GULF AIR foresees TRISTARS,the only way out
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Zürich and Port Elizabeth SA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this creative accountancy to prop up Gamco, or the long rumoured start of an international airline owned by the emirate of Abu Dhabi? Remember that the other owners of GF all have their own international airlines.
If they're really quick, perhaps Gulf Air would like to buy their old VC10s back from the RAF? I flew the last ex-Gulf Air one over to its final resting place earlier this year, but it might not have been turned into saucepans just yet.............
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: min rest
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please correct me if I am wrong... But is there not a financial arrangement in place where AUH effectively will gain total control of Gulf Air if sums of money they have lent the Airline are not repaid on the due date?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In da north country
Age: 62
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must defend the Tri-Star!!
I spent 4 years on it, never shucked an engine, flew it all over the world. Anyone who has ever spent any amout of time on the lovely lady, has nothing but good words for her. If I could spend the next 20 years flying a tri-star, I gladly would. Just tell me where to Go!!!!!!!!
I spent 4 years on it, never shucked an engine, flew it all over the world. Anyone who has ever spent any amout of time on the lovely lady, has nothing but good words for her. If I could spend the next 20 years flying a tri-star, I gladly would. Just tell me where to Go!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only pushed trollies up the thing for two years. It was the best aircraft I operated even if it was the oldest. For pax comfort it excelled over the 767/A300. These aren't true wide-body cabins. The L10 was a huge roomy and smooth flyer. Although not allowed now, the amount of crew you could get in that flight deck was amazing! The lower galley was just one big party! And the doors are the best in the business. I will miss her. She felt the safest of all the jets I have worked. Shame I never operated her as a flight crew. The only drag was the cabin angle at speed less than M0.80. That was hard work!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Gov: You said that the L10 is the way to go for operators without an ETOPS certificate. But as I understood it, the big deal with ETOPS is the tiny possibility that you could lose 2 (i.e. both) engines. Is the L10 any better off in this respect, i.e. if it lost 2 engines can it still fly on its remaining ONE? 
Just a question about this ETOPS business from a non-technical person: don't apply instant flaming
.
Just a question about this ETOPS business from a non-technical person: don't apply instant flaming
.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In da north country
Age: 62
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L-1011's with one engine running(at least the 524's) will do ok, at about 2000 to 5000 feet and you better be looking for somewhere to land. With my past company, we had a few occasions where we were stuck on one engine. A couple of engine out ferries that went not exactly as planned, so the guys just went around the patch and landed and then had a beer or two or three or four!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peter is right, the L10 will fly on one engine at "reasonable" weights. In 20 years and more than 10,000 command hrs on the TriStar, have had NO engine failures, and one precautionary shutdown (high vibs)....a really FINE machine...but getting old so will be assigned to the "small" operators to make....a big profit (we hope)...hey, even a small profit would be welcome in today's market.
All this talk about Tri-Stars is getting me all excited, could there be jobs coming my way again? Beats the hell out of sitting around doing nothing, me and lots of guys I should think. 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 1000ft above you, giving you the bird!
Posts: 579
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just remember though that airlines are run by bean counters and shareholders, and when you can buy a Tricycle for $1 mill USD versus a 767 for $ 150,000 USD per month dry, irrespective of the operating costs, you start to understand the logic of people contemplating the idea but not necessarily opting for it.
Charter Airline = good idea
Scheduled Airline = not so good
Still! that's my opinion.
Tally Ho!! - Bags of Smoke - Over the top - Dagger - Dagger - Dagger?
Charter Airline = good idea
Scheduled Airline = not so good
Still! that's my opinion.
Tally Ho!! - Bags of Smoke - Over the top - Dagger - Dagger - Dagger?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Guv, the aeroplane in AMM is starting to have ah....problems. Several years of Kalitta/Kittyhawk have taken their toll, and then there is the problem of the rear spar...RJ will not sign off a heavy check without the mod done, and the spar cannot be done in AMM, so....well lets just say that there are Belgians involved...you get the picture i'm sure. The word stubborn comes to mind. 
Good thing we have a backup plan.
Good thing we have a backup plan.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In da north country
Age: 62
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A, Which L-1011 from Kalitta is in AMM? I'm curious to know, since I used to fly them.
And all these cracks about the maint. If you didn't work there, you just don't know! Just like every other airline in the world, we had our good ones and bad ones. As for our reliability. I spent 4 years on the Tri-Star there,2400 hours; never had an engine failure, or any maint delay of any significance.
And all these cracks about the maint. If you didn't work there, you just don't know! Just like every other airline in the world, we had our good ones and bad ones. As for our reliability. I spent 4 years on the Tri-Star there,2400 hours; never had an engine failure, or any maint delay of any significance.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: A sandy island
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Simbad, I see nobody has answered your question yet!
ETOPS actually caters for the very tiny possibility that ONE engine might fail. Thus requirements in terms of flyability, electrical requirements and maximum range from a suitable airport. The question of two engines failing is not part of the equation at all (given that it would put a twin in a rather unenviable position!)
ETOPS actually caters for the very tiny possibility that ONE engine might fail. Thus requirements in terms of flyability, electrical requirements and maximum range from a suitable airport. The question of two engines failing is not part of the equation at all (given that it would put a twin in a rather unenviable position!)
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Peter Bach, the problem with the Kalitta/Kittyhawk L10's was not the airframe, it was the rather poor maintenance on the engines. RR engines require a fair degree of special attention, and if given same, will work good/last a long time. I asked the Kalitta DirMaintenance years ago when they received their first L10 if he was going to send anyone to RR school in Derby. His reply was something like..."if these boys can fix a DC-8, they can fix anything"...and it sadly showed, especially with the RB.211-524B4.
Redtail, you are quite correct about the 8130's, they must have used very dull tacks.
[ 26 November 2001: Message edited by: 411A ]
Redtail, you are quite correct about the 8130's, they must have used very dull tacks.
[ 26 November 2001: Message edited by: 411A ]
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dunstable, Beds UK
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simbad, tulips.
When Court line started operating Tristars (-1) Luton-Antigua (1972-3) the UK overwater rules related to 50% of the power plants inoperatives based on 4 engined aircraft.(Hence the twins only relate to single failure) This was the first time that 3 engined aircraft had been involved in this long range flying so the CAA stated that the performance was predicated on 2 engines inop. The Luton - Santa Maria leg was not a problem as at the overwater stage the aircraft was light enought to maintain on 1 engine. The Santa Maria-Antigua leg was more of a problem due to high weights for the southbound leg. With the aircraft at MTOW the CAA allowed that any point during the climb a double engine failure would allow the aircraft to descend on its climb path thereby allowing it to get back to Santa Maria. After TOC double engine failure would result in drift-down. After the failure(s) the aircraft starts going down hill at an fixed rate but as fuel is burnt off that rate decreases. The original Lockheed drift down figures recomputed the drift down rate every 2,000 feet and this did not allow the operation. Lockheed went back and re-computed the drift down at every 100 feet which then made it work !!
Court Line operated the route until its demise in 1974.
When Court line started operating Tristars (-1) Luton-Antigua (1972-3) the UK overwater rules related to 50% of the power plants inoperatives based on 4 engined aircraft.(Hence the twins only relate to single failure) This was the first time that 3 engined aircraft had been involved in this long range flying so the CAA stated that the performance was predicated on 2 engines inop. The Luton - Santa Maria leg was not a problem as at the overwater stage the aircraft was light enought to maintain on 1 engine. The Santa Maria-Antigua leg was more of a problem due to high weights for the southbound leg. With the aircraft at MTOW the CAA allowed that any point during the climb a double engine failure would allow the aircraft to descend on its climb path thereby allowing it to get back to Santa Maria. After TOC double engine failure would result in drift-down. After the failure(s) the aircraft starts going down hill at an fixed rate but as fuel is burnt off that rate decreases. The original Lockheed drift down figures recomputed the drift down rate every 2,000 feet and this did not allow the operation. Lockheed went back and re-computed the drift down at every 100 feet which then made it work !!
Court Line operated the route until its demise in 1974.