Oh SWA…how many is this?

ShortField said:
If we’re in JNU and you call up ops with “Juneau Ops, Alaska 70” I’ll strike you. Do you wanna get striked!?
Click to expand...
You know what if you do that I might walk out of the terminal and just go home.



Meet you at the jet 45 prior tomorrow, enjoy your layover!
 
Boris Badenov said:
Meh. I can barely remember my own name after a 14 hour leg. If I say "UPS 69" to some dude wearing brown short-shorts in whatever trailer they provide, too bad, so sad. That's like .32 seconds of me giving him/her respite from people with real problems. They should thank me.
Click to expand...
Just an FYI, but a tad before my time (early 1990) it was decided that UPS's callsign would be "Browntail". I've heard that lasted a very short time and the manager responsible was demoted to van driver. It was unofficially rejected by those who had to say it and that was that. Similar to the wearing of the hat. And for the MIA base, the tie.
 
Roger Roger said:
Also, that kind of captain reply has big veteran lanyard and flag tie energy.
Click to expand...

Never really understood this energy. I might consider wearing the lanyard on Veterans Day actual, if I happened to remember to bring it (which would likely never happen). You won't catch me in the leather aviator jacket I never once wore in the military, on whatever days per year they say we can. Brown on black (or *ahem* maybe the darkest of navy blues). Cant have that. My career goal is to never be Captain frumpy. Some of those shoes gotta go.....probably an unpopular opinion, but it is mine
 
ERfly said:
Please tell me your reply to the debrief was, "So what WAS the F-15 like?"
Click to expand...

I had no idea what one of my mentors did prior to SJI and it took almost two years before he mentioned the USAF, F-15's or even having to bail out of one.

I feel I've said this before, I don't know.
 
killbilly said:
I get super-annoyed with getting 4 instructions from ATC at the same time, because invariably while I'm trying to do whatever I need to do the other pilot will say something and now I'm doing 6 things - the 4 instructions, whatever I need to do first, and processing what I'm hearing from the other pilot.
Click to expand...
But then when I try to check on with altitude leaving, crossing restriction, instruction after, speed assignment, AND the ATIS I inevitably get either silence of "do you have the ATIS?"
 
Richman said:
Preliminary NTSB report was posted indicating this was the case.
Click to expand...
haipārinku DCA24LA219

“The FO stated that, before pushback, they received performance weight and balance (PWB) takeoff data via AeroData for runway 29. Normally when a runway is closed, no takeoff data is received, only a message stating it is unavailable due to runway closure. The crew did not brief, nor were they required to, the frequency they would utilize. When the flight was ready to push back, the FO advised on the universal communication frequency (UNICOM) frequency 122.95 that they would be pushing back from gate 4. He also advised on the UNICOM frequency they would be taxing to runway 29 for departure. The flight crew completed all briefings and checklists, and the airplane pushed back from the gate normally.

The captain stated that the FO made “multiple calls to Portland Traffic” in regards to their planned taxi route to runway 29. The FO stated, to investigators, that, while taxiing he utilized the UNICOM frequency to announce their intentions. He then, just before reaching the runway, contacted Boston Center and advised that they were number one for departure from runway 29. Boston Center gave a clearance void time with instructions to climb on the runway heading to 4,000 feet. The FO stated that he again advised, over the UNICOM, that the airplane would be turning onto runway 29 for departure. Both crewmembers indicated that they saw a truck exit the runway while the flight was holding short of runway 29. Before applying power, they both confirmed that the truck was clear of the runway; it had turned off the runway onto the taxiway and pulled up by the terminal and faced the runway.”

I guess one takeaway from this prelim is: if you see other vehicles in the movement area, and especially on a runway, but you don't hear them, pause and reflect for a moment.
 
Minuteman said:
I guess one takeaway from this prelim is: if you see other vehicles in the movement area, and especially on a runway, but you don't hear them, pause and reflect for a moment.
Click to expand...

And seeing other aircraft taxiing around, going to different runways, and for some reason all not talking on the radio.

ZapBrannigan said:
Which means the FO was likely prior military?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Could’ve thought the 122.95 was the CTAF. Or the combined Unicom/CTAF. Would have been one thing if they were the only ones taxiing out and not hearing anyone else on frequency. But when multiple aircraft are taxiing out and no one is talking, nor is a vehicle on the airfield proper; perhaps they actually are talking and you’re the one not on freq. Which, was the case.

Other question is why TOLD data was received for the closed runway, when it’s apparently not supposed to be? Only thing I can think is perhaps for the takeoff time scheduled, the runway would have been open. But in this case, SWA was a few minutes early….that few minutes where the NOTAM closure was still in effect.

If, as they were taking the runway, they saw an airport ops truck depart the runway; does that mean there was a second truck on or near the runway? Or was the ops truck that reportedly was near the terminal, having exited the runway, by the time they took the runway, was it the only truck? If so, it would appear it was clear of the runway?
 
Richman said:
Preliminary NTSB report was posted indicating this was the case.
Click to expand...
This was my suspicion all along, making the rest of it seem more probable. Maybe he just goofed and quickly looked down and grabbed the unicom freq and not the CTAF. Early morning, fatigue etc... Ill be taking this one with me and filing it away. Just wondering in similar circumstances ive actually double checked the CTAF freq the other pilot was using since their is no challenge and response barrier.

I dont know if they actually saw the other aircraft and vehicles moving around, but they couldve also dismissed 1 other aircraft, and not hearing it easily. At least here, it is not uncommon for runway data to be present for a closed runway if the closure is temporary in nature.
 
Kingairer said:
This was my suspicion all along, making the rest of it seem more probable. Maybe he just goofed and quickly looked down and grabbed the unicom freq and not the CTAF. Early morning, fatigue etc... Ill be taking this one with me and filing it away. Just wondering in similar circumstances ive actually double checked the CTAF freq the other pilot was using since their is no challenge and response barrier.

I dont know if they actually saw the other aircraft and vehicles moving around, but they couldve also dismissed 1 other aircraft, and not hearing it easily. At least here, it is not uncommon for runway data to be present for a closed runway if the closure is temporary in nature.
Click to expand...

im kind of wondering how it was presented in the charts swa uses
usually the awos has a prerecorded tag when class E in use about the tower being closed and the common traffic advisory frequency. unless we didnt bother with that listening to that and just pulled metars
 
bimmerphile said:
im kind of wondering how it was presented in the charts swa uses
usually the awos has a prerecorded tag when class E in use about the tower being closed and the common traffic advisory frequency. unless we didnt bother with that listening to that and just pulled metars
Click to expand...
I am guessing they just pulled the metar, or half paid attention to ASOS after the weather portion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top