|
|
Originally Posted by iaflyer
(Post 855019)
How Not to land a B767: Four Months After Hard Landing at JFK, Repair of Crippled RAM 767 Nearly Complete | NYCAviation.com | Planespotting and Aviation Photography, Breaking Airline News, Aviation Discussion
YouTube - Accidental Gear Up Landing I wonder how many small plane gear up landings could be avoided by changing the beeping gear warning noise to one that says "GEAR, GEAR" ? At XJT, good life lesson here that even non-XJT or RJ folks can enjoy, I was in a recurrent indoc in our brand new awesome training center and we were doing a CRM study on the Continental DC9 gear up in IAH (didn't turn the hydraulics on, went through the motions but landed gear and flaps up). At the end of the CAL in-house video, we had a discussion. I'll never forget this one pilot, not a brat kid but older, bloviating about how HE NEVER ignores warnings, not a single one, no matter how common they may seem. A multitude of other pilots audibly agreed that they did the same. BTW, did I mention the training center was new? Do you know what its like to be in a new building? Lots of fire alarms, none real. Anyways, the instructor, awesome guy, goes "you know its funny, all of you keep saying you can never ignore any warning signs but the fire alarm has been going off for ten minutes and not one of you did anything." You could've heard a pin drop. I'll never forget it, it was classic, it was funny, and it was awesome to see know-it-alls eat crow so quickly. FWIW, FTB came from the Brasilia, if it didn't give you false warnings then the warning system was broke. Think about it. |
Originally Posted by 20 Mile Final
(Post 854834)
This reminds me of my rightwing extremist mother-in-law, with whom I get into many political discussions. She listens to all these call-in talk shows. Many years ago, while Clinton was still in office, she says to me, "They hate Clinton even in his home state of Arkansas. I was listening to a talk show and many people from Arkansas were calling in saying that it doesn't surprise them that he's a horrible president because he was a horrible governor."
I told her that a call-in talk show is hardly a statistically significant database. She disagreed. Oopss..big ooopss for you. You never know whose watching on these APC sites do you? |
Any one else see the article in today's Wall Street Journal regarding airline fuel efficiency? You guessed it, Delta came in dead last. Our fleet/leg lengths etc add up to the lowest average seat miles per gallon. Alaska surprisingly was first and the spread was something like Alaska averaging 76 passenger seat miles per gallon and DAL averaging only about 64.
The article never mentioned mainline vs connection efficiency, but my take on the story was that they were strictly comparing mainline airlines. They did however mention the poor average fuel efficiency of the RJs. If someone has a online Wall Street Journal account they might be able to post the whole article with the chart - it was pretty interesting. Scoop |
We buy all the fuel for the RJ's so perhaps the data they were using (total fuel purchased vs. total RSM's?) included our massive RJ fleet fuel burn too. They are flying over 50% of our domestic now, right?
BUT...don't start your APU until it's 105 in the back, or all -heck- is going to break loose! |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 854872)
The original was not though, T corrected it in his post in red.
Why do we spell it Air Lines though? The story I head was this: Back in the day all airlines were Air Lines or airways. All of the other airlines were found guilty of price colusion et al and had to basically become different entites, so they went from Air Lines to Airlines. DAL wasnot part of the CAB's findings at the time and therefore kept the Air Lines and did not have to go to airlines like the rest of the companies. It was during the CAB if I recall correctly. I recall something along these lines from one of the CAB courses I took in college as well, but that has been many years ago, and I am too lazy to go find my text books in the basement! |
Originally Posted by 20 Mile Final
(Post 854834)
Usually dissatisfied people are the most vocal. People who are angry feel the strong urge to vent. People who are satisfied tend to go about their lives.
This reminds me of my rightwing extremist mother-in-law, with whom I get into many political discussions. She listens to all these call-in talk shows. Many years ago, while Clinton was still in office, she says to me, "They hate Clinton even in his home state of Arkansas. I was listening to a talk show and many people from Arkansas were calling in saying that it doesn't surprise them that he's a horrible president because he was a horrible governor." I told her that a call-in talk show is hardly a statistically significant database. She disagreed. I said - "Well, then how did Clinton get elected as governor if he was so bad? Not once, mind you, but twice? The only way that can happen is if a majority of Arkansas citizens vote for him. Secondly, Clinton has been elected and reelected as president. In each election, the state of Arkansas overwhelmingly handed over its electoral votes. It wasn't even close. So, apparently, somebody in Arkansas likes him. Do you really expect somebody to call-in and say, 'Uh, I'm just calling to say that I'm really satisfied with the way everything is going and I think Bill Clinton is doing a good job. Well ... uh ... that's all I really wanted to say. Thanks for taking my call. Have a nice day.'"? I think the same dynamic is at work on Delta Airline's Facebook site. Think how many of your non-airline friends feel the need to tell you whenever their flying experience is all screwed up - even if they don't fly Delta. When everything goes as planned - they probably don't say a word. This is why levity over the PA is sometimes risky. You may have 100 passengers on your flight. 99 of them will laugh and think it's funny. And the ONE passenger who doesn't think it's funny will probably take the time to write an angry letter saying something to the effect, "I would think your pilots should have something better to do on the flight deck than play comedian. I expect more professionalism for my overpriced ticket." For example, I've heard the sound byte of that woman kicked off the plane for accusing the pilot of being drunk over and over again. The passenger's perspective is over-spotlighted, while the company's perspective is passively mentioned. Point in case, in every TV media report I have seen, not once have I heard this lady apologize for falsely accusing the captain of being intoxicated. Instead she says she just wanted the captain to talk to her and explain the situation. Bottom line is passengers have been flying around for way too cheap in the recent years, while being over-catered to in the process. Now that things are starting to change with capacity shrinking and ticket prices rising, we are seeing alot of these self-entitled idiots lashing out against the company whenever they can. If you ever in the mood to see the world's stupidest movie, just go rent Flightplan, hands down the dumbest movie I've ever seen. An hour and a half of that man-woman Jodie Foster running around on aircraft acting like a maniac. Recently just saw an episode of The Closer (Wife Remote-Control Woman Empowerment Night at my house) where the Captain and Flight Attendants got busted for being coke-mules connected with Mexican Drug Cartels. I know you have to take this crap with a grain of salt, but unfortunately the average person doesn't realize how far from reality these movies are. As far as those call in talk shows go, you can't dismiss them completely. They still do take a sample of the American people's voice even though sometimes those voices are irrational. |
Nice explanation ACL, glad to know there was a legit reason for it all!
|
I'll take paid for gas guzzlers over new unpaid for efficient airplanes any day of the week but especially in a down economy when fuel prices fall. What are we at? $2.22/gal down from $3.57/gal in summer of 2008? I have the numbers somewhere on my Internet. Anyways, that eats into a lot of advantages. Not to mention, we've got some airplanes that have great fuel numbers per asm, isn't the 753 the leader? And how about $8M 160 seat MD90s? There's a reason we want them all.
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 855152)
I'll take paid for gas guzzlers over new unpaid for efficient airplanes any day of the week but especially in a down economy when fuel prices fall. What are we at? $2.22/gal down from $3.57/gal in summer of 2008? I have the numbers somewhere on my Internet. Anyways, that eats into a lot of advantages. Not to mention, we've got some airplanes that have great fuel numbers per asm, isn't the 753 the leader? And how about $8M 160 seat MD90s? There's a reason we want them all.
It depends on the airframe. 2.22 a gallon is still very high for fuel if you look at the last 20 years. Its pretty easy to do the math on what a aircraft that is 30 percent more efficient saves per month in gas. Its a big number and well beyond the cost to purchase or lease new aircraft. That is why most startups are now going with new equipment rather then old aircraft. This does not even take into account the maintenance savings. The MD-90 is a bit different because its fuel burn is the same as the newer aircraft making it a good deal at the moment. This does not however change the fact that Delta had a aging fleet before the merger. Add in NWA's very old fleet and Delta faces serious capital costs to refleet the airline. Other airlines are doing it on a ongoing basis. Delta seems to be focusing on near term profits and not the long term outlook. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:43 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands