![]() |
Originally Posted by DC8DRIVER
(Post 1527362)
And for those who think this could never happen to them, you may want to rethink your position on this. That kind of invincible mindset is foolish and potentially dangerous. Better to decide that it COULD happen to you and then implement procedures to make sure it doesn't ever happen.
|
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 1527095)
After 42 years of flying... (sip of cognac) They sure look different to me. Next?
Anyone see my garlic breadstick? |
Originally Posted by MD11Fr8Dog
(Post 1527371)
6000x100 can look an awfully lot like a 12000x200 at night.
Thank goodness it wasn't 3000x50. They'd be lucky to stop.:rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by Busboy
(Post 1527372)
Thank goodness it wasn't 3000x50. They'd be lucky to stop.:rolleyes:
I would occasionally be "Cleared to Land on the taxiway ... taxi to the FBO" at my local International Airport. |
Originally Posted by MD11Fr8Dog
(Post 1527371)
6000x100 can look an awfully lot like a 12000x200 at night.
MALSRs never look like ALSF-1s though. Since the approach lights for Rwy 18 are PCL at KAAO - I guess it is lucky they were already on since I'm sure the errant crew hadn't clicked them up using CTAF. |
OK ...
Let's for discussion sake ... say that from some perspective that a 6000' runway "might" look similar to a 12,000' runway (I'm not exactly sure I'm buying this argument?) ... at some point, maybe in the flare(?), would you think something was wrong when your 211' wingspan (with both outboard engines over the grass) doesn't look quite right on that 100' wide runway? :eek: I don't have easy access to a 747 Operating Manual ... how wide are the outboard landing gear? |
Originally Posted by DC8DRIVER
(Post 1527362)
And for those who think this could never happen to them, you may want to rethink your position on this. That kind of invincible mindset is foolish and potentially dangerous. Better to decide that it COULD happen to you and then implement procedures to make sure it doesn't ever happen.
8 Those who properly brief from top of descent to parking wont land at the wrong airport. Those who tune and identify the approach aids will not land at the wrong airport. Those who monitor proper LOC/GS indication even on a visual approach don't land at the wrong airport. Those who review the perils of airports with similar runway alignments will not land at the wrong airport. Those who review the 10-9 or equivalent of the US Government charts wont land at the wrong airport. After 38 years in the industry as a check airman and examiner, I can't stress enough to my colleagues of the perils of relying on automation and complacent behavior. That said to date, it hasn't happened nor will it happen to anyone if disciplines are followed. I will agree, however, experiencing a non-normal situation, engine failure, system failure can happen to anyone, but landing at the wrong airport? It does not just happen to anyone. That said spare the Stockholm Syndrome |
Well said. Some of the posters here may well have that mindset. The crew in question probably did as well. They don't anymore ... :eek: In any case what they're going through now I wouldn't wish on anyone.
Well ... almost anyone:D .
Originally Posted by DC8DRIVER
(Post 1527362)
That kind of invincible mindset is foolish and potentially dangerous. Better to decide that it COULD happen to you and then implement procedures to make sure it doesn't ever happen.
|
Originally Posted by Larry in TN
(Post 1526950)
When the 6,001' runway is also one-third narrower than the 12,000' runway they really don't look all that much different at night.
You need better glasses...;) |
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 1527400)
I disagree.
Those who properly brief from top of descent to parking wont land at the wrong airport. Those who tune and identify the approach aids will not land at the wrong airport. Those who monitor proper LOC/GS indication even on a visual approach don't land at the wrong airport. Those who review the perils of airports with similar runway alignments will not land at the wrong airport. Those who review the 10-9 or equivalent of the US Government charts wont land at the wrong airport. After 38 years in the industry as a check airman and examiner, I can't stress enough to my colleagues of the perils of relying on automation and complacent behavior. That said to date, it hasn't happened nor will it happen to anyone if disciplines are followed. I will agree, however, experiencing a non-normal situation, engine failure, system failure can happen to anyone, but landing at the wrong airport? It does not just happen to anyone. That said spare the Stockholm Syndrome MG2 |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:35 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands