Dear reader,
given its succes, and to make things easier to manage, but also easier to read for you, this blog has been moved to www.plasticpilot.net
I'm sorry if this cause any inconvenience to you, but hope to see you there soon !
PlasticPilot
Tuesday 28 August 2007
Monday 27 August 2007
High-end aviation - Privatair flying luxury
One particular branch of aviation has always attracted lots of interest and fantasies, because it's both discreet, and reserved to a happy few: private jets and business jets. Anyone heard some stories about golden lavatories in these flying palaces... Well, this is partly true.
To illustrate this, I chose to talk about a particular company: Privatair (please note that I'm in no way affiliated to Privatair, and pictures in this post come from their website). This company is amongst the ones offering private taxi, together with JetAviation and a few others.
Such companies offer taxi services for businesses or wealthy individuals. If you can afford it, this kind of services has lots of advantages, including:
1) You define the schedule
2) You go through quick customs / security / immigration checks in the airport's VIP zones
3) A personal limo will take you to your plane, avoiding all check-in and boarding burdens
4) Aircraft performance permitting, they fly you to any small airport close to your destination
5) Personnal service on board is, let's say, above standard
Now, let's have a look and unveil some of the luxurious interiors that made the reputation of such way of travel... As mentioned before, Privatair operates quite a wide fleet, so I selected some pictures from their website for different size of aircraft.
Start with a LearJet 60, for a handful of passengers.
As you can see, the interior is tiny, but quite cosy... I hope you noticed the flower and the bottle of champagne on the table.
If your clan is a bit bigger, you can then opt for a Global 5000, which offers more room.
I personally slept in some hotel room that were not so well equipped !
Last but not least, if you're travelling far away with all your (extended) family, why not renting a 767 ? Yes, you read correctly, a 767, even one with extended range...
At this point the question are: who uses that, and does it really make sense ? The first answer is quite obvious: there is a market for such companies. They flew for years, and in some busy airports, they can represent up to 30% of the traffic !
Apart from a few very wealthy and inactive people, most of the
customers are businessmen moving from one part of the world to the other. In an economy where salaries of top managers can be expressed in thousands of dollars a day, the shareholders probably don't want them to be waiting inactively, or spending hours in transfers and connecting flight, don't they ?
And video conferencing or e-mail can't solve all problems, there
are still cases where a good old handshake is needed. And in such cases, planes just become time saving machines...
To finish with an little story, you should know that even working at the airport, and having good friends working there, it's just IMPOSSIBLE to get on board of such planes for a short visit... secrecy's one of the first values of such companies...
To illustrate this, I chose to talk about a particular company: Privatair (please note that I'm in no way affiliated to Privatair, and pictures in this post come from their website). This company is amongst the ones offering private taxi, together with JetAviation and a few others.
Such companies offer taxi services for businesses or wealthy individuals. If you can afford it, this kind of services has lots of advantages, including:
1) You define the schedule
2) You go through quick customs / security / immigration checks in the airport's VIP zones
3) A personal limo will take you to your plane, avoiding all check-in and boarding burdens
4) Aircraft performance permitting, they fly you to any small airport close to your destination
5) Personnal service on board is, let's say, above standard
Now, let's have a look and unveil some of the luxurious interiors that made the reputation of such way of travel... As mentioned before, Privatair operates quite a wide fleet, so I selected some pictures from their website for different size of aircraft.
Start with a LearJet 60, for a handful of passengers.
As you can see, the interior is tiny, but quite cosy... I hope you noticed the flower and the bottle of champagne on the table.
If your clan is a bit bigger, you can then opt for a Global 5000, which offers more room.
I personally slept in some hotel room that were not so well equipped !
Last but not least, if you're travelling far away with all your (extended) family, why not renting a 767 ? Yes, you read correctly, a 767, even one with extended range...
At this point the question are: who uses that, and does it really make sense ? The first answer is quite obvious: there is a market for such companies. They flew for years, and in some busy airports, they can represent up to 30% of the traffic !Apart from a few very wealthy and inactive people, most of the
customers are businessmen moving from one part of the world to the other. In an economy where salaries of top managers can be expressed in thousands of dollars a day, the shareholders probably don't want them to be waiting inactively, or spending hours in transfers and connecting flight, don't they ?And video conferencing or e-mail can't solve all problems, there
are still cases where a good old handshake is needed. And in such cases, planes just become time saving machines...To finish with an little story, you should know that even working at the airport, and having good friends working there, it's just IMPOSSIBLE to get on board of such planes for a short visit... secrecy's one of the first values of such companies...
Sunday 26 August 2007
About air disasters and investigation reports
One of the lessons I learned from the creation of this blog is that a large interest for crashes and air disasters exist amongst readership. As I already mentioned, the work of the investigators is not easy, very time consuming, and base on many sources of information (testimonies when available, black-boxes, wreckage analysis, expert works, ...).
These reports are the only valid pieces of information when discussing air disasters. Any other published information is based only on speculation, stolen and / or distorted information. Reports are quite complex to read and understand, but they are nevertheless available to public.
So as to familiarize you with such reports, here are some links to the reports published after accidents that attracted lot of media attention. Please feel free to comment if you have any question or remark.
Concorde crash in Gonesse, 25th of July 2000 - French BEA
Ueberlingen mid-air collision, 1st of July 2002 - German DFS
TWA800 in-flight breakup, 17th of July 1996 - US NTSB
I did not select these accidents because they all occurred in July, but because they represent different type of accidents, and have been produced by different investigation agencies. Thus they give an overview of what an investigation report is.
These reports are the only valid pieces of information when discussing air disasters. Any other published information is based only on speculation, stolen and / or distorted information. Reports are quite complex to read and understand, but they are nevertheless available to public.
So as to familiarize you with such reports, here are some links to the reports published after accidents that attracted lot of media attention. Please feel free to comment if you have any question or remark.
Concorde crash in Gonesse, 25th of July 2000 - French BEA
Ueberlingen mid-air collision, 1st of July 2002 - German DFS
TWA800 in-flight breakup, 17th of July 1996 - US NTSB
I did not select these accidents because they all occurred in July, but because they represent different type of accidents, and have been produced by different investigation agencies. Thus they give an overview of what an investigation report is.
A tribute to Commander Caroline Aigle
I've never been a fan of military aviation, but today I want to express all my sympathy and compassion to the family, friends, and colleagues of French Pilot, Commander Caroline Aigle, who died on Tuesday, the 21st of August 2007, from a rapidly evolving form of cancer, at age 32.Commander Caroline Aigle was one of the people who helped modern aviation to progress, as she was the first female fighter pilot in the French Air Force. She got her chase pilot license in 1999.
One of the reasons for which I admire them is that she also combined her very demanding military career with being mother of two children. This certainly deserves high respect from all of us.
Monday 20 August 2007
China Airlines Boeing 737 catches fire in Japan - About certification standards
Today, a Boein 737 from China Airlines caught fire on japanese airport in Okinawa, after landing. All passengers were able to leave the plane, only three of them have been lightly hurt. The following YouTube video shows some images from this fire
As always, the media said it was a miracle that no one have been killed... What they forgot to mention is that the certification standards include evacuation rules. The rule says that the plane must be evacuated by a full load of passengers using only half of the exits within 90 seconds.
This has to be demonstrated by the manufacturers. Obviously the demonstration takes place with calm people, but it's in the dark, with their seat belts fastened at the beginning. The following video has been taken during the official demonstration for the Airbus 380. They evacuated through 8 of the 16 emergeny slides.
You also might object that there are no obese people amongst the "passengers" this day...
Nevertheless, this requirement demonstrated its usefuleness with this chinese Boeing, and it is not the first time... In 2003, an Airbus 340 with 309 passengers did crash-land in Toronto. All of the passengers have been evacuated within 90 seconds, and beleive me they were all but trained ! On top of that, the aircraft was also under fire, so half of the exits were useable, exactly as by the rule !
So, friends journalits, it is certainly a good thing that all those people could evacuate the plane safely, but this is because of WORK, not because of a miracle !
As always, the media said it was a miracle that no one have been killed... What they forgot to mention is that the certification standards include evacuation rules. The rule says that the plane must be evacuated by a full load of passengers using only half of the exits within 90 seconds.
This has to be demonstrated by the manufacturers. Obviously the demonstration takes place with calm people, but it's in the dark, with their seat belts fastened at the beginning. The following video has been taken during the official demonstration for the Airbus 380. They evacuated through 8 of the 16 emergeny slides.
You also might object that there are no obese people amongst the "passengers" this day...
Nevertheless, this requirement demonstrated its usefuleness with this chinese Boeing, and it is not the first time... In 2003, an Airbus 340 with 309 passengers did crash-land in Toronto. All of the passengers have been evacuated within 90 seconds, and beleive me they were all but trained ! On top of that, the aircraft was also under fire, so half of the exits were useable, exactly as by the rule !
So, friends journalits, it is certainly a good thing that all those people could evacuate the plane safely, but this is because of WORK, not because of a miracle !
Flying through hurricane (post with speedlinks)
As hurricane Dean is starting the season, let's talk a bit about hurricanes, their impact on traffic, and planes flying through them. Yes, you read correctly, some planes do fly through hurricanes. In fact, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Organisation (NOAA) has planes flying through each of them !
To remain simple, a hurricane is a zone of very low pressure, arround which strong winds are setting up. Wind speeds can be far above the maximum values admitted by airlines for their operations. However, the wind is not a big problem compared to the windhsears, or changes of wind, which cause severe turbulence. Shortly said, commercial traffic does not fly through them, nor close to them.
So who does, and why ? There are two reasons for flying through a hurricane: research, and forecasting. In fact, getting data from the site directly helps forecasters to do a much better job than with sattelite observation only, and for this purpose, crews are flying through each and every hurricane, as I mentionned before.
Now, some speedlinks for those of you how are more interested in this topic:
Geoff Fox report on his "passenger flight" through a hurricane
An excellent video from "science daily" from crews actually flying throug hurricanes
Paper about hurricanes from NOAA
And obvioisly, if any of you has more details to share, any comment is welcome.
To remain simple, a hurricane is a zone of very low pressure, arround which strong winds are setting up. Wind speeds can be far above the maximum values admitted by airlines for their operations. However, the wind is not a big problem compared to the windhsears, or changes of wind, which cause severe turbulence. Shortly said, commercial traffic does not fly through them, nor close to them.
So who does, and why ? There are two reasons for flying through a hurricane: research, and forecasting. In fact, getting data from the site directly helps forecasters to do a much better job than with sattelite observation only, and for this purpose, crews are flying through each and every hurricane, as I mentionned before.
Now, some speedlinks for those of you how are more interested in this topic:
Geoff Fox report on his "passenger flight" through a hurricane
An excellent video from "science daily" from crews actually flying throug hurricanes
Paper about hurricanes from NOAA
And obvioisly, if any of you has more details to share, any comment is welcome.
Sunday 19 August 2007
Greenpeace protesters arround Heathrow - UPDATE
According to the latest BBC report on the Greenpeace protesters around Heathrow, some minor issues occured between some protesters and the police. This apparently occured when the protesters invaded the BAA offices.
Given the kind of charges against some of the arrested ones, I doubt they came because of the climate (BBC report extract):
"Six people have been arrested during the day - two for assault on a police officer, one for carrying Class A drugs, one for criminal damage, one for going equipped to cause criminal damage, and one for failing to give a name and address after anti-social behaviour."
Again, I just hope that this situation will not evolve to something worse, which would be a loss for anyone. Anything possible must be done to avoid any further degradation in this very complex and tense context.
Given the kind of charges against some of the arrested ones, I doubt they came because of the climate (BBC report extract):
"Six people have been arrested during the day - two for assault on a police officer, one for carrying Class A drugs, one for criminal damage, one for going equipped to cause criminal damage, and one for failing to give a name and address after anti-social behaviour."
Again, I just hope that this situation will not evolve to something worse, which would be a loss for anyone. Anything possible must be done to avoid any further degradation in this very complex and tense context.
Friday 17 August 2007
The black-box is orange
Each time an aviation accident occurs, the media talk about the black box. This is always presented as kind of a magic tool to solve all issues with the investigation. As I already mentionned in previous posts about the TAM crash in Sao Paolo and others, life is not so easy, and I'd like to unveil some of the black-box mistery with this post.
First of all, there are two black-boxes, not one. The first one is the "Cockpit Voide Recorder", and its name is quite self explanatory. It just records all voice communication, as well as cockpit noises. It can help to explain the human factor part of an accident.
The second one is the "Flight Data Recorder", or more recently, "Digital Flight Data Recorder", or DFDR. This one records several parameters, including but not limited to:
1) Air parameters (speed, altitude, ...)
2) Aircraft configuration (flaps position, gear position, control column inputs, control surfaces position)
3) Engine parameters (power, pressures, temperatures, ...)
Depending the type of operation and the number of seats of the aircraft, it can be mandatory or not to have CVR, FDR, or both. On modern airliners, there are also technical recorders, called "Quick Access Recorder", or QAR, which are used by maintenance teams to monitor the technical status of the aircraft.
If you want to know more about FDRs, the french incident investigation burea produced a very good report about them, including details of their functionning, regulations, and some pictures.
Oh, and by the way, the black-boxes are orange, so as to be easier to locate for rescue / investigation teams. They are in protected cases, supposed to resist a crash, but it frequently happens that they get damaged. This was particularly true with the magnetic tape ones, where the tape tended to melt, or to be damaged by sea water.
It is also quite frequent to not have the very last seconds of recordings, because of communication failures between the aircraft and the recorder, in case the aircraft is broken up, or if electrical cables are damaged by overloads.
The analysis and transcription of black-box contents can be done only be certified and assermented officers.
To close this post, here is a link to the French air incident investigation bureau website, listing some other equivalent organisations. From here you can find many investigation reports. And please remind that these reports are the only one holding established facts. All the rest is journalist work as its best.
First of all, there are two black-boxes, not one. The first one is the "Cockpit Voide Recorder", and its name is quite self explanatory. It just records all voice communication, as well as cockpit noises. It can help to explain the human factor part of an accident.
The second one is the "Flight Data Recorder", or more recently, "Digital Flight Data Recorder", or DFDR. This one records several parameters, including but not limited to:
1) Air parameters (speed, altitude, ...)
2) Aircraft configuration (flaps position, gear position, control column inputs, control surfaces position)
3) Engine parameters (power, pressures, temperatures, ...)
Depending the type of operation and the number of seats of the aircraft, it can be mandatory or not to have CVR, FDR, or both. On modern airliners, there are also technical recorders, called "Quick Access Recorder", or QAR, which are used by maintenance teams to monitor the technical status of the aircraft.
If you want to know more about FDRs, the french incident investigation burea produced a very good report about them, including details of their functionning, regulations, and some pictures.
Oh, and by the way, the black-boxes are orange, so as to be easier to locate for rescue / investigation teams. They are in protected cases, supposed to resist a crash, but it frequently happens that they get damaged. This was particularly true with the magnetic tape ones, where the tape tended to melt, or to be damaged by sea water.
It is also quite frequent to not have the very last seconds of recordings, because of communication failures between the aircraft and the recorder, in case the aircraft is broken up, or if electrical cables are damaged by overloads.
The analysis and transcription of black-box contents can be done only be certified and assermented officers.
To close this post, here is a link to the French air incident investigation bureau website, listing some other equivalent organisations. From here you can find many investigation reports. And please remind that these reports are the only one holding established facts. All the rest is journalist work as its best.
Tuesday 14 August 2007
Greenpeace protesters arround Heathrow
The media are quite active these days about the so-called "Climate camp" that Greenpeace set-up close to Heathrow. The purpose of this demonstration is to make people aware of the impact of aviation on the environment, as well as to fight against airport extension.
As I'm part of this industry, I guess I'm probably not exactly objective. The BBC made an excellent paper online, interviewing both Greenpeace and the BAA (British Airport Authority). I don't want to enter in the ecological debate here. As I mentionned, I'm not exactly objective, and I don't know the subject well enough to discuss it as seriously as needed.
My only wish regarding this demonstration is that it won't impact the Heathrow operation, especially not for security reasons. Greenpeace made clear that it is not their objective, and I beleive they are sincere.
Nevertheless, each time few hundreds of people do gather, some unlawful interference can occur. If some ultra-activists infiltrate the pacifist demonstration, the whole thing could turn into a riot, which would be bad for both Heathrow, Greenpeace, and the police, which is also persent in force.
I personally saw this kind of changes in a demonstration because of a few people joining it only to create some trouble. It was during the G8 gathering in Evian, close to Geneva. During the whole day, the demonstration in Geneva were quiet and peaceful, but in the evening some black-block activists mixed with the pacifists. The center of the city has been literally destroyed. Not any single shop window was intact after that.
It was hard for the police to identify the activists as they were mixed with pacific demonstrators. The result was a destroyed city, the pacific demonstration and its message were forgotten because of the riots. No winners in this.
So yes, I hope the Heathrow demonstration will remain pacific and safe to the airport operations, and that a healthy dialogue will start between ecologists and the industry.
As I'm part of this industry, I guess I'm probably not exactly objective. The BBC made an excellent paper online, interviewing both Greenpeace and the BAA (British Airport Authority). I don't want to enter in the ecological debate here. As I mentionned, I'm not exactly objective, and I don't know the subject well enough to discuss it as seriously as needed.
My only wish regarding this demonstration is that it won't impact the Heathrow operation, especially not for security reasons. Greenpeace made clear that it is not their objective, and I beleive they are sincere.
Nevertheless, each time few hundreds of people do gather, some unlawful interference can occur. If some ultra-activists infiltrate the pacifist demonstration, the whole thing could turn into a riot, which would be bad for both Heathrow, Greenpeace, and the police, which is also persent in force.
I personally saw this kind of changes in a demonstration because of a few people joining it only to create some trouble. It was during the G8 gathering in Evian, close to Geneva. During the whole day, the demonstration in Geneva were quiet and peaceful, but in the evening some black-block activists mixed with the pacifists. The center of the city has been literally destroyed. Not any single shop window was intact after that.
It was hard for the police to identify the activists as they were mixed with pacific demonstrators. The result was a destroyed city, the pacific demonstration and its message were forgotten because of the riots. No winners in this.
So yes, I hope the Heathrow demonstration will remain pacific and safe to the airport operations, and that a healthy dialogue will start between ecologists and the industry.
Sunday 12 August 2007
Philipe Vignon to leave EasyJet Switzerland by october
The commercial director of EasyJet Switzerland, Philippe Vignon, announced today on the swiss tv show "mise au point" that he will leave EasyJet by october 2007. The interview is in french only, and was about the enviromental impact of airlines, and potential new european taxes. M. Vignon gave clear and smart answers, and in the end, when the journalist asked him if he would still say the same things in ten years, his answer was something like "In principle yes, but I won't work for EasyJet anymore."
Even the journalist was surprised ! Philippe Vignon then explained that he will leave the company by mid-october.
Philippe Vignon has been part of EasyJet Switzerland from its very beginning, approximately ten years ago. He became publicly known, and became quite a reference for swiss-french media about aviation and EasyJet.
He appeared periodically on TV in the news, and even in a pseudo-trial, where he defended the company in a case of problems with mass reservation.
Even the journalist was surprised ! Philippe Vignon then explained that he will leave the company by mid-october.
Philippe Vignon has been part of EasyJet Switzerland from its very beginning, approximately ten years ago. He became publicly known, and became quite a reference for swiss-french media about aviation and EasyJet.
He appeared periodically on TV in the news, and even in a pseudo-trial, where he defended the company in a case of problems with mass reservation.
Saturday 11 August 2007
Security breach in Nice airport - Safety and security illustrated
On a very recent flight out of Nice airport, on the french riviera, I could observe a security breach. I report this story here to illustrate the way security and safety are dealt with in air-transport industry, and that even the stronger system is only as strong as its weakest element.
I don't know anything about how security is handled in Nice, but I've quite an idea how important access control is, particularly regarding access of passengers to planes. The security system is supposed to prevent any unauthorized access to planes or airside areas. As any system, it is made of equipments (doors, locks, badge readers, ...), procedures (who is allowed to open, what to monitor, close behind yourself, ...) and humans (staff, crews, ...).
This is often depicted as a triangle, and each possible risk relates to one of the angles, and is mitigated by one or both of the others. Typically, there are special procedures to cover an equipment failure, humans are monitoring the automatics in the equipment, and so on...
Now that we described the basic approach, let me tell you what I saw today while waiting for boarding. An airline crew was going to its plane via the waiting hall. For an unclear reason, they were not accompanied by any groud staff (procedure ?). Apparently the captain knew how to unlock the gate.
One of the flight attendant opened the second gate as the rest of the crew were going thourgh the first one. The captain probably did not saw that the second gate has been opened, but when the whole crew continued on its way to the airplane, this second gate remained open.
The abnormal thing here is that the flight attendant who opened the second gate did not closed it (human), and no-one crosschecked it (procedure / human). This gate remained open for approximately 45 minutes. There is an equipment question here, as there could be an alarm or a limit to the time a non-staffed gate can be open.
As a matter of fact, this gate was open without being staffed nor monitored for about 45 minutes, until I mentionned it to the boarding agent of my own flight when I did get on.
The question is then "how to make the system better, without preventing any business activity, and at affordable price ?". This is a very important question in the security and safety domains. Not leaving crews getting to their planes unaccompanied ? Not sure the airport can afford the necessary staff... Ring an alarm if a gate is opened without being staffed ? This could lead to tons of wrong alarms, and the equipment cost could be quite high. Insist on security in crews / staff recurent training ? Probably a good solution...
I don't know anything about how security is handled in Nice, but I've quite an idea how important access control is, particularly regarding access of passengers to planes. The security system is supposed to prevent any unauthorized access to planes or airside areas. As any system, it is made of equipments (doors, locks, badge readers, ...), procedures (who is allowed to open, what to monitor, close behind yourself, ...) and humans (staff, crews, ...).
This is often depicted as a triangle, and each possible risk relates to one of the angles, and is mitigated by one or both of the others. Typically, there are special procedures to cover an equipment failure, humans are monitoring the automatics in the equipment, and so on...
Now that we described the basic approach, let me tell you what I saw today while waiting for boarding. An airline crew was going to its plane via the waiting hall. For an unclear reason, they were not accompanied by any groud staff (procedure ?). Apparently the captain knew how to unlock the gate.
One of the flight attendant opened the second gate as the rest of the crew were going thourgh the first one. The captain probably did not saw that the second gate has been opened, but when the whole crew continued on its way to the airplane, this second gate remained open.
The abnormal thing here is that the flight attendant who opened the second gate did not closed it (human), and no-one crosschecked it (procedure / human). This gate remained open for approximately 45 minutes. There is an equipment question here, as there could be an alarm or a limit to the time a non-staffed gate can be open.
As a matter of fact, this gate was open without being staffed nor monitored for about 45 minutes, until I mentionned it to the boarding agent of my own flight when I did get on.
The question is then "how to make the system better, without preventing any business activity, and at affordable price ?". This is a very important question in the security and safety domains. Not leaving crews getting to their planes unaccompanied ? Not sure the airport can afford the necessary staff... Ring an alarm if a gate is opened without being staffed ? This could lead to tons of wrong alarms, and the equipment cost could be quite high. Insist on security in crews / staff recurent training ? Probably a good solution...
Friday 3 August 2007
Cockpit recording from TAM Airbus crashed in Sao Paulo Congonhas
The media have been buzzish over the last days, as a transcript from the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) from the TAM airbus 320 that did crash in Sao-Paulo Congonhas has been made public. Apparently it has been read to a congressional commision in Brasil, which from my point of view does not mean public...
Personally, I deeply regret it, for various reasons. At first, the source of this document is unclear. Is it officially released from the investigation team ? I don't think so, such teams tend to work very privately until the report is finalised.
Is it from "a source close to the investigators", as journalists often say when they get stolen information ? The source is not know yet, but the transcript is already published on several websites, with various comments, interpretations, and even some conclusions !
This is exactly the other bad thing I see in having such things published at this stage. This recording is only one piece of the huge set of information that will contribute to the investigations. One can not draw conclusions only on that.
Secondly, even experts will probably argue for months on the exact meaning and content of the recordings. Getting a proper understanding and conclusions on base of a simple transcript is certainly well beyond the capabilities of amateur bloggers (me included) and journalists.
So please, once again, leave the investigation team doing their job in peace. We will discuss later on, when the official report will become public. Anything in between is only speculations.
Personally, I deeply regret it, for various reasons. At first, the source of this document is unclear. Is it officially released from the investigation team ? I don't think so, such teams tend to work very privately until the report is finalised.
Is it from "a source close to the investigators", as journalists often say when they get stolen information ? The source is not know yet, but the transcript is already published on several websites, with various comments, interpretations, and even some conclusions !
This is exactly the other bad thing I see in having such things published at this stage. This recording is only one piece of the huge set of information that will contribute to the investigations. One can not draw conclusions only on that.
Secondly, even experts will probably argue for months on the exact meaning and content of the recordings. Getting a proper understanding and conclusions on base of a simple transcript is certainly well beyond the capabilities of amateur bloggers (me included) and journalists.
So please, once again, leave the investigation team doing their job in peace. We will discuss later on, when the official report will become public. Anything in between is only speculations.
Thursday 2 August 2007
One important button...
Any modern airliner cockpit is full of buttons, even if the recent tendendy is to simplify them as possible. Each of this button has a special purpose, and some are more important than others, depending of the flight...
There is one however which I find particularly interesting, if not fun. As you know, pets travelling by air are flying in a special compartment, known as the "Animal Bay". This is a special cargo compartment, pressurized, with other particular equipment...
On the British Aerospace AvroLiner, also known as Jumbolino, the heating system of the animal bay is directly controlled from the cockpit, by a push button hidden behind the co-pilot's control colums (look at the inset on this picture).
Hopefully, the checklists are are making its use standard, otherwise airlines would regularly hand puppies back totally frozen, as the outsite air temperature at jet cruise altitude is typically in the -50°C range !
I will certainly later on publish a post on all the gadgets and gizmos found in a cockpit, but this one is so particular that it deserved its own post, don't you think so ?
There is one however which I find particularly interesting, if not fun. As you know, pets travelling by air are flying in a special compartment, known as the "Animal Bay". This is a special cargo compartment, pressurized, with other particular equipment...
On the British Aerospace AvroLiner, also known as Jumbolino, the heating system of the animal bay is directly controlled from the cockpit, by a push button hidden behind the co-pilot's control colums (look at the inset on this picture).
Hopefully, the checklists are are making its use standard, otherwise airlines would regularly hand puppies back totally frozen, as the outsite air temperature at jet cruise altitude is typically in the -50°C range !
I will certainly later on publish a post on all the gadgets and gizmos found in a cockpit, but this one is so particular that it deserved its own post, don't you think so ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
