dark light

V1

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 240 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: American, Continental or United? #724875
    V1
    Participant

    RE: American, Continental or United?

    Well, out of the US airlines I would go for Continental. I was quite impressed when I flew with them a while ago. American and United aren’t bad airlines, you’ll find very mixed views about most of the major US carriers depending on who you speak to.

    Next time I fly to the US, I’ll be flying with Virgin though. They are excellent.

    It also depends on which airport you will be flying to. If you fly to Newark, expect a Continental flight to be offered. Likewise with American and their Chicago hub.

    Anyway, whatever airline you choose, have a good flight.
    Regards,
    V1

    P.S.- Did you know that 75% of all transatlantic flights are operated by the Boeing 767? Give me a 747 anyday!

    in reply to: Aeroplane Crashes #725104
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Aeroplane Crashes

    There are perhaps too many things to consider when talking about airline safety.

    It does vary between airlines. An airline which comes from a volatile part of the world, say EL-AL for example, have stricter security measures for obvious reasons. I don’t know if this still happens, but I know in the 1980’s, arriving EL-AL aircraft at LHR used to be accompanied by armoured vehicles until it taxied to the gate.

    Older aircraft are more costly to operate than newer ones, but if they are looked after, they will not crash. Look at how many DC-8’s and 707’s are still flying safely.

    I would have thought an airport would have to more responsible for security than the airline itself, but the latter does have an obvious responsibilty too. A notable airport with regards to poor security was Athens in the 1970’s and 80’s. Several aircraft whose flights originated from this airport were hijacked, a TWA 727 being perhaps one of the more famoues ones.

    in reply to: Serial question #725111
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Serial question

    The reason you didn’t see the CO 767 in the book is because it is too new. I assume you are using a civil aircraft markings publication of some description.

    The problem with books like these is the fact that they go out of date too fast. New airliners are being delivered all the time, although the airline will usually reserve a particular registration prefix in anticipation of new aircraft, in europe anyway.

    The North American register is difficult though, airlines often change the registration last minute and think nothing of changing an existing aircraft reg’n, which may be a reason why your NW DC-10 didn’t show.

    in reply to: A380 #725115
    V1
    Participant

    RE: A380

    Jetwash is the vortex an aircraft leaves in it’s wake. This has caused fatal crashes. A light aircraft got too close to a B757 once and ended up crashing.

    The same happened with a DC-9, although this was the victim of a DC-10.

    A typical safe separation distance between large jets is usually between 4/5 miles on final approach. I can’t see the A380 being any larger then 7 miles.

    in reply to: 747-400 versus MD 11 versus A-340 #725647
    V1
    Participant

    RE: 747-400 versus MD 11 versus A-340

    The biggest turd in the water closet with regards to the MD-11, is the fact that Boeing have already axed it. The last production MD-11 was delivered to Lufthansa Cargo a few months ago.

    I think the only McDonnell Douglas design still left in production is the Boeing 717, formerly known as the MD-95. These aircraft are starting to sell now, the USA’s AirTran being the largest customer of the type.

    With regards to the KLM fleet, they rely mainly on the 747 fleet for incontinental routes. The MD-11 fleet is quite small in comparison to the Boeing fleet. They do fly the 767, but mainly on high density short routes, or thinner long haul routes. I think their MD-11 fleet replaced the old DC-10 fleet they once had.

    The Airbus A330 and Boeing 777 seem to be the favourite aircraft for long haul routes at the moment. These two aircraft in particular have helped replace old 747/DC-10/L-1011 fleets that were once the flagships of an airlines fleet, they also have two engines, so they are cheaper to maintain.

    in reply to: 747-400 versus MD 11 versus A-340 #725795
    V1
    Participant

    RE: 747-400 versus MD 11 versus A-340

    The biggest scandal in the past ten years is the MD-11. Why did this excellent aircraft sell so badly? The DC-10 was always a popular aircraft, so you’d think an updated model incorporating the lastest technology would be a seller.

    It is even more tragic that MD-11 passenger models, most of which were built in the ninties, are being converted to freighter variants at an alarming rate!

    What about Varig? They use an MD-11 for spares! An airliner that is only about a decade old being canabalised does not make sense to me. I could understand it if the aircraft was 25-30 years old. It just seems such a waste to scrap a young airliner like this.

    As for the 747-400 and A340, well they are not selling as well as they should be either. Boeing is desperate for more 747 orders, and the A340 production line is hardly a bustling hive of activity. Boeing have their own 777 to thank for the denting of it’s 747 sales, whilst the A340 seems more tailored to routes with hot ‘n’ high conditions, so it has a kind of ‘niche’ market.

    All are excellent aircraft in their own right though. They are the true ‘heavy jets’ of the world.

    in reply to: Arrogancy in this forum #725800
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Arrogancy in this forum

    Well, I always try to respect other people’s opinions. I thought Sam was very abusive and unfair, and his attitude to Kabir stinks.

    I know I have said things on this forum in the past which have been wrong, but at least I was corrected in a polite and friendly manner.

    At the end of the day, we all have a common interest, and that is civil aviation. I find this forum very educational, and I have learnt a lot over the past few months. I have found other members, such as Kabir and Keltic, always full of useful information.

    I hope this recent confrontation will be an isolated case. Have you ever seen the Airliners.Net forum? That place is a warzone. I hope this forum will not go the same way!

    Regards,
    V1

    in reply to: Airport of the year 2001 #725810
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Airport of the year 2001

    Well said Kabir. Hey Sam, why don’t you stop aiming your abuse at Kabir and look at yourself before you criticise others. This forum is usually very good and everybody trys to help each other if there are any queries, it doesn’t need somebody like yourself, who obviously seems to have a bad attitude.

    May I suggest that you try the forum on Airliners.net, you would fit in well there.

    Hey Kabir, don’t let this jerk get to you. Carry on posting things on this forum, I know I’ll certainly read them.

    Regards to the moral majority,
    V1

    in reply to: Airport of the year 2001 #726081
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Airport of the year 2001

    I’ve heard nothing but good stories about Dubai, I think they opened a new terminal and it is supposed to be very good.

    in reply to: Cheap airlines #726083
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Cheap airlines

    I’ve flown with low cost airlines, and I do trust them. It is not fair to say that they all fly the 737-200 either, I know Ryanair has a few, but this airline is taking delivery of brand new 737-800 aircraft, so the older 737 fleet will be replaced. Easyjet, Go, Virgin Express and Buzz all fly modern aircraft such as the 737-300/400 and Bae 146. Just because an airline offers cheap fares, it does not mean that they fly a fleet of old relics. Most of these carriers save a fortune by cutting out on in flight goodies, they don’t do meals or anything like that. If you are lucky, you will get a drink of some kind. Plus, when was the last time any of these carriers were involved in an accident?

    in reply to: Colour Schemes #726726
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Colour Schemes

    Air Zimbabwe have a nice scheme I think. Great airline too. Others I like are: Cathay Pacific, Qantas (simple, but effective), The Singapore tropical megatop (sadly no longer with us), United, Crossair, Emirates, American and Gulf Air. The latter must be proud of their excellent Islamic art applied to some of their fleet too.

    Carriers such as BA, Air France, Continental and Lufthansa all fall into the boring and average category.

    JMC Airlines has to be one of the worst, along with Air 2000. Britannia could do with updating their livery too. Shame Air Europe is no longer with us, they had a great scheme.

    Does anybody remember Court Line? Now that was a nightmare of a scheme!!

    in reply to: Shortest and longest flights #726746
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Shortest and longest flights

    Shortest flight I ever went on was Ryanair from Birmingham to Dublin. This was one of the strangest flights I ever went on too. My flight was supposed to depart at around 10.30am, but it was late January and the weather was awful on the day. I got to BHX quite early only to find that most flights had been either cancelled or diverted due to dense fog.

    After sitting around for a couple of hours in the main terminal after check-in, I had read the same book twice and nobody seemed to know what what happening with my flight, FR662. Luckily, the fog cleared and my 737 landed at BHX at around midday. The flight would have been quite empty, but my aircraft was also taking on passengers for the earlier Dublin departure which was cancelled due to the fog.

    After being herded out to the aircraft (no airbridge was used) I was pushed and jostled to the back of the line of other passengers by other more impatient and rude passengers who were eager to get into Dublin as they were already running very late. I ended up sitting towards the rear of the aircraft (an ex Britannia airways example) close to those noisy P&W JT8D’s. I had only just settled into my seat and the cabin crew were already closing the doors and getting ready for departure. The captain gave an announcment and was very apologetic for the delay and before I knew it, we were taxing to the runway at what seemed like 40mph. The crew were eager for departure and the aircraft felt like it was going to tip over as we turned onto another taxiway.

    Yep, this crew even throttled up before our 737 turned onto the runway. I have never experienced such an quick take off since, lord only knows what the angle was on climb out. We got to 26,000ft though, and Dublin only lies 200mls from BHX! Very quick descent into Dublin too, nice landing as well (for a 737). The flight departed from BHX at 1.00pm and landed in DUB at 1.30pm, so it was exactly 30 minutes. Well worth the £59 return fare!!

    in reply to: Heavylanding #727001
    V1
    Participant

    RE: Heavylanding

    A heavy landing could mean a number of things. Usually if an aircraft lands hard, it will bounce a couple of times. Some airliners are harder to land than others. The 737 is supposed to be a classic for ‘firm’ landings. There was an incident in the early ninties with a Viscount that landed too hard. The aircraft was actually written off because the structure was damaged.

    I would class a heavy landing as an incident involving an aircraft that has had to be inspected after landing due to any possible damage caused. I could be totally wrong, but that is my view anyway!

    in reply to: The Best Airport in the world #727015
    V1
    Participant

    RE: The Best Airport in the world

    I’ve been to a few airports, mainly horible Greek Island airports such as Kos and Corfu. Orlando International was disorganised and cramped and the airport staff had the manners of boghouse rats. The Greek airports were like concrete sheds and there were some very poor facilities in the ‘terminal’ buildings.

    Bangor, in Maine USA was good though. Very ‘different’. Liked the rows of KC-135’s that were parked accross from the main runway. The terminal had a very relaxing bar in it too.

    I’m not saying BHX is the best airport in the world. I don’t have the funds to fly to Chep Lap Kok, which I’m sure is a fantastic aiport, as well as LAX. I grew up around BHX and watched it expand from a small aerodrome into a busy international airport, which is now 114 in the world airport league, ahead of airports such as Milan-Linate.

    in reply to: PIA FLEET RENEWAL #727510
    V1
    Participant

    RE: PIA FLEET RENEWAL

    Yeah, I quite often use the 3 digit codes when talking about a particular a/c type. Quite lazy really, but typing 743 is quicker than typing 747-300!

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 240 total)