Sign in to follow this  
st27

Fin 201

Recommended Posts

I remember when she arrived in the fleet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was flaying that when we only had the first 4 of them. It was quite a change from the DC9. Both great airplanes for their time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always got me home, never hurt me.  Things I really love in an aircraft.

Why they spent the money to remove the pull out tray and replace it with approach plate holders is a head scratcher, no matter how many times it's been explained to me.

Vs

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vs - remember the approach-plate-holder some very clever 320 pilot had made? It was fitted with a 5x7in rubber "tab" which was nicely riveted onto the holder, and was placed in between the two folded top & bottom of the table when it was stowed. There were other clever modifications to the blue AC chart binders that fit between the spring clip and the window-opening handle.

It was a fine design and fine aircraft. Only one design topped it in my view and that was the L1011-500.

The most difficut aspect of flying the A320 was explaining & defending it against the "if it ain't Boeing,..." folks, 😉

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CF-DQQ....an old Fleet 80 Canuck registration.  I wonder what it will end up on next.  Hope it is not a MAX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vsplat said:

Why they spent the money to remove the pull out tray and replace it with approach plate holders is a head scratcher, no matter how many times it's been explained to me.

I've heard varying folk tales about the genesis of that decision, such as the fact that it was initially a "no go" item if broken or that because the rest of the fleet didn't have tables, no way the pilots in them new fangled units were getting them. It would be nice to know the real truth but I'm not sure if any of the players are still around to give an answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don Hudson said:

Hi Vs - remember the approach-plate-holder some very clever 320 pilot had made? It was fitted with a 5x7in rubber "tab" which was nicely riveted onto the holder, and was placed in between the two folded top & bottom of the table when it was stowed. There were other clever modifications to the blue AC chart binders that fit between the spring clip and the window-opening handle.

It was a fine design and fine aircraft. Only one design topped it in my view and that was the L1011-500.

The most difficut aspect of flying the A320 was explaining & defending it against the "if it ain't Boeing,..." folks, 😉

 

much of the technology from the L-1011 made its way to the Bus in one form or another.  L-1011 is still my Favorite aircraft.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"much of the technology from the L-1011 made its way to the Bus in one form or another."

Agree, boestar - just some really good thinking had gone into the aircraft. I wonder what the "cross-pollination" was between the Lockheed design and Airbus's eventual decisions - I have a friend I can ask. It's not as though the L1011 was entirely problem free but I flew it for about three years, mostly YVR > LHR > BOM > SIN and back without abnormality or diversion. It was CATIII to zero vis, (that was informally called CAT "IIIc" I think -  we used "IIIb" which required a bit of vis...). It had MDLC - manoeuvre direct lift control which momentarily brought the speedbrakes out in gusts over a certain 'g' to off-load the outboard wing section, if I recall. I think both the 320 & the 330/340 had such a system).

The Lockheed system also worked when landing flap was selected - the s.brakes would "pop-up" around 9deg or so which permitted to keep the attitude steady while increasing or decreasing lift/drag on the ILS; below slope, the brakes would retract a bit and the "balance of power" would reduce the descent rate...high on the slope and their angle would increase and thus increase the descent rate - same attitude, same power, IIRC. (The B767 autothrust during approach, on the other hand, was a mess...chasing everything that moved until the touchdown relieved it of all responsibilities).

Another idea was the use of the fuselage to take some of the workload of the wings by making the bottom of the fuselage flat..."lifting body" style. So the floor of aircraft always had a 2.5  to 3 deg "uphill climb" for the FA's. I know there are lots of idea behind this feature, and some questions too - this was what I had heard...

I hear it was an expensive aircraft to operate...in terms of maintenance, and fuel flow.

Is everybody healthy? Giving/taking 6ft, staying in except for once a week to the grocery store? Working on the stamp collection?...going through one's s. and making a pile to take to the Sally Anne or the dump?...

It's hard, isn't it, particularly with grandbabies close by but there it is, for the foreseeable future.

Edited by Don Hudson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Don Hudson said:

Is everybody healthy? Giving/taking 6ft, staying in except for once a week to the grocery store? Working on the stamp collection?...going through one's s. and making a pile to take to the Sally Anne or the dump?...

This will be the year that the vast majority of yards and gardens in Canada  will look ravishing,  😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

This will be the year that the vast majority of yards and gardens in Canada  will look ravishing,  😊

assuming of course that you can maintain "self space" while shopping for bedding plants or seeds if indeed they are offered.  I purchased my normal 2 boxes of wild flower mix from McKenzie Seeds last month when they came in and I intend to turn my normal garden space into a wild flower garden except of course for one stand of cherry tomatoes .....  Still using the last of those I froze from last year's crop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Don Hudson said:

"if it ain't Boeing,..."

That now means "If it is a new Boeing, it ain't going (anywhere)"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don Hudson said:

Is everybody healthy? Giving/taking 6ft, staying in except for once a week to the grocery store?

Nope.

The wife and I go out together everyday if only for a drive and sight see.

Can't go into my favourite coffee shop anymore so we buy Tim Horton's from the drive through and then park outside the closed Starbuckets and watch the traffic go by.  If we didn't go out everyday we would not have seen the Easter Bunny snowman that the 9 year old made on his front lawn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Don Hudson said:

"

It's hard, isn't it, particularly with grandbabies close by but there it is, for the foreseeable future.

image.thumb.png.609fe1f901a106e5e5ee961ee55eb4ae.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weekly outing for groceries, lots of walks in the park (staying far away from the few people we see), video chats with the kids and granddaughter.  It’s hard, but the alternative is harder. My next door neighbors are recovering from the virus.. guy was very sick for a while, and they are young.  Stay safe everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went for one of my two walks each day...was ambling down the street, (no sidewalks), and I see a young mother pushing a stroller along with her ..probably 4 year old, in her other hand..... As we approach each other and start to drift apart  we smile and the little girl glues onto her mother and I hear her say "Is that a bad man Mommy?"

The mother was embarrassed and turned and said "Sorry" and bent down to discuss "me" with her little daughter as we slowly passed each other.

I was tempted to say I was...."  just a crazy old man who stands on his porch and yells at clouds"..........but I didn't.

Stay safe everyone....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don - good to hear from you!  I hope everyone is well out your way.  BC has managed things very well thus far, our fingers are crossed that the trend continues to improve.

Never flew the Lockheed, or the 27 for that matter.  From all accounts, great aircraft that earned lifelong loyalty.  Nice to read the discussion here.

Fin 201 carried a plaque, commemorating the Captain who brought her aboard, only to die suddenly a short time later.  I understand that plaque will now hold a place of prominence in Flight Ops and that is a good thing.

COVID has really stripped away so much stuff and fluff - things we had convinced ourselves were valuable and true.  How profoundly different our conversations have become, so quickly.  And how valued simple things that were always precious but lost in the noise are, once again truly seen, now that the noise has died down a bit.   I only hope the world learns the lessons it is paying so dearly for at the moment.

With thoughts to all here and to your loved ones. 

Vs

 

Edited by Vsplat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Don Hudson said:

"much of the technology from the L-1011 made its way to the Bus in one form or another."

Agree, boestar - just some really good thinking had gone into the aircraft. I wonder what the "cross-pollination" was between the Lockheed design and Airbus's eventual decisions - I have a friend I can ask. It's not as though the L1011 was entirely problem free but I flew it for about three years, mostly YVR > LHR > BOM > SIN and back without abnormality or diversion. It was CATIII to zero vis, (that was informally called CAT "IIIc" I think -  we used "IIIb" which required a bit of vis...). It had MDLC - manoeuvre direct lift control which momentarily brought the speedbrakes out in gusts over a certain 'g' to off-load the outboard wing section, if I recall. I think both the 320 & the 330/340 had such a system).

The Lockheed system also worked when landing flap was selected - the s.brakes would "pop-up" around 9deg or so which permitted to keep the attitude steady while increasing or decreasing lift/drag on the ILS; below slope, the brakes would retract a bit and the "balance of power" would reduce the descent rate...high on the slope and their angle would increase and thus increase the descent rate - same attitude, same power, IIRC. (The B767 autothrust during approach, on the other hand, was a mess...chasing everything that moved until the touchdown relieved it of all responsibilities).

Another idea was the use of the fuselage to take some of the workload of the wings by making the bottom of the fuselage flat..."lifting body" style. So the floor of aircraft always had a 2.5  to 3 deg "uphill climb" for the FA's. I know there are lots of idea behind this feature, and some questions too - this was what I had heard...

I hear it was an expensive aircraft to operate...in terms of maintenance, and fuel flow.

Is everybody healthy? Giving/taking 6ft, staying in except for once a week to the grocery store? Working on the stamp collection?...going through one's s. and making a pile to take to the Sally Anne or the dump?...

It's hard, isn't it, particularly with grandbabies close by but there it is, for the foreseeable future.

When the L-1011 was introduced the autoland system was so good they had the reinforce the runways at LHR in the landing zone because it always hit the same spot on he runway.  At least that is what I was told.

DLC also utilized the outboard Ailerons as well as I recall.  Similar to the load relief on the Airbus.

The Tri-Tanic always seemed to be in a shallow climb when a cruise so getting from the Lavs back to your seat was an uphill climb.

She was a Maintenance PIG by any standard.  in the early days engine changes were a regular event.  Those early RB-211 engines almost killed RR and are probably the main reason Lockheed never built a successor.  I loved the aircraft though.  It was easy to work on and a pleasure to fly on.

Still working albeit from the home office and going a little stir crazy here.  the basement is getting sorted though so there is that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Along with 201, 210 and 402 are here as well.

There's also 4 other AC A320's in the chop up area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Maverick said:

Along with 201, 210 and 402 are here as well.

I’m surprised to hear 402 is there. I was in the KFC hangar in Hamilton in January, and 402 rolled in for a “C” check + mods to extend her life due to the Max shortage.  I guess they’re going to chop up a good airplane. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KFC has a hangar in Hamilton? I knew KFL had one but that's a surprise. 😉

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, J.O. said:

KFC has a hangar in Hamilton? I knew KFL had one but that's a surprise. 😉

Not to pick nits but it's actually KFA 😎

https://www.kfaero.ca/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this