My girlfriend just took her first flight on Porter airlines. On descent into the island the pilot informed the passengers that they were at xx height and travelling at 765 miles per hour.
My girlfriend didn't catch on at the time but I sure got a kick out of it
Joking aside she very much enjoyed the flight. Rushing at the water on arrival was a little unnerving for her though.
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by the_cr on Mon Aug 29, 2011 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
stef wrote:Maybe plausible that the girlfriend got it wrong.
entirely plausible as she does not quite achieve the level of enthusiasm for aviation that I have. That being said she does catch things like that pretty well, and 765 km/h does make sense.
disclaimer: I solemnly swear no one was reading over my shoulder when writing this statement
.... Have non of you serioulsy picked up on the fact that 765MPH is the approximate speed of sound?? lol I think the pilot was having a high brow laugh.
Damn, that's clipping right along for a turboprop. Best I ever saw was 434kt groundspeed with the G1, on descent through FL240. The boss came up front and said "Sid if we could keep this airplane going eastbound all the time we wouldn't need the Hawker."
Not on a Canadian aircraft in non Eastern Europe airspace. Again airliners crash from using metric units in aircraft calculations including Soviet ones.
---------- ADS -----------
If we can put oil in the engine while we're flying then we have absolutely no problem at all.
Not on a Canadian aircraft in non Eastern Europe airspace. Again airliners crash from using metric units in aircraft calculations including Soviet ones.
It's not like he was calculating every airspeed on approach and converting it thinking he might try and see how fast he should be going in KM/h, it was probably just a pilot converting it to a unit most passengers would know best for speed and a Canadian aircraft seems like Canadian pax and Km/h seems like the right unit to them. How many Canadian pax would have a clue of what unit of measurement a "knot" is? do you suggest the pilot should have given their airspeed in knots to the pax in the interest of safety? give me a break.
It would be unusual for a non government required by parliament type Canadian to use kilometers in casual conversation so why would a pilot do a needless calculation so that the passengers could calculate it back into English?
---------- ADS -----------
If we can put oil in the engine while we're flying then we have absolutely no problem at all.
I was driving in France in 2000 excited to be using miles per hour in the british rental car. I was winding it up to see how fast it would go. I quit at a bit over 135 or something. As I slowed down my wife knew we were going fast and asked how fast. I told her and she didn't understand, I told her in kilometers and she freaked. Pilots use knots and the general public 35 and under uses kilometers.
System Message wrote:It would be unusual for a non government required by parliament type Canadian to use kilometers in casual conversation so why would a pilot do a needless calculation so that the passengers could calculate it back into English?
Porter passenger PA script has speed in KPH. That's why.
System Message wrote:It would be unusual for a non government required by parliament type Canadian to use kilometers in casual conversation so why would a pilot do a needless calculation so that the passengers could calculate it back into English?
My guess is because the average Canadian doesn't know what the f--- a knot is, and you're doing the PA for the passenger. I am willing to bet everything I own that a plane has never crashed because the pilot did a PA and said MPH instead of KPH.