I have not flown commercially, or IFR even, for quite some time but have retained an interest in aviation and have also maintained my flying skills in my Piper Aztec Twin and I've owned for 10 years.
I have not flown commercially, or IFR even, for quite some time but have retained an interest in aviation and have also maintained my flying skills in my Piper Aztec Twin and I've owned for 10 years.
Sorry, but with the word abuse I invision Phil wipping you with a dipstick.... JIMMY!
Just remember that I am one of those special members (special as in the kind that ride on ths small bus)
now can we bash Airbus and talk about why the world was better off that this was a Boeing?Lololol (nudge nudge, wink wink)
This post was made by my iPhone automated response app
The three most common expressions in aviation are, "Why is it doing that?", "Where are we?" and "Oh Crap".
wow! EXCELLENT!!!! You sold me!Originally Posted by Phil D.
The three most common expressions in aviation are, "Why is it doing that?", "Where are we?" and "Oh Crap".
I k/was thinking it k/was thinking maybe k/the pilots wanted to take their work action a step above k/the whole slow taxi thing that most AA crews do. lolol :lol: :borat:
Southwest Airlines-"Once it pop's it's time to stop" Southwest Airlines-"Our Shamu's are almost real" Southwest Airlines -"We blow our top real easy" Southwest Airlines- "You can't top us..... really"
Yo, my piece ain't spoken yet son! ;)
daneyd:
I wasn't being condescending towards you and I apologize if I came off as so. This is a "forum" - a place where we come discuss, argue and talk about issues and current events. Sometimes the discussion gets heated, emotions get involved and people take things personally (which no one should; at the end of the day it's an online message board). In the case of this thread, we didn't get even close to that type of situation.. In this spirit of debate:
If you go back and re-read our posts you will see we both agree on most of the factors that we think caused this crash. The biggest disagreements we had came when you posted a video of an aircraft doing for all intent and purpose an "illegal" landing, and my reply saying you cannot compare apples-to-apples the crash you posted in that video to this one. I never said the tailwind played ZERO factor in this crash, I said combined with several other factors it was a player.
Anyone who flies (yourself included) knows landing in a tailwind can be challenging, but also knows that they can be safely executed - as they are done on a daily basis all around the world. I don't know if you ever calculate required landing distances in your aircraft, but larger, jet aircraft calculate the required distance to safely stop their aircraft before every approach using many different factors (aircraft weight, environmental factors, runway condition, aircraft configuration etc...). We call it TOLD (Takeoff and Landing Data).
I think it's reasonable to assume this crew would not have attempted landing on a runway that they knew ahead of time they didn't have the landing data to safely stop the aircraft on. Therefore I can only infer that their attempted landing was within both company and FAA legal limits (even with a tailwind). My theory, as I've been saying all along, is that the ultimate cause of the crash will be due to pilot error in deciding to save a bad landing rather than go around when according to Jamaican officials: The plane used up half the runway before touching down, leaving only 4,800 feet to stop, the plane bounced on touch down, which ate up several hundred more feet and the plane was still rolling at 72mph when it went off the end.
Did the fact that there was a tailwind, it was night and that the runway was wet and not grooved lead to all this? As we've both been saying, absolutely!
Anyway, we should wait until the actual findings are released to discuss more... Anyone know the status on it?
non-wingletted 738's just look strange to me these days. are there any still flying here in the US?
i like the way you think!
it is mathematically impossible for either hummingbirds, or helicopters to fly. fortunately, neither are aware of this.
Yes Delta still has some 738's without winglets. They arent common but you see them at JFK every now and then. Taken 10/8/09.non-wingletted 738's just look strange to me these days. are there any still flying here in the US?
Looking at those images reminds me how classy the 737NG looked before the winglets. Now that I think about it I haven't seen a non wingletted 737(NG) in a long time. I guess the only place to see them regularly really left would be on some of the lesser charter companies.
Senga
Again Delta has a handful of 738's without winglets. Some old colors some new. Just go out and hope one flies in that day. Also look at the tail # on the image I put up and check the sheet to see if its comming in that day and if its during daylight. Most recent I saw a 738 without winglets was the very end of 09. I think they put the winglet install on hold while they absorb NWA. I'm figuring come feb when NWA doesnt exist anymore there going to put the winglets on the rest. But hey I could be wrong. Personally I think the 738 looks better with the winglets on.
[quote=USAF Pilot 07]Yo, my piece ain't spoken yet son! ;)
daneyd:
I wasn't being condescending towards you and I apologize if I came off as so. This is a "forum" - a place where we come discuss, argue and talk about issues and current events. Sometimes the discussion gets heated, emotions get involved and people take things personally (which no one should; at the end of the day it's an online message board). In the case of this thread, we didn't get even close to that type of situation.. In this spirit of debate:
If you go back and re-read our posts you will see we both agree on most of the factors that we think caused this crash. The biggest disagreements we had came when you posted a video of an aircraft doing for all intent and purpose an "illegal" landing, and my reply saying you cannot compare apples-to-apples the crash you posted in that video to this one. I never said the tailwind played ZERO factor in this crash, I said combined with several other factors it was a player.
Anyone who flies (yourself included) knows landing in a tailwind can be challenging, but also knows that they can be safely executed - as they are done on a daily basis all around the world. I don't know if you ever calculate required landing distances in your aircraft, but larger, jet aircraft calculate the required distance to safely stop their aircraft before every approach using many different factors (aircraft weight, environmental factors, runway condition, aircraft configuration etc...). We call it TOLD (Takeoff and Landing Data).
I think it's reasonable to assume this crew would not have attempted landing on a runway that they knew ahead of time they didn't have the landing data to safely stop the aircraft on. Therefore I can only infer that their attempted landing was within both company and FAA legal limits (even with a tailwind). My theory, as I've been saying all along, is that the ultimate cause of the crash will be due to pilot error in deciding to save a bad landing rather than go around when according to Jamaican officials: The plane used up half the runway before touching down, leaving only 4,800 feet to stop, the plane bounced on touch down, which ate up several hundred more feet and the plane was still rolling at 72mph when it went off the end.
Did the fact that there was a tailwind, it was night and that the runway was wet and not grooved lead to all this? As we've both been saying, absolutely!
Anyway, we should wait until the actual findings are released to discuss more... Anyone know the status on it?[/quote:n9073a7i]
Well unless you're about 75 year old I don't think you could be my dad. Yes we calculated landing distance requirements all the time. It was actually my job to do so usually. But as we know from the Little Rock crash years ago (I think it was Little Rock, not sure) landing checks can go wrong, or certain steps can be missed. In that crash they forgot to arm the spoilers (an obvious part of the landing check list). In bad conditions when adrenaline gets pumping, people don't perform as well as when calm. Of coarse they wouldn't have attempted the landing if there calc's were not in line however, under pressure the calc's could have been wrong or rushed. Also, the conditions could have been underestimated. ie. tailwind component. Obviously something was done wrong. We know from the initial release of the Jamaica authorities investigating the crash that there was no major mechanical failures.
That was a reply to Phil's post about a "piece"...
Yea they didn't go around after landing halfway down the runway. That's what was done wrong...Obviously something was done wrong.
$20 says that if they landed in the landing zone we wouldn't be having this discussion today...
that's probably true. Sorry about the age reference. I thought you were referring to me.
DannyD
IO just want to point out that at all carriers I know of you cannot land untill the PM calls "Landing checklist complete" or some version of that. It is actually a required callout. To not properly complete a landing checklist as it is legally outlined is boarderline criminal.
Southwest Airlines-"Once it pop's it's time to stop" Southwest Airlines-"Our Shamu's are almost real" Southwest Airlines -"We blow our top real easy" Southwest Airlines- "You can't top us..... really"
I'm sure they didn't improperly or incompletely do the landing checklist intentionally. I'm just saying that with the rough flight in and the bad conditions it could of inadvertently been rushed. Let's face it, as we learned in Little Rock, it does happen under stressful conditions. Again, there was a crash and there were no mechanical failures and there doesn't appear to have been any extreme conditions (bad yes) but not unmanageable. Or so it appears. You do the math. Like the Mod. says, once they touched down half way down the runway you go around.
True but again stressfull situation. They prob couldnt see very well and or was focused straight ahead of them trying to get the plane down and didnt notice how far down the runway they were. When your really focused or stressed you can lost track of where you are. I know from example.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks