Quantcast

Shit that happens with Airlines, thread

boostindoubles

Nacho Libre
Mar 16, 2004
7,880
6,178
Yakistan
Pullman... my home for a few years. They rebuilt the airport after I left. Had to do a ton of earth moving so they could make the runway larger. Cause flying into Spokane and driving an hour is too much...
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,998
9,659
AK
Yep, tail stand

United 737 Sidelined After Football Charter
Russ Niles
September 19, 2021
4
https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/united-737-sidelined-after-football-charter/?MailingID=716&utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Criminal+Charges+Coming+In+MAX+Case%2C+Goshawk+Down%2C+Pilots+Survive&utm_campaign=Criminal+Charges+Coming+In+MAX+Case%2C+Goshawk+Down%2C+Pilots+Survive-Monday%2C+September+20%2C+2021#

https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avweb.com%2Faviation-news%2Funited-737-sidelined-after-football-charter%2F
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=United+737+Sidelined+After+Football+Charter&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.avweb.com%2Faviation-news%2Funited-737-sidelined-after-football-charter%2F&via=AVweb
https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/united-737-sidelined-after-football-charter/&title=United+737+Sidelined+After+Football+Charter

A United Airlines Boeing 737-900 apparently had to be taken out of service after a strange ramp accident at Lewiston-Nez Perce Airport in Idaho on Friday. The airport doesn’t normally see full-sized airliners and there is speculation that might have something to do with it ending up on its tail with half a college football team still onboard on Friday evening. The 737 took the USC team from Los Angeles to Lewiston for a matchup scheduled with the Washington State Cougars in nearby Pullman, Washington, the following day. As the baggage was unloaded from the front compartment and the team and staff left by the front door, the plane settled back on its tail with the nosewheel about 15 feet above the ramp. Those airplanes need a tail support during offloading to prevent them from tipping backward but the ramp crews at Lewiston normally service smaller regional jets and turboprops and omitted that step.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,998
9,659
AK
What they mean is "regional airline that has United on the side of the plane, but pays pilots far less to fly these whiz-bang gadgets". Working for a regional airline has always been a tough gig to fill, no one wants to stay there because the quality of life sucks comparatively. Airline management on the other hand wants to contract out as much flying as possible to the regional airlines, because it's cheaper. This is called "scope" and every time contracts/union comes up, the company wants to put scope on the table. The pilots of the mainline carrier try to limit it in their contract by limiting the number of seats in the planes used by the regional carriers, like max of 70, whatever, but this is the game that's always played and when it comes to the regional airline, the mainline carrier pits all of them against each-other, finding the one that will undercut the rest and fly the route for the cheapest.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,442
20,248
Sleazattle
What they mean is "regional airline that has United on the side of the plane, but pays pilots far less to fly these whiz-bang gadgets". Working for a regional airline has always been a tough gig to fill, no one wants to stay there because the quality of life sucks comparatively. Airline management on the other hand wants to contract out as much flying as possible to the regional airlines, because it's cheaper. This is called "scope" and every time contracts/union comes up, the company wants to put scope on the table. The pilots of the mainline carrier try to limit it in their contract by limiting the number of seats in the planes used by the regional carriers, like max of 70, whatever, but this is the game that's always played and when it comes to the regional airline, the mainline carrier pits all of them against each-other, finding the one that will undercut the rest and fly the route for the cheapest.

They also don't have to include various on time statistics with their shitty regional contractors. When I lived in the Charlottesville the morning US Air flights were on time 30% of the time with an average delay of about 3 hours. In other words that unless you were lucky, for most locations on the East Coast is was faster to drive.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,442
20,248
Sleazattle
Can vouch

from back in the days when I thought going back to the southeast was somehow a thing to do

I've spent some long, unplanned times in airports but nothing like charlottesville

Bounce around all over the east coast for a day and you are pretty much going to encounter a thunderstorm or other shit weather. Schedule an airplane on a nail biting tight schedule all day and expect it to end up where you want is pretty much a fools errand.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,326
16,792
Riding the baggage carousel.
What they mean is "regional airline that has United on the side of the plane, but pays pilots far less to fly these whiz-bang gadgets". Working for a regional airline has always been a tough gig to fill, no one wants to stay there because the quality of life sucks comparatively. Airline management on the other hand wants to contract out as much flying as possible to the regional airlines, because it's cheaper. This is called "scope" and every time contracts/union comes up, the company wants to put scope on the table. The pilots of the mainline carrier try to limit it in their contract by limiting the number of seats in the planes used by the regional carriers, like max of 70, whatever, but this is the game that's always played and when it comes to the regional airline, the mainline carrier pits all of them against each-other, finding the one that will undercut the rest and fly the route for the cheapest.
:wave:
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,326
16,792
Riding the baggage carousel.

Staying classy...
A group of Quebec influencers and reality show stars could be facing thousands of dollars in fines, after videos surfaced showing them partying without masks on board a Sunwing flight from Montreal to Cancun
The plane was privately chartered by 111 Private Club, a promoter that organized the six-day, all-inclusive event in Cancun
Someone violated the first rule of Chartered Flight Club.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,351
2,462
Pōneke
Hey @Pesqueeb wtf is all this about?

EXCLUSIVE Major U.S. airline CEOs warn 5G could ground some planes, wreak havoc
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-major-us-airline-ceos-urge-action-avoid-catastrophic-5g-flight-2022-01-17/

I don’t know what this c-band stuff is, but we’ve had 5G for ages here and there are no issues at airports, in fact they were some of the first places to get it.

C3EC7E6A-7858-46AC-8C22-2E42C42E80DB.jpeg


Is the C-band the millimetre wave stuff?

Edit: No it’s not, this is about 3-4Ghz, (s-band) whereas millimetre is 27Ghz and above. So what gives?
 
Last edited:

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,326
16,792
Riding the baggage carousel.
Hey @Pesqueeb wtf is all this about?

EXCLUSIVE Major U.S. airline CEOs warn 5G could ground some planes, wreak havoc
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-major-us-airline-ceos-urge-action-avoid-catastrophic-5g-flight-2022-01-17/

I don’t know what this c-band stuff is, but we’ve had 5G for ages here and there are no issues at airports, in fact they were some of the first places to get it.

View attachment 170482

Is the C-band the millimetre wave stuff?

Edit: No it’s not, this is about 3-4Ghz, (s-band) whereas millimetre is 27Ghz and above. So what gives?
Literally the first I've heard of it.

Some caveats:
1:. That article is extremely unclear as to what the actual issue is
2:. It focuses on both "Boeing" and "wide body" aircraft, both of which are outside my realm of "expertise", if we're being generous.
3:. It implies or otherwise heavily emphasis "low visibility approaches"

That said, I'm assuming that the issue at hand is CAT III approaches/landings. That is, very low or literally no visibility situations. This is the realm of large, long haul aircraft and large airports. Think 777 into Heathrow, A380 into Hartsfield etc., under super bad conditions. It requires, the aircraft, the airfield and the people operating and maintaining the equipment have some pretty finely tuned and super expensive equipment and training to pull off safely. Lots of Radio and Radar involved with very little room for error, or in this case, interference.

Assuming all the above is accurate and true, I've been in this business long enough to remember when the simple act of even carrying a cell phone was viewed with great suspicion by a more than small number of members of the regulatory community, and it's my suspicion that this will turn out to be more Much Ado About Nothing. These systems have proven to be much more robust than they've been given credit for in the past and I'd bet this will hold true in the future. Aviation has a firm foundation in paranoia for the obvious reasons, and it's further obvious that accidents are bad for business, especially if the ultimate cause of an accident is something super preventable. Like some ramper for a completely different airline watching pornhub on his phone on the opposite side of the airfield.

Ounce of prevention, and all that.
 
Last edited:

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,326
16,792
Riding the baggage carousel.
Hey! That's one of my airplanes!

Coincidentally, happened to be driving past my local airport with daughter in tow the other day and watched a 175 of ours on low approach pull up it's gear and go around on a perfectly clear day. I now have to wonder if the same happened to it.

Yes indeed! Hence the Q. I also came away with the impression it seemed like hyper cautious over-reaction.
So it would seem I was at least half correct. My employer issued internal documentation today talking about this issue, and it seems, at least for now, to be even worse than I first speculated. The issue is interference with radio altimeters, and this effects pretty much every commercial aircraft, everywhere. Not just CAT III, fancy pants big boy stuff. Company internal notice included this statement by the RAA.

.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
18,998
9,659
AK
Hey! That's one of my airplanes!

Coincidentally, happened to be driving past my local airport with daughter in tow the other day and watched a 175 of ours on low approach pull up it's gear and go around on a perfectly clear day. I now have to wonder if the same happened to it.
Lots of reasons that happens...like the last airplane on the runway just didn't get off it fast enough.