NASCAR Air Force Story

"Icebound" wrote in message
...

"Richard Hertz" no one@no one.com wrote in message
et...

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


john smith wrote:

"Taking the chance on being delayed in an airport just won't work,"
Green said. "You have to be there Friday morning for practice or you
miss practice. Miss practice, and they don't let you attempt to
qualify."

Sounds like a recipe for "gottagetthereitis" to me.

Hardly - when you are talking about the pilots, equipment and approaches
they have at their disposal. This is much different than some private
pilot wanting to beat home a lowering cloud deck at night or trying to
beat a t storm...


Not at all different.

Yes sir, it is.


No matter how good the pilots, equipment, and approach equipment is , it
can still be insufficient to successfully execute the approach and be in a
position to land when the runway pops into view.

So, do we go a little below posted minimums, 'cause we might still break
through?
If we pop out high, do we steepen our descent and try to make what's left
of the runway????
Do we attempt to keep the runway in sight with a below-limits circle???...

(Everybody here tell me that you have never tried one or more of the above
and managed it successfully, and if you did it once, why not again).

Never. That might be why I am alive and some other folks aren't.


Remember, practice (or qualifying, or photo-shoot, or...) starts in an
hour.... If we overshoot, we may not do any better on the next try and
will have to divert.

So divert. You will not run into the ground. We are not talking about that
situation here anyway. We are talking about being at 2000 feet bewlow the
suggested altitude 7 miles or so away from the airport and failed to climb
and failed to turn on the missed procedure. Now that sounds to me like they
did everything wrong except the silly scenarios you mentioned.


Different conditions, maybe, but still the same potential for
"have-to-get-there". More dangerous than the Cessna beating the cloud
deck, because the tolerance for error is much smaller, and the financial
consequence much greater.

I don't give a rat's ass about financial consequence. There were no drivers
on that plane. No one "had" to be there. I don't know how you can say more
dangerous or more worth risking life for - sort of reminds me of the Jack
Nicholson quote from "A few good men" - "grave danger? Is there any other
kind?"

Your argument is horse ****.