PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   'split' scimitar at O'Hare (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/612293-split-scimitar-ohare.html)

underfire 16th Aug 2018 16:08

'split' scimitar at O'Hare-ouch!
 
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...306985aa19.jpg
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...8159297530.jpg

Mad (Flt) Scientist 16th Aug 2018 17:29

You'd think there were enough wing-walkers in that second pic to avoid something bad happening...

Jet Jockey A4 17th Aug 2018 01:40

What? Another ground incident? WOW!

pattern_is_full 17th Aug 2018 02:39

I'm just trying to figure out if this was "not enough pushback" or "not enough nose-wheel." Or both.

RadarContactLost 17th Aug 2018 02:44

I never Marshall aircraft into or out of a gate without wingwalkers...
why would you do so without wingwalkers???

SMT Member 17th Aug 2018 06:48


Originally Posted by RadarContactLost (Post 10225997)
I never Marshall aircraft into or out of a gate without wingwalkers...
why would you do so without wingwalkers???

Good luck with that in very many airports around the world! Why do without? Because in a lot of cases it's not necessary; not all gates are operating in ways they were not originally intended, or have been designed by bean counters with zero appreciation of how the real world works.

akaSylvia 17th Aug 2018 08:26

Are there actually more ground incidents? Or are they just making mainstream headlines more often by a media who seriously increased their aviation reporting after MH370?

underfire 18th Aug 2018 00:09


Are there actually more ground incidents? Or are they just making mainstream headlines more often by a media who seriously increased their aviation reporting after MH370?
Probably the same amount of ground incidents, its air travelers with Twitter accounts.

Probably not MH370...stuff more like Air Canada trying to land on taxiways full of aircraft, or people getting sucked out of aircraft when an engine unravels, or recently, drunk crew.

People are getting more savy on why their flight is delayed. Rather than pax just listening to a flight delay or cancellation, and accepting it, they are figuring out why.

gatbusdriver 18th Aug 2018 10:59

You mean to say.....”due to the late arrival of the inbound aircraft” doesn’t cut the mustard anymore.

llondel 18th Aug 2018 20:22


Originally Posted by gatbusdriver (Post 10227174)
You mean to say.....”due to the late arrival of the inbound aircraft” doesn’t cut the mustard anymore.

It might do if the pax can look out the window and see it's not there, although admittedly the airline might be hiding it round the corner.

Looking at the aircraft positions in the picture, it looks like they did a pushback and turned it in a very confined space. Is there a reason for this, because normally I'd expect them to push back clear of all other aircraft out onto a taxiway. Or did it start life more aligned with the aircraft at C31 and not really need a push?

DaveReidUK 18th Aug 2018 23:27


Originally Posted by gatbusdriver (Post 10227174)
You mean to say.....”due to the late arrival of the inbound aircraft” doesn’t cut the mustard anymore.

Except that the majority of delays are rotational/knock-on ones as a result of an earlier problem (from whatever cause) and so are indeed "due to the late arrival of the inbound aircraft".

Tube Rider 19th Aug 2018 01:07

Or my ole favorite; "due to operational reasons". As opposed to what? - non-operational reasons.

This arrogant and empty excuse presumes customers have not the intelligence to realize they have been given no information whatsoever about what has disrupted their travel plans.


RadarContactLost 19th Aug 2018 02:41


Originally Posted by SMT Member (Post 10226083)
Good luck with that in very many airports around the world! Why do without? Because in a lot of cases it's not necessary; not all gates are operating in ways they were not originally intended, or have been designed by bean counters with zero appreciation of how the real world works.

to clarify yes I've marshalled 727, 737, a300, a310 into and out of gates alone IF there was no aircraft at adjoining gates..
If there was an aircraft at an adjoining hate the n yes I used a wingwalker

FlightlessParrot 19th Aug 2018 10:41


Originally Posted by Tube Rider (Post 10227638)
Or my ole favorite; "due to operational reasons". As opposed to what? - non-operational reasons.

This arrogant and empty excuse presumes customers have not the intelligence to realize they have been given no information whatsoever about what has disrupted their travel plans.


I have always assumed that this statement covers everything from the late arrival of the aircraft because of some problem down the line, through the need to service or replace some part of the aircraft's equipment, to one of the crew not turning up for an untold variety of reasons. In any case, what matters to me is that I feel confident that the airline will not let the flight depart without everything being OK. Otherwise, I'm late, that's bad, nothing to do about it, long explanation changes nothing for me. If I think the airline capriciously cancels flights without caring about the consequences for PAX, I'll never fly with them again (so long, IBERIA), but I don't need a detailed explanation (which could just be some bunch of lies, anyway); I want to believe that they're trying to make it good.

oceancrosser 19th Aug 2018 10:54


Originally Posted by FlightlessParrot (Post 10227886)
I have always assumed that this statement covers everything from the late arrival of the aircraft because of some problem down the line, through the need to service or replace some part of the aircraft's equipment, to one of the crew not turning up for an untold variety of reasons. In any case, what matters to me is that I feel confident that the airline will not let the flight depart without everything being OK. Otherwise, I'm late, that's bad, nothing to do about it, long explanation changes nothing for me. If I think the airline capriciously cancels flights without caring about the consequences for PAX, I'll never fly with them again (so long, IBERIA), but I don't need a detailed explanation (which could just be some bunch of lies, anyway); I want to believe that they're trying to make it good.

Good points. If delayed, all the pax care about is how and when the airlines is going to get them moving. Detailed explanations about “why the delay” are not necessary.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:08.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.