If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
nobody
sednews:1109566934.ef54f62587eb8f3822533ae8ed54830 7@teranews: James Robinson wrote: For the first six hours they were flying over land with suitable runways dotted every few miles. Once beyond Newfoundland, they were never more than 60 minutes from a suitable landing place. Great circle from LAX to LHR is actually far to the north of that. Goes over roughly Winnipeg and then over Hudson Bay, Hudson Straight between Québec and Baffin Island (choice of Iqaluit or Kuujuak airports), then north to southern tip of Greenland and on to Iraland (passing not that far from Iceland). In practice, wind patterns and more importantly trafdfic across the atrlantic would dictate varous lanes which may not represent the great circle perfectly. And there are times where wind patterns would have the flight stay south over the USA to the atlantic and head north over the busy trans atlantic routes from there. We don't know what route that particular plane took, and whether it deviated from its originally planned route due to the engine failure. Failure to rise to full altitude may have required differnt route than originall planned. On the other hand, wouldn't 29k feet be a very seldom used altitude and thus given the plane more freedom on what route to take ? All true. Someone that actually knows what he's talking about! Am I still in usenet? Bertie Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
BA flies 747 on 3 engines LAX-UK - New EU comp rules
James Robinson wrote:
For the first six hours they were flying over land with suitable runways dotted every few miles. Once beyond Newfoundland, they were never more than 60 minutes from a suitable landing place. Great circle from LAX to LHR is actually far to the north of that. Goes over roughly Winnipeg and then over Hudson Bay, Hudson Straight between Québec and Baffin Island (choice of Iqaluit or Kuujuak airports), then north to southern tip of Greenland and on to Iraland (passing not that far from Iceland). In practice, wind patterns and more importantly trafdfic across the atrlantic would dictate varous lanes which may not represent the great circle perfectly. And there are times where wind patterns would have the flight stay south over the USA to the atlantic and head north over the busy trans atlantic routes from there. We don't know what route that particular plane took, and whether it deviated from its originally planned route due to the engine failure. Failure to rise to full altitude may have required differnt route than originall planned. On the other hand, wouldn't 29k feet be a very seldom used altitude and thus given the plane more freedom on what route to take ? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
BA flies 747 on 3 engines LAX-UK - New EU comp rules | nobody | Air travel | 28 | March 1st, 2005 01:28 AM |
BA flies 747 on 3 engines LAX-UK - New EU comp rules | nobody | Europe | 17 | March 1st, 2005 01:28 AM |
BA flies 747 on 3 engines LAX-UK - New EU comp rules | Bertie the Bunyip | Air travel | 26 | February 28th, 2005 05:52 PM |
BA flies 747 on 3 engines LAX-UK - New EU comp rules | Capt 'Wild' Bill Kelso, USAAC | Europe | 14 | February 28th, 2005 05:52 PM |
BA flies 747 on 3 engines LAX-UK - New EU comp rules | nobody | Europe | 5 | February 27th, 2005 09:54 PM |