Search results

Whilst the media were telling us how experienced they were, the Captain apparently had 8,000 hours. That’s very low given his age, and makes me wonder why. The FO on the other hand had 1,000, so not even at the level many airlines would even talk to him. Neither may have any relevance to the...

I don't recall that as a limitation (but I could well have forgotten). But, what is the correct setting? The Airbus was very definite about it being the same one that was entered into the takeoff performance page on the FMC. Apparently the 787 uses an equivalent check to allow completion of the...

They're always going to be used to some extent. Generally the lowest setting gives you slats only. The next couple will give area increase at the trailing edge, and perhaps some rear curvature. After that the curvature increases dramatically, and they produce a lot more drag. These draggy...

Since the introduction of electronic calculation of the take of data, the ability to work out the 'best' configuration changed dramatically. On the 747, we basically used just the one setting, because it was too time consuming to calculate the data for multiple settings. Laptops and iPads...

It may be a late rotation, but it doesn’t look wrong with regard to the rate or to the final pitch attitude. If he’d been slow when he rotated, you’d almost certainly have ended with a tail scrape, and the video doesn’t seem to show enough angle for that, nor does the tail in the debris. The...

Makes more sense.

It doesn't work like that. In the BA case he retracted one stage (25 back to 20, I think), but the later stages of flap give a lot of drag, and not much extra lift. So, he was getting rid of some drag, without affecting the lift to any degree. Retracting flaps from a take off setting could well...

The airport elevation is just under 200', so it's really about 400 feet above the ground. The speed and altitude are quite reasonable for a normal departure. Worth noting that they've taken off from a mid-field taxiway, leaving only about 1,800 metres of runway. Looks like there's works...

Those of us who were flying instructors, especially at Pt Cook, where aerobatics were the rule of the day, will all have memories of students who suddenly needed to part company with their last meal. If you were careful with how you manoeuvered the aircraft, you could ensure the cloud of muck...

Just practicing the rotation.

The medical aspect of the diversion is handled by the medical world. They know what is available at any given place, and will recommend an appropriate destination. The ability to handle the 380 is not as widespread as you might imagine. No point in landing somewhere if you then can’t get off the...

We need to know exactly what the issue was to be able to resolve that. Having to cross Iran would be the biggest one. You'll never get an engineering issue fixed in a hurry when offline, unless you just happen to jag the right engineer (as I once did in Amsterdam).

Hopefully the only tickets involved.

Baku is a good choice for many reasons. The medical people would possibly have suggested Dubai (as their choices are only related to medical facilities), but they would also have taken into account the timing. ATC, airfield, etc, issues are left to the crew. Whilst I'd be happy enough to fly...

I guess it will really blow up when the bullets stop being rubber.

The 380 is quite respectable with regard to fuel burn, as long as you keep the cabin mostly full. It does not work at all if you've only got a 787 load!

They wouldn't know. QF doesn't tell them anything either.

I tried one recently for flights to Europe. I was staggered by just how poor their pricing and flexibility was. Booked online.

...which I last flew on 31/3/2004.

This is an old one thread...but the reason for that is probably high altitude wind shear. If you're in a 150 knot jet stream, the boundary as you come out (or in) can be extremely rough, and there will be no warning at all.