dark light

eightandseven

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 34 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: The risks of body scanners. #489417
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Hello,

    To me it is just makes flying that little bit more mundane and troublesome. It really take the fun out of flying.

    How nice it is to remember the days when flying was a significant evident, something to look forward to and savor.

    Nowadays you enter a big building, wait in queues, fumble with the electronic check-in lady, wait in more queues. You might get a glimpse out of the window at a plane, in an area that you must share with many other people – crammed in and feeling just an uncomfortable. To further remove you from the event, you get to walk down a windowless tube into a tube with seats and a small window. The romance of flying…

    in reply to: Single pilot certified commercial aircraft #489713
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Hello,

    You can fly the King Air 350 single pilot, but it is rare.

    in reply to: The Russians invade Salzburg! 09JAN10 #446905
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Does the overly-large tailfin of the IL96 give lie to stability problems?

    Steve

    Hello,

    I think it is more to do with the yaw moment arm of the relatively short fuselage.

    in reply to: Time for some fun! #491134
    eightandseven
    Participant

    😮

    [ATTACH]180462[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Airlines Hiring "Very Substandard" Pilots #491467
    eightandseven
    Participant
    in reply to: Airlines Hiring "Very Substandard" Pilots #491471
    eightandseven
    Participant

    I don’t quite get the point that 4 of the 5 fatal accidents since 2004 were at the regionals.

    Hello,

    Me neither. There is intentional skewing of the statistics here, in favor of “mainline” aircrew – there does seem to be a them/us thing going on.

    To be really conclusive you have to look at the bigger picture. You can argue that “regional” flying is more demanding due to the much more varied sectors flown, quick turnarounds and the similar duty periods.

    It would be interesting to see the number of accidents per sectors flown, for both pilot groups.

    A while back Airbus was talking about the dilution of pilot hand-flying skills due to all the automation, particularly in long-haul flying. I’ll see if I can dig out the article, from somewhere.

    in reply to: SAS to shed its MD-80 fleet #491658
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Another interesting type dwindling in European skies, shame. I believe Iberia have all their MD-80s ready to be withdrawn. It will leave Spanair with the only sizable fleet in Europe.

    in reply to: Airline of the Week: KLM #447563
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Big brownie points for anyone who can work out the aircraft type of Paul’s second shot.

    I have figured it out, but it took me about 10 minutes 😡

    767-300ER, PH-BZ* 😀

    in reply to: Whats the worst Airline service you've had? #492456
    eightandseven
    Participant

    …and the rest of the passengers were just…

    Delightful? 😀

    in reply to: The 787 Progress to Commercial Flight Thread #494699
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Gonna be interesting to see the wing flex when she is fully loaded.

    Hello,

    Equally, at that time there will be more fuel in the wings than they took for the initial flight.

    in reply to: Thames Estuary Airport #494718
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Hello,

    I am actually for the idea in general. The key to the whole idea is the land-side links to the airport, there really needs to be a focus on public transportation and in particular the high-speed rail with links all across the south/southwest England. If you could pair this to the proposed high-speed link to the north of England and Scotland then you have the potential to remove a lot of domestic flights and make an international-class hub that the UK needs and requires.

    At some-point in the future Heathrow and Gatwick will have outgrown itself, and are already quite landlocked. You would be gaining prime development ground, reduce low-flying aircraft and the noise associated with aircraft in general. Needless to say, remove traffic from the already heavily congested M25.

    in reply to: Range needed for widebody #494884
    eightandseven
    Participant

    But the official range of B777-200ER from
    http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/pf/pf_200product.html
    is 14 200 km.

    B777-200ER has 412 deliveries and just 19 orders. A330-200, with clearly smaller capacity and shorter range, has 370 deliveries and 163 orders.

    What makes A330-200 so much better than either B777-200ER or any model of 767?

    Hello,

    Hell, the B737NG has 5177 orders, with 2083 orders remaining. Why is it so much better than either B777-200ER or any model of 767?

    The problem the 777-200ER has now that those carriers that can justify the size and range have ordered it. There are going to be only top-up orders placed by these carriers. The next niche is the ultra-long-range 777-200LR, for carriers who need the range (and there is very few) and those that require more payload lift. The 777-200 has/is being replaced by the A330-300X which is a much lighter airframe, with similar capacity and range. The 767 has been killed by the A330 with increase cargo capacity and range – the very same reasons why the 777-300ER has effectively end the A340-600.

    in reply to: Range needed for widebody #494900
    eightandseven
    Participant

    I should point clarify something I said incorrectly earlier. The B767 opened more non-traditional hub to point service than it did point to point. I am sorry that I said otherwise. A more accurate way to describe the fragmentation brought about by ETOPS and the success of the B767 (which paved the way for the 777 and 330 btw) was that traditional hubs have been bypassed increasingly. This has made the Very Large Airplane less and less desirable since the hub to hub flying is less.

    Boeing believes that the 787 is going to fragment the Pacific market like the 767 did in the Atlantic. In other words, bypassing Narita for example for flights from the U.S. and going directly to smaller Japanese cities or further into Asia without stopping at the gateway hub.

    I agree with you, but there is an argument for both B787 and the A380-type aircraft. I consider the A350 to be more of a competitor to the B777, and more aimed at Emirates. I cannot see the established hub-to-hub flying disappearing, and thus the A380 will be needed to reduce congestion in the skies around these areas.

    in reply to: Range needed for widebody #494925
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Hello,

    All the twin-engine wide-body aircraft deserve their success, their technical and reliability merits are many,

    However, I have my doubts on how (much) the newer generation (A350/B787) are going to open new point-to-point markets. Obviously, the premise that point-to-point avoids hubs is obvious, but how cost efficient will it really be to base, or fly these new generation into smaller airports – fuel aside, crewing, ground handling, engineering are going to cost similar. I suspect these newer generation aircraft will continue to do as A330/B767 do just now, hub-to-hub, and hub-to-point.

    in reply to: Range needed for widebody #494945
    eightandseven
    Participant

    Hello,

    Ship 741, that is one way to look at it, but another is that these smaller aircraft are getting more and more capable. The prime example at the moment is the ongoing success of the A330-300 – which with recent structural upgrades – has made the 777-200 obsolete. The 777-200ER has moved onto thin routes that a 747-400 was on only for cargo and the 777-300ER is being used on more and more 747-400 routes. The 777-300 was limited in its production, and only useful to a niche market.

    747-400 – 442 Ordered, 442 Delivered
    747-400D – 19 Ordered, 19 Delivered
    747-400ER – 6 Ordered, 6 Delivered
    747-400M – 61 Ordered, 61 Delivered

    777-200 – 88 Ordered, 88 Delivered
    777-200ER – 431 Ordered, 412 Delivered
    777-200LR – 56 Ordered, 37 Delivered
    777-300 – 60 Ordered, 60 Delivered
    777-300ER – 410 Ordered, 214 Delivered

    A330-200 – 553 Ordered, 370 Delivered
    A330-300 – 414 Ordered, 241 Delivered

    A340-200 – 28 Ordered, 28 Delivered
    A340-300 – 218 Ordered, 218 Delivered
    A340-500 – 35 Ordered, 30 Delivered
    A340-600 – 103 Ordered, 95 Delivered

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 34 total)