough distance to stop someone in a front row hearing (through a curtain) that the door has just clicked open and rushing the cabin attendant.

    in reply to: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B #690869
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B

    I think Britannia are a very very good outfit. I had the chance to go there this winter but I’m trying to stop moving my pension fund every 2 years coupled with the fact that I’m very happy where I am.

    in reply to: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B #690886
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flight Reports BY616A and BY616B

    [updated:LAST EDITED ON 30-12-02 AT 11:09 AM (GMT)]Good report Jason. There are a few things that I can explain for you.

    ‘The real fun began when the ground crew couldnt find the aircraft and this included a tour of the north terminal.’

    Presumably the aircraft was on a remote stand in the west park. In this case you board the aircraft by catching a bus and being driven to the stand and then climb the steps. There is no direct road across to the west park from the south terminal so the driver has to drive to the north terminal and then down to the stands. It is a roundabout route that appears to show that the bus driver doesn’t know what he is doing but it is the fastest way to get there.

    ‘It also got worse because we didnt move for 1hour and 20 minutes because they had nothing to tow the aircraft off the apron because of staff shortages we were told.’

    Your outbound flight was on the first weekend of the ski season this year. The ground service companies (who the airlines have contracts with to provide handling, tugs, baggage services, etc) were woefully prepared for the ski season. We have changed our contract with our handlers (Servisair) so that next year there are penalty clauses for their lack of service.

    ‘Nice smooth landing at Toulouse…’

    This is the part of the write up were the crew got it wrong! Let me quote from the Boeing 757 flight crew training manual – ‘…prolonged flare increases the body pitch angle 2 to 3 degrees. When prolonged flare is coupled with a misjudged height above the runway, aft body contact is possible. Fly the aeroplane onto the runway at the desired touchdown point and at the desired airspeed. Do not hold it off and risk the possibility of a tailstrike. NOTE: A SMOOTH TOUCHDOWN IS NOT THE CRITERION FOR A SAFE LANDING’.

    ‘Well I wasnt suprised with all the stuff that was in it but they did have a moan at me for having ski walkie talkies in their and not in the hold, burt I just took the batteries out of them and it shut them up.’

    After the shoe bomber incident which departed from a French airport I’m surprised they didn’t confiscate your walkie talkies.

    ‘Descent to LGW was rough. When plane was on final about 300 feet off ground it hit a real strong cross wind which scared other passengers like anything and sent a few loose bags flying through the cabin.’

    Crosswinds don’t generally cut in suddenly in a way that you’d feel like that. At 300′ on the approach I’d say that you most likely hit the wake turbulence either from the aircraft that had just landed or from the wind stirred up as it flowed round either the terminal or the southside hangars.

    ‘…and pilots who can’t land in cross winds very well I can only give them 6/10.’

    A bit unfair bearing in mind you don’t know the circumstances! Even if it was a sudden severe shear (which it can’t have been as the SOP is to initiate a max performance go around) there is nothing the flightcrew can do to smooth it out without deviating course and altitude. At 300′ on the approach that wouldn’t be very sensible.

    Last Sunday I went to Lyons (another ski flight) in the 757-300 and brought back 285 passengers (280 adults and children with 5 babies on laps) and I reckon there must have been 20 to 30 plaster casts on board! Anyway, I hope the above has helped with understanding why some things happen.

    Regards
    Wys
    (non-skier as I like my bones intact!)

    in reply to: Flightdeck security #690889
    wysiwyg
    Participant

    RE: Flightdeck security

    Glad to be of help. The new doors are undoubtedly very secure however the time that they are completely useless is when someone is entering or leaving the flightdeck. This is the point when I think we need more protection.

Viewing 15 posts - 2,716 through 2,730 (of 3,331 total)