American 757 off Runway at JAC
12-29-2010, 05:10 PM
#22
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by yamahas3
Not defending regional pilots, but just pointing out....
Pilots flying 757s have a lot going for them that RJs don't. More high lift devices, auto-brakes, probably much better dispatchers, more frequently airports with better snow removal capabilities, etc. RJ drivers on the other hand consistently and safely take their planes into strips that are snow-covered and 6000ft long, often at uncontrolled fields, with their dispatcher saying "I'm sure you'll be fine"... and they do it on their 5th or 6th leg and 14th hour of duty for that day.
I wouldn't discount or belittle an RJ pilot flying for an airline or based somewhere that does a lot of winter operations. They probably land on a lot more tight, contaminated runways every year than their mainline counterparts, all for a lot smaller of a paycheck.
Every type of airline and airplane, no matter the size or paycheck, consistently and creatively comes up with ways to end up off the end/side of runways. There are a lot of pilots out there, regional and mainline, who need to learn what V1 means, what a touchdown zone means, what nil braking means, and what a wind limitation means. Nobody has a good enough record when it comes to this stuff that they should think they can snub their noses at anyone else.
Pilots flying 757s have a lot going for them that RJs don't. More high lift devices, auto-brakes, probably much better dispatchers, more frequently airports with better snow removal capabilities, etc. RJ drivers on the other hand consistently and safely take their planes into strips that are snow-covered and 6000ft long, often at uncontrolled fields, with their dispatcher saying "I'm sure you'll be fine"... and they do it on their 5th or 6th leg and 14th hour of duty for that day.
I wouldn't discount or belittle an RJ pilot flying for an airline or based somewhere that does a lot of winter operations. They probably land on a lot more tight, contaminated runways every year than their mainline counterparts, all for a lot smaller of a paycheck.
Every type of airline and airplane, no matter the size or paycheck, consistently and creatively comes up with ways to end up off the end/side of runways. There are a lot of pilots out there, regional and mainline, who need to learn what V1 means, what a touchdown zone means, what nil braking means, and what a wind limitation means. Nobody has a good enough record when it comes to this stuff that they should think they can snub their noses at anyone else.
However, there is stuff I would have no problem doing in an ERJ-145 (50 pax MLW 43000) that I wouldn't do in an MD88 (150 pax MLW 139K) or would have done in the 752 (180 pax MLW 198K-210K) or a 763 (216 pax MLW 300-320K).
12-29-2010, 05:19 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
However, there is stuff I would have no problem doing in an ERJ-145 (50 pax MLW 43000) that I wouldn't do in an MD88 (150 pax MLW 139K) or would have done in the 752 (180 pax MLW 198K-210K) or a 763 (216 pax MLW 300-320K).
As opposed to things like a short runway, runway contamination, using an alternate flap setting/higher approach speed mandating more runway, high elevation airport, being approach climb/balked landing limited, mel'd TR's, etc.
Doesn't matter which plane you listed, going into an airport like JAC could be creepy no matter how heavy the airplane weighs depending on whatever factors are involved.
When I commuted out of LGA, riding on the JS on a CRJ going off 13 in the summer time gave me the creeps more than it did being on the JS on a 757 as far as how much pavement was left when the plane rotated. I know, take off is different than landing, just sayin'.......
Last edited by dojetdriver; 12-29-2010 at 09:13 PM.
12-29-2010, 05:37 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,322
YouTube - Plane Crash in Jackson Hole (Cabin view)
Looks like they have trouble with the reverser on #1
Looks like they have trouble with the reverser on #1
12-29-2010, 05:41 PM
#26
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by capncrunch
YouTube - Plane Crash in Jackson Hole (Cabin view)
Looks like they have trouble with the reverser on #1
Looks like they have trouble with the reverser on #1
um... interesting. One of the articles said the pilots said they had brake problems when they made their PA after the plane stopped. Could've been a simple way to say a part of the braking system as a whole to mean spoilers? reversers? brakes?
12-29-2010, 05:42 PM
#27
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
Assuming all those numbers you listed (maximum structural landing weight) are the limiting factors.
As opposed to things like a short runway, runway contamination, using an alternate flap setting/higher approach speed mandating more runway, high elevation airport, being approach climb/balked landing limited, mel'd piece TR's, etc.
Doesn't matter which plane you listed, going into an airport like JAC could be creepy no matter how heavy the airplane weighs depending on whatever factors are involved.
When I commuted out of LGA, riding on the JS on a CRJ going off 13 in the summer time gave me the creeps more than it did being on the JS on a 757 as far as how much pavement was left when the plane rotated. I know, take off is different than landing, just sayin'.......
As opposed to things like a short runway, runway contamination, using an alternate flap setting/higher approach speed mandating more runway, high elevation airport, being approach climb/balked landing limited, mel'd piece TR's, etc.
Doesn't matter which plane you listed, going into an airport like JAC could be creepy no matter how heavy the airplane weighs depending on whatever factors are involved.
When I commuted out of LGA, riding on the JS on a CRJ going off 13 in the summer time gave me the creeps more than it did being on the JS on a 757 as far as how much pavement was left when the plane rotated. I know, take off is different than landing, just sayin'.......
12-29-2010, 06:57 PM
#30
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by FXDX
Why the heel was this thread moved?!?
So geez, this won't make it past page 3 now. Oh well.
BTW, I know I only look at the major section, sometimes regional and sometimes corporate. Otherwise, I don't go looking for threads here.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
