|
PT6A posted:On a somewhat related note, not having any washrooms between the gate and customs for international arrivals is understandable in one sense, but horribly sadistic in another. You'd think so, but I've never been to an airport that didn't have toilets between the gate and customs for international arrivals. Maybe it's a US thing? (you go though US customs in Canada when flying there from here, so that doesn't apply).
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 03:23 |
|
|
You do usually really have to be looking for them though because usually the deplaning area to the customs area is a labyrinth and passport control is usually packed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 01:36
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:You'd think so, but I've never been to an airport that didn't have toilets between the gate and customs for international arrivals. Maybe it's a US thing? (you go though US customs in Canada when flying there from here, so that doesn't apply). Hey, maybe I missed it, it's definitely not a Canada-wide thing because we have them in YYC. Still, three valuable lessons were learned that day: 1) If you're in any doubt, use the plane lav before getting off. 2) Always carry one complete change of clothes in carry-on. 3) gently caress Ft. Lauderdale and its lovely restaurants that cause horrendous food poisoning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Hey, maybe I missed it, it's definitely not a Canada-wide thing because we have them in YYC. Still, three valuable lessons were learned that day: gently caress Florida in general.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Hey, maybe I missed it, it's definitely not a Canada-wide thing because we have them in YYC. Still, three valuable lessons were learned that day: I didn't have to go through customs (I just had to print a little slip of paper on a computer) but when I flew through Toronto the other week, it was a really long corridor without any bathrooms from the gate to the international flights area. The thing about being in the bulkhead on a not so long flight is they start pushing the cart before the seatbelt sign is off, so you have to wait for them to get up to you, then all the way back, then there is a huge line already, or you have a food tray in your lap, etc. On the flight back I used ninja moves to get out from under the food tray so I could go before they collected them and beat the crowds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Huh. Well YUL can gently caress off and die, then. YUL can gently caress off and die for other reasons, how about gates being labeled differently on the inside vs. outside  one time me and the CA ended up (after following signs for the section with the letter of the date we parked at, like fools) ended up separated from it by a nice glass wall, looking through like a poor child in a Charles Dickens book. Oh well, back to the beginning for security and customs, and a better clue next time.edit: Oops, YYZ. I was thinking of YYZ the whole time. I like YUL. You guys can also get some better airport codes while you're at it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
Charles posted:I didn't have to go through customs (I just had to print a little slip of paper on a computer) but when I flew through Toronto the other week, it was a really long corridor without any bathrooms from the gate to the international flights area. The thing about being in the bulkhead on a not so long flight is they start pushing the cart before the seatbelt sign is off, so you have to wait for them to get up to you, then all the way back, then there is a huge line already, or you have a food tray in your lap, etc. On the flight back I used ninja moves to get out from under the food tray so I could go before they collected them and beat the crowds. Terminal 3 or 1? I've only used T3 once in my life, like back when there was still a T2 and T1 was that round thing. I don't remember much about its arrivals area or beyond security.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:gently caress Florida in general. this guy has it i might be ferrying a plane out of florida soon aaaa to be fair it will have a lot of my favorite thing related to florida- leaving
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:I flew them from Mumbai to Delhi and it was not a good experience. I've flown them Europe-India-East Asia several times, and tbh I've flown much worse than them long haul
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 07:27
|
|
|
I had food poisoning on a transatlantic flight once. Vomiting and making GBS threads at the same time in a 777 bathroom is not to be recommended. When we landed at Dulles they offered to wheel me off the plane to passport control and I was feeling so awful I said yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 11:23
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:I had food poisoning on a transatlantic flight once. Vomiting and making GBS threads at the same time in a 777 bathroom is not to be recommended. When flying never take the omlette breakfast option.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 11:49
|
|
|
There’s a reason the captain and first officer aren’t supposed to eat the same meal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 11:55
|
|
|
Flying tip: order a special meal such as vegetarian or say you have an allergy when booking. Your meal will be served first about 30-45mins before everyone else. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
I am so happy that I have never poo poo at Mach >0.8. I hardly piss, even when I'm in the front and drinking hard. The explosive relief between the gate and immigration is how I connect with a new country.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 11:58
|
|
|
Do you think going to the toilet is different at supersonic speed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 12:21
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Do you think going to the toilet is different at supersonic speed? It’s a reference to the thread’s old title, which originated here. For a long time the title was a play on that, “The last time I took a poo poo at mach 0.8, I got locked out” in reference to Germanwings Flight 9525. Platystemon fucked around with this message at 12:28 on Apr 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 12:25
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Do you think going to the toilet is different at supersonic speed? If you face the right way and piss while going >Mach .8 your piss stream breaks the sound barrier and you’ve pulled what’s called a Yeager.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 12:30
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:It’s a reference to the thread’s old title. Yes. Memory is very volatile, isn't it? I wouldn't mind making GBS threads supersonically, just to join the club. And thinking about it, if you exclude extra-atmospheric making GBS threads, i.e. astroshits, and you define making GBS threads as making GBS threads into a poo poo container, not simply making GBS threads your pants or a diaper, that club is probably very small and exclusive. I suppose it contains mostly jaded Concorde-travelers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 12:32
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 13:15
|
|
|
Ola posted:Yes. Memory is very volatile, isn't it? I wouldn't mind making GBS threads supersonically, just to join the club. And thinking about it, if you exclude extra-atmospheric making GBS threads, i.e. astroshits, and you define making GBS threads as making GBS threads into a poo poo container, not simply making GBS threads your pants or a diaper, that club is probably very small and exclusive. I suppose it contains mostly jaded Concorde-travelers. It would kind of have to. Your other candidates for supersonic airplane with a toilet are Tupolev's Concordeski, which loses on number of flights by far, and whatever bombers you can think of that had a crapper installed. There's one in the Tu-160, and we all know about the one they managed to cram into the Su-34 (which I now have learned is apparently under one of the seat covers, so go easy on the negative-g maneuvering in your overgrown Flanker). But again, the number of flight crews that have been able to use the head, while supersonic, is likely to be vanishingly small compared to Concorde deucedroppers. Comparing that number to shits in space might actually be the more interesting question. As an aside, I'm glad I started using duckduckgo, because I don't want to know what google would have thought about me based on the last few searches.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 14:39
|
|
|
Phy posted:Comparing that number to shits in space might actually be the more interesting question. I was just thinking this. I bet the number of people is close due to the Concord, but the number of unique shits is won by astronauts by a landslide.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 15:00
|
|
|
Aargh posted:You couldn't go to the bathroom like a normal well adjusted human being? You're stuck in a tin can with a couple of hundred of other people for what feels like days and you need to poison the air? I bet you also fart in elevators. So 2 things: No, I'm not going to go to the lav to fart Secondly, even if I would, the small plane didn't have one. Guess I could have went to the front of the bus and stuck my rear end in the cockpit, but that would have been even more rude.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
The air is turned over pretty dang quickly anyway though
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 15:12
|
|
|
Big Bird flew. https://twitter.com/thejackbeyer/status/1117053787414224901 https://twitter.com/thejackbeyer/status/1117067150169034752
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Big Bird flew. * guy in the left body looks sheepishly at camera* *other guy in the right body looks accusingly at camera, shouts*
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Terminal 3 or 1? I've only used T3 once in my life, like back when there was still a T2 and T1 was that round thing. I don't remember much about its arrivals area or beyond security. I think it was 3, yeah. Coming from the US, going to Europe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:I had food poisoning on a transatlantic flight once. Vomiting and making GBS threads at the same time in a 777 bathroom is not to be recommended. Good lord Though TBH I'm not sure I'd recommend vomiting and making GBS threads at the same time anywhere
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 19:51
|
|
|
Ola posted:* guy in the left body looks sheepishly at camera* These folks seem to have the correct responses to watching this flight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hku8TH9NKfw
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:I had food poisoning on a transatlantic flight once. Vomiting and making GBS threads at the same time in a 777 bathroom is not to be recommended. How, even? Could you even reach the hand basin? And the suction drain on those isn't that powerful...
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 21:15
|
|
|
meltie posted:How, even? Could you even reach the hand basin? And the suction drain on those isn't that powerful... Barf bag that gets periodically dumped in the toilet. Been there, done that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 23:56
|
|
|
So is the 737 max a fundamentally unsafe design? The probably lovely NYT article and other stuff said the engine placement caused the thing the autopilot was supposed to hide/correct for in the first place? That sort of seems unfixable
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
The OSHA thread in GBS has some drat fine reads and videos. Here's an example, what is Mast Bumping and how to avoid it in the AH-1 and UH-1 by the US Army many decades ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QkOpH2e6tM
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:27
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:So is the 737 max a fundamentally unsafe design? The probably lovely NYT article and other stuff said the engine placement caused the thing the autopilot was supposed to hide/correct for in the first place? That sort of seems unfixable MCAS was always a poor solution, but if it had been designated safety‐critical and engineered appropriately, Boeing would have gotten away with it. Boeing isn’t going to be able to go back and make MCAS appropriately bulletproof. It’s going to require special pilot training.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:MCAS was always a poor solution, but if it had been designated safety‐critical and engineered appropriately, Boeing would have gotten away with it. How big a deal is the change to the basic physical aerodynamics though? Is it something a pilot trained for a normal 737 or equivalent plane could work around/correct for easily as long as they’re aware of it, or is it very different and difficult to fly safely?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
meltie posted:When flying never take the omlette breakfast option. The food poisoning was my fault, from a tuna sandwich from Pret I bought at Heathrow. It started about 15 minutes after takeoff, so I was basically in one of the bathrooms on the plane for the entire flight. Like I said, I really don’t recommend it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:42
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:How big a deal is the change to the basic physical aerodynamics though? Is it something a pilot trained for a normal 737 or equivalent plane could work around/correct for easily as long as they’re aware of it, or is it very different and difficult to fly safely? MCAS is designed to make a 737 MAX fly like previous generation 737s. It just has... extremely bad failure modes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
Would it really be that hard to add more AoA sensors for redundancy?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:Would it really be that hard to add more AoA sensors for redundancy? It would be at this point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:The food poisoning was my fault, from a tuna sandwich from Pret I bought at Heathrow. It started about 15 minutes after takeoff, so I was basically in one of the bathrooms on the plane for the entire flight. Huh, that's uncanny. My partner got food sick on an airplane once too, and though we never were sure, we suspected it was from a smoked salmon breakfast sandwich from Pret at Heathrow. Was it from terminal 3? We were going to Toronto via Halifax and ended up having to spend the night at a hotel in YHZ so she could recover.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 03:23 |
|
|
a patagonian cavy posted:MCAS is designed to make a 737 MAX fly like previous generation 737s. It just has... extremely bad failure modes. But you can’t actually make the plane fly the same as previous planes, because it’s a physically different design/the engines are in a different place. The MAX seems to have a tendency to veer upwards which the older/original 737 did not have, and just having the MCAS autopilot steer the plane’s nose down and hoping nobody notices isn’t the same thing as flying the same as the old design. Can you actually fly the plane safely without the MCAS stuff? Is the veering upwards just sort of a minor annoyance pilots could live with or is it a bigger deal than that? Would the plane pass the normal safety regulations if they weren’t grandfathering it in under the original 737 registration?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 01:24
|
|