A nice little story! (I hate to quibble, but I suspect that it was a tortoise, not a turtle.)

(Written on 2019/07/12)(Permalink)

And the airlines. And does the FAA have a clear conscience? An aircraft that is aerodynamically and structurally sound does not crash except under extreme, extraordinary circumstances. As far as I can perceive, there was no factor that was either extreme or extraordinary about the flight crew. So how can the pilots be the cause? So we come back to Boeing and ask if something about the aircraft was extraordinary in such a way as to introduce unsound aerodynamics.

(Written on 2019/06/21)(Permalink)

Agreed. And thank you. But in the matter of "and move on", I don't think that the fare-paying public will bother to get informed before choosing who's BUY button they click on.

(Written on 2019/06/21)(Permalink)

Long, long ago I was a member of BOAC's Junior Jet Club. BOAC and BEA were THE only worthwhile airlines (with a courteous nod to PanAm). Evidently, The (flying) Queen is dead! But then so is the British Empire, thank goodness.

(Written on 2019/06/21)(Permalink)

I have a haunting hunch that consumers will not bother to be fully informed before making their choices when booking flights. Thus they will avoid flying Boeing, regardless of aircraft type, whenever they can. So I also bet that for civilian aircraft, Boeing will go down the toilet. - - Furthermore, I suggest that Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd. (COMAC) is adjusting plans to fill the opportunity gap. Interesting times!

(Written on 2019/06/21)(Permalink)

It's a sad irony that Boeing will go down the toilet, and Airbus will flourish, because it did the unBoeing Airbussy thing of building in interference with the crew control environment.

(Written on 2019/05/03)(Permalink)

It does look strange to see miles used. Presumably Forbes' target readership was American travellers. One can't help feeling embarrassed for the USA that they haven't gone metric yet.

(Written on 2019/01/11)(Permalink)

@Tyler Emtage: I see your point. Thank you. But with Porter being a private company and, by its recent setting up in Thunder Bay because of shortage of range of the Q400 to serve Western destinations, I hold my breath until word comes from Porter itself. The arithmetic and the shift of relationship to Viking, just might cause a major, dramatic decision. - like becoming a public company? Using raised funds to buy other aircraft? Or leaving CYTZ to make its base elsewhere? or just liquidating? It seems significant for them, - and thus for Viking. - and thus for Toronto.

(Written on 2018/11/10)(Permalink)

Have there been any comments on this from Porter Airlines? I think that their fleet consists solely of Q400s.

(Written on 2018/11/09)(Permalink)

A distinct resonance. But being an avgeek, I can sympathise but not empathise. It's music to my ears.

(Written on 2018/11/09)(Permalink)