View Single Post
Old 03-19-2008 | 06:20 PM
  #35  
JetJock16's Avatar
JetJock16
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,963
Likes: 0
From: SkyWest Capt.
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
Would you mind adding some info to this comment. What did you find more "fun" about an ATR vs. a -145? I have almost zero time in anything with a prop. To me they are both airliners, so I'm just wondering what could make one more of a "real plane" or more "fun" than the other. Not flame bait, I'm genuinely curious.
Thanks.
As for the EMB, when you fly from LAX to PSP and they bring you over the top of that 12K-ish peak (can’t remember its name) to the southwest of the city, jets have to continue out to the east and then swing back around in order to land. In the EMB you just duty yourself up; gear, props max, flaps and you can obtain a decent rate around 6K+ with a ground speed of only 145ish all while easy making the left base to the airport. We do the same thing going into MFR and several other airports.

They often bring us in very close to the airport in an attempt to squeeze us in between a/c. Yes this may sound familiar but, after flying both the CR2/7/9 and the EMB-120, they will literally bring you into a very close downwind which is much closer and lower than jets fly. An example is when they bring us in at 3000’ for left hand traffic and swing you inside the bridge in SFO for RWY 28 when all RJ’s will stay high and continue 4+ miles outside the bridge for sequencing.

My favorite approach is the Bay Visual in SFO where they bring you down the bay at 11K and clear you for a short approach, you’re told to stay inside the bridge. It basically becomes a right hand power off 180 from 11K to sea level, all within about 4 miles of the airport. Jets are just too slick for approaches like this. Plus we hand fly a lot with VFR climbs that include low altitude tours of the SFO Bay, Mount St. Helens, Mount Rainier and several other amazing sites.

Last edited by JetJock16; 03-19-2008 at 06:27 PM.
Reply