SkymonsterMinimum connection time Domestic-International at DFW is 40 minutes, so your connection is “legal”.
If you have booked a single itinerary MCO-DFW-LHR (on AA for example) then whilst tight, the connection should work as long as the MCO-DFW flight is on time – and if you miss the connection AA should look after you and rebook you. If you have an on-line connection with AA, make sure you get both boarding passes at MCO and on arrive at DFW take the “Skylink” train between the terminals (its airside, so no further security checks – just make sure you get on it going the right direction as D–>A is longer one way round the “circle” of terminals than it is the other way) – the longest Skylink journey between furthest points is about 10 minutes, and if you get it right D–> should be less than that. Whilst the view from the Skylink (of all the ramps) is interesting, do not mess about watching aeroplanes – make it a priority to get to your new gate in A.
If however you have booked two seperate tickets, then you’re on your own and I’d say that your chances are next to zero as you’ll have to check in again in DFW, which may also involve coming landside and re-clearing security.
Realistically? I’d say I’d be more worried about my checked bags making the connection than I would about making it in person, AS LONG AS the MCO-DFW flight is on time. And the other issue is that July is thunderstorm season in Florida so you could well pick up a delay out of MCO that could scupper things.
Andy
SkymonsterSome of us are old enough to remember the Suckling Airways “40 Minutes” program from the first time it was shown!!! 🙁
Andy
SkymonsterThe 737-800 is only certified for 189 as has already been said (as is the longer -900). The -900ER is certified for 215 with extra emergency exits and a redesigned rear (flat) bulkhead. I am unsure why the 738 was only certified to 189 passengers – the four exits on each side superficially suggest up to 200 pax would be OK. It may be that 189 was the physical limit given seat sizes and that no airline to date has wanted to operate with only one lavatory, and that if two lavatories were indeed taken out that another row would be possible.
In any case, if it was practical and legal to increase seating on the 738 to 195 without major mods, don’t underestimate Scumbag O’Riley’s buying power “persuading” Boeing to do the certification work – if major mods other than the removal of two toilets were not required, then the certification work could be relatively straight forwards (obviously including new evac tests).
There is no legal or regulatory obligation to install toilets on aeroplanes, and thus O’Riley’s desire to remove two and leave only one would not in itself raise any issues. As to installing credit card readers to open lavatory doors – short of having a trolley dolly stand there all the time to ensure that people coming out didn’t hold the door open for the next in the queue, I see that part of the suggestion only as yet more bolloxolgy from the man himself.
Andy
SkymonsterIts just amazing how journalists talk things up – or down…
A major US carrier will fall victim to the recession, Virgin Atlantic founder Sir Richard Branson has warned.
Huh??? The above seems like a journo paraphrasing SRB, because he’s then quoted:
But Sir Richard described some big US airlines as being “weak” and predicted: “Within 12 months, I would not be surprised if a big American carrier didn’t go”.
Seems like he didn’t say a US airline WILL go bust at all – all he said was that he wouldn’t be surprised if one did go bust.
In any case, we have to recognise that its in SRB’s interest to talk down US airlines, just like Scumbag O’Riley talks down European airlines – SRB stands to benefit from anyone he manages to scare away from US airlines and onto his own branded Virgin Atlantic and Virgin America.
Andy
SkymonsterProving that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I recall being on an Aeroflot A310 departing LHR. Now even to an pro-aviation person such as myself, 10 years ago Aeroflot was not the best of propositions – I’d fly with anyone, but I’d be more apprehensive with some than with others.
So imagine then, I was slightly nervy when the thing started to take off with no flaps extended – from my view to the rear, the wing was completely clean. It was only later that I found that A310 take off config can be no-flaps (slats at the front of the wing apparently required, but flaps not necessarily). So, my “wisdom” and belief that take-off configuration on airliners involved partially extended flaps, I allowed myself to be concerned unnecessarily.
Andy
SkymonsterI’m sure you’ll be fine when it happens. Remember, your instructor won’t let you go until he/she feels you can safely get it down again – they have almost as much desire not to see a bent aeroplane or a bent student than you have! IMHO, its best not to be too pre-occupied with the first solo – it comes when its ready.
A few things I remember about my first solo:
1. I was flying a Cessna 150 and could look down and see the main wheels. I saw the main wheel stop rotating after I lifted off, and remember thinking “Oh well, I guess I better get this one right as I’m rather committed now” It was only when I saw the wheel stop rotating that I really realised what I’d gotten myself into! 🙂
2. The instructor didn’t tell me it’d go up faster with only one person on board. I’d kind of got used to where abouts in the circuit the aeroplane would make to circuit height and I’d have to level off, and [with hindsight] had started fixating on getting to that position rather than checking the altimeter. On reaching that point on my first solo, I looked at the altimeter and found I was already 200′ above normal circuit height. 😮 That was when I discovered it went up faster with one on board. I did a gradual decent back to circuit height – whilst I was tempted to push forward rather firmly and rectify the problem quickly I really didn’t want my instructor to be watching and see me do a noticable decent on downwind! Nothing was said, so I kept that little error to myself! 😮
3. Not to worry – despite the self-conciousness brought on by the error, I still managed a half-reasonable landing. It took me around 10 hours to get from having done no flying to doing half-reasonable landing – and I reckon about another 200-300 hours to get to relatively good landings! 😀
4. The Beach Boys song Kokomo just happened to playing on the car radio when I left the flying school after my first solo. Every time I hear that song, even today nearly 15 years later, it brings back memories of my first solo.
SkymonsterSo the airline made a profit of €105m before exceptional items, and infact if it wasn’t for it’s shares in Aer Lingus would indeed have made a profit. The right down of €222m from this shareholding has been expensive, but not a lot you can do about that.
There’s a lot that could have been done about it. If it wasn’t for O’Riley’s ego driven desire to take on(over) Aer Lingus, Ryanair would indeed have made a profit. The fact that they’ve written off close to EUR200m from their investment in Aer Lingus – which, lets face it, could come back if the shares rebound – is material to Ryanair because it was bad judgement on the part of those running the business that bought the shares. Many CEOs would face a call for their resignation following an error of judgement that cost their company a figure like EUR200m – will O’Riley? Somehow I doubt it, unfortunately. In any case, having made a loss you can make a no-risk bet on who is going to pay for that loss – not O’Riley but the poor suckers who fly on the airline he runs.
Andy
SkymonsterLook, there’s no way Virgin are going to buy bmi – they can’t afford it (not at a price that’s seen as sensible by BBW/Bishop anyway), and in any case Lufthansa still want bmi.
What is at issue here is not whether Lufthansa want bmi anymore, but rather how much they pay for it – not only in terms of the shares they end up buying, but also the further finance they may have to inject into the airline once they’ve got it. A deal was agreed a long time ago, but Lufthansa now have one view about whether they’re getting what they agreed to buy, Bish has another. It may well be settled in court, but whether Bish wins or Lufthansa wins, I don’t see Lufthansa walking away – all that will happen if Lufthansa wins is that they will end up having to spend less money overall (because Bish has no other realistic options right now – he’ll have to settle for a lower price) than they would if Bish wins.
Andy
SkymonsterSaid it before, saying it again… Ryanair – pay peanuts, get monkies (and now, a bigger hole in your wallet than you thought on many occasions)
Don’t know why I’m commenting really – as far as I’m concerned Ryanair are irrelevent. Never flown with them, never will. One day they’ll be gone, then they’ll be irrelevent to everyone and not just to me – come the glorious day!
Andy
SkymonsterFlying historic airliner, is it possible ?
If it can be done with a Victor, I’m sure a VC-10 is not totally impossible! :diablo:
Very nice picture, by the way!
Andy
SkymonsterSurely it’s better to delay fixing the date of the first flight until such a time as Boeing are satisfied they’ve got the bugs ironed out than to fix the date now and then suffer the embarrassment of another cancellation and further delay?
Indeed so… And IF the first flight of the Plastic Pig is delayed again, I suspect it should be known as the “Nightmareliner” rather than the “Dreamliner”
A
SkymonsterTo be honest I’m pretty pi**ed off at always having logical arguments to contend with an obviously narrow minded, and plainly thick approach to the world today… I have to confess that your arguments Andy feel as though you just woke up one day and decided you would hate RYR at all costs, and will write any old nonsense to defend your position.
:diablo: :p
But, for what its worth – I do not see all of your arguments as logical, nor do I think all I say as “any old nonsense” as you call it… I regard you as equally narrow minded in your defense of certain sectors of the market whatever they do and whatever their [adverse] impact.
this becomes a discrimanatory view which suggests that Air Travel and it’s social and economic benefits should only be the domain of the wealthier part of society. It sounds an awful thing to say because of the environmental cost, and indeed carbon trading schemes are designed to price some travellers out of the market over time.
If that’s what it means and thats what it takes – so be it. Really though, your so-claimed “logical” argument is not totally correct. Even though increasing costs are not yet ring-fenced for environmental projects (which they should be), its not about pricing certain socio economic groups out of the market, but rather its about EVERYONE being forced to realise the impact of their habbits. Yes, some people may be priced out of the air, but there’s no automatic right to it – just as some can afford a car and some travel by bus, so some may have to reduce their air travel. In any case, unless some magical new technology can be invented pretty quickly, It IS going to happen sooner or later (and thus you may have to consider how often you go see your mother – or your mother will have to consider whether she wants to remain in Italy), whether you like it or not.
have a conference call, or travel economy so as not to waste space on an aircraft..my guess is you won’t do either!
Wrong – just going to show you write is much nonsense as you claim I do.
Andy
SkymonsterI really do believe that the days of the £15 return are behind us.
Largely, of course they are – despite what Ryanair’s biggest fanboy on this forum (RDC) might say. Fares at this level are not sustainable from a commercial standpoint, and are not sustainable from an environmental standpoint either. The only people who will be paying sub-£15 these days, even on Ryanair, are those who have total flexibility with dates and/or don’t care where they go or how they’re treated. For these people, travel isn’t a necessity, its a discretionary spend – and as such these are just the people we should (and indeed in the long term MUST) be taking out of the air travel system for the sake of the environment and to reduce the impact the growth in air travel is having on airports and those who live near them.
Andy
SkymonsterViews from airside in T1 are almost non-existant – there used to be good views but they built a Dixons and a duty free shop where the windows were… Some limited views from the airside pier but they don’t announce gates until shortly before boarding and they are not keen on people coming back from the piers. T2 has good views of some of the terminal ramp and the hangars (but useless for photos due double glass).
The Ian Allan shop closed a couple of years ago but has been replaced with another well-stocked enthusiasts store which carries books, models etc. There is also a viewing deck connected to the shop which has views over the ramps and hangars alebit also through glass – entry is free to passengers with boarding passes.
Andy
SkymonsterIts a shame that Scumbag O’Riley stoops this low for a publicity stunt… Mind you, what do you expect from an airline that many carries Sun-reading chavs? O’Riley’s sense of humour probably appeals mostly to that section of the population, which are the main target for his airline.
Andy
Sign In
