how pilots can save fuel........?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blackbird,
Are you pilot or ?
Your Pprune info doesnt give any info.
If you are a pilot, i suggest you google info from your aircraft manufacturer or others of same type.
For boeing you can start to google 'flight ops engineering fuel conservation'.
If you are wannabe pilot,an enthusiast...please let us know so people dont get into too much details for no reason.
SLASHER,
You must be one of those who just believes flight plans are over innacurate,loading loads of extra fuel each time just because it is safer,no?
FUEL SAVING IS NOT DANGEROUS,quite the opposite...you end up with more fuel on the other side
Mr De facto
Mr De facto,
Every Airline discuss things with the manufacturer on different issues.... Dont act oversmart..........
I put forward a thread to discuss the ideas/suggestions of pilots/future pilots on their responsibility to save money for their company... These type of attitudes makes more unemployed pilots................
Mr De facto,
Every Airline discuss things with the manufacturer on different issues.... Dont act oversmart..........
I put forward a thread to discuss the ideas/suggestions of pilots/future pilots on their responsibility to save money for their company... These type of attitudes makes more unemployed pilots................
Your Pprune info doesnt give any info.
If you are a pilot, i suggest you google info from your aircraft manufacturer or others of same type.
For boeing you can start to google 'flight ops engineering fuel conservation'.
If you are wannabe pilot,an enthusiast...please let us know so people dont get into too much details for no reason.
SLASHER,
You must be one of those who just believes flight plans are over innacurate,loading loads of extra fuel each time just because it is safer,no?
FUEL SAVING IS NOT DANGEROUS,quite the opposite...you end up with more fuel on the other side
Last edited by de facto; 3rd Apr 2012 at 08:22.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: WIDE ASIA
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Share the knowledge
Mr Defacto
The value of Knowledge increases with sharing, Maybe what we have learned might not be true. Its always good to share and know more what people think on different issues. I dont agree with you about your statement that " if you are an enthusiast then let us know so that we can stop posting too much info"...... for the simple reason that No pilot is perfect. He is and will be an enthusiast for ever..............
if you feel you are perfect and you dont want to share your knowledge & views then ignore the threads/posts... let others do.....
Then Regarding my identity, dont worry it will be open in a few weeks........
Iam here to know whos best, to get more views on many issues and to share what I know.
Regards
..........................
The value of Knowledge increases with sharing, Maybe what we have learned might not be true. Its always good to share and know more what people think on different issues. I dont agree with you about your statement that " if you are an enthusiast then let us know so that we can stop posting too much info"...... for the simple reason that No pilot is perfect. He is and will be an enthusiast for ever..............
if you feel you are perfect and you dont want to share your knowledge & views then ignore the threads/posts... let others do.....
Then Regarding my identity, dont worry it will be open in a few weeks........
Iam here to know whos best, to get more views on many issues and to share what I know. Regards
..........................
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you feel you are perfect and you dont want to share your knowledge & views then ignore the threads/posts... let others do.....
I just gave you a link to search which contains 155 pages on fuel saving,so if you cant bother googling it then my dear 'brother' i dont think other professional pilots should waste their time writing you what they learned from the same source!.
All the info posted on this thread is in there and much more...except the junk SLASHER wrote obviously.
I dont need to know your identity,not interested.
All the best in your chatroom survey.
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Formerly of Nam
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
except the junk SLASHER wrote obviously.
when seriously presented by this same garbage from drivers
in a cheap lousy low cost outfit that I temporarily worked for
once (except the last line - that was my personal dig).
There're fuel savings and fuel scavenging - two completely
different subjects.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: My Suitcase
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All pilots know what they can do to help their company save fuel ($$).
It is whether or not they want to make the effort to actually do it. And for that to happen, you need a happy bunch of pilots.
Like what The Dominican said, a happy pilot is one who works in a comfortable and good environment, and receives a healthy salary.
It is whether or not they want to make the effort to actually do it. And for that to happen, you need a happy bunch of pilots.
Like what The Dominican said, a happy pilot is one who works in a comfortable and good environment, and receives a healthy salary.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: OMAA
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most carriers in India are sulking under tough operating environment, primarily due to fuel costs and taxes levied thereon. The scenario is ripe for innovation in this regard. As they say, necessity is the mother of all inventions.
Last year, BBC News ran a story on Easyjet which was running a trial of Nano-technology enabled Paint coating on its aircraft. The manufacturer of the paint was claiming a reduction in fuel consumption of 2%, which, in absolute terms is commodious saving.
This paint, reportedly, weighs less and reduces friction of air molecules over its surface. Just watch this video to know what they mean by reduced drag.
The manufacturer who supplied the paint to EasyJet was TripleO. Another company, which is manufacturing such paints is Trelleborg. Trelleborg add Microspheres to the paints which help reduce viscosity and improve spreading characteristics.
Link to BBC Article on Easyjet
Last year, BBC News ran a story on Easyjet which was running a trial of Nano-technology enabled Paint coating on its aircraft. The manufacturer of the paint was claiming a reduction in fuel consumption of 2%, which, in absolute terms is commodious saving.
This paint, reportedly, weighs less and reduces friction of air molecules over its surface. Just watch this video to know what they mean by reduced drag.
The manufacturer who supplied the paint to EasyJet was TripleO. Another company, which is manufacturing such paints is Trelleborg. Trelleborg add Microspheres to the paints which help reduce viscosity and improve spreading characteristics.
Link to BBC Article on Easyjet
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cochin VOCI , India
Age: 35
Posts: 1,605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^^
I remember reading somewhere that IndiGo also uses a similar if not the same paint on their aircraft . Must be one of the reasons why they are profitable
I remember reading somewhere that IndiGo also uses a similar if not the same paint on their aircraft . Must be one of the reasons why they are profitable
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: WIDE ASIA
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
great job mate
Great job aditya
This is what I want. see few of these people who has posted their views are criticizing about the salary of pilots, the ridiculous political/Industrial system of India or even questioning the identity of the author than the Topic of Discussion.
Few people have given real wonderful views including the glide angles, brakes , usage of Engines etc etc which I really appreciate. This is the first post on how paints can decrease the fuel burn..... Even Regular cleaning of the aircraft decreases the drag, thereby adds to the fuel cost reduction.
Regards
This is what I want. see few of these people who has posted their views are criticizing about the salary of pilots, the ridiculous political/Industrial system of India or even questioning the identity of the author than the Topic of Discussion.
Few people have given real wonderful views including the glide angles, brakes , usage of Engines etc etc which I really appreciate. This is the first post on how paints can decrease the fuel burn..... Even Regular cleaning of the aircraft decreases the drag, thereby adds to the fuel cost reduction.
Regards
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cochin VOCI , India
Age: 35
Posts: 1,605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A small gain but adds to the overall effort
EcoPower Engine Wash Service
http://www.pw.utc.com/media_center/a...r_brochure.pdf
EcoPower Engine Wash Service
http://www.pw.utc.com/media_center/a...r_brochure.pdf
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Blackbird,
I read all the post, and for my experience, the aircraft manufactures they want to sell aircraft so not always the suggestion about fuel saving are true! They prefer to sell you the next generation aircraft.
I can tell you, what are we doing in my company 737 ng
Apu min usage,
Start engine only on completation of pushback
Flight plan acurately update at latest wind on rute
Minimum fuel or tanker fuel dependent on the cost at departure and destination
Pilot in comand demanded to fly always at the optimum flight level as per fmc in accordance with performance limitation
Extensive use of vnav even with poor atc controll ( we are suppose to be trained pilot not monkey so able to interact with system to achieve the target)
Low drag approach for 99% of the approach flap 5 max 10 to 4 miles and than final configuration
Minimum usage of reverser ( according boeing performance) brake cooling rwy lenght!
plan to vacate at the suitable exit to minimize taxy route
Gpu immediately available at parking to minimize engine run.
STRONG APPLICATION OF COMPANY SOP
About taxi with one engine, we did it in my previous company, after 3 months they discover the rate of replace nose weels was almast double due to asimmetric trust on taxi with increase cost in company operation rather than fuel save.
I hope i answer you
Cheers.
I read all the post, and for my experience, the aircraft manufactures they want to sell aircraft so not always the suggestion about fuel saving are true! They prefer to sell you the next generation aircraft.
I can tell you, what are we doing in my company 737 ng
Apu min usage,
Start engine only on completation of pushback
Flight plan acurately update at latest wind on rute
Minimum fuel or tanker fuel dependent on the cost at departure and destination
Pilot in comand demanded to fly always at the optimum flight level as per fmc in accordance with performance limitation
Extensive use of vnav even with poor atc controll ( we are suppose to be trained pilot not monkey so able to interact with system to achieve the target)
Low drag approach for 99% of the approach flap 5 max 10 to 4 miles and than final configuration
Minimum usage of reverser ( according boeing performance) brake cooling rwy lenght!
plan to vacate at the suitable exit to minimize taxy route
Gpu immediately available at parking to minimize engine run.
STRONG APPLICATION OF COMPANY SOP
About taxi with one engine, we did it in my previous company, after 3 months they discover the rate of replace nose weels was almast double due to asimmetric trust on taxi with increase cost in company operation rather than fuel save.
I hope i answer you
Cheers.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Save fuel? Save money? "save time"
Interesting thread people, some interesting ideas. Some a little impractical?! Your walking the fine line between "operational" requirements and practicality.
What sort of aircraft are we talking about here? It will make a difference for sure. Short haul or long? Let me tell you about the 767 and 777 which is where my experience lies and some practical "tips"
For a short haul flight on either the 767 or 777, let's say of up to about 2 or even 3 hrs endurance you can take "tons and tons" of extra fuel and it won't make a blind bit of difference. Perhaps 0.1 or 0.2 extra? Likewise the level you fly at on these short sectors won't matter much. If you get clobbered by ATC to fly at a low level, you make it up on the climb fuel and speed flown at the lower level. Thus a time saving and "total operating cost" saving.
If you try that on from bkk to fra then your probably not gonna make destination.
This has been a big "accountants" issue for many years.
Here's what American airlines did way back in the 80's:
They put a competition out to all employees asking for their suggestions to save money, they came up with this,
They removed the foam backing on the carpet saving hundreds of kg's on a heavy. They removed most of the paint, adopting the current "colors" another huge weight and drag issue. They redesigned the galleys and changed the baggage carts to save weight. And I'm sure there were other changes too?
Here's a few ideas if you fly the 777.
Low cost index does not always equate to the best economy. If its going to slow you down 40 mins on a bkk fra then you must be armed with "all" the information. ie what is your airlines "direct operating" cost per hr and reserve for overhaul costs? Good luck getting this information from your company as most of the time it's a closely guarded secret. They don't want you as Johnny pilot to know. But let me tell you, the cost of operating a 777 per hr with crew ATNS charges, catering, fuel, reserve for overhaul etc is eye watering. You'll all have to dig deep to get this info if your really keen, and of course, every airline will be different. Not surprisingly, the cost of crew and Flt atts is one of the lower costs. We're a "bargain" on the scale of things.
Airlines in the middle east etc have greatly reduced fuel costs, perhaps even "free" if the truth be known? There's exactly "zero" anyone can do to compete with that! Maybe that's why they've grown so huge so fast??
Air New Zealand has elected to keep its B767 fleet. And why not? It's a great aircraft. With the addition of the winglets that they now all have I've heard claims that on long flights their getting a saving of anywhere up to 15%. That's pretty impressive. The down side is that fitting winglets cost a cool million bucks US and theres a huge waiting list. So you are committed to keeping those aircraft for quite a few years if you want to make it pay.
With the 777 it comes down to how your putting the winds in the fmc and what cost index/level your using. It's the old story. BS in BS out. The fmc is only as good as the info "you" put in it. If you've got rubbish or inaccurate winds in and the fmc is telling you "climb now" that might not necessarily be so.
Flying higher is not always better. So many times I see guys force the aircraft up to some unrealistic level like 390 way before its planned because they think their gonna save fuel. "wrong" now you have an aircraft dragging itself through the air at a higher angle of attack and a lower Mach number burning "more" fuel. Remember the good ole days (those older pilots) we had and used "fuel, altitude, wind" charts? If you want to climb then you better have at least 20kts wnd advantage? (or whatever the chart indicated) if you didn't, then there was no point going there. We live in the "fmc" age now. Take the fmc away from some of these guys and theyll dam near on declair an emergency!!!
Common sense seems to be lacking? Or perhaps just a lack of knowledge? Hey it happens to us all. Experience is the key here. Time and hours and ton of flying. Those older guys you see around who flew 707's convairs, DC8's etc. you really need to sit down with those guys and have beers down route. If you want to learn something about operating an aircraft to its maximum performance/efficiency then go no further then one of those guys.
Taxing effectively can save you a few penny's too (and it will be penny's on the scale of things, but hey? Every little bit helps right?) how many guys do you know that jockey the throttles like their at brands hatch? Every time you push those taps open an ocean of fuel is getting sprayed in those burners! Not much point if 50 yards later all your gonna do is stomp on the brakes?! I know TRE/TRI's that will dam near knock you out if you do this. So don't. It makes you look like a clown and it's unnecessary. On a rolls Royce after brake release no more than 30% N1 is required. To achieve this move one throttle exactly one throttle top width, then simply match it with the other one. 30% every time.
She'll accelerate slow, but it's all you need.
On decent try and keep those taps closed. Do your level best to make it a game every time you fly. Taps closed, constant descent. (I know what your gonna say? Our "friends" in ATC arnt always up to this? Especially in India) but hey, if you do your bit, then the rest is out of your control. Use Vnav! It's your best friend! Don't just bash the thing into FLCH because your impatient. This is a smart airplane, it's worked out exactly when, where, and how much it needs to descend to get to those restrictions you've put in. ( don't get caught? Remember? BS in BS out?) ATC will not always play nicely either?! I've flown across the world to arrive at "bubin" in Dubai only to have the 2 ton of fuel I have meticulously saved on the flight to be blown in 10 mins by inefficient controlling. ( yes I know their busy) but that their in is one of the biggest problems.
Make your ATC as efficient as it can possibly be and see the savings on fuel? It's a win win for everyone. London Heathrow is a shining star on how it should be.
It's a dam pity other countries can't model themselves on this example.
I've raved on folks, but saving fuel money and time is something we can all do.
Carbon tax, penalties, etc etc is just governments making money. It's a band aid against a sea wall.
Airmanship my friends "Airmanship" more than a word. It makes the difference between a good pilot and a "great" pilot. Let it be "you"
Happy flying kerosene cowboys.
What sort of aircraft are we talking about here? It will make a difference for sure. Short haul or long? Let me tell you about the 767 and 777 which is where my experience lies and some practical "tips"
For a short haul flight on either the 767 or 777, let's say of up to about 2 or even 3 hrs endurance you can take "tons and tons" of extra fuel and it won't make a blind bit of difference. Perhaps 0.1 or 0.2 extra? Likewise the level you fly at on these short sectors won't matter much. If you get clobbered by ATC to fly at a low level, you make it up on the climb fuel and speed flown at the lower level. Thus a time saving and "total operating cost" saving.
If you try that on from bkk to fra then your probably not gonna make destination.
This has been a big "accountants" issue for many years.
Here's what American airlines did way back in the 80's:
They put a competition out to all employees asking for their suggestions to save money, they came up with this,
They removed the foam backing on the carpet saving hundreds of kg's on a heavy. They removed most of the paint, adopting the current "colors" another huge weight and drag issue. They redesigned the galleys and changed the baggage carts to save weight. And I'm sure there were other changes too?
Here's a few ideas if you fly the 777.
Low cost index does not always equate to the best economy. If its going to slow you down 40 mins on a bkk fra then you must be armed with "all" the information. ie what is your airlines "direct operating" cost per hr and reserve for overhaul costs? Good luck getting this information from your company as most of the time it's a closely guarded secret. They don't want you as Johnny pilot to know. But let me tell you, the cost of operating a 777 per hr with crew ATNS charges, catering, fuel, reserve for overhaul etc is eye watering. You'll all have to dig deep to get this info if your really keen, and of course, every airline will be different. Not surprisingly, the cost of crew and Flt atts is one of the lower costs. We're a "bargain" on the scale of things.
Airlines in the middle east etc have greatly reduced fuel costs, perhaps even "free" if the truth be known? There's exactly "zero" anyone can do to compete with that! Maybe that's why they've grown so huge so fast??
Air New Zealand has elected to keep its B767 fleet. And why not? It's a great aircraft. With the addition of the winglets that they now all have I've heard claims that on long flights their getting a saving of anywhere up to 15%. That's pretty impressive. The down side is that fitting winglets cost a cool million bucks US and theres a huge waiting list. So you are committed to keeping those aircraft for quite a few years if you want to make it pay.
With the 777 it comes down to how your putting the winds in the fmc and what cost index/level your using. It's the old story. BS in BS out. The fmc is only as good as the info "you" put in it. If you've got rubbish or inaccurate winds in and the fmc is telling you "climb now" that might not necessarily be so.
Flying higher is not always better. So many times I see guys force the aircraft up to some unrealistic level like 390 way before its planned because they think their gonna save fuel. "wrong" now you have an aircraft dragging itself through the air at a higher angle of attack and a lower Mach number burning "more" fuel. Remember the good ole days (those older pilots) we had and used "fuel, altitude, wind" charts? If you want to climb then you better have at least 20kts wnd advantage? (or whatever the chart indicated) if you didn't, then there was no point going there. We live in the "fmc" age now. Take the fmc away from some of these guys and theyll dam near on declair an emergency!!!
Common sense seems to be lacking? Or perhaps just a lack of knowledge? Hey it happens to us all. Experience is the key here. Time and hours and ton of flying. Those older guys you see around who flew 707's convairs, DC8's etc. you really need to sit down with those guys and have beers down route. If you want to learn something about operating an aircraft to its maximum performance/efficiency then go no further then one of those guys.
Taxing effectively can save you a few penny's too (and it will be penny's on the scale of things, but hey? Every little bit helps right?) how many guys do you know that jockey the throttles like their at brands hatch? Every time you push those taps open an ocean of fuel is getting sprayed in those burners! Not much point if 50 yards later all your gonna do is stomp on the brakes?! I know TRE/TRI's that will dam near knock you out if you do this. So don't. It makes you look like a clown and it's unnecessary. On a rolls Royce after brake release no more than 30% N1 is required. To achieve this move one throttle exactly one throttle top width, then simply match it with the other one. 30% every time.
She'll accelerate slow, but it's all you need.
On decent try and keep those taps closed. Do your level best to make it a game every time you fly. Taps closed, constant descent. (I know what your gonna say? Our "friends" in ATC arnt always up to this? Especially in India) but hey, if you do your bit, then the rest is out of your control. Use Vnav! It's your best friend! Don't just bash the thing into FLCH because your impatient. This is a smart airplane, it's worked out exactly when, where, and how much it needs to descend to get to those restrictions you've put in. ( don't get caught? Remember? BS in BS out?) ATC will not always play nicely either?! I've flown across the world to arrive at "bubin" in Dubai only to have the 2 ton of fuel I have meticulously saved on the flight to be blown in 10 mins by inefficient controlling. ( yes I know their busy) but that their in is one of the biggest problems.
Make your ATC as efficient as it can possibly be and see the savings on fuel? It's a win win for everyone. London Heathrow is a shining star on how it should be.
It's a dam pity other countries can't model themselves on this example.
I've raved on folks, but saving fuel money and time is something we can all do.
Carbon tax, penalties, etc etc is just governments making money. It's a band aid against a sea wall.
Airmanship my friends "Airmanship" more than a word. It makes the difference between a good pilot and a "great" pilot. Let it be "you"
Happy flying kerosene cowboys.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: OMAA
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting to Grips with Fuel Economy is indeed good material on optimum fuel consumption. Thanks to Pantload. 
Jet engine performance is optimised for flight conditions, but due to airport congestion they must spend a lot of precious time and fuel on ground. I believe the best way to save fuel while taxiing is having the aircraft towed as far as possible.
I am apprehensive with regards to single engine taxiing. The above manual by Airbus also talks about SE taxiing. There are limitations with regards to SE taxiing. It would result in fuel saving but at the cost of increased brake wear, and it is not always advisable. Do you taxi with any engine out? Please tell us about it.
Jet engine performance is optimised for flight conditions, but due to airport congestion they must spend a lot of precious time and fuel on ground. I believe the best way to save fuel while taxiing is having the aircraft towed as far as possible.
I am apprehensive with regards to single engine taxiing. The above manual by Airbus also talks about SE taxiing. There are limitations with regards to SE taxiing. It would result in fuel saving but at the cost of increased brake wear, and it is not always advisable. Do you taxi with any engine out? Please tell us about it.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: India
Age: 35
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low cost index does not always equate to the best economy. If its going to slow you down 40 mins on a bkk fra then you must be armed with "all" the information. ie what is your airlines "direct operating" cost per hr and reserve for overhaul costs? Good luck getting this information from your company as most of the time it's a closely guarded secret. They don't want you as Johnny pilot to know.
on topic:
There's a fuel economy card issued to the pilots in the company for which I work. I can't find it on an open source at the moment, so I can't post it. If I do, I'll get back here. Regardless, pilots working with an airline have plenty of company-issued material to save fuel (it's in their own best interest).
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cost index Zero equates to long range cruise. The direct operating cost of the aircraft per hour is fuel cost, lease repayments, reserve for overhaul, crew costs, catering, etc etc. burning a ton of fuel might cost you $2000 bucks (or whatever the airlines pay for it?) The total cost of staying in the air per/Hr will be something like $10,000 bucks per hour, or more? Who knows? So many variables. (B777) Therefore staying in the air longer because your at cost index zero is not necessarily saving you money. Thats what I mean. your an hr closer to your C and D checks and Eng overhaul time etc.
The FMC dosent know what your overheads are. It just knows what the most economical fuel scenario for your entered conditions is.
These Direct operating costs will probably not be made readilly available to you. Its how airlines "undercut" other airlines.
The FMC dosent know what your overheads are. It just knows what the most economical fuel scenario for your entered conditions is.
These Direct operating costs will probably not be made readilly available to you. Its how airlines "undercut" other airlines.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: OMAA
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PT6A mentioned about Optimum Descent Profile. OPD is an interesting technique. It is relatively new and not widely used yet. India needs to be an early adopter of this technique.
FAA has a program- NextGen Air Transportation System, which may completely transform the current radar-based Air Traffic Control System. One of the main aims of this program is to reduce waiting times and streamline traffic movement on ground as well as in air. NYT had an article yesterday on NextGen Satellite System. Alaska Airlines will begin testing this system from June onwards at Seattle. They hope it will reduce delays and save fuel.
Also, from the article:
Link to the article: A Satellite System That Could End Circling Above the Airport:NYT
FAA has a program- NextGen Air Transportation System, which may completely transform the current radar-based Air Traffic Control System. One of the main aims of this program is to reduce waiting times and streamline traffic movement on ground as well as in air. NYT had an article yesterday on NextGen Satellite System. Alaska Airlines will begin testing this system from June onwards at Seattle. They hope it will reduce delays and save fuel.
Also, from the article:
Airplanes may be able to share weather conditions they encounter during flight, including wind speeds or even turbulence, and automatically relay that information to other planes. The data is currently recorded by each plane but is not shared.
Guest
Posts: n/a
There will be a day when there is no ATC, rather we will log on like data link at the commencement of the flight and we will be given instructions on screen, not unlike now with the 777 system, but more advanced. imagine flying across the world without the pain of trying to get a word in sideways and waiting for the often endless rubbish and non standard RT, with say again, say again? Or confirm this or that blocking your chances of getting a word in. Bring it on. A flight across India in silence would be just heaven.