|
Originally Posted by Vito
(Post 4034344)
Ugleeual,
Nobody is talking about” smoking the brakes” 40+ years of flying and never had hot brakes….i keep explaining that You can get on the brakes aggressively and stop the jet a lot shorter than most think possible, I do regularly fly a 767 into 6000-7000 ft runways, (RIC, BDL, PVD, SDF) land close to the 1000 ft markers, smooth application of brakes,full reverse.so far it’s worked well… But I guess the energy dissipation of striking a bread truck probably helped |
We don’t know. They didn’t either before it was too late to recover, obviously. You look at something like the Asiana triple disaster at SFO and think, how is that even remotely possible? 13 years ago now. But as all the contributing factors came to light, they painted a much different picture. Especially to those familiar with such cockpit dynamics, auto throttle function and descent momentum of heavy airliners.
|
Originally Posted by METO Guido
(Post 4034374)
We don’t know. They didn’t either before it was too late to recover, obviously. You look at something like the Asiana triple disaster at SFO and think, how is that even remotely possible? 13 years ago now. But as all the contributing factors came to light, they painted a much different picture. Especially to those familiar with such cockpit dynamics, auto throttle function and descent momentum of heavy airliners.
|
Originally Posted by John Carr
(Post 4034395)
Was Wi To Lo on the 76 crew?
|
Originally Posted by John Carr
(Post 4034395)
Was Wi To Lo on the 76 crew?
|
Originally Posted by Uninteresting
(Post 4034415)
ho lee hell
|
I wonder how many times a 767-400 has landed on 29 since CAL started service. My guess is that there were a lot of successful landings, and probably a few go-arounds. I would also venture to guess it’s the first time a 764 was low enough to make premature ground contact.
it was an anomaly, they will figure out what happened, and a pilot bulletin will be issued. We will all be more careful (than we already are) when landing 29. The pilots in question will probably do a dozen landing in the sim to show they can. if you are unable, you are unable. It’s not that deep bro. What a silly argument about pilot abilities. |
Originally Posted by John Carr
(Post 4034416)
Truk eeen way
‘you’re home from work early, what happened, they run out of rolls?’ “No, runway 29 rolling pin” |
Originally Posted by dingdong
(Post 4034469)
I wonder how many times a 767-400 has landed on 29 since CAL started service. My guess is that there were a lot of successful landings, and probably a few go-arounds. I would also venture to guess it’s the first time a 764 was low enough to make premature ground contact.
it was an anomaly, they will figure out what happened, and a pilot bulletin will be issued. We will all be more careful (than we already are) when landing 29. The pilots in question will probably do a dozen landing in the sim to show they can. if you are unable, you are unable. It’s not that deep bro. What a silly argument about pilot abilities. |
Originally Posted by John Carr
(Post 4034365)
Well, this crew didn’t use all of 29 either I believe, did they “smoke” the brakes? who knows.
But I guess the energy dissipation of striking a bread truck probably helped |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:33 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands