You don’t have to imagine,,, with the current price at for Jet-A at Teterboro between $6.20 and 7.40 per Gallon, if we use a “average” price of 6.75, than that would be an approximately $270,000 JUST for a 40,000 Gallon Top Off

(Written on 09/03/2021)(Permalink)

Wasn't it not already proven that the "Engine Fire" was actually in-fact due to damage of the Hydraulic / Fuel lines to that engine even though both Hydraulic and Fuel lines WERE shut off / and valves closed after the catastrophic "Blade-Off" Event during high power climb out phase,,, and that Fire Suppression WAS actually used, and successful as after the engine was shut down and the Fire Warning Sounds and Notifications/Warnings actually went away? (Similarly but also obviously very different,,, to a situation such as the Front Wheel of your Car / Truck somehow having caught fire, you than putting out that fire with a portable extinguisher or something similar,,, but the Brake / Hydraulic lines have already been melted-damaged so now as your driving to a garage or home, Although the entire wheel is no longer on fire because you put it out,,, you still have highly flammable hydraulic brake fluid leaking and dripping onto VERY hot brake Disk / Rotor as your driving to safety which is g

(Written on 02/26/2021)(Permalink)

Granted that was some impressive aviation skill, airmanship and one VERY odd and intense situation ending in a MOSTLY really great landing and evacuation after such an incident. But I don’t see how it has to do with Engine Out accidents or incidents over water or ETOPS Ratings and how they work as the aircraft your referring to,,, Aloha Flight 243 an Aloha Air N73711 “Queen Liliuokalani” wasn’t even ETOPS certified and Aloha Airlines itself only ever had 2 737-200’s that were ETOPS certified on N817AL and N808AL and those 2 were only certified under/up to 120min-ETOPS Certification but both aircraft N817AL ETOPS certification ended in late 2003, beginning 2004 and N808AL also ended sometime in 2004.....

(Written on 02/25/2021)(Permalink)

I get that 1,380 Gallons out of 60,000 doesn’t seem like a lot, but I’m betting if you were getting on a flight and we’re told that 1,380 Gallons of I don’t know, water or something else that isn’t good was being mixed into the 60,000 Gallon tanks for testing you would probably be A-little bit more worried during that flight than any “normal” one. The whole point is you have to start somewhere if anything is ever going to change for the better, and in a case like this with testing un-proven fuels,,, 2.3% is probably a well thought out Starting/ Base Line mixture that isn’t damaging to the aircraft systems and over the next few months and years, different mixture percentages can be tested raising and lowering different mixture amounts to create a table or “graph” of any aircraft performance/environmental impact data to find a perfect balance which MAY or MAY NOT be around a smaller mixture like the current 2.3% mixture OR it could be a 5x, 10x or higher mixture percentage that manages to

(Written on 01/01/2021)(Permalink)

Would you bet your life on that,,, and get on a Transoceanic Flight with ZERO chance of making any land, with an almost full fuel load... 2.3% of which is knowingly “contaminated” and hasn’t been tested in those circumstances / conditions before ?

(Written on 01/01/2021)(Permalink)

So you don’t think a 2.3% mixture of 60,000+ Gallons would equal a surprisingly large amount? Especially considering it’s a FIRST Test Flight without knowing what the effects are going to be ?

(Written on 01/01/2021)(Permalink)

I understand percentages just fine, maybe I typed it wrong or misspoke but you know what I meant. 2.3% on its own doesn’t sound like a lot,,, but when you consider that it’s 2.3% of 60,000+ Gallons,,, it’d actually quite a lot.

(Written on 01/01/2021)(Permalink)

2.3% IS INDEED an impressive quantity when you 1, consider how many (63,000+ Gallons) each Boeing 747-8 can hold and /or use. 2, its a TRIAL/Testing run so the effects of this vegetable based fuel could effectively be a contaminate to the 747's Engines, sensors, pumps and entire fuel system causing much worse fuel burn rates (making the benefits of a mix JET-A/Renewable fuel useless if its going to just need to burn more fuel per flight) and at worse since it hasn't been done before in any commercial "every day" during different conditions at different altitudes and weather/ temperatures there could be a catastrophic engine failure, multiple engine having to be shut down,, we literally dont know yet what happens what any amount added to JET-A fuel yet and its long term effects. Reduced Power / Performance would obviously also be a massive downfall even if its a slight reduction as each flight would have to leave with Less weight and/or cargo wasting valuable space making less money and

(Written on 01/01/2021)(Permalink)

I don’t hate it. Not because of Political Correctness or any of that but stuff but that phrasing alone Sounds kinda “fancy” and “”proper”. Not bad at all

(Written on 09/30/2020)(Permalink)

I mean they are a Massive company with people specifically working to make decisions like these BUT from the outside looking in,,,, Yeah..... that doesn’t sound like the BEST plan, at all considering some of the issues they have been having at the SC Plant in the past and lately.

(Written on 09/30/2020)(Permalink)