Fantome
The 'suicide bomber' would never make it in a light twin. Once the left engine had thrown a piston and the right engine, now at full power, was losing oil pressure, he would be on his way to his fate long before reaching his chosen target.

@Well he was very perceptive on one thing....we are all going to die.

I must admit I have felt the same way after eating out in India.


Where exactly did you eat out in India, what did you eat and why was it a bad experience? I find most people who eat out are fine if they choose their eateries. Pretty much the same, all over the world, I would think!!:)

But they've got the dog with them to make sure they don't touch anything.

t1grm

My objection is people who turn up in the queue and have no end of
bits and pieces to take out of pockets - which invariably they don't
start organising until they get to the trays and so it takes ages
- and then have broaches, large metal belt buckles, metal shoes
to add to it.

I wish some advice was given out to flyers to plan ahead.

Might be too much to ask.

Agreed, that’s also annoying, along with a myriad of other things at the security check such as; inability to understand what constitutes a liquid (yes aerosols and creams are liquids); inability to understand what a metal object is; blocking space on the conveyor/table whilst you unload when there is room for another 5/10 trays between you and the x-ray machine which other people could be using; insisting upon repacking your hand luggage and pockets right at the exit door of the x-ray machine where your tray first reappears rather than carrying it to the acres of repacking space usually provided. I could go on…. :{ :)

Yep, and all it would take is the Security person who collects
the trays to do a bit of traffic organisation by voice command.

Anyway, enough of that !

Overheard next to a carousel in GLA on Wednesday: "You'd think our bags would be here by now; I'm sure we were first to check in".

My fellow pax worry me sometimes.

This is slightly offtopic as this comment was written today as a response to the silly daily mail article, complaining how they're slowing their planes by 2mins per hour to save fuel. A misguided but funny response:

Some car drivers used to (some still do) switch off their engine whilst travelling down hill to save petrol. Perhaps Ryan Air could ask their pilots to switch the engines off when there is a backwind say, or even switch just one engine off, as planes are capable of flying on one engine until ready for descent. Just a though.
- RBCR , Basingstoke,

Thick Passengers
 

Hello All,

I am now so fed up with passengers yelling to me in the flightdeck from the forward vestibule (B737) with dumb comments such as:

"You said 10 minutes to landing on the PA and I timed it and it was 12, that's not very good!"

"There are screws missing on the wings" (engine pylon vents)

"You've got an oil leak" (condensation)

"The wing looks bent" (winglet)

"You've had an airmiss by 200', file a report, I'm a glider pilot!!" (TCAS, ATC anyone?)

"A bit fell off the engine on landing" (Thrust Reverser deployment)

"You've braked too hard, you have to call the engineers" (Autobrake 3, Idle reverse)

"You hit something up there!" (wake turbulence)

"Lousy parking, you're miles from the corridor" (airbridge)

"You took off on one engine, I'm reporting you to the CAA!" (he did)

"It's not foggy at the airport, my sister is there, why can't you do an autoland?" (100m visibility, non precision approach)

Now, a few years ago I would have taken some time to reassure the concerned individuals that all was normal and explained what it was that they saw, heard or felt in order to further good PR and to make the passenger feel appreciated and to avoid being dismissive.

However, now we have more and more of these inane comments coming thick and fast (pardon the pun) from ruder and apparently dumber passengers who don't seem to want to believe the truth even when I take the time to explain it, and coupled with insanely short turn round times so I don't have the opportunity these days to explain anything in detail, I'm afraid that I resorted to telling the last complainant firmly just to "get off as you are blocking the emergency exit". No further conversation was entered into.

This did the trick.

I'm a bit disappointed that it has come to this but I've run out of patience and good ideas, and I'm not too bothered with good PR any more as it seems to be completely wasted on the masses, any suggestions folks?

A cattle prod and just 'tickle' the offenders as they exit the aircraft.

Maybe get a job with a non-LCC?
If you're lucky, it will be a different class of "masses".

If he thinks as distant as 200' is an airmiss, he isn't a glider pilot, trust me.

Why is that a thick comment? I often find if I'm very early to check in my bag is one of the first on the carousel.

If you follow the sequence, first to check in would mean first in the hold area waiting to be loaded, so first on the truck so last off the truck, so first on the aircraft, so first off the aircraft and first on the carousel. Or something like that.

EH?...How do you work that one out then? Are you suggesting that every cargo compartment has an "IN" door , and an "OUT" door?....so the loaders push the first bag all the way to the out door and pile the others behind? NO
First on ,is, logically, last off.

you forgot the pax scanner
 

You probably just don´t notice the cameras as you enter the baggage claim area. Using face recognition software, the faces of the first passengers to clear immigration and arrive at the baggage claim, will be scanned and their baggage will be set aside until the last few bags come in.

Meanwhile, the passengers last off the aircraft, will have their bags going round and round and round, as entertainment for these first passengers, waiting for their own bags.

:uhoh:

Sorry, just a typo, I meant last off the truck, last on the aircraft, first off.

There must be some logical process to bag handling, and more often than not I find that if I checked my hold bag ridiculously early then it's one of the first out, whereas travelling companions who checked in much later had to wait longer for theirs.

"There must be some logical process to bag handling" :=

Baggage loading
 

The trouble with baggage loading is it varies so much. At a tiny airport they may well put each bag straight onto the trolley which then gets pulled out to the aircraft. If that's the case the first bags will be at the bottom of the pile, last into the aircraft, first off onto the trolley and at the bottom of the pile again so last onto the conveyor.

All that assumes one trolley. Add a 2nd trolley and all bets are off; fill one first, then the other or spread the load across both trolleys in some logical, or more likely, illogical way? Now, when you get to the aircraft the trolleys will get loaded one by one so now everything is potentially mixed up. And the whole process at the other end will probably have bags coming off onto one trolley and when that's full the rest go on the next trolley. Which gets offloaded first at the terminal?

Now think about somewhere like Heathrow. People checking in 3 hours before departure for a 747. The bags probably go to a holding area then into a container. Some airlines prioritise bags of premium classes so First and Business bags go into the last container loaded on the plane (in theory). By the time the bags have been put in several containers and then several containers have been offloaded and taken back to the terminal who knows what order they're in.