Comair 5191/Eyewitness Animations

ChasenSFO said:
Which is why I have so many fond memories as a customer service agent working those ACV flights. "I'm oversold, I need a full boat, 4 kids". "Hold it to 25". "I said 4 kids". "Hold it to 21 and 4".
Click to expand...
Some weeks ago the nearest suitable alternate for SFO-MFR was...wait for it...PDX. Release fuel was 3,800 (so you can draw a conclusion about just how suitable the alternate was too). We took 4,000 just to make it a nice round number (I mean, at that point, what's the point) - we were also booked to 10 or some low number, so yeah.

edit: also, you once told me the typical "load planning" algorithm. It had something to do with complicated mental gymnastics then "ah screw it, 25".
 
Last edited:
PeanuckleCRJ said:
BTW- I read that the FO lost his leg because he didn't have the lower part of the 5-point harness on. It turns out that some think it's cool to not have that fastened. Are you freaking kidding me? Is this middle school!? I know he was a Gulfstreamer and part of the culture I probably have the most distaste for other than scabs (known for its immaturity, and its "graduates" were involved in all the regional accidents the last 10 years), but my goodness... that's just pure immaturity.
Click to expand...

And where exactly did you read this?

And bite me about the GIA crap.
 
PeanuckleCRJ said:
It really puts a clearer perspective on the pace of the CVR vice what you read it at.

So many prior practices reinforced and other cleanups instituted as a result of 5191.

BTW- I read that the FO lost his leg because he didn't have the lower part of the 5-point harness on. It turns out that some think it's cool to not have that fastened. Are you freaking kidding me? Is this middle school!? I know he was a Gulfstreamer and part of the culture I probably have the most distaste for other than scabs (known for its immaturity, and its "graduates" were involved in all the regional accidents the last 10 years), but my goodness... that's just pure immaturity.
Click to expand...
We'll he was the only one to survive, so....
 
ATN_Pilot said:
And where exactly did you read this?
Click to expand...
I haven't read that anyplace and I'm not aware of a document that suggested it. The officers that responded said he was "hanging from his lapbelt in a jack-knife position", suggesting he didn't submarine under his belt as suggested. The officers made a smart call not waiting for ambulances to arrive, transporting him in their police SUV, trying to control bleeding, en route.
 
UAL747400 said:
Ah, I was thinking lift dump might be treated like thrust reverse, as in it could fail and not be included in the distance calculations.
Click to expand...
IT could fail but so could flaps and brakes. Those stipulations and multipliers are given. Part 25 specifies devices that become less effective with an engine failure or something like that.
 
Jesus

I've watched /listened to so many of these.

Every time you keep hoping they're gonna make it even though you know the ending.

That one was hard to watch
 
mikecweb said:
IT could fail but so could flaps and brakes. Those stipulations and multipliers are given. Part 25 specifies devices that become less effective with an engine failure or something like that.
Click to expand...
I see, I just think it'd be one of those things(like TR) that could fail during the landing rollout and therefore, wouldn't be part of landing distance calculations. I don't fly a part 25 airplane per say, more of a part "eh whatever" category. :)
 
UAL747400 said:
I see, I just think it'd be one of those things(like TR) that could fail during the landing rollout and therefore, wouldn't be part of landing distance calculations. I don't fly a part 25 airplane per say, more of a part "eh whatever" 23 category. :)
Click to expand...
 
A Life Aloft said:
You're right. It doesn't take as much force as people think to send you either flying forwards or even sliding underneath the side straps. There have been pilots found after a crash under the rudder pedals. No bueno.
Click to expand...
PeanuckleCRJ said:
It really puts a clearer perspective on the pace of the CVR vice what you read it at.

So many prior practices reinforced and other cleanups instituted as a result of 5191.

BTW- I read that the FO lost his leg because he didn't have the lower part of the 5-point harness on. It turns out that some think it's cool to not have that fastened. Are you freaking kidding me? Is this middle school!? I know he was a Gulfstreamer and part of the culture I probably have the most distaste for other than scabs (known for its immaturity, and its "graduates" were involved in all the regional accidents the last 10 years), but my goodness... that's just pure immaturity.
Click to expand...

Pilots seem to think the anti sub strap will crunch the junk if you stop short.

Reality is, that strap keeps the hip belts from riding up into the soft tissue(allowing you to slip under.)

Your hip will stop you long before your junk will.. Wear the bottom belts!
 
ChasenSFO said:
Fun fact, I've read ACV was built because the land was selected as a location for a USAAF training airport due it it fogging in more often than any other part of the coast they could build on. I think they tested a decent amount of instrument approaches in there back in the day. Didn't translate very well for commercial service.
Click to expand...
yes, that's where they designed and tested the ILS.
 
TUCKnTRUCK said:
Pilots seem to think the anti sub strap will crunch the junk if you stop short.

Reality is, that strap keeps the hip belts from riding up into the soft tissue(allowing you to slip under.)

Your hip will stop you long before your junk will.. Wear the bottom belts!
Click to expand...

I'd still rather have a 6 point harness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top