Canadair Crash at ASE / Aspen Eagle, Colorado

JEP said:
I believe the correct vernacular is :drops mic:

But I see your point.... ;-)
Click to expand...
original.gif
 
GypsyPilot said:
The issue isn't the regulars like you. It's the transient guys that show up, often without doing appropriate research. Heck, I've sat on the ramp and watched people botching the Lindz 8 many, many times. It isn't the regulars doing that.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure this is once again ships in the night. No one (that I noticed) said ASE should be closed tomorrow. But as you seem to be pointing out yourself, the way it operates right now is not safe. I was a "regular" at one point, and I didn't like it then anymore than I like it now. Obviously, it's up to the PIC to use their good judgment to determine whether or not the trip can be completed whilst remaining within the limitations of the aircraft. But, uh, when you're flying an aircraft that literally cannot get to the runway from the MAP (and I mean in still air) AND if, instead, you miss in that aircraft, lose an engine, and fly the (unique, slightly nutty) missed *with second segment climb being an actual consideration for whether or not you meet cumulo-granite*, even if you DO manage to intercept and track the localizer outbound while dealing with a not-in-the-sim-but-oh-poop-real-life unexpected emergency, there is something severely screwed up with the way things are being done.

I mean, as everyone well knows, I'm Superpilot, so I could do it no sweat. But if you think your average crew is going to successfully fly their way out of that, you need to stop co-habitating with Herve Villechaize.

Isn't this the same forum where people were defending the four goofballs who couldn't help but crash in CAVU with basically no wind on a 11,000ft runway?

Jesus, there's a happy medium.
 
Boris Badenov said:
I mean, as everyone well knows, I'm Superpilot, so I could do it no sweat. But if you think your average crew is going to successfully fly their way out of that, you need to stop co-habitating with Herve Villechaize.
Click to expand...

Which I can only imagine is why my company has a policy of not even attempting an IFR approach into ASE unless the weather is better than 5,000 and 5sm. If things go really pear-shaped, It's decent VFR and you can see virtually all of that pesky granite, save for the peaks of the 14,000+ terrain immediately southwest.

Otherwise, Rifle, Junction or Eagle are all close enough.

And Herve Villechaize? Really?! Impressive.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
No doubt about it; there certainly is pressure. But, I can only hope that me providing real world examples as evidence that it IS possible to say no and still keep your job, that a young, impressionable pilot that eventually reads this thread will understand they can do the same.
Click to expand...

This is awesome.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Isn't this the same forum where people were defending the four goofballs who couldn't help but crash in CAVU with basically no wind on a 11,000ft runway? Jesus, there's a happy medium.
Click to expand...

Oh no way...what little exercise in aviation lessons was this?

(And if you say Asiana...then I apologize for asking...I wasn't aware four goofballs were up front on that little experiment).
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
No doubt about it; there certainly is pressure. But, I can only hope that me providing real world examples as evidence that it IS possible to say no and still keep your job, that a young, impressionable pilot that eventually reads this thread will understand they can do the same.
Click to expand...

I agree 100 percent. Very well said
 
BEEF SUPREME said:
Of course no one has brought up departing from ASE, with the 7.6% climb gradient until now. I guess because no one has died doing that, that I know of.
Click to expand...

They brought this up in every bitchjet course I ever took at Simuscam. One of the best things they did. Let me rephrase that: "Possibly the only terribly useful thing they did". Getting out the book and running the numbers on second segment, etc at KASE (provided you can figure out how to do it...I freely admit I couldn't the first time, and neither could anyone else) is, uh, eye-opening. IMS, there's a pretty good argument to be made that even once you get the data, it's incomplete and deceptive.

The general consensus, though, seemed to be that if you miss at 100ft and have an engine failure in the next ~minute or so, unless you're at like 14,000lbs, you are mathematically certain to hit something on the way out, no matter how well you fly the missed. I won't swear to the precision of those numbers, but I'll give you dollars to donuts that if anyone ever actually DOES lose an engine in a twin and misses the approach at the threshold, they'll be hitting something else tout suite. Let's hope we never find out.
 
Boris Badenov said:
They brought this up in every bitchjet course I ever took at Simuscam. One of the best things they did. Let me rephrase that: "Possibly the only terribly useful thing they did". Getting out the book and running the numbers on second segment, etc at KASE (provided you can figure out how to do it...I freely admit I couldn't the first time, and neither could anyone else) is, uh, eye-opening. IMS, there's a pretty good argument to be made that even once you get the data, it's incomplete and deceptive.

The general consensus, though, seemed to be that if you miss at 100ft and have an engine failure in the next ~minute or so, unless you're at like 14,000lbs, you are mathematically certain to hit something on the way out, no matter how well you fly the missed. I won't swear to the precision of those numbers, but I'll give you dollars to donuts that if anyone ever actually DOES lose an engine in a twin and misses the approach at the threshold, they'll be hitting something else tout suite. Let's hope we never find out.
Click to expand...

I have to ask, how did you fly the missed approach from 100'? It was something I wanted to add to recurrent at the old shop, a balked landing engine failure pattern out of ASE. It is important to point out that all of the approaches available to us mere mortals are circling approaches, i.e. you are not to land straight in from the MAP, but circle in left traffic in the valley and land on 15 or make right traffic to 33.

As far as the Lindz8 goes, I have had jackasses coming straight out right at me while on final. A good friend of mine put ASE this way, "I would rather slam my junk in a sliding glass door than go back up there" Now granted, he pretty much hates everything but I found it funny.
 
IMS (and it's been a while), they treated it as fly 300 to 14k, then fly the missed as published, but you're quite right that it doesn't actually fit in to the TERPS as written to do so from the threshold rather than the MAP on a circle (if I'm understanding you correctly). Which strikes me as not exactly a "plus" in the "nah, it's fine!" column.

The upshot (as best I can figure) is that if you miss anywhere past the MAP, you have zero copper-bottomed, data-proven protection for anything you do. AND, at least on the bitchjet, the data you do have is suspect. I mean, what could possibly go wrong!?
 
arkflyr said:
I have to ask, how did you fly the missed approach from 100'? It was something I wanted to add to recurrent at the old shop, a balked landing engine failure pattern out of ASE. It is important to point out that all of the approaches available to us mere mortals are circling approaches, i.e. you are not to land straight in from the MAP, but circle in left traffic in the valley and land on 15 or make right traffic to 33.

As far as the Lindz8 goes, I have had jackasses coming straight out right at me while on final. A good friend of mine put ASE this way, "I would rather slam my junk in a sliding glass door than go back up there" Now granted, he pretty much hates everything but I found it funny.
Click to expand...

That's the thing... Once you're passed CEYAG, you're committed to landing. The only other option is a Balked procedure, which is operator and aircraft specific. But there is no "missed" passed CEYAG.

You obviously understand this, but I think a lot of people don't. I have heard some people make comments like "turn left" for the Balked, but that is really vague. Turn left at what point? To what heading? What bank angle? We have a published Balked for ASE, and it is very specific. Even then, it is damn tight for SE ops.

Agreed about the Lindz 8 departure traffic. That happens all too often, and I voiced the same complaint earlier in this thread.
 
GypsyPilot said:
You obviously understand this, but I think a lot of people don't.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for a lot of people. I can barely speak, most of the time. But I understand this just fine, I just also find it ludicrous. The whole point of having second segment data, etc, is to plan for all eventualities in jet aircraft (ie. be able to guarantee climb performance in the event of a missed approach). Like, would I take a PC-12 in to KASE? If the company asked me to and I thought I could get in, yeah. Because that thing realistically crashes at around 70 knots. Like, I might get a PT-6 enema, but there's a pretty decent chance the people in the back would just beak some bones and swear off "little airplanes" for the rest of time.

OTOH, "land or crash" is stupid in a jet, IMHO. You crash at 110 knots in that terrain, and it's curtains for everyone and sympathies all around.
 
Boris Badenov said:
I can't speak for a lot of people. I can barely speak, most of the time. But I understand this just fine, I just also find it ludicrous. The whole point of having second segment data, etc, is to plan for all eventualities in jet aircraft (ie. be able to guarantee climb performance in the event of a missed approach). Like, would I take a PC-12 in to KASE? If the company asked me to and I thought I could get in, yeah. Because that thing realistically crashes at around 70 knots. Like, I might get a PT-6 enema, but there's a pretty decent chance the people in the back would just beak some bones and swear off "little airplanes" for the rest of time.

OTOH, "land or crash" is stupid in a jet, IMHO. You crash at 110 knots in that terrain, and it's curtains for everyone and sympathies all around.
Click to expand...

I agree. Going in there without an out (passed the MAP) is pretty nuts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top