CRJ-200 Freighter!

I flew a 99 with a storm scope in it the other day and wondered which was more worthless, not that it really matters much flying out of Burbank.

Don't speak so soon. I almost got popped by lightning from a pop up thunder bumper going from EMT to MYF. I requested a heading a got the heck out from around that one.

[thread hijack]

That had to be the weirdest day since I've been flying for AMF. I waited over twenty minutes trying to get out of MYF because of all of the traffic. There had to be about twenty aircraft inbound for the aircport at the same time. There were about 8 to 10 aircraft lined up to depart both runways. And with all of that traffic, there were still some training flights asking to practice approaches.:insane: Weekend warriors were out there making every mistake in the book. The poor controllers got so busy that they created a seperate frequency to handle departures while the other tower frequency handled arrivals.

I was cleared for a right base to land into EMT and there was this traffic watch guy at my 12 o'clock on a left base. He was instructed to pass behind for the visual to the same runway. I haven't figured how he could possibly past behind me if he's at my 12 o'clock and he was confused by it also . I watched him edge within a 1/4 of a mile from me before he decided to turn away from the airport and pass me off of my left side. The controller did not like this and asked him to contact the tower when he landed. (They apparently were going to try to nail this guy to the wall. The next day Tower called my ACP requesting that I call them and explain how it looked from my point of view. I did so and defended the traffic watch guy whole heartedly. I found the towers instructions to him unclear myself. So I told the tower supervisor that I believed the guy did the best possible thing in that senerio.)

On my way back to MYF was when the lightning incident occured. About ten miles out, I was cleared to land #2 behind a life guard metroliner and was instructed to follow it in. I began aligning myself up behind the metroliner as it veered further and further away from the airport. At first I figured it was just extending downwind to make more room to land. But it continued going a good 10 miles east of the airport. As I was about to key up the mike to make sure I had contact with the right aircraft, tower keyed up and asked them what were there intentions. They were setting up to land at the wrong airport. (I only figured rookies made mistakes like that, especially since this airport has a localizer to the runway that they were cleared to land on. I've flown into the same airport for two weeks straight and even I use a localizer, NBD, or something to make sure everything is where it should be.)

I get cleared to land #1 now and hear tower ask another aircraft how
much fuel and soles are on board this aircraft. As I land I see a lot of fire rescue trucks waiting out on the ramp. Apperently there was a C-172RG that was having gear up problems. Now the controllers were having it really bad. The airport is still busy, there is an aircraft that has declared an emergency, there are atleast three aircraft that can not find the airport, people are being asked to stay outside of the airspace and still are busting in anyway, and there is an approaching thunderstorm.

After I land, tower is overly saturated and didn't really have time to tell me to contact ground. I monitored ground and they are trying to coordinate with fire and rescue, which isn't going too great. I sit off one runway and holding short of another runway for maybe ten minutes. I finally got my clearance to taxi and shutdown. I hopped out the plane contacted dispatch to let them know that everyone there might be late getting out because of emergency and the approaching T'storm.

After hanging up with dispatch, I make it out in front of the FBO just in time to witness my first live gear up landing. The guys did a really good job of it. One of the mains were down (which collapsed on impact) and the nose and the other main was up. They had the doors cracked and were out of there as soon as the plane came to a rest. You know the rest.... fire crews were rushed out there and etc...

Everything pretty much went to normal after that. That had to be the most chaotic three hours of my flying career thus far.:)

I was going to make my own seperate thread about this, but with all of the Regional vs. Freight arguements going on around here lately....I didn't want seem as though I was beating my chest. OOTSK!

[sorry for the hijack]
 
I know, but I just thought I'd post it to inform everyone that finally cargo planes will have an FMS, weather radar and TCAS!

:laff:

the cargo mod will include removing radar, fms, and tcas...also all glass panel should be cracked, covered in coffee, and preferably have spastic power outages...you know...to keep it fun.


at least the paintjobs been figured out thanks to expressjet!:rotfl:
 
Yeah they'd take all of the fancy stuff out of the RJ to increase the payload if it was used to carry freight.
 
Innnteresting ... something with a MTOW of around 63,000 lbs. Too big for a bizjet, too small for all the new "RJs" coming soon.

I wouldn't say too big for a bizjet....the 'midsize' Gulfstreams (the G450) comes in at 74K pounds - the 550 is nearing 100,000 pounds.
 
True, the Challenger 600 was designed as a freighter...... Fedex had a contract for them and was heavily involved in the design and outfitting - that's one reason the 600 has those goofy ass Lycoming engines. There was a regime change at Fedex and the new boss cancelled the orders. The 600 was designed as a freighter, then they made a corporate airplane out of it.

½ True. This needs to go on snopes.com. The Challenger was never designed as a freighter. It was designed by Bill Lear as the Learstar 600 (business jet) in the early 1970s. Canadair bought the rights and sold Federal Express on using it as a freighter. But it was a business jet by design.

After selling Learjet, Lear saw an opportunity to combine new NASA airfoil technology, high-efficiency turbofan engines and a stand-up cabin into a business jet that would provide unprecedented passenger comfort, range, and operating costs. The Canadian aircraft manufacturer Canadair entered the business jet industry by buying rights to the concept. Initially called the Learstar 600, it is now known as the Challenger 600 series.
http://www.wingsoverkansas.com/history/article.asp?id=198


…LearStar 600 was designed “around the passenger.” Preliminary project was based on a large diameter fuselage that allowed the passenger to walk around the cabin not having to duck. But as far as it was not supposed to be a major liner but a business jet, though of a larger capacity, the fuselage turned out disproportionately short.
http://www.jetmagazine.ru/Articles_e/?art=1043&gr=2057


…Bombardier elected to take the cheap route and simply extended the 604 fuselage and wings - the 604 became the CRJ.
It was actually the 601. CRJ development began in 1989, the 604 began in 1993.
http://home.ca.inter.net/~rapickler/bizjets.html
http://home.ca.inter.net/~rapickler/region1.html

I agree with being full circle. The Challenger (bizjet) was going to begin life as a freighter. Now it has finally happened. Hey, at least flying at night they won’t get in our way :D :D
 
The new 300 series is sick! We make the engines for them the HTF7000's!

The new 300 series bares no resemblance to the 600-601 series. Anyone know why?
 


½ True. This needs to go on snopes.com. The Challenger was never designed as a freighter.

I agree with being full circle. The Challenger (bizjet) was going to begin life as a freighter. Now it has finally happened. Hey, at least flying at night they won’t get in our way :D :D


Ummm...kinda true I guess depending on how you read it....

The LearStar was designed as a corporate airplane to have a larger cabin (relative to the Learjets)....Candair bought the rights to the design and did make significant changes - most notably and even wider cabin and the upward opening door to accomodate the loading of pallets. Bill Lear publicly commented at the time about how the wider cabin destroyed the beautiful lines blah blah blah.


You prima donna 750 pilots - if you're not goin' 92 then you're not s**t - is that the way it is???? :D
 
This freight vs airlines debate is futile, let me end it right now forever. There are no hot Stewardesses on Freight!! Enough said.
 
HA! You obviously don't fly passengers either if you're saying that.
:yeahthat:
I'll take the no stewardess with silence behind me and weekends off to meet women outside of flying vs. the occasional good looking stewardess who is probably a slam clicker.
 
You prima donna 750 pilots - if you're not goin' 92 ......is that the way it is???? :D
Yea.......That's pretty much it :D

Oh, yea........and our passenger seats actually have padding in the seat bottom (unlike the RJs, man those 900s are horrendous!)
 
Ahem.

"Also, Dude, stewardess is not the preferred nomenclature. Flight Attendant, please."

Sorry, I learned that whilst a member of the "Little Lebowski Urban Achievers"
 
Yea.......That's pretty much it :D

Oh, yea........and our passenger seats actually have padding in the seat bottom (unlike the RJs, man those 900s are horrendous!)

But they can do 410 and 0.83!

Can is highlighted because though they can, doesn't mean they "can" do it all the time. Just when the skygods smile upon them!
 
Back
Top