Looking for Hawaiian A321 Pay Rates

[dicko]

That mean you're sticking up for dicko's post Ty. Thought we were boys? C'mon man

Hey dicko, had any Jacksonville layovers lately?? So much better than sdf!

I'll take your silence as you knowing I've been to Brisbane, and you unable to figure out how to respond. That's usually how our interactions go, so...nothing new

(How was that for "insular"?)

"Hick" was funny though for a Vegas transplant from California

No, I've been busy destroying your city.

Not a fan of JAX; the meth is expensive and the locals fill me with a sense of undefinable dread. I do like Louisville, and the bar at the Brown. I was based there for a year or two (the city, not the bar).

So, you've been to Brisbane once, four years ago. Pick on Adelaide next time. You'll appear more credible.

 

[waveflyer]

Hey, I like Adelaide!
But that probably had more to do with sara than anything!

Do your best with Vegas man!

 

[HighSpeedClimb]

Doh

Hawaiian Airlines Jet Allegedly Flew 5,000 Times Without a Single Proper Inspection
Associated Press
Apr 15, 2014 4:00 am

Only one part of the jet’s engine was overlooked, but the allegations bring up the scary question of which other jets are also flying without a complete inspection.
— Samantha Shankman
The Federal Aviation Administration says Hawaiian Airlines went eight years without properly inspecting certain components of one of its planes used for commercial flights.

The FAA said Monday it is suggesting a fine of nearly $548,000 for the Honolulu-based airline. Airline and FAA officials say the company asked for an informal meeting to discuss the matter.


The agency says Hawaiian didn’t comply with a 2000 directive that established inspections of specific engine thrust reverser components. FAA officials say Hawaiian operated a Boeing 767-300 on more than 5,000 flights without complying with the directive.

The agency says a 2012 inspection found Hawaiian records wrongly said the directive didn’t apply to the aircraft.


An airline spokeswoman declined comment on the allegations but says Hawaiian’s first priority is safety

 

[waveflyer]

You know, first American, then SWA, others too if I remember, now this. If the past is any indication, it's been perfectly safe and inspected, just didn't dot the i's

Got to love today's reporting - the only airline that's never had a fatality or hull loss and it's all so "scary"

 

[Dan Roman]

Well said Wave, isn't amazing how the media goes for making a story rather then reality. I guess it's always been that way, but it sure seems that cable news has really boosted sensationalism being more important than truth. I guess with the amount of advertising dollars on the table, creating a story trumps everything else.

 

[HighSpeedClimb]

You know, first American, then SWA, others too if I remember, now this. If the past is any indication, it's been perfectly safe and inspected, just didn't dot the i's

Got to love today's reporting - the only airline that's never had a fatality or hull loss and it's all so "scary"

Have you all forgotten Hawaiian DC10 going into Tahiti

On 24th December 2000, a Hawaiian Airlines DC10 overran the runway at Tahiti after landing long on a wet runway having encountered crosswinds and turbulence on approach in thunderstorms.
Synopsis

This is an extract of the synopsis from the official report into the incident published by the French BEA.
"While landing on runway 04, in a storm, the airplane touched down about halfway down the runway. It overran the end of the runway and came to a stop resting on its engines, its nose in the lagoon."
The Report's conclusions include:
"During the final approach, the airplane entered an area of rain and turbulence associated with the presence of a storm.
The runway was wet, the wind was blowing from the left at the threshold of runway 04 and was between 18 and 28 kts.
Due to the difficulties in controlling the airplane, thrust reduction was late.
The touchdown of the main landing gear wheels occurred about one thousand three hundred meters [4000 feet] after the displaced threshold of runway 04.
Landing with a crosswind on the wet runway with a low vertical speed made it impossible for the spoilers to be deployed automatically.
The flight engineer extended the spoilers manually eight seconds after touchdown of the main landing gear wheels.
The airplane touched down to the right of the runway centerline, then its track veered to the left before coming back towards the center.
The airplane left the runway along the extended centerline then came to a stop with its nose in the lagoon.
The Report states the cause of the accident to have been:
"The accident was caused by the failure, during the preparation for the approach, to take into account the risk of a storm passing over the airfield at the time of landing."

Outcome
Damage or injury Yes
Aircraft damage Major
Non-aircraft damage Yes
Injuries None
Fatalities None

Maybe no fatalities but the aircraft hull was lost.

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/woIxI7SHBgM/maxresdefault.jpg

 

[waveflyer]

I do remember

But it's kind of like a shark attack-
If there are no fatalities, you can say, 'there we were, on our honeymoon into Tahiti ...'


I'm not sure that hull was lost
Dan? Others?

 

[Jim]

Maybe no fatalities but the aircraft hull was lost.

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/woIxI7SHBgM/maxresdefault.jpg

The aircraft was not a hull loss. It was parked in the desert in 2002 by Hawaiian and bought by FedEx in 2005 where it was reregistered as N568FE.

 

[fr8doggie]

The aircraft was not a hull loss. It was parked in the desert in 2002 by Hawaiian and bought by FedEx in 2005 where it was reregistered as N568FE.

568 is currently in storage. Probably permanently.

 

[FLYN4LVE]

The aircraft was not a hull loss. It was parked in the desert in 2002 by Hawaiian and bought by FedEx in 2005 where it was reregistered as N568FE.

Ouch! Looks like someone needs to remove their foot from their mouth! Haters