What passengers want? I don't Re Graham Lake's letter (Flight International, 7-13 September) "Mobiles: what passengers want." I am sure that many passengers would like to use their mobile telephones while flying; however, I am sceptical about the "independent" market research used to strengthen the case for their use. Research is often used to justify desire! The implication that passengers would choose to fly with a "mobile friendly" airline is certainly interesting. Someone might also like to ask how many passengers would prefer an airline that banned the use of mobiles. Research could indicate that an airline that catered for mobiles and smokers would be very popular, but I bet it would lose money! Arinc's "silent" approach is commendable, but for the sanity of "ordinary" passengers like myself, an "in-seat" voice chat must not be allowed. The thought of sitting beside someone giving an inane running commentary to a friend or family member about where they are, how late they are likely to be and "better delay dinner", is too stressful to even contemplate; I suggest this could cause a significant increase in air rage. At least when they do it on the train they are frequently cut off by tunnels! Martyn Redmore Cambridgeshire, UK
C-295: for the record... Your cover story about Alenia'sC-27J (Flight International, 24-30 August) makes incorrect references to EADS's C-295 military transport aircraft technical and operational data. For the benefit of your readers let us provide you with precise data about the C-295. The C-295 is cleared to airdrop up to 8,000kg in a single run (in three linked containers). The C-295 airdrop clearances include CDS (container deliver system), GEP (gravity ejected platform), HE (heavy equipment airdropping with parachute extraction) and LAPES, for a variety of single or multiple sequential loads combinations. These procedures are documented and approved, and are in operational use with the Spanish and other air forces. At this time the C-295 is cleared to drop up to 48 paratroopers, seated in twin-row arrangement. The C-27J uses a triple-row arrangement to carry 46 paratroopers. The C-295 is cleared to carry up to 71 troops in a triple-row arrangement. It should be noted that theC-295 has already completed extensive tests for airdrop of paratroopers and cargo; this is not the case for the C-27J at this time. The C-295 is a military transport aircraft derived from the CN-235, which was designed from the outset as a tactical transport aircraft, as evidenced by such design features as the rear loading ramp and the tandem twin-wheel undercarriage for operation from rough surfaces. Both the CN-235 and C-295 are equipped with military-standard avionics, including optional defensive aids equipment such as radar warning receiver and chaff and flare dispensers. The C-295's cabin is divided in five loading zones (in addition to the ramp, which can carry up to 1,000kg [2,200lb]) with load-carrying capabilities varying from 1,000 kg/m to 1,300kg/m; these limits apply to complete compartments (ie each compartment can be loaded to the rated limit along its entire length). These values are not comparable to the C-27's 5000kg/m, which is a more localised floor strength limit. The C-295 can carry 7,000kg of payload at 2950km at its approved MTOW. All C-295 customers routinely operate the aircraft at MTOW (the C-295 airframe and landing gear are designed for routine operations at MTOW). These and other figures together with its excellent characteristics have made the C-295 a real winner in its class. Air forces from Poland, Jordan and Spain have purchased it. The C-295 has also been selected in open competition after detailed evaluation by Brazil, Switzerland, and UAE. Miguel Sánchez Vice President Communications, Military Transport Aircraft Division, EADS, Madrid, Spain
Fixation error Recent letters and articles on false stall warnings and instrument scanning during take off reminded me of a crash 40 years ago. In what became known as the "Ankara Comet" the crew allegedly were fixated by the readout from the director horizon (DH) to the exclusion of other information. The subsequent investigation revealed that a screw within the DH had become loose and jammed the needle. History still has much to teach us. Anthony G Phillips Wiltshire, UK
Ryanair crew and safety I was shocked to read (Flight International, 10-16 August) that the Ryanair "cabin crew found some exits difficult to open because they were 'armed' to deploy escape slides, which they found unfamiliar". This is the primary duty of a flight crew! Cabin crews are there first and foremost for passenger safety. The fact that the Ryanair crew was unfamiliar with how to deploy escape slides and allowed passengers to exit on the wing with the smoldering engine raises serious safety concerns regarding Ryanair and the training Ryanair provides its cabin crew. Francis S Rath Great Falls, Virginia,USA
Source: Flight International
