dark light

Skymonster

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 1,877 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 787 service entry – six months delay #586722
    Skymonster
    Participant

    Boeing stock heading south pretty fast, despite them saying it’d have no effect on earnings!

    http://finance.google.com/finance?q=boeing

    😀 😀 😀

    Andy

    in reply to: 787 – 1 Month Delay #592865
    Skymonster
    Participant

    You show a complete lack of knowledge.

    Far from it, although you still keep using weasel words to justify something that may well not go as well as is being suggested.

    Do you think boeing gives a squat about what you think or what I think?

    Nope, but that doesn’t mean we’re not entitled to debate the issue here.

    Delivery aint the same as EIS… EIS can be days away from delivery or weeks away

    Indeed…

    The delivery of the first aircraft – a 787-8 – to ANA is scheduled for May 2008, and it will enter service shortly afterwards.

    No doubt you’ll use more riggle-words to say that “shortly” could mean anything, but to all intents and purposes for Boeing to meet the industry perceived targets they need to get the airplane to ANA and ANA need to get it into operation in May 2008, or thereabouts. As you say, certification date is irrelevent, what matters is when its revenue flying with the airlines.

    i have got a word of it (again my source so only take it at face value , nothing concrete) that boeing might think to get the cert. done by May (remember Cert is less then 50% of testing according to boeing so if the original timetable was 7-8 months to Delivery then it was only half of the flying that was for cert) and then work with ANA and the likes to do route prooving , and other prooving runs (in toto – worst case or partially – optimistic) when the aircraft is in service . That is the reason why mentioned EIS and delivery as separate things because contractually they are 2 different things . Boeing only specifies the delivery dates it is upto the airline to put it in service .

    Sigh! See above – ANA entry into service “shortly after” the May 2008 delivery. Aircraft don’t go into service until route proving is done – indeed, much route proving needs to be done BEFORE certification. Sure, the likes of ETOPS can be delayed until after initial entry into service, but even if we assume Boeing COULD work with ANA on route proving post-delivery (some route proving by ANA will be necessary to get the type on their AOC in any case), it still needs to be done very very quickly – no drawn out process that your “then work with ANA and the likes to do route prooving , and other prooving runs” suggests – otherwise the industry percieved EIS will be missed and Boeing will be regarded to have failed to deliver to promise.

    Andy

    in reply to: 787 – 1 Month Delay #593054
    Skymonster
    Participant

    And boeing hasnt promised EIS to its customers only Delivery , it will be upto NH to EIS their aircraft when they are comfortable with it , boeing only guarantees may deliveries .

    Well you – or Boeing – can use all the weasel words you or they want… Anyone can deliver an aircraft – hell, Boeing could put the first 787 on a ship and deliver it to ANA in Tokyo before it even flew. A delivered aircraft that’s not able to be put into service – an aircraft that lacks the certification needed to operate it as intended – is of practically no use to any airline. And I’m pretty damned sure ANA won’t be paying for a bunch of aircraft that have been delivered but that they can’t operate. Airbus could have delivered A380s to Singapore Airlines, Qantas, etc ages ago – not that it wouldv’e done the airlines or Airbus any good, and nor will it Boeing if ANA aren’t flying this thing when expected. So, like I say, use all the excuses you want, but if the aircraft is either (a) not with ANA or (b) with ANA but not suitable for operation, it’ll be seen as a failure by Boeing.

    And as far as the 787 delay being Airbus-esque, you missed the point. I wasn’t talking about the nature of the problem, I was talking about whether execs might be being overly optimistic with their statements regarding future progress – Airbus were with the A380, and now the consensus seems to be that Boeing might be with the 787 aznd its projected certification/EIS date.

    Andy

    in reply to: 787 – 1 Month Delay #593372
    Skymonster
    Participant

    So, the Plastic Pig’s first flight is going to be late, is it? Well there’s a surprise! :rolleyes: Maybe they should have sub-contracted some of the work to Reliant here in the UK – they have experience of working with composites, and one of their products even flew for a while – thanks to Top Gear! :p

    IMHO EIS is going to be a very big challenge now, not helped by the fact that winter flying means inclement weather can occasionally pose a challenge to certification flying. And its all very well getting the a/c to the customer, but it really doesn’t help if you’ve got to start sending mod kits out and planning down-time to get the in-service a/c up to regular production standard, and I’d be surprised if there aren’t some issues with the early a/c even if they make the EIS.

    Does anyone see anything Airbus-esque in all of this – late aircraft, but execs still blowing sunshine up everyone’s a** about how they can still make the EIS?

    Andy

    in reply to: Flying DC6 #1279899
    Skymonster
    Participant

    Landed at CVT 17:30 this evening with three turning and burning – number four seemed to have abdicated itself of its responsibilities. Hopefully the ailment will not be an obstacle to future plans outlined above. Noticed that it had “TGA” above flight deck windows – will it carry [PH]-TGA at some point, or will it retain the un-authentic G-APSA on the tail?

    A

    in reply to: ATC medical #497466
    Skymonster
    Participant

    Its more or less the same as class one for commercial pilots…

    http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx/docs/247/docs/%2033/default.aspx?catid=49&pagetype=90&pageid=529

    So yes, colour vision will be checked. If you can’t do the normal coloured spots type thing, you will be allowed to do a lantern test which some find easier.

    Andy

    in reply to: More Ryanair robbery #497655
    Skymonster
    Participant

    do you not think if Ryanair added all these additional, optional charges to the original price of the ticket people would THEN complain that Ryanair have bumped their prices up? You’d also get people complaining they’re paying for things they don’t need (on a low cost service)

    Nope, this is designed to catch the casual traveller out. The experienced Ryanair-ite might know to internet checkin, but the average traveller will still assume that they can checkin at the airport and will then be in for a shock. Sure its in the Ts&Cs, but you know what Ts&Cs are for… Don’t believe me? Check how many people get caught out by the Ryanair “you can’t combine your baggage allowance into a single bag” rule – I know the guy who runs the hobby shop in the terminal at EMA and he sells LOADS of bags every day to Ryanair passengers who’ve been caught out and feel cheated. This charge also discriminates against those going away for several days, who may not have access to the internet whilst they’re away – why should they have to pay more just because the hotel or villa they’re staying in doesn’t have internet?

    But if you really want to allow people to chose what services they pay for, how about the Ryanair saying “Here’s the price for your flight… Now, if you chose to internet checkin we’ll reduce that price by two pounds per leg, and if you chose not to take baggage, we’kk knock another fiver off that price for each leg”? Of course they won’t do that, because the headline price would be higher and they want the stupid punters believing Ryanair is cheap. And that’s just what those who suck up all the “Ryanair is always the cheapest” messages – stupid.

    Andy

    PS: I guess its all fairly irrelevent as far as I’m concerned – Ryanair has never had a penny of my money and they never will have any money from me – in fact, they wouldn’t get a penny of my money if they were the only airline on the planet

    in reply to: ZOOM UK off to bad start…? #498366
    Skymonster
    Participant

    sorry do you mind me asking whats ETOP?

    Its ETOPS – it stands for “Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim”

    A

    in reply to: XH558 First Flight #1300182
    Skymonster
    Participant

    My money is on some date between 20th of August and the 7th of September.

    BBC East Midlands this morning report “should have taken place next week” now “delayed”… No real explanation, just said that it wasn’t engineering but that “certain things had to be in place before the first flight…”

    Andy

    in reply to: Jet2 to get 767s!? #501460
    Skymonster
    Participant

    That mean’s then they will have to train the Cabin Crew/Flight Crew for 3 Different types of A/C which will be both expensive and they will have to have different crew for different A/C.

    Not a big issue really. Cabin crew can legally be qualified on three a/c types concurrently – or at least they could when I was very involved with crewing at BM a few years back (where we had individual cabin crew qual’d on 737, Fk100 and A320, or DC9, ATP, Fk100 for example).

    Andy

    in reply to: SRB in Malaysia airline deal! #502758
    Skymonster
    Participant

    They’re going to fly with A330-300’s I gather…

    No need to “gather”… First one is already painted up. Pics have been put up elsewhere on the WWW

    Andy

    in reply to: Jet2 to get 767s!? #502949
    Skymonster
    Participant

    Suggestion elsewhere on the web that Jet2 are acquiring (have acquired) two 767-300ER from Gulf Air

    Andy

    in reply to: Ryanair cuts Stansted flights #506665
    Skymonster
    Participant

    Probably yet more Ryanair posturing… Landing fees are only a relatively small part of operating a flight, and I can’t believe that if the services that get cut are profitable now hiking the average fares a few quid each won’t make them continue to be so. More likely IMHO there’s some Stansted routes that don’t pay, so now they’re using the nice convenient getout of blaming the BAA, rather than losing face by having to admit they can’t cut it on some routes.

    A

    in reply to: A330 ID? #507080
    Skymonster
    Participant

    I don’t recall ever seeing an Emirates A330 with the logo on the underside….

    Indeed, that’s what I said…

    Andy

    in reply to: A330 ID? #507091
    Skymonster
    Participant

    The early afternoon Emirates flight into BHX is now operated by a 777-300ER (complete with the red Emirates logo on the underside), whilst the evening flight is still on the A330.

    The A330s do NOT have the large red Emirates logo on the undersides.

    Andy

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 1,877 total)