NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
Yet yall still miss the crossing restriction over DYLIN on the PHLBO
Singapore Severe Turbulence
- Thread starter tcco94
- Start date
Yet yall still miss the crossing restriction over DYLIN on the PHLBO
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
100%. Northwest guys as a group used to love to do that on flights to and from the West Coast (with no PA about bumps ahead or anything, just 3.5-4 hours of the signs on) and just as you said, all it does is get passengers to ignore the sign and FAs to stop enforcing it. It's been a while since I've seen that on a smooth flight tho, but I have as a whole noticed FAs (generally) caring less and less if pax hop up in smooth air or light chop when the sign has been on a while. I try to respect the signs myself and always stay loosely fastened but sometimes when you've been holding it across a few states with no turb you just gotta go.
CFI A&P
Exploring the world one toilet at a time.
Luckily I’ve never botched DANDY or WENTZ.
Hiboglossi
The Most Depressing Person
I remember flying with a captain at C5 who had that mentality, and actually said it was because he was worried about being held liable if someone were to be injured after getting up while the fasten seatbelt sign was off.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
And yet again, another thread you injected your own political inclination. At least the other topic was in the Lav.
inigo88
Composite-lover
Wrong. Not politics. Empirical, measurable science.
Extreme Weather - NASA Science
As Earth’s climate changes, it is impacting extreme weather across the planet. Record-breaking heat waves on land and in the ocean, drenching rains, severe
science.nasa.gov
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
Dude, that’s almost literally all you do here.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Wrong. Not politics. Empirical, measurable science.
Extreme Weather - NASA Science
As Earth’s climate changes, it is impacting extreme weather across the planet. Record-breaking heat waves on land and in the ocean, drenching rains, severe
You cannot prove global warming caused this particular incident. Fact.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
No. Not in general topics.
Face it, had I done the initial instigation post about something right-related, you would have made a nasty post about it.
inigo88
Composite-lover
And you can’t prove that it didn’t. But it’s not political to express a general concern about extreme weather becoming more common. Considering you go to work in the upper atmosphere you’re going to have to deal with it the rest of your career, whether you “believe” it or not.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
“Prove that it didn’t”
Is not a scientific statement. We learned that from the Challenger. This happened in/near the ITCZ, a well known area of thunderstorms. And from a glance of the flight path, it seems to be very near/in a storm.
So your side can literally claim from now on, EVERY lightning strike, thunderstorm penetration, hail damage, and turbulence injuries on “global warming.”
How about I say:
Liberals and global warming - blaming literally everything under the sun.
See how that would be annoying?
///AMG
Well-Known Member
Somehow reminds me of a leg not too long ago. It was forecast to be a little bit bumpy across the front range and then again in the upper midwest. Didn't really end up being much of anything, but there was a good chance it would get bumpy again on arrival in the NE. Anyway, we had 2 FAs who were the type who you could tell were just really afraid of bumps. They kept calling, asking about it and the ride ahead. At one point, they tried to get the CA to decide if they could do their service. He said, and I agreed with him, that the reports were pretty good ahead, and that they had an hour or so before we thought it would get bumpy again, so up to them, but no reason not to. You could tell after a while, and several more calls, that what they really wanted was for him to say they couldn't, and to probably make a PA about it to the cabin. I don't know if it was fear of turbulence, or just not wanting to work. Doesn't really make a difference. Eventually it was just like "are they seriously calling again to ask us if they should shut down cabin service in smooth air"?
///AMG
Well-Known Member
haha laughs in JFK......."you can just keep that heading of 030 until the North Pole if you can't get from 16k to 3k in less than 2 minutes......we said any speed at or above 250 that you want, so thats on you"
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
I never understood pilots at JFK after LENDY and getting vectored, would take their sweet time doing VS -1000 fpm. As they are told to descend from 16-19k down to 3-8k.
"I'm flying away from the airport!"
Ugh. It's an airspace issue. The quicker you get down, the sooner they'll get you turned and sequenced.
It's like at LAX landing east. They like to drop you down to 2,000 ft while 15-20+ miles from the airport. Once turning on final, they have to have the required vertical separation from other parallel traffic. I had a FO do -600 fpm while getting vectors to final for the south complex. I told him, politely, that you might wanna expedite down, they need the separation from the parallel guy on the ILS for the north complex. He doesn't change the flight path. Then we get told, turn right away from the 07R localizer and expedite down, that he needs the vertical spacing. FO acts surprised and thinks it's ridiculous. In the debrief I mentioned that it is what I was trying to tell him, you can't really be going for efficiency with slow descends in the terminal area, they needed us down. He said he doesn't like being down at 2,000 ft away from gliding distance to shore. I get that - but there isn't much we can do for that kind of approach. If you lose both engines, we're taking a swim. But going -600 fpm from 5k to 2k isn't really helping anything. By the time you turn back towards shore, you wouldn't have made the glide anyway.
///AMG
Well-Known Member
uhhhhh "within gliding distance"? Haha we have some real nuts out there. Did you ask him to define the altitude/range glide ratio of a zero engine 737? I don't think that number exists other than it probably is vaguely achieved while drifting down to UP bug (assuming you gave up on trying to restart them)? I might be wrong about that last part
inigo88
Composite-lover
CCGWDS - Cherokee Cruiser Global Warming Derangement Syndrome. I shared a link from NASA, you don’t want to read it, I don’t care to read what you have to say either. Carry on.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
CCGWDS - Cherokee Cruiser Global Warming Derangement Syndrome. I shared a link from NASA, you don’t want to read it, I don’t care to read what you have to say either. Carry on.
I read it. It's basically says increased temps are leading to more increased/violent storms.
AGAIN, you cannot prove that is why this incident happened. This incident could have happened 40 yrs ago in the ITCZ and the result would have been the same if you flew through a storm. In fact, we had a fatal A330 crash as a result of storms around the ITCZ that iced over pitot probes which confused 2 button pushers on how to react.
Weird how in 2009, no one blamed global warming for their predicament and the resulting crash.
Sorry dude - the planet is going to continue to get warmer. And no matter how green you go, there are 3 billion+ people in India, Africa, and 3rd world Asian countries that are going to continue to pollute the skies with the nastiest gases, diesel, fossil fuels, all the nasties - and continue warming the planet. The planet will get warmer - you may be able to ever so slowly reduce that progression towards warmth, but it's gonna happen. The number of 2nd and 3rd would countries and their poor infrastructure, poor people, poor economy, far outweigh the number of first world countries like the United States that are trying to do "something" about warming.
There is one quick solution. It's well known that human beings are the most invasive and destructive species on this planet, for this planet. The natural selection of any such problem is a natural re-balance, almost always in the form of a culling. I distinctly seem to recall the planet unleashing a virus (a self defense mechanism) in order to cull the human herd. But we said no, we have to save lives. Earth gave you a natural solution, you just didn't like it. So here we are. As long as humans exist and continue to multiply, the planet will get warmer. And no amounts of Tesla driving or clean living in the United States is going to change that outcome for the other 3 billion+ people in India, Africa, and Asia. Having a 1/3 of the human population wiped would undoubtedly put a serious dent in global warming. Would you like to volunteer?
inigo88
Composite-lover
I’m invited to go kill myself? Smiley face? No, no thank you…I read it. It's basically says increased temps are leading to more increased/violent storms.
AGAIN, you cannot prove that is why this incident happened. This incident could have happened 40 yrs ago in the ITCZ and the result would have been the same if you flew through a storm. In fact, we had a fatal A330 crash as a result of storms around the ITCZ that iced over pitot probes which confused 2 button pushers on how to react.
Weird how in 2009, no one blamed global warming for their predicament and the resulting crash.
Sorry dude - the planet is going to continue to get warmer. And no matter how green you go, there are 3 billion+ people in India, Africa, and 3rd world Asian countries that are going to continue to pollute the skies with the nastiest gases, diesel, fossil fuels, all the nasties - and continue warming the planet. The planet will get warmer - you may be able to ever so slowly reduce that progression towards warmth, but it's gonna happen. The number of 2nd and 3rd would countries and their poor infrastructure, poor people, poor economy, far outweigh the number of first world countries like the United States that are trying to do "something" about warming.
There is one quick solution. It's well known that human beings are the most invasive and destructive species on this planet, for this planet. The natural selection of any such problem is a natural re-balance, almost always in the form of a culling. I distinctly seem to recall the planet unleashing a virus (a self defense mechanism) in order to cull the human herd. But we said no, we have to save lives. Earth gave you a natural solution, you just didn't like it. So here we are. As long as humans exist and continue to multiply, the planet will get warmer. And no amounts of Tesla driving or clean living in the United States is going to change that outcome for the other 3 billion+ people in India, Africa, and Asia. Having a 1/3 of the human population wiped would undoubtedly put a serious dent in global warming. Would you like to volunteer?
I would invite you to go back and read @Roger Roger ’s post, and then read my first post, and find where either of us said with 100% certainty that A caused B. He said:
You attacked him for making the thread political. That’s BS. He’s right and NASA agrees with him that convective activity is becoming larger and more frequent. @Screaming_Emu and @jtrain609 started the thread off with their actual personal observations of storms trending larger. In 2024 this shouldn’t be a political issue.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
To each his own. I don’t think the storms are any worse than my regional days. But I guess it’s all everyone’s personal experience.
Ah, in your opinion. Call NASA and NOAA and tell them your credentials and that you, personally, have feelings that suggest otherwise.
Please record and share this phone call and make sure it’s clear and in a sharable .MP4 format.