Sunwing Delay At Yyc

[boestar]

I'm sure they're not, because it seems like at most airlines each department fights for its budget amongst each other, budget dollars are based on performance, and delays are pinned on the easiest, but not necessarily the most accurate, target.

Too many carry ons is a pandora's box, in terms of who's "fault" delays are, and what the total cost is. To get accurate data on how turn times are affected, you'd need to compare a full year of data pre- and post-charging, because turn times are seasonal. A year is too a long time, during which time probably several dozen other operational and business policy changes would have taken place as well.

My guess is that this is a "what the CEO wants" issue, and a revenue issue primarily, because the total costs are way too hard to pin down. Also, CEO's and C-suite bonus is based (partly) on growing top line revenue, which the market likes, which drives up share prices. Shaving 5 mins off a turn time and making your FA's happy...I doubt very much that is a consideration at all.

I know we put a great deal of effort in pinning the delay where it belongs so we can prevent the same failure (if Possible) in the future. We have a meeting every day to go over the previous days delays and look for the causes and solutions. Pinning a cost to the delay is another matter but a significant delay is significantly expensive.

I can pull delay data back to a time when Pontius was a pilot.

[Fido]

It is nice to see that Olivia Chow can make a stupid twitter too.

[Kip Powick]

Obviously I was not there but as an armchair Quarterback I say..................REJECT !!!!!...... after the first bang, (well below V1)

[DEFCON]

With a bang and yawing @ 90kts....why wait for things to get worse?

[mrlupin]

The CFM56 never stalls and survives. As a technician who has done numerous inspections on these particular engines, I can attest to their inability to survive even a mild stall.

[conehead]

Bang with yaw at 90 knots, so they continue to accelerate.... whaaaaaaaat?

[mrlupin]

Bang with yaw at 90 knots, so they continue to accelerate.... whaaaaaaaat?

I am unfamiliar with compressor stall procedures for pilots. In the AMM,(we are on the ground when doing tests) Snecma/GE still haven't grasped that their engines do not survive stalls. They tell you to throttle back rapidly, then slowly re-advance the throttles and if you get a second stall, in the hangar it goes for a Borescope inspection. Usually, with the first stall you have compressor damage, with the second one, you've wrecked so much you might have to write off that engine.

Even if the bang was from a tire, @90 knots wouldn't you rather reject the takeoff?

[rudder]

Even if the bang was from a tire, @90 knots wouldn't you rather reject the takeoff?

Boeing does not recommend an RTO after 80 knots due to tire failure as all accelerate - stop distance calculations are out the window due to reduced braking efficiency.

[Kip Powick]

I wonder how close they were to V1 ??? Personally I would have rejected at the first 'bang'....based on the runway length that they were on, I think there would be no problem stopping on the remaining runway even if a tire had blown.

In my mind, the initial 'bang', (with yaw), was just an indication that 'something ' had gone wrong and I would have no hesitation in making a decision to stop.

Remember Nationair ?? If I remember correctly they blew a tire(s) right around 80-90 kts....would things have been different had they rejected at the initial noise?.....maybe...maybe not...perhaps many would have died/been injured if the plane went off the end but I really don't think they would have all perished. ( I personally knew the Captain and the FO)

[blues deville]

In this situation, I'd rather have some good pilots making wise decisions rather than an ace ticket counter agent finding me another Domincan flight.

Yikes!