[ Tier1: No payment upfront, a substantial yearly payment to RR to support the engine and a per hour fee. A fee say 103% of later cheaper options. This was very popular with A350 and A330NEO. Tier2, $500k to $1M USD payment upfront, a slightly lower yearly payment, and per hour say 102% of later opt...
Jump to postAnother nail in Boeing's coffin. Congratulations to Airbus. I am a little surprised at the small number of firm orders compared to the large number of purchase rights. Would've expected closer to 12 firm and 14 purchase rights. Whatever works for Cathay I guess. There are 6 ERFs at the moment that ...
Jump to postGPS is an excellent tool if everyone is playing honest. Which is, sadly, no longer the case - technology availability is growing, and less than honest people are always out there. That should make GPS at most a secondary tool for critical use cases - but, sadly, there is little critical thinking in...
Jump to postenzo011 wrote:Great win for Airbus, existing 777X customer and only ever had Boeing cargo aircraft as well.
Would you personally feel comfortable doing autoland given that there were GPS spoofings? My bet that was software thing more than hardware as signal is weak and transmitter can be really small. ANd it doesn't take a lot of deviation to put a plane on a taxiway.. As part of the GLS system there is ...
Jump to postWhile I would not say that SFO is operationally unsafe I would question why a project that I was involved with a number of years ago at SFO appears to have been implemented so slowly. The project involved the use of newly developed RNP to GLS approaches and was a joint project of the SFO airport, F...
Jump to postWell the market will be any 737 operator worldwide.
The reason to do a PMA or EASA equivalent is to permit the use worldwide
Not an impossible task, however not a box ticking exercise either
Essentially they are not authorised parts which means the conformance to the original specification has not been sought. They maybe fine, or may not be. If the Chinese were smart they would try and obtain PMA approval for them, this is a consumable part that is in high demand. The PMA approval will ...
Jump to postMissile defence system “The DAS comprises four units mounted under the fuselage - two in its nose section and two in the tail one. Each of the units includes two threat detection sensors (one for the front hemisphere and the other for the rear one) and an infrared jammer of incoming missiles’ heat s...
Jump to postVictoria also has terrain, you don’t want miss the loc.
Jump to postGiven that some of the Russian ALs have recently been buying planes off lease companies it might not be technically stolen ! But you're probably right about the rest! I thought the “buying” aircraft off the lease companies (settling the debts for pennies in the dollar like BOC aviation did) was jus...
Jump to postIt's a little more complicated than that, as you well know. In addition to the terrain in the region London doesn't have, SFO airspace overlaps with OAK's class C, and both in the vicinity (10 or less nm) and under the SFO class B are three more towered and quite busy GA airports. San Carlos averag...
Jump to postRVSM is from FL290 to FL410. So if you're AP is deferred, dispatch will file you at FL280 or lower. Nothing cosmic. Problem solved, time to go flying! The aircraft is technically stolen, technically unairworthy, technically without a certificate of airworthiness, flying with bogus maintenance and p...
Jump to postQ wrote:75% still flying. I heard some aircraft with autopilot was INOP. Russian pilot had to fly manually all the way!!! No autopilot it was broken. Crazy!
Q
As of right now, SFO operates at slightly over 1000 operations a day. Compared to 1200 at JFK with better runway pairs separation and 2200 at ATL with 5 runways, two other busy airports. My impression is that capacity wise it's about full, especially during rush hours. Isn’t this well behind the li...
Jump to postBoeingGuy wrote:
YXX was probably more than 15nm closer given they had a straight in shot without going downwind. EK didn’t serve YVR so it wasn’t an on-line station.
"Suitable" can also mean different things in different situations. If I'm truly about to run out of fuel, a lot more airports become "suitable" that I would never consider for a diversion under more typical circumstances. According to the controller they were only 15 mm closer, ...
Jump to postI’m sure that YXX and YYJ are in the FMC database. If you are about to run out of fuel or on fire, any close piece of concrete long enough for your airplane is “suitable”. The database is company specific, Honeywell/Jepp etc charge for them by the size. Most airlines have databases which are specif...
Jump to postObviously to generate advertising revenue for a.net through multiple threads
Jump to postI’m not sure how in the world you would interpret him saying that SFO is a delight as meaning an ILS is useless. SFO has ILSs on several runways. I grew up near SFO and have also connected there recently. It seemed very efficient. Back to the OP’s point, I work in the industry and have no safety co...
Jump to postIIRC they had like 8 minutes of fuel left when they landed. My understanding was their decision to go farther to YVR wasn’t because they couldn’t get down to YXX. It was because, by gosh, they had already programmed YVR in the FMC and that’s where the magenta line said they were going. The Captain ...
Jump to postIf you end up in an emergency fuel situation, you'll definitely need to explain yourself. Lufthansa here was nowhere near an emergency - they had an alternate very close by and had plenty of fuel to get there. That isn't an emergency. They essentially did make the minimum fuel call by telling the c...
Jump to postIf I remember correctly the flight originally diverted because of very strong crosswinds in SEA (and possibly after 1 or 2 go-arounds) and originally requested Vancouver because it was their filed alternate. The fuel situation became apparent to the crew while enroute; the controller offered Abbott...
Jump to postTrevor Jacobs did far more than "falsely" declare an emergency; he literally created one for the sole purpose of self-promotion and, when one considers the wildfire risk of crashing an airplane in the area where he did, put millions of people at risk in the process. Yes, it was a well kno...
Jump to postI have no idea who Trevor Jacob is, a friend of yours ? As far as declaring an emergency the PIC can do so for any reason they see fit, not just the situations you described, in aviation there are just too many scenarios where it could be necessary with the dynamic nature of this business I’ll let ...
Jump to postIt’s quite extraordinary you don’t know an emergency can be declared at any time, this is entirely up to the pilot in command if her or she decides it is necessary No you cannot “declared at any time”, you can only declare an emergency when an emergency exists, I.e. safety of flight is in doubt, th...
Jump to postAgain you’re exaggerating the use of inappropriate language and on top of that trying to prove it by the stupid and overly aggressive “use google” response. Does it happen on super rare occasions, sure, common occurrence as you claim, nope. I had posted some other examples before in a previous post...
Jump to postYou can declare an emergency at any time, you should know this Incorrect, it is as i stated above. “The pilot-in-command shall declare a situation of fuel emergency ”MAYDAY FUEL”, when the calculated usable fuel predicted to be available upon landing at the nearest aerodrome where a safe landing ca...
Jump to postSo I guess I’m not understanding why it makes analytical sense for the cost shifting to run only one way. Analytically, if ATC would charge for a “carrier initiated” go around on the theory that the additional ATC services cost money, why should the carrier not be able to recover the attendant cost...
Jump to postNo Zeke it doesn’t, even the link you provided did not detail any real examples of using the F word deliberately on the radio beyond anecdotes and attempts at humor Do a google search and listen the various LiveATC hits. Swearing at a controller because you’re not getting your way after demanding s...
Jump to postI have never heard the F word used by a pilot or controller in 20,000 hours and thirty years of professional flying, mostly as an airline pilot with a U.S. major , what you seem to have a grudge against Happens all the time, lots of use recently up in ANC with the 5 hr delays to get to the ramp. Th...
Jump to postLooks like I hit a nerve, pilots all over the world make mistakes but I’ve never heard one swear at a controller if he didn’t get his way Do a google search, you will find lots of examples of both pilots and controllers swearing at each other. Meanwhile read this to fill in the gaps as to what has ...
Jump to postImagine a U.S. carrier operating into a major European airport at peak times demanded an approach no one else was using then swore at the controller if it wasn’t granted immediately I have heard pilots from US majors both passenger and freighters get angry and unprofessional at controllers overseas...
Jump to postIf the preceding aircraft did not vacate, that would be ATC initiated. You would not get charged for that, and you could not get the cost of doing the go around back from ATC.
Jump to postGalwayman wrote:
I don't know if it happens anywhere, but billing anybody for a rejected landing or balked landing or goaround (I'm not so interested in terminology here) does not seem to promote safe operations. There is still a cost to have that landing slot available, both for the airport and ATC. In many parts ...
Jump to postIt’s really not very similar to the 747SUD at all, is it? That was engineered and certified by Boeing before becoming the standard hump on the 747-300. You’re suggesting that a 3rd party engineer and certify both a stretch and re engine of the A380? I just can’t see it happening and I doubt Airbus ...
Jump to postThis is why we see Emirates wanting both more on-wing engine time (which is a bigger consideration when used for high-cycle operations, such as DXB-India) and another 10,000 lbs of thrust. They’re just one airline, though. The A35K will takeoff from DXB at 40.9 deg C (average highest temp in DXB), ...
Jump to postProblems with the airframe? Do tell. And actually, GE states operational thrust is 105,000 lbs. not 110,000 lbs. An older source was in error. . I see this post was amended after my post in an attempt to correct the misinformation in the OP and make me look stupid. The certificated maximum rated th...
Jump to postI think the mission profiles in consideration is different now than then. Back then, they probably wanted an aircraft equivalent to a significantly lighter 77W with 20% more efficient engines for under 12 hour flights. Currently, the seem to be considering 350+ passengers and cargo for 12-18 hours....
Jump to postThere are two chances for an A380neo - slim and none. The thing is, slim already left town. If Clark/Emirates can’t accept this, then it sounds like their problem. I don’t agree, UAE more so than EK have been talking to Airbus for over a decade to setup aerospace manufacturing in the UAE as part of...
Jump to postThe only reason to increase design thrust is due to the airframe needing more thrust than originally specified.
The extra thrust is there to overcome the higher drag on takeoff.
Normally points to higher weights and/or higher drag.
I only fly GA planes as a hobby and unfortunately have to pay for it myself (I love the hobby but its not the cheapest one around in Germany). In Germany, you usually pay for each landing, even at small airfields. This usually also applies for touch and gos. So, for example at my home airfield EDLH...
Jump to postI have a question regarding engine performance. The new GE GE9X is listed as having 110,000 lbs. thrust but has been tested up to 134,300 lbs. thrust. If needed in hot or high operations could this engine be safely operated above the 110,000 thrust limit without damaging the engine? Say, 115-120,00...
Jump to postThink the relatively low lease rates on the 77W is too hard to justify a different aircraft/engine
Jump to postEspecially with the a320/1NEO engine issues. As mentioned they have 4x a321 (domestical configuration) all now parked engine less. They opted to remove the engines to keep the international a321/320NEP fleet flying. The domestic a321NEO fleet is less than a year old, and parked up already. Not real...
Jump to postUA857 wrote:According to the photo description this aircraft is currently on lease from CX.
Airlinerdude wrote:Thanks. Noting that the video linked shows a slightly lower QNH at 1000. What does it look like at QNH 1000 using the same temp and wind?