Losing Its Luster

Status
Not open for further replies.
Screaming_Emu said:
I can't :yeahthat:the 2nd part because I went to UND and paid half for my education ;)
Click to expand...

Well I went to Delta State and paid a quarter of what he did and half of what you did! I say you both got off bad.:D

Plus my school had better looking women.:)
 
ppragman said:
I do get satisfaction in knowing how my ship will perform, its also useful information to know if I have to put down on a road or on the beach, "will I make it given my previous performance?". And considering I do between 10 and 20 takeoffs and landings on an average summer day I get lot's of data.

Also, there's not that much of a fudgefactor if you don't have accelerate stop and accelerate go data for your airplane.
Click to expand...

How can you have that data for a single? All the power to you Pat. All I'm saying is that doesn't apply to most pilots. I make sure I have a great understand of the systems and performance of my "ship". I also make sure I have a good foundation on where those numbers are derived from. That is one thing I see lacking in those that don't have a solid education background. They know what their Vmc speed or V1 speed but they have no clue on where that number came from. That is a generalization but I think it holds pretty true. Yes there are guys that went mom and pop that know that stuff but most of that they gleamed from self study.

Another thought, people bag on the big flight schools because they don't expose students to elements "outside the box". While this wasn't true in my training because I didn't let it I will concede where the standards set by the insurance companies can be a little restrictive. You don't got to Riddle or UND to fly ag or bush or any of the "other" segments of the industry. Riddle and the other universities train you for the career that most 121 and 135 shops fall into. Highly regulated, train as you fly, fly as you train type places. Beyond that baging or trumpeting these places is little more than dick waiving. Can you get by without going there, sure. Does it have some benefits, sure. This expectation that university flight students have some inept ability to fly planes is as ignorant as those that thing they are gods gift because they went there.
 
ppragman said:
Lol, usually its, "well, the book says I can put it down in 950', however, with the wind and conditions we've got today, combined with the fact that this is an old ass airplane, the best I've been able to do in similar conditions is around 1400." So, plan for 1400'. What's the problem with that?
Click to expand...

You are seriously so full of it
 
wheelsup said:
You are seriously so full of it
Click to expand...

Ummm...I do the same thing. I fly 30 year old planes and most certainly have a fudge factor in place, particularly in terms of accel/stop and accel/go planning. I hate to sound like I'm sitting here fighting ppragman's battles, but he's yet to say anything on this thread I disagree with. :dunno: I come from 121, and have a significant 135 background as well.

Listen, 121 is very cut and dry. At least when I was in 121, we had performance charts for every runway we were authorized to use; it was very comprehensive and covered just about every little possibility, measured down to the pound in terms of MATOW. Plug it all into the FMS, and off we go.

Much of 135 is not nearly that black and white. The performance charts in my current ride take wind into account, and that's it. It says nothing about runway condition, slope, different flap settings, etc. It's a basic guide that works when everything is perfect. However, I spent all winter landing on ice/slush covered runways, sometimes at reduced flap settings because I had ice all over the tail boot. I used my experience to decide which runway I needed, and where I should touch down. Same goes for short runways; 33R in BOS is a great example. It's a 2557' runway that's technically legal up to MLW. However, in my experience, I won't do it at greater than 6500#. Just my experience. It's not written down in any of the books, but hey, I haven't come close to killing anyone yet.

That's the 135 environment. That's what pilots outside of 121 do on a daily basis. It's not always cut and dry. Sometimes you just have to get out there and get the job done, making sure you leave yourself enough outs. Nothing cowboy about it, nothing wrong about it. It's just a different segment of the industry that many in 121 (particularly regionals) haven't seen and don't understand.
 
I'm really surpirsed this many people keep a separate book of performance numbers, I really can't believe it. Guess I have to eat my words. I certainly don't have the time to do that crap and pick the longest available runway when it's even remotely close, screw landing on a 2200' runway never seen anyone even use that ever) when there are like 6 more available. Guess it's good I turned down that Cape Air interview!!
 
wheelsup said:
I'm really surpirsed this many people keep a separate book of performance numbers, I really can't believe it. Guess I have to eat my words. I certainly don't have the time to do that crap and pick the longest available runway when it's even remotely close, screw landing on a 2200' runway never seen anyone even use that ever) when there are like 6 more available. Guess it's good I turned down that Cape Air interview!!
Click to expand...

I certainly don't keep a book. I've got 48 different 402Cs in my logbook...no way I'd keep up with that. I'm just sayin'...I can't look down on someone who does.

As far as landing on that runway, well, you can always decline it. I have. Nobody holds a gun to your head, and it's certainly not unsafe to land on it at lower weights in the dry. If that kind of thing makes you glad you turned down an interview, well, what can I say? 20 years without a passenger fatality. We do something right. :dunno:
 
You're using a fudge factor, he keeps a book, I guess you lost me when you said "I do the same thing".
 
wheelsup said:
You're using a fudge factor, he keeps a book, I guess you lost me when you said "I do the same thing".
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess that was a bad choice of words. I meant that I do the same basic thing; he says he's comfortable with 1400' when the book says 900', yeah, I do that same thing without writing it down. In fact, I think we all do that (even you said you'd take the longer runway instead of landing on the 2557' runway in BOS ;)).
 
Anyway...I don't want to hijack this thread anymore. I just want to say that man, if I could go back and teach multi-instrument again, I'd do things a lot differently. :)
 
wheelsup said:
You are seriously so full of it
Click to expand...

In most cases, I agree. The way ppragman often comes across is as a bit overly proud that he flies in Alaska and pushes the limits. 99% of his posts are talking about how "well, its different in Alaska."

That being said, what he described above sounds a lot like personal minimums, which there's certainly nothing wrong with. There's nothing wrong with saying "well, the numbers say it can do this, but with my abilities in this old airplane, a more realistic number is ______".
 
Or the other way around. The book says I need 800 feet to land but if I slip it in and skim he water beforehand, that 200 foot sand bar is plenny big enough.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
In most cases, I agree. The way ppragman often comes across is as a bit overly proud that he flies in Alaska and pushes the limits. 99% of his posts are talking about how "well, its different in Alaska."

That being said, what he described above sounds a lot like personal minimums, which there's certainly nothing wrong with. There's nothing wrong with saying "well, the numbers say it can do this, but with my abilities in this old airplane, a more realistic number is ______".
Click to expand...

Proud to fly in Alaska and push the limits? Lol, you are assuming that I push the limits. I certainly like flying up here. I think that more people should experience the scenic beauty and challenge that this place provides. However, as for "being proud to fly here?" Not really. Alaska is all of my flying and most of my life. I don't really know too much else.

To digress. You want to know why this career is losing its luster? Because no one wants to deal with the BS and problems that goes into flying anymore. Flying isn't special anymore. There's no prestige associated with it, or the level of presitge lessening. In airline flying there's no perceived danger level or specific level of skill involved (how many times have you heard someone say, "those things fly themselves." It seems like flying down south is losing its position as a white collar job.

It is different than the airlines up here. To an extent, everything is different. Ask someone who flies down there who flew up here. When was the last time you ever heard of ten little airplanes holding VFR in a published VFR hold waiting for specials just outside the surface area? When was the last time you heard of guys driving out to a 3000' gravel strip in a mile of vis the whole way there and the whole way back? IFR just doesn't happen the same way or with the same frequency as down south. This stuff isn't cowboy stuff, nor is it made up on the fly. This stuff has been proceduralized over years, and has been coordinated into groundschools across the state. There are standards and practices here too, they're just not like what you do in the airlines. That doesn't mean they're crazy.

Think I'm full of it all you want, but at the end of the day I still think that in 135 in general we're treated with more respect than our regional counterparts by both our passengers and our employers.
 
OldTownPilot said:
Or the other way around. The book says I need 800 feet to land but if I slip it in and skim he water beforehand, that 200 foot sand bar is plenny big enough.
Click to expand...

That's done quite a bit. I haven't had the pleasure of getting out to the gravel bars in a few years, but yeah, if you're light, your performance can be pretty good. I never went into those places with a cub, just cessnas and really long gravel bars, and never did any waterskiing, but I had a blast.
 
Dude we don't care this is the 121 forum. Go the 135 and beat your chest.

[modhat]Moderator comment: hey man, cool out...you have taken a few shots now, and he's not responding to your digs...and, according to the guys I fly with, things ARE different in AK. Honestly, the only chest beating I see is you trying to get something going. [/modhat]
 
Cool down a bit here.

If guys want to fly crew stuff to 8000' runways in the RJ, with an autopilot, spikey hair, a crash pad and food stamps. So be it.

If guys want to fly single pilot, stick and rudder, living in BFE, in a piston single or twin, scruffy dressed, and have most of the pay go to a high cost of living in the AK region. So be it too.

Lighten the hell up, people.
 
wheelsup said:
Dude we don't care this is the 121 forum. Go the 135 and beat your chest.
Click to expand...

:yup: Sounds like a cop out thing to say. Guy holds his own after criticism and speculation over his "cowboy procedures". RESPECT.
[modhat]Moderator comment: how does this contribute to the thread? Other than to egg on the argument?? Right?[/modhat]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top