Meet Mary Kirby

During college Mary Kirby had aspirations of teaching erotic Victorian literature at Berkeley. Before she had the opportunity to try her luck out in California, however, Mary landed a job as an air transport journalist in Washington DC. She was quickly bitten by the travel bug and began to take a serious interest in all things aviation.

Mary has now been navigating the aviation world for a decade, including a nine-year stint at Air Transport Intelligence and sister Flight International. As a senior editor at Flight, Mary covers North American major and regional carriers and regional aircraft manufacturers in the Americas. She has also developed expertise in the in-flight entertainment (IFE) and Caribbean aviation sectors.

An Irish/American residing on the outskirts of Philadelphia in “Amish Country”, Mary has found a happy outlet in the blogosphere for her newsy posts and slightly cheeky sense of humour.

OFFICE PHONE: 717-626-1456


4 Responses to Meet Mary Kirby

  1. dakota67 February 21, 2008 at 5:30 pm #

    Have been pondering just how the budget short/medium-haul carriers can expedite aircraft that will produce the large wish-list fuel economy improvements they desire/demand.They do not have to wait for prop-fans, unducted fans,geared uncowled/open fans etc. The fuel-efficient aircraft are already on the showroom floor. They are called “Propeller” aircraft and are powered by gas-turbine engines.Even in my earlier piloting years I flew Vickers Viscounts which achieved about one nautical mile per gallon carrying 60 pax. And the Fokker F-27 which did about 1.4 mpg with 44 pax. And these were powered by the first-generation RR Darts.
    But seriously, it is going to be interesting to see just how the advertising troops are going to try to convince the public that the new generation of “Open-Fans” are still “Jets”. After all, if it looks like a propeller, turns like a propeller, vibrates like a propeller and sounds like a propeller…then it probably is a propeller..isn’t it?
    I can see the new airline names now. “Easy-Prop”, “Eco-Prop”, “Budjet-Prop”.
    Just a thort from an old Turboprop driver.
    Cheers from dakota67….hey. How about a Propjet DC-3?

  2. Mary Kirby February 22, 2008 at 12:24 am #

    Interesting post. I showed the EasyJet pic to a non-industry friend the other day and that’s exactly what he said: “Isn’t that a prop?” There is also the issue of biofuels, which could deliver improvement in fuel consumption and emissions even sooner. What’s your take on flying a “Propjet DC-3″ with coconut oil fuel?

  3. claes eriksson June 10, 2008 at 1:51 am #

    I think the future is different for 1 hr flights in a 737/A320 vs 5-9 hrs in a 787/A350.

    The 1hr jumper could really cut fuel burn if it get electrical assisted T-O to M 0.3 and climb to altitude and from there go down to flight idle and glide to the runway on a 40:50-1 lift to drag ratio design continious decent. Alot can be done in Airport runway design to allow a high speed roll-out to a holding zone just in front of the gates.

    For the widebodies it is all about burner pressure and bypass ratio. Hence the wing can host a couple of podded contra-rotating shaft driven fans getting a 100:1 bypass-ratio without having huge landing gears.

  4. Orville Bevans December 31, 2009 at 2:14 pm #

    You made some good points there. I did a search on the topic and found most people will agree with your blog.