PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Wall Street Journal reports on BA 747 3 engine LAX-MAN flight
Old 28th Sep 2006, 19:50
  #35 (permalink)  
jondc9
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
cargo boy

tell me, is it easier to fly boxes or people?

I so enjoy hearing you misquote me.

Tell us all about the 747-400 will you? For example, can this wonderbird do a 3 engine ferry? I am sure it can.

Landing in the USA, discharging passengers and doing a ferry to a mx base might have been another option...key words: MIGHT & OPTION. I also mentioned bringing another engine (podded) to LAX.

And while I don't have a 747-400 manual handy, at least I never said it HAD to land at the nearest airport... I did say it should have. Perhaps you will chat up an old english professor and ask the difference between these words.


post your phone number and I will give it to CNN if you would like to comment on aviation matters. chances are you couldn't handle it. prove me wrong if you like.

Maybe you will learn what its like to chat up a few million people at a time.


Be sure your boxes are loaded properly.

By the way, the BAE 146 was called just that when I flew it. Not the HS 146.


I've flown 2 british planes that I think were very well built. How many have you flown that you think are well built?


How come the Queen of England used a BAE 146 as Queen's Flight and not a B747-400 (unless leased from BA).


regards from the homeland of the 747-400. and I do wish AF1 had RB211's and not GE 's.

j
jondc9 is offline