PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Wall Street Journal reports on BA 747 3 engine LAX-MAN flight
Old 28th Sep 2006, 20:54
  #38 (permalink)  
jondc9
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
dear globe

from the article in the WSJ:

<Last month, the FAA told British Airways it was dropping the case based on assurances that airline changes will "preclude the type of extended operation that was the subject of this enforcement action." Says the FAA: "Our goal was to get them to change their procedures, and when we found out they were changing in the U.S., we settled the case.">


That is quite clear to me, isn't it to you?


And to H. Finn.


If you wish to remove non long range pilots from this forum topic, do you agree to remove long range pilots from any topic not involving long range ops?

For example, should a 747-400 pilot comment on the comair crash in Kentucky?

Should a short haul pilot of a two engine plane NOT comment on the Air France over-run at CYYZ? Did 4 engines cause the plane to go off the end, or was it a bit of wind, a bit of wet and a bit of?

I think it is a wonderful fact that BA has operated in this fashion 15 times since 2001. If this is not a fact ( or has increased ) please dispute the article's information now.


regards

jon
jondc9 is offline