Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Part 135
Cape Air glides into Naples >

Cape Air glides into Naples

Search
Notices
Part 135 Part 135 commercial operators

Cape Air glides into Naples

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-28-2009, 07:30 AM
  #21  
Flying Farmer
 
Ewfflyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Turbo-props' and John Deere's
Posts: 3,160
Default

Originally Posted by FlyJSH View Post
The media reads these and occasionally they even quote them.

Statements like "I'm raising a huge BS flag. Sorry Cape Air I just don't buy it" are not theorizing or inquiring: they are inflammatory.


By the way according to the report, when it landed, the plane had about 350 lbs (275 lbs plus the 12 gallons) not just 275 lbs.



And thanks, I had a great day
The fuel quantity was quoted from the article(Indicated by the ******//////******). I never said anything besides that about actual fuel quantities.

I'm with 172driver, I'd probably fall out of my seat to see any respectable news organization "Quote EWFFLYER off the Airlinepilotcentral forums stated that XXXX". They could say there's plenty of "buzz" on the blogs, but other than that what can they really do that anyone would take seriously???

And now for the bonus round. Even if this plane had only 275lbs(45gallons+ 12), that should've been plenty. What was the reason that the aircraft wasn't able to get that fuel to at least One of the engines?

I understand crossfeeding if there's a slight imbalance etc..., but wouldn't one engine still be able to draw off the tank? If not, and it's pretty obvious that it wasn't, would you have still taken off?

I have many questions, because honestly I'm still having a hard time feeling this one out. I've experience weird fuel problems with the C310's(well just one specific airplane), where when you went to AUX, it didn't do the typical use half, pump the other half out to the main. It never transfered any fuel to the main tank(still in kahoots on this one). Does it make sense....no, did it fly safely....yes......did you really have to pay attention to your fuel loading, definately. I'm just trying to figure out if any of this related to the C402.

And quick question while I have some C402 drivers here. Does the fuel system have only MAIN/Crossfeed/OFF, or is there MAIN/AUX/X-feed/OFF??? Didn't know if it's like the C310 or not. Thanks again.
Ewfflyer is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 09:02 AM
  #22  
El Capitan
 
Kougarok's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 615
Default

Originally Posted by Ewfflyer View Post
And quick question while I have some C402 drivers here. Does the fuel system have only MAIN/Cross feed/OFF, or is there MAIN/AUX/X-feed/OFF??? Didn't know if it's like the C310 or not. Thanks again.
I haven't flown 402C's in fifteen years! But if I remember correctly each engine had a valve on the floor for left, right and off. Also there was a pull up cross feed shutoff that I don't recall ever using. On the 402C there are just two integral main tanks (wet wings) holding 600 pounds each. It had an extremely accurate capacitance type fuel quantity system.

Anyway no one died! Good job on the pilots part!
Kougarok is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 09:28 AM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 737FO
Posts: 177
Default

Originally Posted by JUG47 View Post
Arrogant assumption! If you knew anything which you don't, so let me inform you: Pilots who worked at USAir with higher seniority than "Sully" who retired early are also flying 402's these days.
I'm offering an apology. I am not fully aware of the demographics of experience at Cape Air, however, I do know there are pilots at Cape Air who have been around since the beginning if not right after the beginning. I also know there are Cape Air pilots who have recently been hired with not so much experience.

Without having insider knowledge of who the pilot actually was. . .my assumption could be considered a valid point. With your "kind" assistance, I now know my assumption is wrong.

Furthermore. . .I'm stating that despite one's experience level(Cape Air pilot or not), the ability to make snap decisions in a limited amount of time is possible.

What I'm really "knocking" is the media. Obviously you didn't pick up on that.
check6 is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 09:31 AM
  #24  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 737FO
Posts: 177
Default

Originally Posted by NightIP View Post
This pilot was an early 1990s hire at Cape Air. Don't think that just because he's flying 402s he's inexperienced. Lots and lots of retired airline guys and furloughees flying the line out here.
Again, I know there is a wide gamut of experience at Cape Air. I didn't read the article.
check6 is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 09:32 AM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 737FO
Posts: 177
Default

Originally Posted by FlyJSH View Post
Yeah, the Cape pilot ONLY had 25 years in Cessnas (according to the paper).
Yup. . .I failed to read the article. My assumption was wrong.
check6 is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 11:46 AM
  #26  
Day puke
 
FlyJSH's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,865
Default

Originally Posted by Kougarok View Post
I haven't flown 402C's in fifteen years! But if I remember correctly each engine had a valve on the floor for left, right and off. Also there was a pull up cross feed shutoff that I don't recall ever using. On the 402C there are just two integral main tanks (wet wings) holding 600 pounds each. It had an extremely accurate capacitance type fuel quantity system.

Anyway no one died! Good job on the pilots part!
Your memory is good! The only checklist I remember calling for the cross feed shutoff to be closed was engine fire. The unofficial reason for closing it was to prevent transfer while parked on a sloped ramp.
FlyJSH is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 11:54 AM
  #27  
Day puke
 
FlyJSH's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,865
Default

Originally Posted by F172Driver View Post
If the media quoted a forum online I would die from laughing and then change the channel or wipe my rear with the newspaper. Forums can lead them to knowledgeable people maybe but they should by no means be used as a source.
Unfortunately, they have quoted or at least paraphrased what has been said on this forum. They do it just like they find a friend's cousin's buddy who has a Tomahawk to be an "expert" on the ditching properties of an Airbus.

Also some non-pilot types, the kind that wouldn't know an APU from an NG, start threads like this:

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ma...-thoughts.html

So if we, "the real experts", start casting doubt on another pilot, the nut cases will come out the woodwork and say "pilots are incompetent, drunken, womanizers." I know that isn't true, almost all of us are competent
FlyJSH is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 12:06 PM
  #28  
Flying Farmer
 
Ewfflyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Turbo-props' and John Deere's
Posts: 3,160
Default

Kougarok: Thank you for the info.

For the record, I don't wear a tin-foil hat, and that guy posting about USAir is definately special.
Ewfflyer is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 02:28 PM
  #29  
Line Holder
 
F172Driver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: C172 Right Side
Posts: 93
Default

Originally Posted by FlyJSH View Post
Unfortunately, they have quoted or at least paraphrased what has been said on this forum. They do it just like they find a friend's cousin's buddy who has a Tomahawk to be an "expert" on the ditching properties of an Airbus.

Also some non-pilot types, the kind that wouldn't know an APU from an FNG, start threads like this:

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ma...-thoughts.html

So if we, "the real experts", start casting doubt on another pilot, the nut cases will come out the woodwork and say "pilots are incompetent, drunken, womanizers." I know that isn't true, almost all of us are competent

You know, for some reason im still amazed that these huge news organizations backed by even bigger corporations can't or won't get reputable aviation experts on when something happens. I know that eventually most of them dig someone up, but in the mean time, don't speculate. I don't speculate about what women think because I have no clue whats going on in there,.

Last edited by F172Driver; 01-29-2009 at 04:17 AM.
F172Driver is offline  
Old 01-28-2009, 02:31 PM
  #30  
Line Holder
 
F172Driver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: C172 Right Side
Posts: 93
Default

Wow, I just read the post by the guy about 1549 being a conspiracy. I bet he works for Fox Noise.
F172Driver is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
freightdog
Regional
64
12-03-2009 02:17 PM
cencal83406
Regional
17
02-03-2009 07:19 PM
Ozpilot414
Regional
1
01-05-2009 12:37 PM
mregan
Regional
10
09-29-2008 12:25 PM
zephyr
Part 135
68
09-21-2008 12:03 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices