Aviation Discussion

[WestCoast]

The 757 is a totally different aircraft to the 737 and wasn't developed from or with it. It was developed alongside the twin-aisle 767 and they share avionics amongst other things. Though the 757 and 737 both share the 707's airframe width.

The 757 certainly is powerful, but that comes at a price. Literally!
It practically drinks fuel in comparison to the previous generation A320/ 737NG families, never-mind the newer MAX and NEOs.

I also think the 757/767 share the same type rating, so they can/could be flown by the same crews on a single license for both?

The A321XLR is definitely a game changer from an economics perspective, but I stand by the point that it's not a pioneer of single aisle long-haul travel. Makes you wonder if Boeing should have developed a 757NG as it doesn't look like the MAX is going to cut it as a full replacement.

It's not about the interior which, as you note, can be changed very easily. The main differences are the engines which compared to modern twins are over-powered and the wing - which is also "too big", to the point that the 757 is classed as a heavy. The combination means that it takes off like a rocket and it doesn't get bumped around as much in turbulence.

The longer version 757-300, aka the flying pencil, is even beastlier. I flew one once (it was a charter airline in the early 00s - JMC Air maybe?) and it's so long inside I swear from the back you could see it bending slightly in the middle. Took an age to board and get off as well, nearly 300 passengers on a single aisle plane. Same problem with A321s as well as they're up to something like 240 seats now.

In fairness the United ones have only been doing it since 2007 ish, ETOPS isn't that old yet!

Interesting - I didn't realise it was as recent as that. I'm guessing we are talking about Continental before they merged with United. I thought ETOPS was much older than that with 767s also only having two engines and being transatlantic workhorses.

I do know BA flew 757s on a couple of transatlantic routes in the 90s - a quick search on Google says they had them on Birmingham and Glasgow to JFK and Toronto as well. I'd be interested if anyone knew more about those.

 

[nlogax]

Weird hot breakfast offering in Lounge of Bacon & Hash Brown Roll - looked like 1st Lounge had the "full works"

I had that roll in the 1st lounge the other day even though I could have had the full breakfast. It was pretty fabulous, definitely made the right choice.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I had that roll in the 1st lounge the other day even though I could have had the full breakfast. It was pretty fabulous, definitely made the right choice.

When I have a Maccy's breakfast I do like eating the hash brown with the meat, so I reckon that sounds great too!

Chuck in sausage too and it'd be perfect.

 

[najaB]

Interesting - I didn't realise it was as recent as that. I'm guessing we are talking about Continental before they merged with United. I thought ETOPS was much older than that with 767s also only having two engines and being transatlantic workhorses.

ETOPS has been around for ages - it's the longer ETOPS ratings that are new. When ETOPS was introduced the limit was 90 minutes from a diversion airport, then it was increased to 120 minutes in the early-eighties and 180 minutes in the late 80s. That's where it stayed for the better part of twenty years - the change in 2007 was that the introduction of EROPS greater than 180 minutes, the A330 had an option for EROPS 240 and the 777 300. The latest widebodies (e.g. the A350 have up to 360 minutes, IIRC).

 

[nlogax]

Chuck in sausage too and it'd be perfect.

Even better! Though BA's bread-based vehicles being the size they are they wouldn't stretch to it.

 

[Speed43125]

e.g. the A350 have up to 360 minutes, IIRC

ETOPS 370!!

787 is also 330 minutes.

 

[najaB]

ETOPS 370!!

787 is also 330 minutes.

Thanks! Who would've thought a twin-engine aircraft would be rated to fly over six hours on one engine.

 

[TravelDream]

That's exactly the point. They load the fuel that should be enough for the planned destination but file for an alternate airport that's a bit closer. 99% of the time they are able to refile to the planned destination, but it means that in the 1% where they aren't able to because the winds aloft are stronger than expected they don't have to try and figure out where they're going to divert to as it's already planned and in the FMS.

I don't want to sound harsh, but you are 100% totally wrong. No jet flight takes off if the planners think it won't make the destination (even 1%). Very occasionally, due to stronger winds than expected, a delayed departure with lots of ground holding, a longer than expected in-flight hold (maybe bad weather at the destination), a flight will have to make a fuel diversion. It is never planned though.

I also think the 757/767 share the same type rating, so they can/could be flown by the same crews on a single license for both?

Interesting - I didn't realise it was as recent as that. I'm guessing we are talking about Continental before they merged with United. I thought ETOPS was much older than that with 767s also only having two engines and being transatlantic workhorses.

I do know BA flew 757s on a couple of transatlantic routes in the 90s - a quick search on Google says they had them on Birmingham and Glasgow to JFK and Toronto as well. I'd be interested if anyone knew more about those.

They do share a type rating. The cockpit is essentially exactly the same. Though there is a small amount of non-sim differences training.

ETOPS is pretty old. 60 minutes was the standard until the mid-70s (until then only quads or triplets flew long-haul anyway) when the first ETOPS 90 was introduced for the A300. ETOPS 120 then came in the 80s. Since then it has been up and up with that number.
Engines are so reliable these days, I'd have no issue whatsoever going anywhere on a twin.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Engines are so reliable these days, I'd have no issue whatsoever going anywhere on a twin.

Me neither. Engine failures are either independent (in which case the risk of one is tiny and the risk of two is infinitessimal) or caused by a fault common to all engines e.g. a fuel fault or shortage (in which case they'll all fail regardless of whether you've got 2 or 6). When was a plane crash last caused by two independent engine failures on a twin (that didn't involve a screw-up like one failing and the good one being shut down in error, i.e. Kegworth)? I can't think of one.

 

[hotel_mode]

That's exactly the point. They load the fuel that should be enough for the planned destination but file for an alternate airport that's a bit closer. 99% of the time they are able to refile to the planned destination, but it means that in the 1% where they aren't able to because the winds aloft are stronger than expected they don't have to try and figure out where they're going to divert to as it's already planned and in the FMS.

It’s not. Fuel reclearance is vanishingly rare on airliners. It’s only ever necessary where you’re approaching the payload/range limitations of the aircraft and that simply doesn’t happen very much with modern airliners. The 757 on Westbound Atlantic crossings in winter is probably the only time it ever occurs anymore.

It isn’t just something you do for fun or to save fuel uplift.

22 years flying airliners from turboprop to A380 and I’ve never done it or met anyone that has in that period. It pretty much went out with the 707/747 classic generation of aircraft.

Having diversions planned to avoid figuring out where to go isn’t a thing either, situations are far too dynamic for a 12 hr old plan to necessarily be the right thing 12hrs later.

 

[Speed43125]

22 years flying airliners from turboprop to A380 and I’ve never done it or met anyone that has in that period. It pretty much went out with the 707/747 classic generation of aircraft.

IIRC there was a BA 744 around 2005 that crossed the Atlantic on 3 and had to divert to Manchester?

 

[najaB]

It will be interesting to see what Heathrow is like on Saturday morning. 2h 45m between an international arrival and domestic leg at six in the morning. Normally way more than enough time but of late, who knows.

It was either that or an eight hour connection.

It took seven minutes to clear border control.

 

[TravelDream]

IIRC there was a BA 744 around 2005 that crossed the Atlantic on 3 and had to divert to Manchester?

That's a pretty unique situation and not at all applicable to what we were speaking about above.

The 747-400 is certified to fly with three engines whereas no one engine plane can cross the Atlantic.

The fourth acts as a giant bucket reducing efficiency, but it was originally thought the plane could make it to Heathrow. More unfavourable winds than forecast meant it couldn't do so before reaching minimas so had to divert.

As I said, nothing like what everyone was talking about above.

 

[Aictos]

It took seven minutes to clear border control.

That's not too bad, last time I came though Heathrow I spent more time waiting for my suitcase then I did going though border control.

 

[Butts]

Can I just give a big pat on the back to Newcastle Airport.

There may only 5 Flights from here today (mine to LHR being one) but The Smoking Facility Airside is open.

Excellent Geordie hospitality

 

[FrodshamJnct]

Can I just give a big pat on the back to Newcastle Airport.

There may only 5 Flights from here today (mine to LHR being one) but The Smoking Facility Airside is open.

Excellent Geordie hospitality

Clearly got their priorities right

 

[Butts]

Clearly got their priorities right

Even though the BA Lounge is no longer and the tightwads haven't handed out vouchers to spend at Boots ( the only shop open) I'd rather have a smoking area or "tin balcony" available.

 

[ainsworth74]

The illegal diversion/hijacking of a Ryanair flight by Belarus deserves it's own thread which can now be found here.

As a general note whilst we are maintaining this 'Master Thread' it is only really intended for small bitty discussions. Major news events like the incident in Belarus, plan crashes or similar topics really should be in their own dedicated threads rather than trying to mash them all into this one.

Thanks

 

[Bald Rick]

Major news events like the incident in Belarus, plan crashes or similar topics

I hope no-one on this thread actually plans crashes...

 

[ainsworth74]

I hope no-one on this thread actually plans crashes...

Ah good! Someone has been paying attention and spotted the deliberate mistake. I was, of course, simply testing you all!

 

[nlogax]

Rumours of the US being added to the green travel list from June 7th and airlines allegedly ramping up for such an event.

Will believe it when I see it.

 

[Butts]

Rumours of the US being added to the green travel list from June 7th and airlines allegedly ramping up for such an event.

Will believe it when I see it.

Biggest cash cow for a lot of Airlines both sides of the pond, so it's reintroduction would be welcome by punters and operators.

G7 ???? - hence the speculation ?

 

[221129]

My BA Shuttle this morning from Glasgow to London was pretty much at capacity. A few spare seats in club but the back was full. Good to see things starting to bounce back.

 

[Butts]

My BA Shuttle this morning from Glasgow to London was pretty much at capacity. A few spare seats in club but the back was full. Good to see things starting to bounce back.

Flew up from Birmingham to Edinburgh last night and it was two thirds full on Easyjet.

Bring back the days when there were only 15 on the service (x-mas last year) !!

 

[Bald Rick]

My BA Shuttle this morning from Glasgow to London was pretty much at capacity. A few spare seats in club but the back was full. Good to see things starting to bounce back.

Yesterday and today are going to be very busy in the air and on the rails and roads.

 

[Butts]

I'm flying Club from EDI- BHD via LCY on Tuesday looks like it's two abreast (Embraer ?)

What sort of service do you get on BA Cityflyer in Club - no seat separation by the look of it.

 

[Chester1]

Rumours of the US being added to the green travel list from June 7th and airlines allegedly ramping up for such an event.

Will believe it when I see it.

Biggest cash cow for a lot of Airlines both sides of the pond, so it's reintroduction would be welcome by punters and operators.

G7 ???? - hence the speculation ?

It will be down to whether the US wants to allow Brits in. From a British perspective its a no brainer. The US is a massive country, with a high vaccination rate and huge capacity to sequence the virus.

My money is on 7th June green list additions being countries that narrowly missed out last time. Malta and Finland probably being only European additions. The domestic capacity crunch and people being unable to have a holiday won't become a major problem until July. Until then there is little incentive for the government to take risks.

 

[nlogax]

It will be down to whether the US wants to allow Brits in. From a British perspective its a no brainer. The US is a massive country, with a high vaccination rate and huge capacity to sequence the virus.

Yup, always has been the case with any countries on that list. My guess is that the US is hesitant due to the new variant and people are going to be disappointed come the 7th that even though the UK may put the US on the green list, the US won't reciprocate with re-admitting UK visitors.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yup, always has been the case with any countries on that list. My guess is that the US is hesitant due to the new variant and people are going to be disappointed come the 7th that even though the UK may put the US on the green list, the US won't reciprocate with re-admitting UK visitors.

One thing I think the Government is doing us a disservice over on this is that they aren't finding out what other countries are doing and only putting countries on one of the lists where there is a reciprocal arrangement, i.e. they will let us in without quarantine.

 

[nlogax]

One thing I think the Government is doing us a disservice over on this is that they aren't finding out what other countries are doing and only putting countries on one of the lists where there is a reciprocal arrangement, i.e. they will let us in without quarantine.

I agree. One could argue it's everyone's personal responsibility to check the destination's restrictions but the UK government waving a 'green list' around in the media does give a somewhat misleading impression.