If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
I can't find anything in Part 121 to support this assertion...but maybe I'm
not using the correct search arguments. Do you have a regulation citation? Bob Gardner "john smith" wrote in message ... In article , "Montblack" wrote: Aren't all airline pilots required to operate from the field before they carry passengers from it? I've never heard of this before. All aircarriers are required to fly prescribed familiarization flights into and out of any airport they intend to serve several times without passengers before they begin passenger service. (There is a term for it, but old age prevents me from recalling what it is.) Having said that, I wonder if they are given credit for using the sim to fullfil this requirement in these days of high level simulators? |
#143
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
In article ,
"Bob Gardner" wrote: I can't find anything in Part 121 to support this assertion...but maybe I'm not using the correct search arguments. Do you have a regulation citation? I don't have a cite reference. It is something I remember being told 30+ years ago. |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
Bob Gardner wrote
I can't find anything in Part 121 to support this assertion...but maybe I'm not using the correct search arguments. Do you have a regulation citation? I think that this is what John is talking about: http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/e...volume2/media/ 2_076_00.pdf D. Airport Operations. An operator/program manager must conduct a representative number of proving tests into airports that the operator/program manager plans to serve in approved OpSpecs scheduled/unscheduled or approved MSpecs operations. If an operator/program manager plans to provide service to airports in more than one area (domestic and overseas), the operator/program manager must conduct proving tests into a representative number of those areas. The Administrator will determine what constitutes a representative airport or area of en route operation. We used to call them 'Proving Flights'. I have flown them for 3-4 newly certificated airlines. Bob Moore |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
Bob Moore wrote:
Pilots are not required to have previous entries into an airport. Brings me around to asking what I wanted to for a while now... what on earth is it that 'airport familiarity' provides that an approach plate doesn't? If we can navigate in cars using street maps on the roads, it must be a breeze from the air, what? Ramapriya |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
Brings me around to asking what I wanted to for a while now... what on
earth is it that 'airport familiarity' provides that an approach plate doesn't? If we can navigate in cars using street maps on the roads, it must be a breeze from the air, what? In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Sure, we can navigate in cars using street maps on the roads, but it's a lot easier going somewhere when you're familiar with the area. You recognize stuff in real life that isn't even on the maps. Sometimes the squiggles on the maps make things look important that aren't, and look unimportant that are. You can probably make your way home blindfolded, but haven't you ever been creeping along at night in the rain looking for 35th Avenue (it's between 34th Avenue and Sedona Place, but 34th Avenue is off at some cockeyed angle and the street sign is missing, there's traffic behind you and you think you just missed Sedona, or was that Sequoia... and yes, the windshield wiper blade should have been changed the last time it rained. As for navigating the roads by air, ever tried it? You can't see the street signs, you often can't see the streets for the trees (unless you live in the desert); everything looks different. It can be done; I've done it, and it's kind of fun, but it's not the cinch you make it out to be. When you are familiar with an airport, you know where to go by many many cues (shapes of buildings, light patterns, the pond on the left, the runup area that's white concrete instead of black tarmac...) these things are not shown on approach plates. A real look counts for a lot. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#147
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message ... What Dave said. Controllers are no longer liable for failure to catch erroneous readbacks. How so? |
#148
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
Jose wrote:
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. As for navigating the roads by air, ever tried it? You can't see the street signs, you often can't see the streets for the trees (unless you live in the desert); everything looks different. It can be done; I've done it, and it's kind of fun, but it's not the cinch you make it out to be. When you are familiar with an airport, you know where to go by many many cues (shapes of buildings, light patterns, the pond on the left, the runup area that's white concrete instead of black tarmac...) these things are not shown on approach plates. A real look counts for a lot. Very nicely written. Makes me feel that flying into a familiar airport just adds an extra layer to the pilot's situational awareness, when not in IFR or VMC. Didn't know that you guys verify your position visually with cues from lakes, buildings, light patterns... no kidding? Not trying to be derogatory here, but won't flying into an unfamiliar airport ensure that you check and double-check everything? ) Thanks again Jose, Ramapriya |
#149
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
Didn't know that you guys verify your position visually
with cues from lakes, buildings, light patterns... no kidding? If we know the airport, that's the way we do it. You do too. When you're driving in a familiar area, how do you navigate? You remember the red building on the corner, the curve in the road, the place where they did some construction not quite right... A lot of us (private pilots) fly =completely= visually, using cues from lakes and light patterns (and correlating them with the charts), and not using GPS or gizmos at all. but won't flying into an unfamiliar airport ensure that you check and double-check everything? Well, yes, sort of. At any airport, familiar or not, we check everything (even familiar ones can change radio frequencies or close runways). It's just that with the familiar airports, we get more chances to do that, from more sources (like having been there just yesterday). Personally I have a form I fill out with pertinent airport information (frequencies, runway orientations, FBOs) and at the bigger ones, I pull out a taxi chart too. It's a bit embarrasing to key the mike and say "N3423 Juliet on the forty five for runway... um.. er, sort of the northbound one". I just look down and see that the choices are 8/26 and 17/35, so the "sort of northbound one" would be 35. After landing, I'll need to know where to taxi to, and one FBO can be MUCH more expensive than the other one. Ask me how I found out! Much better to know which one you want, and where it is. (and if you think I'll remember after a five hour flight, well, my choir director would say "elephants have memories, people have pencils". He was right. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#150
|
|||
|
|||
Crashing on takeoff... how odd
Didn't know that you guys verify your position visually
with cues from lakes, buildings, light patterns... no kidding? Just one little addendum; coming back from Block Island there was this bright line of lights which I couldn't identify. It looked like the top of a skyscraper, if that skyscraper were a mile wide. It could have been a road, but it was lit up far too brightly and would be a very short road. It was visible for half a hundred miles. I figured it was probably the mercury lighting from a large industrial building. But as we got closer, I realized it was Oxford Airport (OXC). The lights in question were probably the lights for the parking area in front of the FBO. Now I've filed that little tidbit away. It makes OXC much easier to find at night! (assuming those lights are on, which one can't count on). The guy coming in for the first time won't know this. He'll be looking for the green and white airport beacon. He'll find it, but not from fifty miles away. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Approaches and takeoff mins. | jamin3508 | Instrument Flight Rules | 22 | September 14th 05 02:51 AM |
Landing and T/O distances (Was Cold War ALternate Basing) | Guy Alcala | Military Aviation | 3 | August 13th 04 12:18 PM |
Overweight takeoff / flight | Koopas Ly | Piloting | 50 | December 3rd 03 11:53 PM |