Jump to content

That's plane scary!  I'd rather not fly with this Thai airline, says poster


webfact

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Moonlover said:

And just where did you acquire that gem of complete nonsense from?

 

Why don't you ask Captain Chesley Sullenberger whether a jet airliner can glide.

Dear me, so I'm wrong. Do you have the tar and feathers handy?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, KC 71 said:

3962C586-54F7-4504-BE1E-574C845FAE5C.jpeg

Loved that film, Gert Frobe was a classic doing it by the instruction manual. Remember Otto the inflatable pilot in "Flying High"?

 

Edited by Lacessit
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Dear me, so I'm wrong. Do you have the tar and feathers handy?

Don't worry, we're not that cruel! Probably the most notable examples of an airliner gliding was an Air Canada flight back '83.

 

Google 'Gimli glider' for an interesting read.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Moonlover said:

Don't worry, we're not that cruel! Probably the most notable examples of an airliner gliding was an Air Canada flight back '83.

 

Google 'Gimli glider' for an interesting read.

The slowest aircraft I've ever been in was a DeHavilland Beaver, used to fly the 100 odd km between Port Hedland and Goldsworthy. 80 km/hr in a headwind. One leadfoot had a race with it in a ground car, and won.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Loved that film, Gert Frobe was a classic doing it by the instruction manual. Remember Otto the inflatable pilot in "Flying High"?

 

Some classic footage ,and giggles to boot.

they certainly don't make ‘em like they used to eh ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Loved that film, Gert Frobe was a classic doing it by the instruction manual. Remember Otto the inflatable pilot in "Flying High"?

 

Some great footage and giggles to boot

they certainly don't make em like they used to eh ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, webfact said:

The poster - who said this was Nok Air - said that the flight used an aircraft with a propellor, something that the passengers were allegedly not told about before. 

Are airline passengers ever told, specifically, about the means of propulsion of the plane? 

 

I'd have been a lot more concerned if that aircraft didn't have a propellor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, phutoie2 said:

A plane is something a carpenter uses. If you are going to critique know it alls. Please use correct terminology. 

A plane is also something with wings and an engine(s) that flies.  A carpenter could use his plane in a plane. 

 

To quote you, "if you are going to critique know it alls. Please use correct terminology" [sic]. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pilotman said:

No pilot I know would ever refer to their aircraft as a 'plane'.   

What does it matter when no one said that they would? 

 

This is a discussion between civilians, where colloquial terms are the norm, not pilots...or very ex-pilots.

Edited by The Word
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pilotman said:

Rights of way for different aircraft

There are four main types of aircraft; balloons, gliders, airships and powered aircraft. Each type of aeroplane has to give way to another depending on its method of thrust.

balloons, gliders, airships and powered aircraft flight rules

Conventionally powered aircraft have to give way to everything. Airships have to give way to balloons and gliders, gliders have to give way to balloons. Finally, balloons have very little means of manoeuvrability and therefore have right of way over all 3 other types of aircraft.

 

Ok, ok...    We all know that you used to be a pilot.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The Word said:

What does it matter when no one said that they would? 

 

This is a discussion between civilians, where colloquial terms are the norm, not pilots...or very ex-pilots.

someone got out of the wrong side of the bed today. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, webfact said:

The poster - who said this was Nok Air - said that the flight used an aircraft with a propellor, something that the passengers were allegedly not told about before.

Flights from Saigon to Phnom Penh had a few of these.  A lot of fun.  You actually felt like you were flying.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50% of cabin air is normally recirculated and may or may not be filtered through a HEPA filter as there is no requirement for this on some aircraft.  Also as efficient as these filter are unless the are inspected and changed regularly they are not effective.  Social distance means nothing in this context.  If one person is infected chances are that everyone on the aircraft could be infected no matter where they sit.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, The Word said:

This is a discussion between civilians, where colloquial terms are the norm, not pilots...or very ex-pilots.

Less than a month here, your going to be a real fun poster aren't you, hope you manage to prove whatever it is your out to prove quickly ???? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Grumpy John said:

Would lose her <deleted> altogether if she had flown on the Melbourne to Griffith NSW flight I used to take in a WW2 era de Havilland Heron.  Dam plane had wings made out of rubber!   Flying through turbulence I  would swear black and blue the deflection was 12" in either direction.

There is a Heron for sale parked on Jersey airport in the Channel Islands. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever the current circumstances, there is nothing wrong with Nok Air's propeller planes. I used to fly from Udon Thani to Chiang Mai in such planes, and having a maximum altitude of 25,000 feet, or less, (engines need oxygen/air), on a clear day one could see magnificent views of the mountains, lakes and forests below from a window seat. Nok Air's propeller planes, ATR-72 500 and Q400 NextGen:-

 

ATR72-500.jpg

 

Q400-New.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, unamazedloso said:

Nothing wrong with propellars. Old tech but more refined since invented and still used on new planes today. Sounds like a big mouth, know all, know nothing type person. FB is full of them.

I agree, nothing wrong with turbo-prop aircraft and I've been in a few of the older ones years ago. But I flew to BKK in a Nok Air TP a while back and I could still feel vibrations as I was disembarking. The sound was deafening too and thought thing was going to disintegrate at any moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, yellowboat said:

Flights from Saigon to Phnom Penh had a few of these.  A lot of fun.  You actually felt like you were flying.  

Yes indeed. Used by Laos Airlines between Luang Prabang and Chiang Mai, also other domestic airlines within Burma (Myanmar) and Cambodia - great fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...