HawkerJet

Agreed on the training but local knowledge for that kind of flying is OJT only. All of our check airmen were prior Dash-8 and or had Aspen experience.

The 2nd part about the fence, how are Lynx pilots going to fly under a Republic certificate prior to the SLI?

True story, some do, some dont. We had performance software to help us calculate the requirements, applied at Eagle also.

Aspen turn is about 50 min. block. More questions than answers now.

flyandive

No it's not but, it's strange how people treat it. Tend to see a lot of stuff with total disregard to winds aloft, the upsloping runway, and just not knowing the local landmarks.
The scariest seems to be when someone tries to fly a normal approach, not following the PAPI, and ends up nearly scraping tree tops, or when someone has to go around and the controller has to remind them to turn downwind. Plus same thing about the lack of balked or single engine procedures.
Contrary to what most believe, it seems, if you go missed after the missed approach point, the published missed does NOT provide terrain clearance. Moot with an ILS but with a LOC that has an MAP three to six miles from the runway it becomes kind of important. I think the charter outfits that fly in there a lot do a great job and don't mess around but for many it becomes pretty obvious that they have never been there before.

I sure hope so too, it's a good aircraft, very capable and fun to fly. The only downside it seems that an airline has to have a lot of spare parts for it. It's amazing how well we did do considering how long we went without a spare aircraft and parts.
As far as performance, I remember flying the CRJ and even with the 700 and 900 we had a lot of flights that had weight issues. Either a performance limit for takeoff or more commonly a landing weight limit. It just seemed rare that we had issues like that in the Q. Every once and a while in ASE while it was snowing maybe, but most of the time the FMS would take whatever we put into it. Very very capable aircraft.

The flight was usually blocked at 50 minutes but it was typically 25-30min wheels up to wheels down.

Exactly

We could too under most conditions, not sure if we had a waiver or not, don't think we did. Just a big difference in the performance requirements between part 91 and part 121.

BoilerUP

Since ODP climb gradients are based on all-engines operating climb performance, that's 100% correct for part 91 operators...you don't have to be able to meet the ODP climb gradient with OEI. The FAA says the PIC does have to have a contingency plan, however, should circumstances arise that they cannot meet the gradient (like in the case of an engine failure). Visually maintaining one's own terrain/obstruction avoidance is one method, the other (useful when departing IFR) is a runway analysis & special departure procedure developed by APG.

I've heard that yarn before - FAA ASIs writing down tail numbers of aircraft departing at ASE in order to violate operators. Interestingly enough, nobody ever claims to have been violated or personally know anyone who was violated for departing ASE because they couldn't meet the 7.6% gradient OEI...

My AFM says at 18°C there's no possible way for me to depart ASE and maintain 7.6% to 14,000ft, but with an APG analysis says at 18°C I can depart at MGTOW. Needless to say, I wouldn't be real keen on being harassed by an ASI expecting me to prove I could meet the gradient when he cannot provide I couldn't...

ToiletDuck

I have no idea. I don't believe anything until it happens either. Until recently there was a 100% guarantee that all the Qs were going away. Knowing this management I wouldn't be surprised if they try something sneaky.

Yabadaba

I know you don't NEED it part 91... but for me common sense sends a different message. If it's not legal 121 or 135 then my judgment says I shouldn't do it. I used to stop in Peublo or Grand Junction most trips out of ASE part 91 cause I thought it was a smarter plan. The boss never complained when I told him it was safer. You could even play the fuel is 8 bucks a gallon card if you had to but it never came to that.

G-Dog

I can tell that our contract states that the flying would be done by RAH pilots. As duck duck goose said, who know what our management team will dream up for this one.

sizzlechest

Just hire former Lynx guys as management pilots? Already typed...already experienced...$60k a year?.....

void

If it was a performance issue with the 170 or 190 it's not the first time they made that kind of mistake.

About 7 or 8 years ago CHQ management assured Delta that the EMB135 could get in and out of EYW and fly to MCO without any issues. They found out only a day or two before that it might not. After last minute scrambling and talking to Embraer they found out that the 135 could indeed do it with 37 people and full bags but only with a few hundred lbs above min fuel with no alternate. If any more fuel was added they would bump passengers. So they got away with it. However, on several occasions due to MCO needing an alternate they needed to fuel stop from EYW to MCO in RSW! Not one of Chautauqua management's (now Republic), finest moments.

In light of this I wouldn't be surprised that someone in management screwed up badly. But what do I know?

BoilerUP

That's an interesting story...

When I worked at AWAC we'd seasonally do EYW-MCO in the CRJ-200; I don't remember if we were pax-restricted on that particular segment (I do remember we didn't have more than a few extra pounds of fuel to play around with) but I seem to recall it not really being a problem to take 40ish people to Orlando.

I know Eagle used to do RDU-AUS in a E135 which I've always heard was "hot rod"...I presume the E145 I saw Freedom flying EYW-MCO during that time was better on that particular route?

ColdWhiskey

In my opinion Lynx should be added to the Frontier certificate. It never made sense to me to have Lynx seperate from Frontier. Economies of scale (10 airplanes) should have precluded it in the first place. All of the duplicated functions (management, headquarters, dispatch, scheduling, maintenance, ect., ect. made it a losing proposition from the start (three times the startup cost than what was planned). Inside rumors report that Lynx IS the reason for the bankruptcy. Frontier could just as easily have added the Q400 to the Frontier certificate and made that aircraft the entry level position and negotiated a fair wage scale for that aircraft. The aircraft and it's markets made sense. A whole new airline for just 10 aircraft did not.