Air Canada pulls a Hans Solo

[James Bond]

Update: NTSB opens docket for San Francisco International Airport near taxiway collision incident

[Schwartz]

Interesting article: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...to-air-safety/

[Evan]

Interesting article: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...to-air-safety/

This smells to me like conservative dilatory tactics to delay regulation. The argument is: We need to know more before we can do it right.

The intelligent counter-argument is: We need to play it safe until we know more.

I also have to take issue with a couple things:

For one thing, researchers cannot agree on what fatigue actually is. More importantly, there are few (if any) studies that show how fatigue affects a pilot’s flying ability. Do fatigued pilots have trouble communicating with air-traffic controllers? We don’t know. Are they more likely to slip up during takeoff? We don’t know. Do they hit the brakes too hard on landing? We don’t know.

We know that fatigue is detrimental to concentration, memory and proficiency. We know that excessive fatigue can have effects that resemble intoxication.
We also know that fatigue can cause one to fall asleep quite unexpectedly.

That’s big bucks for an industry that has long struggled to turn a profit. In fact, were it not for low oil prices and "innovations” such as seat-selection fees, cancellation fees and baggage fees, airline balance sheets would still be in the red.

A major reason airlines are now raking in profits is reduced capacity. Most flights are now flying full or nearly full, whereas a decade ago half empty flights weren't that uncommon.
Another factor is market dominance brought about by mergers, which has allowed airlines to charge added fees and maintain higher fares.

[Gabriel]

A major reason airlines are now raking in profits is reduced capacity.

Correct. Reduced capacity overall combined with an increased capacity per flight (reduced seat pitch to add rows, reduced seat width to add 1 seat abreast, reduced number of lavatories, reduced size of lavatories and galleys...). Also giving legacy economy service and comfort in a new "premium economy"class for which they charge quite more than the now downgraded standard economy (and don't get me started with the basic economy).

[elaw]

Why am I picturing an airline board debating seating pax on the wing, with half of them arguing the price should be low due to the cold and lack of oxygen, and the other half arguing the opposite because of the abundant legroom?

[3WE]

Why am I picturing an airline board debating seating pax on the wing, with half of them arguing the price should be low due to the cold and lack of oxygen, and the other half arguing the opposite because of the abundant legroom?

How about we damn near always use a magenta line- with physical punishment if you don't?

Could we also use approach lights or REILs in a more positive fashion?

[ATLcrew]

This smells to me like conservative dilatory tactics to delay regulation.

The Globe and Mail is hardly a bastion of conservative thought.

[TeeVee]

Another factor is market dominance brought about by mergers, which has allowed airlines to charge added fees and maintain higher fares.

really? as if all but one us based airline wasn't charging bag fees even before the little guys got gobbled up and the bigger guys merged. in 2008 bag fees were just about the RULE.

as for 1/2 empty planes a decade ago, i guess you would be the expert on that since you fly so much. me? i know nothing, except 1/2 empty planes were frickin rare. 75% full may have been somewhat common on certain heavily saturated routes i flew back then, but most domestic flights i flew in the US were at 80%+ load factor

[Gabriel]

as for 1/2 empty planes a decade ago, i guess you would be the expert on that since you fly so much. me? i know nothing, except 1/2 empty planes were frickin rare. 75% full may have been somewhat common on certain heavily saturated routes i flew back then, but most domestic flights i flew in the US were at 80%+ load factor

I don't know if 1/2 empty (as in the precise form of 50%) or if one decade ago.
But I think you will agree that the average load factor today is clearly higher than pre-9/11 (and that with quite more seats per plane of the same size).

[Evan]

as for 1/2 empty planes a decade ago, i guess you would be the expert on that since you fly so much. me? i know nothing, except 1/2 empty planes were frickin rare. 75% full may have been somewhat common on certain heavily saturated routes i flew back then, but most domestic flights i flew in the US were at 80%+ load factor

I think you fly mostly domestic. I used to get a lot of transatlantic flights where the back 40 was pretty sparsely populated. You could usually find an empty middle row to lie back on. Especially on Delta.

[TeeVee]

Gabe, 9/11 was 17 years ago not a decade ago. the airline industry was in the midst of driving itself into bankruptcy well in advance of 9/11. i flew considerably less then, but still about 8 rt's per year. very rarely were planes 1/2 empty or close to it.

[TeeVee]

I think you fly mostly domestic. I used to get a lot of transatlantic flights where the back 40 was pretty sparsely populated. You could usually find an empty middle row to lie back on. Especially on Delta.

actually about 60/40. i fly about 12 rt transcons and 30 or so FL-mid-atlantic/northeast trips annually. in addition, i fly about 20 rt's to nicaragua and a handful to panama. the only time in the passed who knows how long i've been on a half or more empty plane, was during the past few months going to nicaragua during the violent political repression being perpetrated by the douchebag dictator.

[elaw]

...the violent political repression being perpetrated by the douchebag dictator.

Just to be clear, this is referring to the one in Nicaragua, right?

[TeeVee]

yes

[elaw]

NTSB report is out: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/...ts/AIR1801.pdf