Virgin and British Aiways Boeing 747-400's racing for the finish (yes, I am sure this is photoshopped)
Virgin Atlantic and British Airways have had a cold war going on for years, according to Sir Branson. Now he is taking advantage of British Airways’ admission of financial difficulty by urging the British government not to financially assist the legacy carrier. He states that British Airways is, “not worth much.”
Although Sir Branson might be trying to stir up trouble, British Airways is not in the best financial shape. British Airways’ CEO Willie Walsh has a self-imposed June 30 deadline which he calls, “a fight for survival.”
He recently asked all 40,000 employees to work up to four weeks without pay in an effort to keep the airline afloat.
Sir Branson, who founded the privately held Virgin Atlantic, obviously has much invested if British Airways fails. “We and others are standing by ready to take on their routes and runway slots at Heathrow if they get into serious trouble,” Sir Branson stated re-assuring the government their nation would still have a viable transportation network.
A British Airways spokes person calls Sir Branson’s comments as “fantasy.” The airline stated, “There are no talks with the Government and there will be no talks. We have opposed state aid and our position has not changed.” Both British Airways’s CEO Walsh and finance director Keith Williams have announced they will work for free during the month of July.
Even if British Airways pulls through and Branson is just in fantasy-land, it is never a good sign having an airline (or any company for that matter) asking its employees to work for free. In this economic time, nothing is impossible and it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Source: dailymail Image: SamR
It fits!
Rep Dan Lipinski from Illinois feels it is a good idea for the TSA to have a uniform carry-on size regulation. He wants to limit the maximum size of a carry-on to 22″ x 18″ x 10″. It is not the size that is as disconcerting, as not allowing the airlines to make their own decisions and the total lack of need for this legislation
Each airline flies different aircraft, have different configurations and clientele with different baggage needs. The bill would require the TSA to enforce the rules (presumably during the security check process). Although TSA has made leaps and bounds with speeding up the security process, this could greatly slow it down. People would be having to take stuff out, trying to cram their bags through and of course having to leave the line to check in their bags and come back through.
CrankFlier points out that many low cost airlines have their “minimum size” larger than what Rep Lipinski is asking for, and legacy carriers are already meeting the requirements. The low cost carriers would have to cut what they already offer.
What is the real reason for this? I don’t see a safety issue here, I would like to see someone try to make a valid one. In fact this would decrease safety. The TSA would have to police bag-size instead of doing what they are trained and look for illegal items taken through security.
This seems like a waste of time and legislation that will really hold no benefit. If airlines want to get together to create their own standard carry-on size, that is one thing, but for the government to come in and require standardization seems unnecessary.
UPDATE: FlyWithFish.com has a great chart showing all the airlines and their bag size requirements.
Image: FlyingWithFish
US Airways at Boston
The Airline Blog just covered how LAX is upping their tarmac safety, and just recently an incident at Logan International Airport showed how important safety is. A US Airways Airbus A320 was throttled up for takeoff from Boston to Phoenix when a construction vehicle decided to cross the runway. “It was a serious thing, a matter of seconds,” said spokesman Phil Orlandella.
The driver of the construction vehicle has been placed on leave and all construction work on the runways has been suspended until the FAA has completed a full investigation of the incident.
One cannot underestimate the damage that someone on the ground can cause. From not closing a cargo door properly to driving at the wrong place at the wrong time, inattention on the ground can cost lives.
From: Boston.com via Today in the Sky
Image: cliff1066
- Delta’s Boeing 757 (N653DL) just pulling into gate at Tampa Airport – taken 5 mintues ago by The Airline Blog
Happy Father’s Day to all the fathers out there and a VERY HAPPY FATHER’S DAY TO MY FATHER!
I am in process of flying back home after a great visit with my father who introduced me to flying and aviation many long years ago!
I am taking Delta from TPA to ATL to SEA. Have a B757 on the first leg and B767 on the second leg. Haven’t been on a B767 in a few years, so a little excited — yes I am a flying nerd :).
AIM 120 AMRAAM Model Rocket
In early June a Continental Airlines Commuter jet had a close encounter. While flying out of Houston, they saw a missile-like object flying at about 16,000 feet. At first the six foot long object was heading towards the aircraft, but fortunately veered off. This near miss happened almost exactly one year after a similar occurrence in the same Texas county.
It is now believed to be a model rocket fired from a hobbyist on the ground. Even though there was no immediate danger to the plane, it still could have turned out terrible if the rocket would have hit the plane and obviously caused a distraction of the pilots. Model rockets of this size require a permit to launch in Texas.
Source: KAUZ Image: karl.simpson