Search results

In which of the 4 mentioned (BA, US, SQ, EK)?

Ah, the good old days. Back when I was working (getting close to 7 years now), I mostly commuted to Melbourne from Albury on Rex. They had 3 flights per day during the week, and a couple per day at the weekend. Medical specialists in particular were able to fly from Melbourne early in the...

The airspeed and altitude make sense for normal operations in the diversion, so I can't glean any ideas from FR24. Well, you never really know who comes up with these times.... The crew that flew it out of Sydney would already have been out of hours for a flight to JNB when they landed...

The aerodynamic differences between a "fuel efficient" aircraft, and one without that moniker, but also from the last couple of decades would be in the low single digits percentage-wise. Their efficiency comes from improvements in the engines, which aren't all that relevant in a glide, and...

An airliner will glide about 3-4 nautical miles for every 1,000' of altitude. You experience that on every descent.

Too stupid to devote any of my life to.

That's the Kiwi air force, so who knows. Presumably all of the Fords are broken down. Looks like the apron at Nowra. Used to be a lot more aircraft there.

It has little to nothing to do with the runway. When you need a medical diversion, there's discussion with Medlink about the actual medical situation. They will then recommend the place they'd like the person taken. As long as that's acceptable from an aviation perspective (i.e. weather), then...

I've even started booking the night before with AirBnb. That few hours between arrival and the nominal check-in is torture.

I told the Hilton at Rome airport that when I was checking in. They had no issue, and just moved on.

I recall them taking my toothpaste off me on a departure from HK back in 2008. Aircraft still blew up. Once security get their fingers into something, they will NEVER relent on it.

Whilst I think it’s pretty obvious which way the wind is blowing here…. it’s worth noting that the recorders do not record the fuel cutoff switches being moved. They record a signal that they identify as having come from those switches. Just slightly different.

Ramp down and loadmaster talking to the pilots. Common operation in the military.

Note that the description of the hydraulic system and computers does not apply to the A350 or A380.

Not really. It might get you a better derate, but beyond that it would just be a guess.

Even if you don't exceed the structural limits, this has the potential to duplicate QF72.....and that hurt quite a few people. I'm actually more interested though, in the difference between the older software and the new. I'm sure we'll never find out, but generally you'd expect newer to be...

Well, as it completely grounds flights (with the exception of non passenger ferry flights) there’s obviously no flight risk…as they aren’t allowed to fly.

Or quality of maintenance..i.e not bothering to do updates. To me this smells of software that was updated to fix an issue, and then a subsequent update removed it. Presumably all will eventually be revealed.

Computer….flying normally, flying normally, flying normally, [radiation arrives], stalled, stalled, “full forward stick to unstall”, oops. QF 72 2008.

Interesting, if true. I’m just talking to an Airbus engineer (in Germany) to get a bit more detail about exactly what happens. It seems that the box may have to be removed for the the data upload to take place. The box change is simple and quick. But the limitation will probably be the...