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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seggy said:
Do you really think the pilots of Asiana, Colgan, and Air France decided that they were going to go out an stall an aircraft?
Click to expand...

Yes, Aviation Oracle. You've broken the code. My thesis was that all those guys went out one day and said "Time to die!" In the face of those sorts of deductive reasoning skills, the scales have fallen from my eyes. You're Right. About everything, ever. But you already knew that, didn't you? Just like everything else. Which does raise the question of why you persist in wasting your time talking to the Great Unwashed, though, doesn't it? Can't quite piece that one together. But, then, I'm not properly Qualified, one imagines. :D

Are you sure you went to college?
 
ppragman said:
Really, you flew into gravel runways in Maine?
Click to expand...

The gravel part isn't the point here. You, in Alaska, have to make a determination if the runway is suitable for landing. Whether it be to soft, flooded, whatever. At Colgan (and other airlines, corporate, private airplanes, etc.) we had to make a determination if that nor'easter in Maine that was brining a foot of snow to KRKD per hour would make it OK for us to come into land. The same threats are involved here. This is with the station calling braking action 'fair', them telling us that the WX was improving, and that they needed us to land in order to meet their monthly EAS quota or we would be fined.

How is it any different bringing in a Piston on a gravel runway with marginal conditions or a Beech 1900 on a paved runway with marginal conditions? Both planes need to land before the end and the crews have to make good decisions on how to do it safely. Or if it is even possible to try now or later.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Yes, Aviation Oracle. You've broken the code. My thesis was that all those guys went out one day and said "Time to die!" In the face of those sorts of deductive reasoning skills, the scales have fallen from my eyes. You're Right. About everything, ever. But you already knew that, didn't you? Just like everything else. Which does raise the question of why you persist in wasting your time talking to the Great Unwashed, though, doesn't it? Can't quite piece that one together. But, then, I'm not properly Qualified, one imagines. :D

Are you sure you went to college?
Click to expand...

obama-borg1.jpg
 
z987k said:
He also flew into LRRS's at colgan to.
Click to expand...

The runway composition isn't the point.

It is the threat. Landing an aircraft on a potentially marginal surface.

For example, you take off out of DCA and loose an engine. You can land the aircraft at DCA, but why? The aircraft is marginally able to do so in the degraded conditions. IAD would be a much better choice.
 
Boris Badenov said:
I don't think arrogant condescension is exclusively a Democratic trait, Tall. But I must admit, I enjoyed the pic. ;)
Click to expand...

I find it quite ironic that you continually call me arrogant and condescending but think it is beneath you to get in a low speed flight regime and stall an aircraft. It can happen to any of us if the conditions are right.
 
For those still questioning why I opened my mouth.

Look at the title of this thread.

I don't buy the @Boris Badenov philosophy.......

Boris Badenov said:
If I understand the Alaska Salties on this one, their complaint isn't that Delta are a bunch of amateurs who are going to decorate the landscape with 737s.
Click to expand...

Once again, the folks in Alaska want to put Delta on their knee and explain things to them.

And folks are calling ME condescending?
 
Seggy said:
I find it quite ironic that you continually call me arrogant and condescending but think it is beneath you to get in a low speed flight regime and stall an aircraft. It can happen to any of us if the conditions are right.
Click to expand...

I'll check in with you in about 30 years. My suspicion is that if I haven't been shot by a jealous spouse or you haven't been "disappeared" for being a Union rabble-rouser, we'll both still be here sucking down air and being unpleasant on the Internet, and neither of us will have just suddenly forgotten that the plane stops flying when the needle goes too far to the left. I certainly hope so.
 
Seggy said:
The gravel part isn't the point here. You, in Alaska, have to make a determination if the runway is suitable for landing. Whether it be to soft, flooded, whatever. At Colgan (and other airlines, corporate, private airplanes, etc.) we had to make a determination if that nor'easter in Maine that was brining a foot of snow to KRKD per hour would make it OK for us to come into land. The same threats are involved here. This is with the station calling braking action 'fair', them telling us that the WX was improving, and that they needed us to land in order to meet their monthly EAS quota or we would be fined.

How is it any different bringing in a Piston on a gravel runway with marginal conditions or a Beech 1900 on a paved runway with marginal conditions? Both planes need to land before the end and the crews have to make good decisions on how to do it safely. Or if it is even possible to try now or later.
Click to expand...

No - they're really not. That particular airport you mentioned has excellent facilities, excellent approaches, snow removal services, and paved runways - you don't have to worry if the airplane that landed yesterday physically cut a rut into the runway that will damage your airplane when you land, you don't have to worry about having absolutely no-way to de-ice if it starts snowing again while you're there. If the airplane won't start, you don't have to worry about freezing to death (you can go to the hotel). You don't have to worry about what your obstacle or traffic clearance will be when you have to cram and climb up into the clouds while running VFR underneath when you lose sight of everything. You're operating on a published route to areas that have facilities. It's apples and oranges.

Also, to bring up the "language difficulties" you mentioned earlier, while ATC speaks the language up here, there are plenty of villages where English is not the first language of the people giving runway reports, or the people you're picking up.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to do some flying on the East Coast for a living, it's pretty challenging from my limited experience over there - the airspace is pretty busy and you guys do get a lot of ice, but it is most certainly not the same. The truth is, there are challenges on the east coast - big ones, but flying there is most certainly not "the same" as flying up here.
 
Seggy said:
Once again, the folks in Alaska want to put Delta on their knee and explain things to them.

And folks are calling ME condescending?
Click to expand...
I don't think I've ever said such a thing. I think Delta will do just fine in Juneau. Only time will tell there. The locals are just going off of history.

Where you're wrong, and even said so, but continue to deny is that flying here is very different from the flying people do down south. LRRS's aren't about the runway composition, they're about the approach and landing that you have 1 shot at. I've seen some other airports like that in the Himalayas, but it is not something your average lower 48 pilot does.
Again(I think I've said this 3 times now), you've even said you would not be willing to do it. You even asked why someone would go to an airport without an approach(have you lost all fun in flying?). Clearly what we do is different. If it weren't you would be willing to do it since you do it all the time right?
I don't expect a response, because each time I point out that you're wrong you just ignore it.
 
Derg said:
You guys have convinced me.

I'm going to call Engineering and advise them that Juneau is so advanced and the barriers to entry into the market are so vast and onerous, that they should immediately cancel plans.

Like the message from the closing scene from "2010: Odyssey 2":

"ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT (JUNEAU) ATTEMPT NO LANDING"
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is saying Delta won't be able to successfully operate in Juneau. At least not at this point.
 
ppragman said:
No - they're really not.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is the same.

They are both, on their best days, marginal for the aircraft that are scheduled to fly into them. To say KRKD has excellent facilities for a Beech 1900 isn't the case. We can do it with minimal threats on a good day, like you can land a Navajo on gravel with minimal threats on a good day, but when a few things start piling on, the threats go up.
 
Seggy said:
Yes, it is the same.

They are both, on their best days, marginal for the aircraft that are scheduled to fly into them. To say KRKD has excellent facilities for a Beech 1900 isn't the case. We can do it with minimal threats on a good day, like you can land a Navajo on gravel with minimal threats on a good day, but when a few things start piling on, the threats go up.
Click to expand...

That's the thing - things pile up every day.

Edit: I also know the 1900 pretty damn good, I'm single pilot typed in the thing and have flown it up North too. The facilities available just scanning the AirNav description at KRKD blow away what is available at PFCB, PAKA, AK40, and many others. By the way, those are all places 1900s go to.
 
Seggy said:
Yes, it is the same.

They are both, on their best days, marginal for the aircraft that are scheduled to fly into them. To say KRKD has excellent facilities for a Beech 1900 isn't the case. We can do it with minimal threats on a good day, like you can land a Navajo on gravel with minimal threats on a good day, but when a few things start piling on, the threats go up.
Click to expand...
We(the collective we) fly beech 1900s into these same airports. I fly a slightly shorter version of a 1900 into gravel airports with slopes and terrain we can't out climb.
If RKD doesn't have good facilities for a 1900, AKP on a whole other level of no facilities.
 
z987k said:
I don't think I've ever said such a thing. I think Delta will do just fine in Juneau. Only time will tell there. The locals are just going off of history.
Click to expand...

Uh huh.

Where you're wrong, and even said so, but continue to deny is that flying here is very different from the flying people do down south.
Click to expand...

It isn't different. The threats can be the same! Flying is about minimizing threats! Airplanes fly the same for the most part, it is about minimizing threats!

LRRS's aren't about the runway composition, they're about the approach and landing that you have 1 shot at.
Click to expand...

Once again, why fly into that airport?

Again(I think I've said this 3 times now), you've even said you would not be willing to do it. You even asked why someone would go to an airport without an approach(have you lost all fun in flying?).
Click to expand...

No, I love flying, think it is the best job in the world, and have a fun while at work. I just don't want to die doing my job.

Clearly what we do is different. If it weren't you would be willing to do it since you do it all the time right?
Click to expand...

Just because I like to minimize risk, doesn't mean what you do is different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top