Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

Flying the Unfriendly Skies

Post Reply
User avatar
Phoenix520
Posts: 4149
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:20 pm
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#101

Post by Phoenix520 »

Gate attendants are now responsible for flights that haven’t landed yet? Good to know! I’ll be sure to berate the next hapless airport employee I see for… not making sandwiches for my flight. :mrgreen:

Quelle asshat!
User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 6120
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:01 am
Location: FloriDUH Hell
Verified: 🤩✅✅✅✅✅🤩

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#102

Post by neonzx »

Gosh, never seen Bill O' angry.... He has always been so stable.

User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9859
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#103

Post by AndyinPA »

I don't even have to watch that to know what it is. :biggrin:
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9859
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#104

Post by AndyinPA »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transpor ... k-mandate/
Before there was a federal transportation mask mandate, individual U.S. airlines required customers to wear face coverings when flying. Those who refused were placed on airline “no-fly” lists — a tally that ballooned into the thousands amid pandemic-related conflict in the skies.

In the days since the mask mandate has fallen, several airlines have said they will consider allowing some of those passengers to return.

Some of the nation’s largest carriers are developing procedures to restore boarding privileges that were revoked for mask-related conflicts, a move that prompted outcry from the union representing workers who were on the front lines of enforcement. The decision comes after airlines and federal agencies spent more than a year developing deterrence and enforcement measures to battle confrontations often stemming from the mask requirement.

United Airlines, which has placed nearly 1,000 people on its no-fly list during the pandemic, will consider reinstatements on a case-by-case basis, with executives noting that those whose behavior escalated beyond refusing to wear a mask might still be banned. United President Brett Hart said Thursday the carrier would take a “thoughtful approach” to evaluating each case.
They broke the law; they hurt people; they caused major disruption to flying, but all good now? :confuzzled:
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17657
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#105

Post by raison de arizona »

Co-worker flew from NYC to SF last weekend, all masks, the mandate was still in effect. He flew back to NYC from SF yesterday though, and he reported about 75% mask usage still on the flight. Which is... nice? More than what I thought we'd be seeing. But considering the origination and destination, perhaps not the best indicator.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 11592
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#106

Post by Volkonski »

Strike causes chaos at Amsterdam airport as holiday begins

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/am ... ce=twitter
Amsterdam's Schiphol airport urged travellers to stay away for several hours on Saturday as a strike by ground personnel at the start of a school holiday caused chaos at Europe's third-busiest airport.

"The terminal is too full at the moment ... Schiphol is calling on travellers not to come to the airport anymore," airport authorities said in a statement issued shortly before noon (1000 GMT).

Almost three hours later the airport said passengers were welcome again but would still face long waiting times and possible delays or cancellations.

Police closed down highway exits to the airport briefly on Saturday afternoon as lines at departure gates stretched out of the airport buildings.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 11592
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#107

Post by Volkonski »

“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 11592
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#108

Post by Volkonski »

“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
Estiveo
Posts: 2302
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:50 am
Location: Inland valley, Central Coast, CA
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#109

Post by Estiveo »

Estiveoshot_20220424_084215.jpg
NYT via Joe My God:
The Federal Aviation Administration has found that Trevor Jacob, a daredevil YouTuber who posted a video of himself last year parachuting out of a plane that he claimed had malfunctioned, purposely abandoned the aircraft and allowed it to crash into the Los Padres National Forest in Southern California.

In a letter to Mr. Jacob on April 11, the F.A.A. said he had violated federal aviation regulations and operated his single-engine plane in a “careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.”

The agency said it would immediately revoke Mr. Jacob’s private pilot certificate, effectively ending his permission to operate any aircraft. Reached by email on Wednesday, Mr. Jacob appeared unaware of the F.A.A.’s ruling and replied, “Where’d you get that information?”
https://www.joemygod.com/2022/04/faa-yo ... the-views/


Image Image Image Image
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14356
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#110

Post by RTH10260 »




User avatar
Phoenix520
Posts: 4149
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:20 pm
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#111

Post by Phoenix520 »

Mentour Pilot is cool!
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14356
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#112

Post by RTH10260 »

Phoenix520 wrote: Sun Apr 24, 2022 1:36 pm Mentour Pilot is cool!
He is a senior pilot at one of the European budget airlines and also responsible for their pilot training.

His main channel is Mentour Pilot with educational stuff and industry news, target viewers pilots and student pilots and aspiring pilots.
Also explains airline desasters from a technical perspective using the accident investigation reports
https://m.youtube.com/c/MentourPilotaviation/

The mentour Now channel is more the lighter side
https://m.youtube.com/c/MentourNow/videos
Intro video:
► Show Spoiler
jemcanada2
Posts: 952
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:12 am

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#113

Post by jemcanada2 »

AndyinPA wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 6:29 pm We've actually been to most places, but not St. Catherine's. We've been through the St. Lawrence Seaway as far as Montreal from the Atlantic; now we will get to do the rest of it. It's spectacular scenery.
This is the Viking cruise ship going through the flight locks of the Welland Canal.

User avatar
johnpcapitalist
Posts: 809
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:59 pm
Location: NYC Area
Verified: ✅ Totally legit!

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#114

Post by johnpcapitalist »

jemcanada2 wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 10:33 am
AndyinPA wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 6:29 pm We've actually been to most places, but not St. Catherine's. We've been through the St. Lawrence Seaway as far as Montreal from the Atlantic; now we will get to do the rest of it. It's spectacular scenery.
This is the Viking cruise ship going through the flight locks of the Welland Canal.

That's pretty impressive. I wonder why they don't have bumpers hung all along the length of the ship to avoid scratching the paint.

Why are there no throngs of passengers hanging from the rails to observe this interesting part of the journey? You'd think this was a high point of the trip, not unlike transiting the Panama Canal. Was there a warning that they were at risk of being pelted with Molson's bottles by unruly locals irate at a recent hockey loss?
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9859
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#115

Post by AndyinPA »

jemcanada2 wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 10:33 am
AndyinPA wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 6:29 pm We've actually been to most places, but not St. Catherine's. We've been through the St. Lawrence Seaway as far as Montreal from the Atlantic; now we will get to do the rest of it. It's spectacular scenery.
This is the Viking cruise ship going through the flight locks of the Welland Canal.

That's the new Viking Cruise ship going through. It's one of their new small expedition ships, 378 guests. Our Vantage ship has only 177 guests, so even smaller. We love Viking, but we set this trip up because we had to use vouchers from and a land trip that we canceled because of Covid. Either ship, we are really looking forward to it.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
jemcanada2
Posts: 952
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:12 am

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#116

Post by jemcanada2 »

johnpcapitalist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 11:05 am
jemcanada2 wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 10:33 am
AndyinPA wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 6:29 pm We've actually been to most places, but not St. Catherine's. We've been through the St. Lawrence Seaway as far as Montreal from the Atlantic; now we will get to do the rest of it. It's spectacular scenery.
This is the Viking cruise ship going through the flight locks of the Welland Canal.

That's pretty impressive. I wonder why they don't have bumpers hung all along the length of the ship to avoid scratching the paint.

Why are there no throngs of passengers hanging from the rails to observe this interesting part of the journey? You'd think this was a high point of the trip, not unlike transiting the Panama Canal. Was there a warning that they were at risk of being pelted with Molson's bottles by unruly locals irate at a recent hockey loss?
There’s always a danger of unruly locals irate at a hockey loss! :P :P
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9859
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#117

Post by AndyinPA »

johnpcapitalist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 11:05 am
jemcanada2 wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 10:33 am
AndyinPA wrote: Sat Apr 16, 2022 6:29 pm We've actually been to most places, but not St. Catherine's. We've been through the St. Lawrence Seaway as far as Montreal from the Atlantic; now we will get to do the rest of it. It's spectacular scenery.
This is the Viking cruise ship going through the flight locks of the Welland Canal.

That's pretty impressive. I wonder why they don't have bumpers hung all along the length of the ship to avoid scratching the paint.

Why are there no throngs of passengers hanging from the rails to observe this interesting part of the journey? You'd think this was a high point of the trip, not unlike transiting the Panama Canal. Was there a warning that they were at risk of being pelted with Molson's bottles by unruly locals irate at a recent hockey loss?
Can't speak to the hockey loss, but I'd bet it went through during Covid.

I hung out all day on a ship that was going through the Panama Canal. It's one of the most amazing cruise days ever. And on Viking, people were all over the outside of the ship going through the Strait of Gibraltar.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
jemcanada2
Posts: 952
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:12 am

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#118

Post by jemcanada2 »

I can’t wait to hear about your cruise, Andy! Lots of locals here are very excited about the cruise ships going through the canal. :biggrin:
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 11592
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#119

Post by Volkonski »


A new viral TikTok shows a woman on a plane incoherently ranting about free speech while hurling homophobic slurs and praising Elon Musk as she is kicked off the aircraft.

The incident occurred on a flight out of West Palm Beach airport in Florida. It's not clear what initially caused the woman to be booted from the plane, but the TikTok user who originally posted the footage claimed it was over racist and homophobic comments she made.

It showed the woman delivering an unhinged rant about masks, China and Elon Musk being "the king"—Elvis would like a word, ma'am—while hurling homophobic slurs and profanity at nearby passengers.

:snippity:

She then gloated about making the entire plane late before warning the United States was turning into China and mocking passengers for wearing masks.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
chancery
Posts: 1315
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#120

Post by chancery »

johnpcapitalist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 11:05 am That's pretty impressive. I wonder why they don't have bumpers hung all along the length of the ship to avoid scratching the paint.
I'm curious too. My inexpert guesses are (i) there isn't enough room for a bumper large enough absorb enough energy to do any good, and (ii) a safe passage depends on maintaining a straight course; contact with anything on the side runs the the risk of imposing a sideways force, which you don't want.

Any engineers care to chime in?
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9859
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#121

Post by AndyinPA »

Not an engineer (married to one), but I've gone through lots of locks from the local ones on the rivers here, to rivers in Europe, to the Panama Canal, and the ships move very slowly and carefully. It's been a few years, but I seem to remember bumpers in the locks themselves.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
chancery
Posts: 1315
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#122

Post by chancery »

I've spent some pleasant hours watching watching canal boats traverse locks at the southern portion of the modern Erie Canal. The boats were quite a bit smaller than the locks, and so bumpers served a useful purpose. You obviously wouldn’t want to play canal-boat-bumper-pool inside a lock, but there was a little room to bounce around if necessary.

With such a large vessel, and so few inches to spare on either side, I don’t see how bumpers would help, and can imagine that they would be problematic. I think you might rather have long smooth low-friction panels, rather than anything with a rebound.

Watched a couple of time lapse videos of big ships going through the Panama Canal, and there did seem to be quite a few long smooth panels.
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9859
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#123

Post by AndyinPA »

Yeah, I would agree that bumpers is not quite the word.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14356
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#124

Post by RTH10260 »

Ships, starting with medium sized yachts, have bow and stern thrusters to help maneuver sideways. Usually operated from the bridge. I have seen the owner of avyacht operaating them by remote control while while working at the side of the boat (handling lines). It's my best guess that on the large ships cruise liners or cargo carriers there are distance measurement points along the vessel just above the water line and a computer keeping the ship centered in the canal. Much too fine work than a captain could work from the bridge with manual controls.
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9859
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: Flying the Unfriendly Skies

#125

Post by AndyinPA »

I'm not sure if it's 100 percent true, but pilots often come on the boat/ship so that it's not actually the captain who is taking the boat/ship through the canal.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
Post Reply

Return to “General Stuff”