![]() |
Originally Posted by Big E 757
(Post 2698272)
On what runway in ATL would you be conducting LAHSO? I’ve been there once or twice and don’t remember any intersecting runways.
|
Anyone who changes their voice, cadence, accent, speed of speech or changes wording for a checklist. Stop it. Now. Also, at least look at it. That’s the point. I’m glad you have it memorized. Good job. However, read it.
|
Originally Posted by 4runner
(Post 2701865)
Anyone who changes their voice, cadence, accent, speed of speech or changes wording for a checklist. Stop it. Now. Also, at least look at it. That’s the point. I’m glad you have it memorized. Good job. However, read it.
:D |
Originally Posted by 4runner
(Post 2701865)
Anyone who changes their voice, cadence, accent, speed of speech or changes wording for a checklist. Stop it. Now. Also, at least look at it. That’s the point. I’m glad you have it memorized. Good job. However, read it.
|
Originally Posted by 4runner
(Post 2701865)
Anyone who changes their voice, cadence, accent, speed of speech or changes wording for a checklist. Stop it. Now. Also, at least look at it. That’s the point. I’m glad you have it memorized. Good job. However, read it.
|
Originally Posted by Moonwolf
(Post 2701578)
Where the heck are you doing your walk arounds? La Garbage?
Small victories. Maybe tomorrow will be slightly less tool-ish. |
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
(Post 2701603)
They’re not paying you to use your brain are they?
|
Originally Posted by king10pin02
(Post 2701725)
spirit has never been allowes to do LAHSO, they dont want to train us
Not being snarky, I understand that accepting LAHSO is part of being a good neighbor at an over-capacity airport but it puts the risk of high volume ATC ops right in the cockpit of the LAHSO participant. I can totally see why any particular company might refuse to accept that risk. |
Originally Posted by flensr
(Post 2701964)
Maybe it's also a bit like why the USAF doesn't permit LAHSO... It benefits everyone except the crew that's put at risk doing the landing, increases the chance of botching the landing or violating the LAHSO clearance, etc. Let someone else absorb that risk or build another runway.
Not being snarky, I understand that accepting LAHSO is part of being a good neighbor at an over-capacity airport but it puts the risk of high volume ATC ops right in the cockpit of the LAHSO participant. I can totally see why any particular company might refuse to accept that risk. Any US 121 carriers have the LAHSO in their OPs Specs? |
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 2701986)
Any US 121 carriers have the LAHSO in their OPs Specs?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:48 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands