OO pressuring mainline carriers to not hire

Reply Subscribe

Page 8 of 8

« First

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

06-07-2022, 08:20 AM

#71

Swakid8

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2015

Posts: 2,427

Quote:

Originally Posted by dera

And remember, it's 10k/30 from field elevation, not MSL. 10k/30 is the side of a mountain going into some airports in Colorado.

Biggest issue I think is not being aggressive enough. Gear and full boards will make any transport category jet hit around 6-8:1 descent ratio (assuming no crazy tailwinds or similar exceptions). If you were ahead of the game and slowed down early, you can be 4000ft too high at 10 miles, and still be stable and configured at the marker.

‘That why I said airport elevation.. but yes, terrain is to taken into consideration… A lot of these airports that Skywest flies into, the 3 to 1 rule really can’t be used for it due to terrain. That’s when pilot stuff need to be done.

06-07-2022, 08:48 AM

#72

Excargodog

Perennial Reserve

Joined APC: Jan 2018

Posts: 11,501

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peabody17

Remember, airline cycle is HIRE-HIRE-HIRE-FURLOUGH.

Except for record upcoming retirements at the legacies, and that’s AFTER they finish hiring to replace those they early retired due to COVID. And seniority doesn’t help if your regional folds altogether. Just ask former Compass pilots.

06-07-2022, 09:22 AM

#73

LAXtoDEN

Banned

Joined APC: Jan 2021

Posts: 1,121

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swakid8

Correct, which is why it’s common to request an IAF off an RNAV approach to the runway you intend on landing. That sets you up well for a VNAV decent. Surprisingly the difficult part is not the decent planing into mountainous terrain, it’s receiving a clearance for the RNAV on a visual day with an approach controller who’s lazy and wants to just clear you for a vector to a short final visual approach with 8000ft MSL mountains surrounding the valley so they can go back to watching “South Park”.