Yet another aviation thread.

Quote: terapined

Actually had to put the orthodox Jewish client on a much earlier double connection in coach one way around 900.00 for price and a arrival around noon.

7:15a to 9:00a 1h 45m Fukuoka to Tokyo (FUK) to Narita Intl. (NRT) Japan Airlines 3052 layover 2h 10m stop Tokyo (NRT)
11:10a to 8:00a 11h 50m Tokyo to Chicago Narita Intl. (NRT) to O'Hare Intl. (ORD) Japan Airlines 10


I know that airport as it is 120 km from Sasebo navy base. Sasebo is only 500 miles from the Chinese submarine base Qindao.


The only US airlines to fly into FUK are:
Delta Air Lines Honolulu
United Airlines Guam

I was actually trying to get him in and out of Saga Japan. The few flights that worked were sold out so used next closest airport, FUK

Kyushu prefect is difficult to get in and out of. Frequently, people would end up flying to Tokyo or Osaka and taking a Japan across Japan.

In the prefect, Nagasaki Airport opened over 40 years ago. It was the first of the so called "Island Airports" where much of the island is artificial.. Nagasaki opened only 3 years after the terminal in Narita airport first opened. The government of Japan vowed to build only island airports after the civil riots associated with expropriation of land over Narita (far outside of Tokyo).



As I said in another thread, many people feel that the only real alternative for the USA is to build "floating airports". The coastline of the USA does not easily support "artifical island airports".

The news now is that AA's 737 MAX aircraft, to be delivered later this year (one hopes) won't have seatback screens.

Why not? Well, because, per AA, 90% of their passengers bring in a device with a screen onboard. There will be content one can stream to one's devices. But I got conflicting reports on whether this will be paid or complimentary. One report stated you need to buy the onboard WiFi. another claimed it's complimentary whether you buy WiFi or not (if you do buy WiFi, allegedly you'll be able to stream external content, such as Netflix).

I've mixed feelings about this, even assuming the onboard content is complimentary.

I understand the idea, and it's not terrible. On the plus side it makes the plane cheaper both to acquire and to run. No need to pay for the screens and their installation, and there will be less weight to carry, which either saves fuel or can be budgeted for paid cargo.

On the other hand, I suspect a vast majority of the "devices" are phones, which have tiny screens (even phablets), and a small minority are tablets, which top out at around 10-11 inches. I find my 7" Nexus too small for any serious video watching. I suppose a 10" one would be ok. But as I recall a 13-15" screen was standard in economy.

It doesn't affect me. I typically sleep or listen to an audiobook or podcast while flying.

Quote: Nareed

On the other hand, I suspect a vast majority of the "devices" are phones, which have tiny screens (even phablets), and a small minority are tablets, which top out at around 10-11 inches. I find my 7" Nexus too small for any serious video watching. I suppose a 10" one would be ok. But as I recall a 13-15" screen was standard in economy.

I have found that as phones have display resolution of WVGA or better (mostly last 5 years), they are easier to watch when you are trapped somewhere.

HVGA (Half-size VGA) 320 x 480 (resolution of iPhones prior to #4 released on June 24, 2010)
WVGA (Wide VGA) 480 x 800 (or 848 or 854)
HDTV-standard 720 x 1280

But over the lifespan of the jet, it makes sense not to build in heavy expensive technology that will look archaic in a few years.

Quote: Pacomartin

I have found that as phones have display resolution of WVGA or better (mostly last 5 years), they are easier to watch when you are trapped somewhere.

I tried watching TV on the Nexus, with a 7" screen in landscape mode, and it's too small even when it's right in front of me. I don't even like it to watch movie trailers. The images are too small. That's why I wound up getting a Chromecast.

Quote:

But over the lifespan of the jet, it makes sense not to build in heavy expensive technology that will look archaic in a few years.

Oh, sure. I completely get that.

But in addition to the onboard content, paid or not, I hope AA does install power ports on every seat.

Not a twin-aisle narrow body, but a short wide body to replace current narrow bodies?

It looks really good: http://aviationweek.com/technology/aurora-refines-design-ultraefficient-d8-airliner?NL=AW-05&Issue=AW-05_20170124_AW-05_66&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_4&utm_rid=CPEN1000003016480&utm_campaign=8342&utm_medium=email&elq2=db067fa8ddac4bcfad552858472f5dc9

(free registration is required)

I as looking through some old papers and found two printouts of a ticket for my last flight MEX-LAS with Mexicana. I think that was in 2010, mere months before it folded.

What's really odd is there are meals listed on the ticket. The outbound is marked "breakfast." and the return "dinner." That must also have been the last time I had a meal on a plane. The mere thought of a working galley (not just coffee, ice and cold storage) on an A320 seems sooooo odd these days...

Three interesting items:

1) Delta will be offering complimentary meals on coach on some routes, all of them transcontinental. It may be that service will slowly creep back in, but don't bet on it. This is a move to lull passenger loyalty in highly competitive markets.

2) Volaris will now charge for the first checked bag on flights to the US. I've said they want to become Ryanair/Spirit, and they're doing a good (god-awful) job. See, first checked bag on domestic flights is still complimentary. Mexicans tend to do a lot of shopping in the US, and come back with loaded bags and/or boxes (a popular item is sports equipment). They've also introduced the term "clean fare."

3) the CEO of the unfortunately named Boom company trying to produce a commercial supersonic jet, said in a recent interview with Real Clear Future, he envisions a 200-passenger supersonic liner. That sounds good, until you realize that's on the small size for a wide body, or dense packing of a narrow body. I hope traffic doesn't negate the time gained by Mach 2.2+...