Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
2 World Airways MD-11s At IAH Term D  
User currently offlineSt530 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 138 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6134 times:

This morning on arrival at IAH we passed 2 World MD-11s at consecutive gates in D. The flight board in Terminal C showed only one World flight out of D, namely, the "Houston Express" flight to Luanda. Anybody know what was up with the other? Didn't have my camera so couldn't take a shot unfortunately.

23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCO777ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 691 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6110 times:

"Houston Express"
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/WOA1000


2nd World Flight departed 0910cst
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/WOA9004


User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6089 times:

I would guess that perhaps they were rotating a/c for the service, as there was a WO flight from IAH to ATL that arrived in ATL just after Noon:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/WOA9004

The history for this flight number also shows two previous IAH-ATL legs, which definitely makes me think they were rotating a/c for this service.


User currently offlineFRA2DTW From Germany, joined Feb 2004, 322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5868 times:

I have heard rumors that the Houston Express is to be upgraded to 747-400 service but cannot confirm whether World will continue to do the flying. Does anyone know? What is the target date?

User currently offlineCO777ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 691 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5823 times:

The Houston Express is funded directly or indirectly by some of the major oil companies here in Houston. I doubt they will change the aircraft unless they are certain that they need more capacity.

There are a lot of oil production sites that are being developed on the western, central coast of Africa, so it wouldn't surprise me if they do need extra space.


User currently offlineGARUDAROD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1516 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5764 times:



Quoting FRA2DTW (Reply 3):
have heard rumors that the Houston Express is to be upgraded to 747-400 service but cannot confirm whether World will continue to do the flying. Does anyone know? What is the target date?

The rumor I heard was that TAAG was going to fly the route and hence the change to a
B744. They do have the authority, but they are still banned by the JAA to fly to Europe
so I wonder if that has some affect on the FAA as well. We shall see as they say.



Cargo doesn't whine, moan, or complain
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5105 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5730 times:

The 9000-series flight outbound is a deadhead. The second aircraft came in Thursday morning from AEX as a deadhead, following a live military flight from Points East to AEX. So it may be a scheduled a/c change. Of course, since there's only one a/c configued for the Houston Express, those swaps are probably kept to the minimum possible.

The latest agreement extending the Houston Express contact with World was signed in June 2008, and for the last 8 years seems to have run from mid-year to mid-year. Given that the major users of the service are American companies whose employees might prefer a commercial routing on a European carrier to a nonstop on TAAG, we'll have to see. I don't know the relative leverage positions of the 3 major American companies drilling offshore in Angola, so I don't know whether they'd be inclined to suck it up if Sonangol wanted to switch the air service provider to TAAG, but I don't think that the FAA would have any reason to feel compelled to cowtow to the Angolan regime. If there's a legitimate safety concern giving rise to the European ban, I would imagine that the FAA wouldn't be likely to be less lenient. But stranger things have happened.


User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3702 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5603 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting FRA2DTW (Reply 3):
I have heard rumors that the Houston Express is to be upgraded to 747-400 service but cannot confirm whether World will continue to do the flying. Does anyone know? What is the target date?

What we have been told is that most likely there will be two 747-400's flying for SonAir. They will be configured with 200 seats, and will be able to take full payload and cargo both ways. There are quite a few sticking points to the deal. One was that SonAir wanted an Angolan pilot as a member of the flight crew, which our guys shot down right away. I think you will see the 747 eventually, but I am not holding my breath.

Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 6):
The 9000-series flight outbound is a deadhead

Yup, she was coming in to go to the Delta T.O.C. I was the loadmaster that met her and raided her galley for food along with the mechanics. I think that I am sending her back to IAH on Monday, but I haven't checked the schedule.



Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5105 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 5497 times:



Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 7):
SonAir wanted an Angolan pilot as a member of the flight crew,

Lovely.


User currently offlineTZTriStar500 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1451 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 5417 times:



Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 7):
What we have been told is that most likely there will be two 747-400's flying for SonAir. They will be configured with 200 seats, and will be able to take full payload and cargo both ways. There are quite a few sticking points to the deal. One was that SonAir wanted an Angolan pilot as a member of the flight crew, which our guys shot down right away. I think you will see the 747 eventually, but I am not holding my breath.

I was the Engineering Project Manager for the company World hired to convert 277's interior as a temporary replacement for 278 while it was in C check last November. When I was in ATL in Aug, I was told that they hoped they did not have to do the 277/278 swap again for the next C check interval as the 744 talks where on-going, but it wasn't clear if World was going to operate them or how sure the aircraft upgrade was.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 7):
Yup, she was coming in to go to the Delta T.O.C. I was the loadmaster that met her and raided her galley for food along with the mechanics. I think that I am sending her back to IAH on Monday, but I haven't checked the schedule.

Was this 278 coming to ATL for an A or B check? By the way, I was told 277 was going to be converted back to all coach except zone A was to remain with business class. Do you know if this is correct?

Also, since I used to work for ATA and was largely responsible for the interior configuration of your ex-NWA DC10s since they nearly matched ATA's, I am curious how these aircraft are doing especially 139 (ex-N701TZ).



35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5105 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4719 times:



Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 9):
I am curious how these aircraft are doing especially 139

You still have a soft spot for her, good soldier that she was.  Wink (Nice to see you.)


User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3702 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4595 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 9):
Was this 278 coming to ATL for an A or B check? By the way, I was told 277 was going to be converted back to all coach except zone A was to remain with business class. Do you know if this is correct?

It is here for an A check, and she was put back into her old layout. I don't think SonAir would put up with with the standard coach product. They used to get mad when we'd swap a Delta bird ont the route.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 9):
Also, since I used to work for ATA and was largely responsible for the interior configuration of your ex-NWA DC10s since they nearly matched ATA's, I am curious how these aircraft are doing especially 139 (ex-N701TZ).

Interior wise 139 is good to go, but it ends there. Being that it has the additional (non-functional) fuel tank in hold 3/bulk it is a tremendous pain to load. I know that many loadmasters (myself included) have begged sales not to sell her for any payload over 90,000 lbs, but they never listen. She is always on the forward edge of the c.g. envelope. 13 is the most forward, and even with my most creative loading in FRU a couple months back I could only get a 13.8. The extra tank either needs to be removed, or certified for use. We need weight in the ass of that old girl.



Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlineTZTriStar500 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1451 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4533 times:



Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 10):
You still have a soft spot for her, good soldier that she was. Wink (Nice to see you.)

Thanks, Bill. Yeah, I have a soft spot for them especially ole 701. I busted my ass for a year and a half bringing those on the certificate and a little extra "blood, sweat, and tears" on 701 since she was the first.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 11):
It is here for an A check, and she was put back into her old layout. I don't think SonAir would put up with with the standard coach product. They used to get mad when we'd swap a Delta bird ont the route.

Thanks. I was told SonAir liked 277 in the 2 class configuration (business class in zones A and B) during the month of November especially the seats which were better than those in 278 with the exception of the lie flat seats in zone A.



35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5105 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4426 times:

ATA seemed able to use 701 for lots of mil flights, and in fact was pretty dependent on her since she was at least initially the reliable one. Mil flight necessarily include a presumption of a lot of heavy bags. What techniques did they use to allow them to load it wihin CG (and/or keep the weight down?

User currently offlineABQopsHP From United States of America, joined May 2006, 848 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4385 times:

We connect a few guys a month to the "Houston Express" out of CRP. They have all told me that it is a great ride onboard since World has configured the a/c especially for them.
JD CRPXE



A line is evidence that other people exist.
User currently offlineAntonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 720 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4346 times:



Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 11):
. I know that many loadmasters (myself included) have begged sales not to sell her for any payload over 90,000 lbs, but they never listen. She is always on the forward edge of the c.g. envelope. 13 is the most forward, and even with my most creative loading in FRU a couple months back I could only get a 13.8. The extra tank either needs to be removed, or certified for use. We need weight in the ass of that old girl.

It must be a pain to load. Do you tie down the nosewheel like Fedex does ?


User currently offlineCaptSeth From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4270 times:

I recall taking a delay down at Ft. Hood with 701 while we worked out the numbers. Had to load aft first, use compartment loading making sure aft cabin was full, but it wasn't such a problem as long as you planned ahead and informed the handlers. It was a nice airplane.

User currently offlineTZTriStar500 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1451 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4211 times:



Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 13):
ATA seemed able to use 701 for lots of mil flights, and in fact was pretty dependent on her since she was at least initially the reliable one. Mil flight necessarily include a presumption of a lot of heavy bags. What techniques did they use to allow them to load it wihin CG (and/or keep the weight down?



Quoting CaptSeth (Reply 16):
I recall taking a delay down at Ft. Hood with 701 while we worked out the numbers. Had to load aft first, use compartment loading making sure aft cabin was full, but it wasn't such a problem as long as you planned ahead and informed the handlers. It was a nice airplane.

Yes, we utilized the aircraft for bulk loading only as the military doesn't use containers. Each hold was divided up into compartments per our W&B Control and Loading Manual. The loading system was left in to be able to use the container loading capability at a later date.



35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
User currently offlineAntonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 720 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4145 times:

I worked for World Airways years ago in FRA.
I can say it was the nicest airline I worked for and the crews were the best  Smile


User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3702 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4054 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Antonovman (Reply 15):
It must be a pain to load. Do you tie down the nosewheel like Fedex does ?

Nope, she's way nose heavy, no need to.

Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 13):
ATA seemed able to use 701 for lots of mil flights, and in fact was pretty dependent on her since she was at least initially the reliable one. Mil flight necessarily include a presumption of a lot of heavy bags. What techniques did they use to allow them to load it within CG (and/or keep the weight down?

I am not saying that it can't be done, I am just saying that it's a pain to do. Last time I had her, we bulked out hold 3, hold 2, the bulk pit, filled C zone, filled B zone, and only had 2,000 lbs in hold 1 and she was still almost out of CG. Nothing like telling the officers that they are sitting in the sardine can in the back while the load team gets to spread out in the front. The big problem with the NW birds is that they have so many seats in the A zone. The CG slams forward very quickly on these things.



Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlineTZTriStar500 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1451 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3866 times:



Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 19):
The big problem with the NW birds is that they have so many seats in the A zone.

I am not sure this is the reason they are nose heavy. The max density 10 abreast layout on a DC-10 has 92 in Zone A and the ex-NWA 10's currently have 71. In fact, the original NWA configuration was 26 business class seats that weighed 1885 lbs total. The 71 coach seats that replaced them weigh 2105 which is only an increase of 220lbs. Of course, this is unoccupied seat weight only. Also, Zones B and C did change from NWA's at all.

This makes me curious why they are nose heavy as its not the interior configuration.



35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5105 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3834 times:



Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 20):
This makes me curious why they are nose heavy as its not the interior configuration.

Is this largely a function, as Airtran suggests, of the deactivation of the aft fuel tanks? At 6.75 lbs/gal, you would seem to be able to get some weight back there in a hurry. However, it doesn't seem like there's a viable alternative to their current deactivation. I understand from reading a post on here from a former NW mechanic that they are very problematic if used infrequently (fuel line/shroud leaks), although OK if used regularly. It doesn't seem that, if activated, they would be necessary to use with a high degree of frequency, and so I can't imagine that WO maint wants them to be activated. OTOH, I understand (from you in a post on here) that removing them isn't a financially-viable option.

Any quick-and-dirty thoughts?


User currently offlineLovetojetblue From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 137 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3688 times:

was one of the aircraft ex Air Namibia?


Jetblue: The official airline of Springfield! And Eventually: The official airline of Quahog, RI
User currently offlineCaptSeth From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3616 times:



Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 21):
Any quick-and-dirty thoughts?

Yes, but instead I'll talk about the DC-10.

The EER aircraft (701) had that additional tank all the way back there, and it took up a lot of space that would ordinarily have been used to load cargo. As the tank itself was deactivated, the aircraft had a built in bias towards a forward CG, and the only way around it was to get as much weight aft as possible. That included passengers as well as cargo.

While it might have been useful to activate the tank, I believe that would have been impracticable due to accompanying maintenance issues.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
World Airways MD-11s To HNL posted Sat Sep 13 2003 07:02:39 by Bluewave 707
World MD-11s At YIP posted Thu Oct 24 2002 06:23:54 by HlywdCatft
World Airways MD-11 @ IAH posted Sun Apr 29 2001 00:39:49 by B757300
MD-11s At SAN posted Fri Oct 27 2006 19:26:11 by Lindy Field
MD-11s At Goodyear, Arizona posted Mon Aug 7 2006 23:00:24 by EBJ1248650
MSY To Europe On World Airways MD-11 posted Tue May 16 2006 23:43:38 by MSYtristar
World Airways MD-11 In FLL Now posted Wed Mar 1 2006 15:00:09 by Eastbay
World Airways/MD-11 Cargo posted Wed Mar 16 2005 23:30:10 by Vikingair
Breaking News...World Airways MD-11 posted Thu May 27 2004 16:56:59 by Max777
Delta MD-11s At MCO posted Fri May 16 2003 05:00:03 by HlywdCatft