Guess they didn't learn the first time.. Delta's new KSEA-PAJN run.

Status
Not open for further replies.
One simple question.
If Alaska flying isn't different, then why are there literally only two (soon to be 3) airports in the entire state served by airlines from "outside"?
 
Seggy said:
I have experienced many of those conditions you talked about on the same flight flying from KBOS to KRKD.
Click to expand...

The difference is that when you get to these places - they're marginally-maintained gravel runways, some of which have substantial terrain or slope or both - many of them aren't served by any approach at all - let alone an ILS. I'm not saying what you do/did isn't/wasn't challenging - I'm not into dick-waggling about who's the biggest badass anymore (I was when I was younger) frankly I don't care - I want flying to be easy, safe, comfortable for the passengers, and simple. But this is more complex than what I was doing down south, and your continuous insistence that it isn't that hard tells me that you're by and large ignorant to what life and flying is like up here. That's fine - I'm ignorant of 121 operations and the corporate world - but then again, I've learned not to make a stink about things I don't know a whole lot about.
 
z987k said:
You should probably read the plate again then. I'm not aware of another one like it in the world. You sure you didn't read the LDA-X? The LDA-Z isn't publicly available.
Click to expand...

I think it was the LDA-X. Doesn't matter. An approach is an approach is an approach. All has to do with proper training to execute that approach. I know Delta will properly train their crews to do what they need to do to safely conduct operations into JNU.
 
Roger Roger said:
One simple question.
If Alaska flying isn't different, then why are there literally only two (soon to be 3) airports in the entire state served by airlines from "outside"?
Click to expand...

The monopoly Alaska Airlines has on the market and contracts up there.
 
ppragman said:
The difference is that when you get to these places - they're marginally-maintained gravel runways, some of which have substantial terrain or slope or both - many of them aren't served by any approach at all - let alone an ILS.
Click to expand...

GUA is an airport, with substantial terrain, a sloping runway, and a marginally maintained runway for the type of equipment that lands there. Landing there is no different than landing a Caravan in a place in Alaska. The threats are VERY similar.


But this is more complex than what I was doing down south, and your continuous insistence that it isn't that hard tells me that you're by and large ignorant to what life and flying is like up here. That's fine - I'm ignorant of 121 operations and the corporate world - but then again, I've learned not to make a stink about things I don't know a whole lot about.
Click to expand...

I have clearly countered every point to why it ISN'T more complex compared to what other pilots in the lower 48 do. Yet, no one is actually looking at what I am saying, and is just pissed off that I dare question flying in Alaska.
 
Seggy said:
I think it was the LDA-X. Doesn't matter. An approach is an approach is an approach. All has to do with proper training to execute that approach. I know Delta will properly train their crews to do what they need to do to safely conduct operations into JNU.
Click to expand...
I agree, except that you really do need to be specifically trained on that approach, which we all know Delta will do. Non-issue. I certainly wouldn't take a run at it like any other approach. I mean you don't specifically train for the ILS into ICT do you?
 
ppragman said:
This is accurate - however I will add that the environment creates economic challenges for operators who don't commonly operate in the region.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean?

Economics meaning they'd make more money with their metal going someplace else is what I'm saying.
 
Seggy said:
Why do you need to go there? What is it called..........'get there-itis'?
Click to expand...
We need to go there, because the flight requires it. There are no alternative options aside from not going ever. It's not like the runway will flatten out tomorrow. They can't drive the patient to the next airport. No roads.
 
Roger Roger said:
One simple question.
If Alaska flying isn't different, then why are there literally only two (soon to be 3) airports in the entire state served by airlines from "outside"?
Click to expand...

Think population, not aerodynamics...
Perhaps because there are only two (soon to be 3) people wanting to fly out of those airports.
 
z987k said:
I agree, except that you really do need to be specifically trained on that approach, which we all know Delta will do. Non-issue. I certainly wouldn't take a run at it like any other approach. I mean you don't specifically train for the ILS into ICT do you?
Click to expand...

Perfect example of why I made the comment earlier on how those that fly in Alaska want to put Delta on their knee and explain how things work.

Delta will most likely have a handful of JNU Qualified guys that they train for JNU and are the only ones that can go to JNU. They already do something similar to other cities.
 
z987k said:
We need to go there, because the flight requires it. There are no alternative options aside from not going ever. It's not like the runway will flatten out tomorrow. They can't drive the patient to the next airport. No roads.
Click to expand...

What about a helicopter? Why is the patient there? Did they decide to live there on their own or are they a tourist?
 
Seggy said:
GUA is an airport, with substantial terrain, a sloping runway, and a marginally maintained runway for the type of equipment that lands there. Landing there is no different than landing a Caravan in a place in Alaska. The threats are VERY similar.




I have clearly countered every point to why it ISN'T more complex compared to what other pilots in the lower 48 do. Yet, no one is actually looking at what I am saying, and is just pissed off that I dare question flying in Alaska.
Click to expand...

There are places where the threats are similar - however the threats in my experience generally don't stack up in the same way. Down south, I'd see maybe one, or two, major potential threats pop up on a given flight - up here that's every flight. We routinely fly to airports without any infrastructure - no approaches, no hangar, no fuel, nothing. These airports are often located in the mountains, far from reasonable alternates. There are similarities, and flying down south can be challenging - up here I've found flying is consistently challenging.

As for Guatemala - I've heard that's a challenging airport - never been there can't comment.
 
I think what some of you guys in Alaska might cling to is the fact that it's kind of a fraternity up there because there are not "that many" of you that fly up there or ever have. Where you go down the wrong path is when you think there is something special about this fraternity. If there was more money to be had and thus more jobs there would be more pilots.
 
mikecweb said:
Not sure what you mean?

Economics meaning they'd make more money with their metal going someplace else is what I'm saying.
Click to expand...

A company that specializes in operating up here already has the infrastructure, systems, and operational knowledge in place - Delta has to generate some of that from scratch to break into a new market.
 
mikecweb said:
I think what some of you guys in Alaska might cling to is the fact that it's kind of a fraternity up there because there are not "that many" of you that fly up there or ever have. Where you go down the wrong path is when you think there is something special about this fraternity. If there was more money to be had and thus more jobs there would be more pilots.
Click to expand...

It's actually pretty lucrative - a PA31 pilot can make $100,000 / year. Most folks don't stick around though, it has a tendency to be a stepping stone to "bigger and better" things. Nothing wrong with that - it's a lot like freight in that way.
 
z987k said:
Because we need to go there and there isn't another way, maybe besides dog-sled to get there.
Click to expand...

In terms of modern Capitalism, Alaskan bush villages are to economic viability what brown rice is to bicycle chains.
There is no "need" to get to a place that fashions itself self-subsisting (unless there is something very, very wrong with that politico-ecomomic definition).
Most pilots who die in Alaska do so delivering Pepsi... or Coke (just like the rest of the "undeveloped" world, it depends on which gang holds sway).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top