dark light

symon

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 676 through 690 (of 1,114 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Type rated aircraft for LCY #501885
    symon
    Participant

    @FlyMonarch – I would think that the limiting factor would the payload you could lift off the LCY runway with the Embraer 145 – severely restricted pasyload/range or both. I don’t think that the Embraer 135 is all to efficient for LCY operations anyway.

    What about the A318 then, compared to the ERJ145? Does the A318 have better STOL characteristics, or is it that the A318 would be in a VIP config and as such have a reduced number of pax compared to, say, a typical ERJ145 layout?

    in reply to: Ever get nervous flying? #502789
    symon
    Participant

    I always get that tingle in my stomach when I walk onto the plane, from the fact that from that point on, something could happen. However, I soon think realistically and realise that if anything were to happen, it would be totally out of my control and it would happen anyway. That soon puts my mind at rest and allows me to enjoy the flight – turbulence and all.

    in reply to: EK 777 at MAN 23/10 #502790
    symon
    Participant

    I was gonna post a question asking why an EK 777 was parked up remotely, no need now. What was the reg?

    There was 3 Emirates 777s in today –

    A6-EBX – Tech
    A6-EMP – UAE8017/8018 (picking the tech pax up)
    A6-ECB – UAE17/18

    Answer.

    in reply to: BA flight makes emergency landing #504296
    symon
    Participant

    I think the issue was that there may have been a ‘burning’ smell of such from a screen, indicating an electrical fault or somthing. In that case, if the origin of the smell cannot be seen (i.e. coming from within the seat), I think the diversion is made as a precaution.

    in reply to: Dispatches: The Trouble With British Airways… #504446
    symon
    Participant

    Sorry have to disagree with that, although i agree Heathrow is the main problem, that is by BA’s own doing. THEY chose to be a one airport airline!, if ,for example, American or United chose to only fly long distance from,say, New York for the entire US they would have the same issues. BA’s desire to be London Airways is what is causing them so much bother, not Heathrow’s fault that an airline wants to use it as it’s sole gateway airport.
    There is lots of extra runway capacity available to BA, at Birmingham, Glasgow,Manchester,Cardiff,Newcastle,Belfast,Aberdeeen,Leeds etc… BA just choose not to use it.(Cue bleats about BA being a business and not here to pander the needs of the “countryfolk”… Shock Stat: Not only Londoners fly BA!!!)

    This was along the lines of what I was thinking. Agreeably, it is a bit of a Catch 22 scenario – BA want to streamline their business to maximise profits/reduce losses and an easy way to do that may be focusing all their long haul from one hub and drawing the passengers from the regions. However, to do this at an airport with severe capacity constraints and inferior infrastructure? Why don’t we pretend that there is more than one airport in the London area? And for the sake of argument, why don’t we say that it might be an idea that BA conducts long haul operations from more than one London airport to share the load? (I know they have/do, but I mean a true spread of services, not just a spattering) Just my opinion of course 🙂

    Although I didn’t see the programme, I will try and pick it up on the interweb on some catch up thing as this discussion sounds quite good! I’d like to see the webmaster save a transcript of this thread and send it in to Dispatches so they get a point of view from people who read/talk/breath about this kind of thing all day long!

    in reply to: A New Meaning For "Flyweight"? #504660
    symon
    Participant

    Mind you that gives them two meals so it’s not all bad.

    Rgds Cking

    😀

    in reply to: Virgin Australia – First Shot #504670
    symon
    Participant

    ??? Are you referring to the Southern Cross on the tail?

    I think he ment the Union Flag in silver before the tail. bmi-esq but perhaps a bit more subtle.

    in reply to: BA flight makes emergency landing #504676
    symon
    Participant

    BA better be careful….it already seems as though things are going the same way they did/have for Qantas! Every little incident picked up by the news, just because ‘something happened the other day and because something has happened again today, it must mean something shoddy is going on!’ :rolleyes:

    in reply to: BA to pull out of Scotland ? #505143
    symon
    Participant

    Twenty one Scottish MP’s have tabled a House of Commons motion suggesting British Airways rebrand as “London Airways” ! :D:D;)

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7660797.stm

    Oh, if only it was possible to force them to change their name to that! Sadly, we all know it will never happen and they will never do it willingly 🙁

    in reply to: A New Meaning For "Flyweight"? #506020
    symon
    Participant

    Thanks for the explanation Dean. So, it possibly sounds as though the CC were required to shuffle things round a bit and unfortunately they looked around and asked the couple in question instead of asking for volunteers?

    in reply to: A New Meaning For "Flyweight"? #506257
    symon
    Participant

    Mrs Coupe, 49, said: ‘It was a decent-sized plane full of holidaymakers – it wasn’t a small plane – so it was devastating to be told that even a big plane like that couldn’t cope with all our weight being at the back.

    In April that year, the couple decided to go on a week’s holiday to Guernsey with son Chris – and that’s when the plane from Southampton couldn’t take off.

    So….it was either a Blue Islands Jetstream 32 or more than likely a Flybe Dash 8? They were correct, not ‘small planes’ at all :rolleyes: Maybe Dean would be able to say if the aircraft are that sensitive? Must have been pretty fully laden for it to make a difference?

    in reply to: EDI 03-09-08 LARGE POST!!! #488428
    symon
    Participant

    Brilliant shots. Great variation of aircraft and airlines. Just a shame there is never really anything ‘big’ around that place!

    in reply to: Internet while flying #506678
    symon
    Participant

    Conor; whereas the technology is being developed for onboard internet access, it is not yet at the full commercial stage. Even if it is being trialled now, it will likely be restricted to First/Business class. My suggestion: put some music/movies on your laptop and listen/watch those during the flight (that’s if the on board IFE isn’t up to much).

    in reply to: Ryanair to go long haul with 787 #507755
    symon
    Participant

    😮 Was it? Sorry all, I had that 5 hour figure in my mind! Anyway, my point was, Ryanair don’t bother me seating wise, just service wise (but that’s what you aren’t paying for in fairness)

    in reply to: Ryanair to go long haul with 787 #507916
    symon
    Participant

    I flew Prestwick to Rome (Ciampino) in the new year, which was one of their “long” routes (5ish hours) and I was ok (at 5’11”). I think what would get to me on a Ryanair aircraft, in routes over 5 hours (say, 8 to the US) would be the lack of IFE and complimentary food/drinks.

    It is always the case in life however – you pay for what you get. I think people sometimes have difficulty understanding that.

Viewing 15 posts - 676 through 690 (of 1,114 total)