Turbofan

Members
  • Content Count

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Turbofan

  • Rank
    1

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. AND WHAT IF THEY HAD JUST BEEN OFF A NORMAL VACATION BASED ON SENIORITY OF 20 TO 30 DAYS? Marshall, I am not suggesting the gap in flying is the cause. Based on the ADS-B data this looks almost shall we say inexplicable. I quoted Don simply because he reminded us to not underestimate human factors. Those words are looking pretty wise right now. After seeing that video I’m going to just leave it at that until we see the real CVR/FDR data. Cheers.
  2. A very interesting video using ADS-B data of the accident. Anyone know how accurate this data usually is?
  3. Hi Don, 220kts is max gear up speed. There is a hydraulic safety valve that prevents green hydraulic pressure from entering the landing gear hydraulic system above 260kts. The hydraulic architecture says that if ADR1 or ADR 3 are less than 260kts, AND the gear leaver is down, the valve opens pressurizing the system.
  4. I really doubt they forgot the gear. There is just too much redundancy. Besides a 320 could never do that angle without the gear down. I suspect rather. High unstablized approach. Long landing into a low inertia state. Go around. Gear up. Settle back onto runway to scrape engines before climbing away. With the aircraft auto trimmed well forward in the flare, just relaxing the back pressure will allow the aircraft to sink. Initially it takes almost full aft stick to keep the aircraft in the landing attitude during a low inertia go around. At AC we train this, for this reason. Im not sure everyone does though as it is considered a maneuver outside of certification. If this crew had never trained it they would have had a real surprise during the initial stages of the go around. Similar EK 521 only this aircraft scraped the ground rather than full impact.
  5. I can’t come up with any scenario where both engine nacelles have damage on the bottom and the gear is down when it happens. That’s the part that doesn’t compute. The Airbus trims forward below about 50’ for feel in the flare. A late go around takes a lot of back pressure to get the nose up until the trim catches back up. If the gear was selected up early in a low inertia state it would be very easy to settle back onto the runway. To be clear I’m thinking a scrape based on the images.
  6. The right engine sure looks like it has a ragged underside against the blue sky doesn’t it. But it looks like both sides. Can a very hard landing in a 320 cause the engines to touch? That geometry doesn’t make sense to me. Low inertia Go around with the gear retracted too early?
  7. Fleet plan mostly. I won’t repeat here as it should not have been posted. Look to united’s fleet reductions as a ball park. It will be out tomorrow.
  8. Much will depend on international traffic. Only a short while ago cargo yields were depressed due to the excess cargo capacity out there. Everyone with a 787/777/350 was a cargo airline. I would bet against this change and it’s viability longer term. Short to medium term though might as well be flexible and reconfigure what you have to what the market wants. A dedicated freighter though? I doubt it.
  9. Kip, Previous page. Air Transat was in trouble before the pandemic. Unless they have a Plan B that we haven't heard about I hope for the sake of jobs there that the acquisition proceeds. The poster has now clarified their comment. They were not suggesting to sacrifice junior AC employees. Discussion closed I jumped on this for one reason. Support for one group will be interpreted as a lack of support for the other. Even though the lack of support is not stated it will be taken as implied. Even in the above situation which I believe was well meaning.
  10. Gumbi I wish you and your colleagues the best. I have no issue with Transat getting a lifeline. Actually I have no issue with a merger either. I believe Transat will be here 2 years from now. Either merged or separate. I actually believe the current situation makes the merger more likely. I was simply pointing out that we are well beyond a point of win win for employee groups. Something no one thought about 4 weeks ago. Someone is going to get hurt. Throwing support behind one group, even though it is not stated, implies a lack of support or sympathy for the other. My intention is only to shed light on that fact. Support for one group implies lack of support for another. Much like you probably interpreted my comments as a lack of support for you. All the best.
  11. Thanks FA@AC. I wasn’t trying to pick on your comments by the way. They were actually very empathetic which I respect very much. My point was simply that we are beyond a point where it all works out in the wash. We are at a point where people will get hurt. Support for one group will come at the expense of another. By expressing concern for one group we are by default expressing a lack of concern for another.
  12. Yes I have been through a merger. Yes I know what seniority is and the value of it. I am fully aware of how arbitration’s work. I have also worked for a company that failed. Actually that has happened to me twice. The comment placed a page earlier was not what happens if the merger goes ahead. That is obvious. I’m not sure why you have gone in that direction with your comments. The comment that started this discussion was one lamenting that the merger should move ahead so that those at Transat don’t have to start over? My point was that today’s reality is that protecting one group will come at the expense of another. So let’s assume you are king for a day. You decide if the merger stops or proceeds. Someone either senior or junior is going to get the pointy end of your choice. Would you move forward with the merger simply on the grounds it saves Transat employees from starting over?
  13. Again, AC will only employ the amount of employees it needs. Currently there are way too many employees. I didn’t realize there was such a pervasive belief that junior people should be sacrificed to protect the senior from starting over.
  14. Again I understand the sentiment. This is a very tough situation. No one wants to see layoffs or failures. It’s not like AC employees aren’t already taking big hits. But the underlying message I am hearing from you is that you would prefer to see the consequences of this crisis on Tansat employees, transferred to junior AC employees rather than have Transat fail. Is that what you are saying?