Whoa..... Talk about delayed reaction. Boy George's last post was 8/16 - five weeks ago. Did you keep it in that long, Ralph? You said you did not have an anger problem. Are you sure?
yep, I think I made three or four posts under that name. ivor you certainly are quite an individual. you have asked me to post some of your shit because you believed the moderators wouldn't allow it... and I stupidly oblige you. I am not here to make friends. and I am not here to make enemies.
RB- u r sofa king we tar did. it is amazing! absolutely amazing. I am not out to get you boy. I have not been posting under other fictitious names. you my friend are in serious need of professional help. that could be either a psychologist or a hooker. or both. they are pros and they are exactly what you need. the shrink could take care of your emotional needs, and the hooker could take care of your physical needs (give your hand a rest too). it would be much cheaper than this FSU thing for sure. good luck with it.
Let's see... doppeldanger was in this forum for months before his 9/20 post and did not post anything. Yes, I created trouble, but there were others. doppeldanger picks out only me. Sounds like Ralph to me.
name calling time --- KNUCKLEHEAD! I HAVE NO REASON TO PICK ON YOU! AND I HAVE NO REASON TO USE OTHER NAMES TO DO SO. GET IT STRAIGHT. FOCUS YOUR ATTENTION ON OTHER THINGS. AND IF YOU MUST KNOW WHO THESE PEOPLE ARE, ASK IVOR. HE FINDS GREAT PLEASURE IN TRACKING DOWN PEOPLE. SERIOUSLY DUDE, YOU NEED TO GET A LIFE.
Well, it's time to go ground hog hunting. have a nice day all. also going to the Franklin Institute to see the mummy exhibit this afternoon. And they are showing the Pearl Jam 20 movie in the IMAX theater as well. Should be a good day in Philly despite the Phillies being on a tear and the Eagles looking like shit. Hockey starts soon!
Speaking of hockey, how about that Russian hockey team that went down in a plane crash. A tragic loss for sure. Maybe ivor can fill us in on why the plane crashed. And what's up with all the recent air problems in Russia. Kind of scares me because I will be flying there in a couple months. I'm not worried about the crossing the Atlantic, but I am concerned about the connecting flight to a smaller airport.
I'd be more concerned about crossing the Atlantic on any aircraft that has less than 3 engines.
I had the (un) joy of flying on a Frog Air B777-300 last year, there were no reasonable 3 or 4 engined alternative flights available, allbeit I was flying mostly across land where a diversion airfield would mormally be available, unbelievable that they can seat up to 425 passengers on 2 engines across oceans and in the event that one engine becomes shut down then there are up to 425 souls, plus crew, praying that the one remaining engine keeps turning until they can land at the nearest available diversion airfield which might be hours away!
Fortunately I returned from last year's trip on a KLM B777-200, across mostly land, much of it Russia, a B777-200 is much more reasonable with a mere 327 seats.
But, across expanses of water, check the aircraft type and try to book on a 3 or 4 engined aircraft.
Ivor,,, what makes of planes have 3 or more engines??
Back in 1998, I was on a MD,,,, I forget the number,,,, 30 or 40?? It seemed to be a lot faster than the Boeing 707-767s
How are the Air Buses??
About the only 3 engined airliner remaining in passenger service is the MD11 and there's very few of them and I think there's an odd few L-1011's still in adhoc passenger service.
The MD11 replaced the DC10, back in the day I travelled to/from USA 8 times in one year on DC10's, across the Atlantic twice in one day and including travelling Tampa-Bangor-London on an overfull flight and my seat being one of the aft toilets ... I bought the Captain a bottle of Scotch for that favour.
Indeed here's a pic of a 4 engined DC10 from that era:
We were one of the few airlines to own an engine pod which was used to ferry engines back and forth for heavy maintenance in USA and/or to rescue another of our aircraft that might have blown an engine. Our boss, dear old F.A.L, was a very knowledgeable and clever man and we had the same engines on our DC10's as we did on our Airbus A300's, there was two incidents where A300's blew an engine on take-off from Arrecife to subsequently do dirty dives into Las Palmas whilst we would subsequently dispatch a 4 engined DC10 to ferry the engines back and forth whilst bringing the passengers home.
As for 4 engined airliners, well you won't get me on an A380 ... To certify these aircraft they have to practice emergency evacuations and achieve getting everybody out within a specified timeframe. Well what they do is fill the aircraft with students and tell them that the first one out gets USD100 or whatever ... some of these students have got it down to a fine art, they go straight across the seat backs without their feet touching the floor. :) ... As far as I'm concerned the A380 is a disaster waiting to happen!
Besides that, 4 engined, there's the B747 and the A340, I quite like the A340, it's a narrow (8 seats across) wide-body and the shorter ones such as the -300 variant are, in this day and age, quite a small aircraft for 4 engines.
Most wide-body airliner engines have enormous diameters, making them quite difficult to ship -- so they get carried under a wing.
While I certainly understand feeling more comfortable with 3 or 4 engines when crossing an ocean, I don't think there's any practical effect on safety. The spooky scenario is one engine at night, and the nearest diversion airfield hours away under lousy weather. But the ships can fly so well on one engine, that in practice the option of continuing to a more distant airport with better conditions will usually be open.
The reliability of modern jet engines is amazing. Even with the small business jets, dual engine failures are very rare -- and the airliners that fly across oceans have MUCH stricter certification. I have read that there has never been a failure on a jet transport of two engines from separate causes (as opposed to same-cause failures like running out of fuel, encountering a flock of birds, ingesting volcanic ash etc.)
For the twin engined airliners that fly across oceans, when an engine shuts down (assuming something didn't happen to damage both engines), the other engine has a (maximum) 1 in 10,000 likelihood of failing during the next 5 hours -- that's actually "the law", the planes aren't certified if engines are less reliable than that. Today's best engines are doing a lot better than that, around 1 in 100,000 failure likelihood over a 5 hour period.
Even with more than 1000 transatlantic flights each day, a twin airliner losing both engines from separate causes would be expected (by certification rules) less than twice in 1000 years.
Also, when you look at the (blessedly rare) cases of engine failures causing a lot of damage or even a crash, these have happened or could happen on airliners with more than 2 engines.
The bottom line, is that flying on scheduled flights of major international carriers is now so safe that it's hard to comprehend. The Boeing and Airbus fleets are now seeing close to 3,000,000 departures for each fatal accident. When the average person spends 10 hours strapped into a transatlantic sardine can, their likelihood of dying is much less than 10 hours of normal daily life at home.
Infact all long haul airliners have a further engine in the tail as an auxiliary power unit and often these APU's are aircraft engines, of smaller aircraft, in their own right.
But 4 or 5 engined aircraft are for wimps, at my last airline I worked for I was working with, amongst other oddball aircraft types, the largest aircraft in the world: