Fedex 1376

MikeD said:
Did RAPCON deal with the QFs when they were flying unmanned, or did they kind of do their own thing?
Click to expand...

They did their own thing. But the damn drone ops, ( WEG maybe?)I can’t remember their name now, had priority for launches and recovery and would activate R2905 with about 30 seconds notice irregardless of what we had going on in the middle of wing recoveries with people on final that we’d have to break out or doing multiple approaches and we’d have to quick climb them to 11k on downwind to top the R. R2905 protected the drone runway and path out to the W-areas and was smack in the middle of the final to the Rwy 32’s
 
Last edited:
///AMG said:
I was meaning the aircraft electricity
Click to expand...
The F-22 that crashed cause loss of its generator? I can tell you exactly what happened with that bird cause I was working approach assist during it and that report did not get it right. In fact the report lays a hefty bit of blame of me for “not passing on information” because it wasn’t on a recorded line. Nevermind the person I supposedly didn’t pass the info to was sitting right next to me. It also didn’t help on initial contact the pilot speaking misidentified which aircraft was the emergency. It didn’t help the only controller on the AIB had only ever worked tower and never worked radar in their life.
 
Last edited:
Kingairer said:
It looks like a good 700-1000 feet off the end, could've been a lot worse.
Click to expand...
Everything. Always. Could be. A lot worse. Act accordingly.

Did they land in the "landing zone" 'cause that's what the McPilot Manual had "trained" them to do??? You know, abandon a 1000 or more feet of runway before setting down? Adjusting to current objective realities is the second most important job of a real pilot (sometimes the primary job). Sometimes, that needs to be the primary job of even an average citizen wandering about in society at large, even when incessantly exposed to InstaTwatFace abuses.
 
Last edited:
form810 said:
Everything. Always. Could be. A lot worse. Act accordingly.

Did they land in the "landing zone" 'cause that's what the McPilot Manual had "trained" them to do??? You know, abandon a 1000 or more feet of runway before setting down? Adjusting to current objective realities is the second most important job of a real pilot (sometimes the primary job). Sometimes, that needs to be the primary job of even an average citizen wandering about in society at large, even when incessantly exposed to InstaTwatFace abuses.
Click to expand...

I think I'd rather risk going off the end of the runway at slow speed than dropping in low and risk having an obstacle rip up the bottom of the plane while it's still in the air.

You know... when thinking about PilotStuff(tm) and all.
 
I don’t know where their actual touchdown point was on the runway, but it might not have made a difference depending on the slide distance, and the not-very-long main runway there at CHA, RW 2-20. Once they touched down, they were merely along for the ride at that point.

Am curious how long they were airborne working the emergency and talking to company, coordinating, etc, before coming in for the first approach. Whatever the extent of the emergency, it was enough for flight control issues, primary and alternate landing gear issues, and subsequently not risking leaving the area of a suitable landing field to try and make another one. Even if same flight time could have been had proceeding to MEM. Will be very interesting to see the findings and analysis of what occurred.
 
NovemberEcho said:
The F-22 that crashed cause loss of its generator? I can tell you exactly what happened with that bird cause I was working approach assist during it and that report did not get it right. In fact the report lays a hefty bit of blame of me for “not passing on information” because it wasn’t on a recorded line. Nevermind the person I supposedly didn’t pass the info to was sitting right next to me. It also didn’t help on initial contact the pilot speaking misidentified which aircraft was the emergency. It didn’t help the only controller on the AIB had only ever worked tower and never worked radar in their life.
Click to expand...

I wasn’t actually referring to that one specifically, just some of the electrical gremlins they had in the very early build jets, and the interesting stuff involved in getting a power off/nordo stealth airplane back on the ground. That sounds really frustrating though. But i was definitely not trying to poke fun at that one (or you)
 
///AMG said:
I wasn’t actually referring to that one specifically, just some of the electrical gremlins they had in the very early build jets, and the interesting stuff involved in getting a power off/nordo stealth airplane back on the ground. That sounds really frustrating though. But i was definitely not trying to poke fun at that one (or you)
Click to expand...

Yeah working a stealth jet without a transponder gets interesting lol. Especially when they can’t tell you where they are either. Fortunately for me most of those gremlins had been worked out before I arrived and most of the stuff was just routine
 
BobDDuck said:
I think I'd rather risk going off the end of the runway at slow speed than dropping in low and risk having an obstacle rip up the bottom of the plane while it's still in the air.

You know... when thinking about PilotStuff(tm) and all.
Click to expand...
Ok. That's precisely what I'm talking about. It was VFR. Eyes are good fer obstacle avoidance, m'kay. 'Specially in "special" circumstances. But, hey, to each their own. When yer in a set-up in which nobody cares about skill and actual outcomes, and EVERYBODY cares about how the paperwork is gwang look after the write-off, that makes total sense... Of course, that was precisely my point.

I got into flying precisely BECAUSE I no longer could abide sitting in an office and allowing my life to be dictated to me by them what create "reality" by the pushing of papers...
 
obx said:
I always wonder about the value of a low approach with gear issues. If you have an unsafe gear indication and you do a low approach and the tower reports that they see the gear down, it doesn’t mean it’s down and locked. And it’s not going to inform or change the way you handle the subsequent approach and landing. What it does do is add a maneuver that we’re not trained or taught to do in an airliner (it’s not just a go around) and adds further opportunity for further issues. Especially if you’re root problem is a hydraulic issue.
Click to expand...
In the Lear 40/45/70/75 series jets, the taxi lights we on the main landing gear and acted as a secondary indication of gear configuration. They would only illuminate in a down and locked position. Theoretically you wouldn’t need to do a low pass and could just ask what tower sees from a couple mile final. At school most instructors would always mention doing a low pass in a situation. In the 40 series it would be possible for a burned out gear indicator bulb but not so much in the G5000 series 70 series jets. Just some fun facts I guess about gear malfunctions.
 
5Right_5Left said:
In the Lear 40/45/70/75 series jets, the taxi lights we on the main landing gear and acted as a secondary indication of a down a locked configuration. They would only illuminate in a down and locked configuration. Theoretically you wouldn’t need to do a low pass and could just ask what tower sees from a couple mile final. At school most instructors would always mention doing a low pass in a situation. In the 40 series it would be possible for a burned out gear indicator bulb but not so much in the G5000 series 70 series jets. Just some fun facts I guess about gear malfunctions.
Click to expand...
People mock what they don't know. Therefore, people mock Lears... or call ALL biz jets Lears. All models had their kinks, but Lears were all great aircraft (excepting the 55).
 
MikeD said:
I don’t know where their actual touchdown point was on the runway, but it might not have made a difference depending on the slide distance, and the not-very-long main runway there at CHA, RW 2-20. Once they touched down, they were merely along for the ride at that point.

Am curious how long they were airborne working the emergency and talking to company, coordinating, etc, before coming in for the first approach. Whatever the extent of the emergency, it was enough for flight control issues, primary and alternate landing gear issues, and subsequently not risking leaving the area of a suitable landing field to try and make another one. Even if same flight time could have been had proceeding to MEM. Will be very interesting to see the findings and analysis of what occurred.
Click to expand...
I don't know where they touched down either. That was the point of my question. Regardless, a pilot knows (or should know) that if he lands without gear he's gonna sliiiiiide.

Therefore, I reckon, land at the point on the runway that gives you the most slippy/slidey room, eh?

The poster stated that they overran the runway by 700-1000 feet. Anywhere within that range would likely have been avoided by landing 1000 feet earlier on the concrete slab, eh?
 
form810 said:
I don't know where they touched down either. That was the point of my question. Regardless, a pilot knows (or should know) that if he lands without gear he's gonna sliiiiiide.

Therefore, I reckon, land at the point on the runway that gives you the most slippy/slidey room, eh?

The poster stated that they overran the runway by 700-1000 feet. Anywhere within that range would likely have been avoided by landing 1000 feet earlier on the concrete slab, eh?
Click to expand...
Maybe. Maybe not. What is the coefficient of friction of smooth concrete vs. turf?
 
Itchy said:
Maybe. Maybe not. What is the coefficient of friction of smooth concrete vs. turf?
Click to expand...
Don't know. I do know that kids oft have fun sliding down turf covered hillsides - both dry and wet. I also know that operational runways don't tend to have ditches and fences and gopher holes and small trees in the midst of them. But, you know, while careening off the the end of a perfectly good runway into the great unknown seems like a terrific time to experiment and find out.
 
5Right_5Left said:
In the Lear 40/45/70/75 series jets, the taxi lights we on the main landing gear and acted as a secondary indication of gear configuration. They would only illuminate in a down and locked position.
Click to expand...
This is like the one thing I remember from Lear 35 school at CAE!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top