[home][rumors and news][model release matrix][dealer network][desktop calendar][exhaust notes][tov forums][links][search][sponsors][garage][login]

Tire Rack Upgrade Garage
 Search for a Dealer:
 Canadian Flag US Flag
 Honda Acura
 ZIP  
2019 Honda Civic Type R and Civic Hatchback Accelerate into Dealerships
More.......................
American Honda Reports October Sales
More.......................
Honda Rugged Open Air Vehicle Concept Debuts at 2018 SEMA Show
More.......................
SEMA: Graham Rahal Injects Style, Power and Performance to Custom Acura RDX A-Spec
More.......................
NSX GT3 Evo To Compete Globally in 2019
More.......................
2019 Acura ILX Arrives with Dynamic New Styling, Major Technology Upgrades and New A-Spec Treatment
More.......................
Honda Joins with Cruise and General Motors to Build New Autonomous Vehicle
More.......................
Honda reports September 2018 sales numbers
More.......................
CR-V --> Re: Oil Contamination in CRV's and Civic's with the 1.5T
Join Discussion......
Odyssey --> Valve adjustment needed?
Join Discussion......
Fuel Cell Technology --> Hydrogen Power coming back into focus?
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: F1 - 2018 Brazilian Grand Prix - Spoilers
Join Discussion......
Type R --> Re: DC-R
Join Discussion......
CR-Z --> Re: Honda's Biggest Mistake? Why Now Is The Time To Buy The Misunderstood CR-Z
Join Discussion......
Honda Motorcycles --> Re: Honda's Hawk: LSR-Attempt Bike
Join Discussion......
Honda Power Equipment --> Re: Considering a Honda mower
Join Discussion......
Photoshops --> Re: 2022 TLX FR plank
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: 2018 Super GT - spoiler
Join Discussion......
MDX --> Roof rails and cross bars installed -- MDX
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Politician's cars
Join Discussion......
TLX --> Re: My TLX so far
Join Discussion......
Accord --> 2019 Accord Release Info
Join Discussion......
Odyssey --> Re: D3, Out of Curiousity
Join Discussion......
2019 Acura NSX PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Acura ILX
Read Article....................
2019 Acura ILX PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Honda Pilot
Read Article....................
2019 Honda Pilot PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Honda Insight
Read Article....................

[fancy] [flat] [simple]
TOV Forums > Today's Reading Links > > Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked

Go to:

Viewing Threshold (What is this?)

Thread Page - 1 [2]
Author
  Post New Thread
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 00:40
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
..

But I digress...



Did you ever think of wearing a helmet and a fire retardant flight suit?

I can't think of many jobs that would be more dangerous than a general aviation pilot instructor. And I don't figure it pays that well considering the risk.

Are simulators helping out? I know of a ex coworker who worked his way up to a twin engine with instruments rating because they had lots of simulators at his work ( in Phoenix of all places ) and he didn't need many hours of actual flight instruction.

Digressing is good. The tangents are interesting.



We had talked about it as a department, but the instructors repeatedly voted it down. Too Top Gun-ish. Plus, in a GA airplane the bigger threats are blunt force trauma and sharp impact impalement, so the Nomex might help, but probably didn't increase your changes much.

However, on helicopters, it is a different story. On the Robinson stuff (at least the R22) you are in the same compartment as the gas tank, so the FAA requires them. I think they allow a waiver that says "I know I will die in a fire if I don't wear my suit, and neither me nor my family can sue" or something to that effect.

Anyway, a definite advantage would have been the ability to wear anything underneath and still be "in uniform." As it was, we wore polos and Dockers, and let me tell you, it was gross in the summer time.

Pedaling around in a Cessna where the cabin temperature probably never goes below 95* for 12 hours a day made for some smelly uniforms. Nothing quite like getting into an airplane with a wet seat cushion from all of the sweat, not to mention the mass of water consumed everyday.

That's why my official motto now is "It's a jet, I don't sweat" with anything temperature related.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 00:59
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Gfn8r wrote:
Were you near the end of the runway when you had the near-miss, or midfield? Seems like they’d want to autorotate someplace into the middle of the runway. (Or are choppers required to get down to a certain altitude above the runway and air-taxi the length to a taxiway?)


We were at the threshold and the collision would have occurred pretty much right on the numbers.

I don't think there is a specific requirement to do an auto to the numbers, but it is probably a good idea, just like it is a good idea to land early in an airplane. The reason is likely related to a "touch and go" in which the helicopter autorotates to the numbers, gets everything going again and then accelerates in ground effect so they can accelerate out of it while still having as much landable pavement below them as possible. It would significantly reduce risk and even though it has been a number of years now, I am pretty sure that is exactly how they did it.

Keep in mind too that this was at 5,000+ feet of elevation, so at those density altitudes, most helicopters are struggling a lot more performance wise than even the GA airplanes, which are themselves gasping for air. I can remember routinely seeing density altitudes of 9,000+ feet in the summer and you had to be REALLY careful at those numbers. Inevitably, every summer, someone would either kill themselves or try to kill themselves because even though they were required to learn it, they didn't really understand density altitude. More often than not, it was someone from the coast of SoCal where the weather is always perfect and always very close to sea level. The would fly out west in their Cherokee 140 and try to take off with a full payload. When the airplane typically wouldn't climb, they would assume it was having engine failure and declare an emergency and crash trying to get to a runway, or they would just not say anything and hit a mountain on the way out (especially at night).

I distinctly remember seeing an accident one day where an older gentleman and his buddy tried to depart in a Piper Comanche with 160HP. His plane had just did engine work done at a local shop (with a STERLING reputation) and when they took off in the heat of the August day, they weren't getting the climb rate he was expecting (because he was at 9500 feet of density altitude instead of 0 feet). He thought he was having engine trouble, so he declared an emergency, tried nursing the plane back to the downwind and stalled and entered a spin about 800' AGL as he was turning onto the downwind. He crashed about 200' from the instructor building I worked in and both guys died. The other tragic part of it is that they was literally less than 100' away from the crosswind runway which would have been completely suitable to land on as the winds were calm. He also had a pretty suitable ditch to put it in that was basically underneath the downwind, had he not tried to keep altitude at the expense of speed.

And therein was another physics lesson I was sure to impart on my students. It is better to fly the airplane into the ground at a controllable airspeed, rather than try to stay airborne to the point the airplane can't fly. If you lose an engine, its coming down. Not a matter of if, but when. Learning how to use gliding ability is paramount to being able to get out of those situations safely, as is being able to pick a suitable landing spot and being able to plan to get it there.

A task I used to require of any student before I would solo them and would really demand excellence on before I put them up for their Private Cert ride is that I had to be able to fail their engine anywhere, and they could identify, choose and plan an approach to a suitable landing spot. I could tell if they set a field up properly, but due to safety, we obviously couldn't be landing in fields all of the time. So I would also set them up doing maneuvers and then simulate failure of the engine. They had to be able to consistently plan a glide to an approach, to a landing on a runway. They had to be able to get me on the ground in the first third of the runway, in a stable approach, on speed, on path and in the proper configuration that they had chosen. I usually made the do it for me 3 or 4 times at different airports with different scenarios before I would sign them off. It was actually really fun because ultimately, the last part of a landing is a glide anyway, so it gave them a chance to actually connect the training from being able to setup for a field and actually following through on the ground. It helped connect the dots on a lot of "separate" skill sets that they were required to know. I got a lot of positive feedback on that.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 01:22
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
NSXman wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
..

But I digress...



Did you ever think of wearing a helmet and a fire retardant flight suit?

I can't think of many jobs that would be more dangerous than a general aviation pilot instructor. And I don't figure it pays that well considering the risk.

Are simulators helping out? I know of a ex coworker who worked his way up to a twin engine with instruments rating because they had lots of simulators at his work ( in Phoenix of all places ) and he didn't need many hours of actual flight instruction.

Digressing is good. The tangents are interesting.



There is an airport on the north side of Phoenix that does a lot of training, and is one of the busiest airports in the world in terms of take offs and landings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Deer_Valley_Airport

Flying is huge when it rains every 100 days.



Ah yes, I have been to Deer Valley many times. Those hills off the end of the 25's are a PITA at night. A little unnerving to know they are there and not see anything but the little flashing red beacon... TransPac is a huge training institution for the Chinese. Ironically, it used to be called Pan Am Academy, which in conjunction with the FAR Part 121 simulation portion of the company was the last entity remaining from PanAm airways. I guess it was profitable during the bankruptcy, so someone bought it and kept the name. So much history washed away. I think Pan Am had more influence on the world of aviation that any other company on the face of the Earth. They are the reason our uniforms look the way they do. They are the reason we use nautical terms in aviation (dating back to the flying boats). They helped found and start nearly every airline flying in Latin America including both Mexicana (defunct) and AeroMexico (Aeronaves de Mexico back then). They wrote the book on international operations, transoceanic flying, and opened most of the foreign world to flying along with companies like BOAC (merged to become British Airways) and Lufthansa.

Coincidentally, Goodyear Airport has ATCA which is the Lufthansa flight training academy and is the school where the German Wings guy trained that locked the captain out and killed everyone (I won't say his name). But a really good school overall. They also do a lot of cool MRO stuff out there.

Then of course, Luke is a huge training base for the Air Force.

Oxford and Sabena, which are both located at Mesa Falcon Field are also foreign owned schools to train pilots for Europe.

And of course, there are a litany of schools out at Mesa Gateway, including ATP, Mesa Flight Academy and UND.

It was always a real PITA to go down to Phoenix or Tucson because the ATC controllers didn't want to deal with GA guys (even though they had published routes to stay out of the way) and the training traffic was like a mid-air free for all. For a long time, the ATC controllers wouldn't even let us into Sky Harbor's airspace, so we were forced to go below it and then around the outside to the east over by the Superstition Mountains. Of course, the bottom of the airspace was right at the height of the mountains, so you were inevitably below the tops of those mountains, at night, with no ATC assistance and hugging them all the way around while every other GA airplane was doing the same for the same reason. Then on Thanksgiving one year a guy flew his plane right into the side of Superstition Mountain with his 2 young kids who he was delivering to his ex-wife for the rest of the holiday. In the investigation, they found out that he never contacted ATC to try and get though the PHX Class B because he knew they weren't going to let him in. So he tried to take the route out that he normally did and missed it by *this much*. You can still see footage of it online. This lead the FAA to crack down on it.

I used to get so pissed off about it (had a controller kick me out one night after I was half way through because he didn't want to deal and accused me of entering without a clearance (which was B.S.)) that I started clogging the arrival paths on my way around. If they refused to let me in, I would just do my own thing and then when they had to start moving airliners around (because they are REQUIRED to keep them clear of traffic and that gets expensive fast), I would just say "sorry, I'm not in your airspace, I'm going this way and you'll have to move them." When they would complain that I was interfering with their arrivals, I would just politely tell them "That is why I requested a VFR transition sir. I was denied the transition, so now I am navigating around your airspace. I am sorry if that interferes with your operation, but it is beyond my control." After we started doing that en masse, they started accommodating us too.

That is one of the things I do love about flying in SoCal. They have the staffing to take care of the airlines AND the GA guys, and they are usually pretty easy to work with as long as you aren't being a bonehead or a douche.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 01:33
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
honduh wrote:
owequitit wrote:
It is a life lesson in James Reason's theory of multiple layers of protections and how accidents don't happen by a single event, but rather a series of events which are not stopped by protections that are supposed to occur. It is usually referred to as "the Swiss Cheese Model" (which Reason actually hates). I always apply it when I study accidents and it is amazing how in pretty much 100% of mishaps you can relate it back to organizational failures that occurred long before the accident. The Space Shuttle is always the most classic for me as both Challenger and Columbia were nearly exclusively the result of bad policy and risk analysis on the part of NASA (oddly, many of the direct causal factors were the same, even though the actual accidents were different).


Yeah, I remember about the Challenger accident. It was like a bad case of the telephone game, and the mistakes added up.

Also, what you described is covered in Malcolm Gladwell's book, Outliers, when he discusses about plane disasters. He also gave the 3-mile island accident as another good example. It all started from a relatively routine giant water filter blockage. The blockage caused moisture to leak into the plant's air system. That tripped two valves shutting down the flow of cold water into the steam generator. The backup cooling system should have kicked in but for some reason the valves had been closed on the backup. The indicator in the control room to show they were closed was blocked by a repair tag. So the reactor had to depend on another backup system but as luck would have it that system was not working properly the day of the accident either. Worse the gauge that was supposed to tell that it was not working...also failed. It was an unfortunate sequence of events.

You have some very interesting anecdotes. Makes good life lessons, especially to share with the young ones.



Three Mile Island is another good example, as was the Exxon Valdez, Chernobyl, The BP oil spill and almost every other major one. I count Takata in there too.

One of my Master's classes was specifically a look at organizational case studies so we could learn to identify core issues in an organizational structure. We covered all of those (except Takata, which hadn't happened yet) and the connections were astonishing. One of the reasons I decided to focus the way I did because there is a lot more value for a lot less cost in preventing the accident before it happens. However, the downside to it is that you are usually fighting an uphill battle because people don't "get it" when you point out why they are going to cause one. It's an interesting lesson in organizational drift and normalized deviance.

sadlerau
Profile for sadlerau
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 01:47
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
It's a Friday, so I think we need to lighten this topic up. I don't know if you Americans are familiar with the air traffic controller David Gunson's "What goes up, must come down", a wonderfully funny verbal rambling on life in the control tower?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KbUNzi58wM

HondaForever
Profile for HondaForever
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 06:50
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Owe, a question for you.

I've always wondered why pilots announce an impending landing by saying "we'll be on the ground soon". I KNOW that. No matter what happens, sooner or later we will be on the ground. What I am hoping is to be on the ground in one piece, so why don't they instead of "we'll be on the ground soon" tell us "ladies and gentlemen, we'll be landing soon"? Same meaning, but more reassuring, don't you think? Or is there some FAA rule that mandates this less than 100% comforting announcement?

Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 08:28
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
HondaForever wrote:
Owe, a question for you.

I've always wondered why pilots announce an impending landing by saying "we'll be on the ground soon". I KNOW that. No matter what happens, sooner or later we will be on the ground. What I am hoping is to be on the ground in one piece, so why don't they instead of "we'll be on the ground soon" tell us "ladies and gentlemen, we'll be landing soon"? Same meaning, but more reassuring, don't you think? Or is there some FAA rule that mandates this less than 100% comforting announcement?



"Landing on a runway" is the only re-assuring thing you want to hear.

I believe 'landing on the sea' is generally used as a euphemism for ditching it in the drink.

HondaForever
Profile for HondaForever
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 08:36
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Nick GravesX wrote:
HondaForever wrote:
Owe, a question for you.

I've always wondered why pilots announce an impending landing by saying "we'll be on the ground soon". I KNOW that. No matter what happens, sooner or later we will be on the ground. What I am hoping is to be on the ground in one piece, so why don't they instead of "we'll be on the ground soon" tell us "ladies and gentlemen, we'll be landing soon"? Same meaning, but more reassuring, don't you think? Or is there some FAA rule that mandates this less than 100% comforting announcement?



"Landing on a runway" is the only re-assuring thing you want to hear.

I believe 'landing on the sea' is generally used as a euphemism for ditching it in the drink.


"Landing on the sea"? Sounds like an oxymoron to me :-)

Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 13:14
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
HondaForever wrote:
Nick GravesX wrote:
HondaForever wrote:
Owe, a question for you.

I've always wondered why pilots announce an impending landing by saying "we'll be on the ground soon". I KNOW that. No matter what happens, sooner or later we will be on the ground. What I am hoping is to be on the ground in one piece, so why don't they instead of "we'll be on the ground soon" tell us "ladies and gentlemen, we'll be landing soon"? Same meaning, but more reassuring, don't you think? Or is there some FAA rule that mandates this less than 100% comforting announcement?



"Landing on a runway" is the only re-assuring thing you want to hear.

I believe 'landing on the sea' is generally used as a euphemism for ditching it in the drink.


"Landing on the sea"? Sounds like an oxymoron to me :-)



It is indeed.

Never leave your landing light on if you live near an airport.

TonyEX
Profile for TonyEX
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-17-2018 15:52
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
HondaForever wrote:
Owe, a question for you.

I've always wondered why pilots announce an impending landing by saying "we'll be on the ground soon". I KNOW that. No matter what happens, sooner or later we will be on the ground. What I am hoping is to be on the ground in one piece, so why don't they instead of "we'll be on the ground soon" tell us "ladies and gentlemen, we'll be landing soon"? Same meaning, but more reassuring, don't you think? Or is there some FAA rule that mandates this less than 100% comforting announcement?




Well, they could say:

"We'll be on the ground very soon, the bar is opened, help yourself to the bourbon, ignore you doctor. Oh, don't worry about the seatbelts"


Hmm...

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-18-2018 02:59
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
HondaForever wrote:
Owe, a question for you.

I've always wondered why pilots announce an impending landing by saying "we'll be on the ground soon". I KNOW that. No matter what happens, sooner or later we will be on the ground. What I am hoping is to be on the ground in one piece, so why don't they instead of "we'll be on the ground soon" tell us "ladies and gentlemen, we'll be landing soon"? Same meaning, but more reassuring, don't you think? Or is there some FAA rule that mandates this less than 100% comforting announcement?



There is no specific requirement for briefings, though most Flight Ops Manuals do require briefings for certain things. It's also good customer service.

That said, if you are getting a routine announcement, then you can bet that a landing on a runway at the expected airport is pretty much implied, regardless how it is phrased. If it weren't expected, you wouldn't be getting a generic announcement or an expected one. You would get one specific to the situation. An example would be diverting to an alternate in the case of the weather at the destination going below minimums. Also, announcements are very secondary to actually doing our job, so if you are getting an announcement, then everything is pretty much under as much control as it can be. If we are up to our eyes in doo doo, the LAST thing we think about is briefing the passengers.

You also have to consider that you are more savvy than the average flyer, and I can tell that just from your questions. You would be amazed at how low the knowledge of a traveler can get, especially as the skies are liberalized and more and more people get the ability to fly. There is still a pretty significant portion of the population that hasn't flown at all and an even bigger % of people who either don't understand what is going on, don't like not being in control, or so distracted by their electronic devices that they are oblivious to the world. Those are just the people who aren't hammered, stoned or otherwise not fully available mentally.

I have watched people panic over a routine go around, I have seen them be combative with crew members because they think a rule is stupid (trust me, if there is a rule, there is a valid reason). I once watched customers from an Ultra-Low-Cost carrier ask another airline if they could check their flight for them. When the answer was "no, we don't have access to their system" it was a couple of pointed comments about how they all used the same system and the lady just didn't want to check...

I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking...

When it comes right down to it, people don't really understand what is going on and they have completely entrusted their lives to 2 people that they don't know, didn't get to choose and can't see, so there is an element of fear that goes with that whether we spent years, multiple ratings and multiples of tens of thousands of dollars learning what we do. People also don't consider that we also have families and our #1 priority is to get home safely too. Movies like Flight don't help at all because they simply perpetuate stereotypical myths that lend to public anxiety about something they already don't trust.

I've personally been through 13 certification check rides as well as annual and semi-annual check events and will for the rest of my career. There are guys that have done a lot more than that. We aren't just up there snorting coke and pounding beers and flight attendants, even though that is the myth.

I had an old racist guy in Newark once stop me in the terminal and tell me that he was glad to see me as his pilot because I was like "that fair haired guy who landed in the Hudson" and that he knew he was in good hands because I looked like Sully... Which is odd, because he was grey (Sully) and I was more of a blonde/light brown and he was old and I was young. I just looked at him and said "well thank you for the vote of confidence, but my qualifications are based on my training and experience, not on my hair color." He was basically saying he was glad I wasn't a minority or a woman, and least I am pretty sure he was.

Which is another irony about this business. You are either "too old" or "too young," depending on the person. There seems to be a magic age right between 46 and 2 months and 46 and 6 months. Anything younger and you can't possibly know enough to be safe and any older and you are sure to kick the bucket at any second...

As a First Officer people used to ask me when they were going to let me fly the airplane and to tell the Captain thanks for the great landing. I would just look at them and say "Well, I just made that landing, thank you for the compliment, and I already fly 50% of the time. LOL. Can't make this stuff up.

Grace141
Profile for Grace141
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-18-2018 09:34
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I'm the passenger who likes to be lost in music or a movie with my tablet and noise-canceling headphones. All airplanes need free WiFi now. Just roll the cost into the ticket prices. I've always enjoyed travelling by air but the passengers around you in an airplane these days become incredibly tedious. It's not usually that they want to talk directly to you but rather they feel at ease holding loud conversations with their travelling companions seated nearby. My routine air travel is for work and the unspoken rule for my colleagues is we don't sit together and we don't discuss work on an airplane so I like to be quiet. The one discussion with a stranger seated next to me which I found remotely interesting in three decades of air travel was with a man who was the director of the oncology department at a hospital in Chicago returning from serving as the keynote speaker at a professional seminar. I'm sure he found me tedious.

I've had the window seat with a woman next to me go into full flailing her arms panic attack mode just as the crew throttled up for takeoff on the runway. I've had the screaming children near me. I've had the old people who never seem to understand going with the flow (including my mother once). I've had the superheroes around me whose goal in life has been to be the first person to exit an airplane at an arrival gate. I've explained too many times that no airline ever just loses your luggage and says "sorry". My overnight return flight from Honolulu to the mainland a few years ago was wonderful with my headphones and music. I definitely recommend them.

As for communication from the crew, the common practices seem okay. I don't really need to know the names of the flight crews and attendants but it's not a big deal. I'm going to say "thank you" to the attendants. I'm not going to say "thank you, Susan. I'm Bob, your customer." I do like to pick out landmarks along the way, especially at night, so it wouldn't be a problem for a pilot to say "we'll remember to take that tricky left turn at Albuquerque".

Modern travel by air is bad enough as it is what with the lack of control of the environment you're in and the need to pack as many people into a plane as possible but with the seating on Amtrak trains and Greyhound buses taking on an air of luxury these days when compared to a regular airplane the only benefit to air travel is speed. That part I appreciate just enough to tolerate the negatives. There have been times in the past decade when I've travelled in large groups on charter buses for school events my kids have been involved in and I've found the buses to be quite nice. The modern Prevost Touring Coaches are limousines compared to the old Greyhound of days gone by. When I'm on my own time, driving myself on the back roads when possible is a pure, liberating joy.

Nick GravesX
Profile for Nick GravesX
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-18-2018 09:36
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Well, some of us do it, albeit humourously.

I was on a flight landing in horrible weather, when I believe the plane caught a vicious side-gust right before touchdown, causing a nasty roll and coming off-centre.

The lady pilot recovered the line and was forced to slam it down a bit hard due to the wasted distance.

I had thought 'oh, this could end up a bit unpleasant' but it all ended well. Of course, the inevitable jokes about 'women drivers' and 'I'll go up there and park it for her' lightened the mood.


HondaForever
Profile for HondaForever
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-18-2018 12:16
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Nick GravesX wrote:
Well, some of us do it, albeit humourously.

I was on a flight landing in horrible weather, when I believe the plane caught a vicious side-gust right before touchdown, causing a nasty roll and coming off-centre.

The lady pilot recovered the line and was forced to slam it down a bit hard due to the wasted distance.

I had thought 'oh, this could end up a bit unpleasant' but it all ended well. Of course, the inevitable jokes about 'women drivers' and 'I'll go up there and park it for her' lightened the mood.



Unless you were a woman on board :-(

TonyEX
Profile for TonyEX
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-18-2018 17:52
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
...
I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking......



Well, they panicked because they realized that you were planning on landing in New Jersey after all. Maybe they were hoping you'd land at La Guardia, JFK, Miami... anywhere but New Jersey.

I have no issue with flying myself. I finally learned that communication is the key to flying in a cabin filled with people.

If the fellow in front reclines his seat, and the seat stop is broken and allows it to bump on your face, instead of sabotaging his/her flight, calmly get up ( try to ) and let them know about it. 99.9999% of people will readjust the seat.

Don't ask the stewardess to relay the info.

Indeed, I've gotten free drinks from the crew when I handled the situation in my own hands (figuratively that is... not by throttling the other passenger's neck).

If children kick you seat and scream.. then, again, get up and face the kids and parents. Again, the odds ( 100% ) for me, they will handle it. Likely they are simply bad parents and let their kids get away with crap like that all the time.

Other than that, I find the hum of the transformers in the Boeing Cabin Systems to be very relaxing. Heck, I have a hearing notch in my right ear from spending way too much time in labs filled with such transformers... whatever, they lull me to sleep.

Only use headphones, no need for music, if theres' a loud baby near by.

Although, I must say the horrendous gear noise those A320s make when they lower the flaps... Ay! In one such flight, one of the passengers commented very loudly: "Well, doesn't that sound reassuring".. Almost the whole cabin started laughing at that one. It was REALLY funny.

And now, with the current flying systems -fog? what fog?- the only time I pay attention is when the pilot handles the controls at the last 2 feet above the runway... specially with a heavy cross wind.

We did one such landing at SeaTac... rain, storm, heavy cross winds, landing from the North. Winds from the West with big gusts. The plane crabbed down facing right with no problem.. the second it hit the runway, the pilot took over and suddenly we were rotating left... and bouncing. You could feel it in your inner ear. Anyhow, pilots did well. Caught it, kept the plane level. We all applauded the landing.

On the way out, as the pilots were out greeting the passengers, I congratulated them on a fine Navy Landing. ;-)




Dren
Profile for Dren
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-20-2018 08:38
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Grace141 wrote:
I'm the passenger who likes to be lost in music or a movie with my tablet and noise-canceling headphones. All airplanes need free WiFi now. Just roll the cost into the ticket prices. I've always enjoyed travelling by air but the passengers around you in an airplane these days become incredibly tedious. It's not usually that they want to talk directly to you but rather they feel at ease holding loud conversations with their travelling companions seated nearby. My routine air travel is for work and the unspoken rule for my colleagues is we don't sit together and we don't discuss work on an airplane so I like to be quiet. The one discussion with a stranger seated next to me which I found remotely interesting in three decades of air travel was with a man who was the director of the oncology department at a hospital in Chicago returning from serving as the keynote speaker at a professional seminar. I'm sure he found me tedious.

I've had the window seat with a woman next to me go into full flailing her arms panic attack mode just as the crew throttled up for takeoff on the runway. I've had the screaming children near me. I've had the old people who never seem to understand going with the flow (including my mother once). I've had the superheroes around me whose goal in life has been to be the first person to exit an airplane at an arrival gate. I've explained too many times that no airline ever just loses your luggage and says "sorry". My overnight return flight from Honolulu to the mainland a few years ago was wonderful with my headphones and music. I definitely recommend them.



I grew up in a military family so I have flown a lot. It's a pain in the ass now compared to how easy it used to be. I much prefer to drive unless it's over a day's drive.

I've sat next to all sorts of people. One of my favorites was this huge Samoan looking guy who just looked at me and jokingly said, sorry dude, I'm fat, and laughed when I was sitting next to him. He talked the entire flight, which I normally do your thing and put on the noise cancelling headphones, but he was entertaining. Luckily, that was a short flight.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-22-2018 01:16
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Grace141 wrote:
I'm the passenger who likes to be lost in music or a movie with my tablet and noise-canceling headphones. All airplanes need free WiFi now. Just roll the cost into the ticket prices. I've always enjoyed travelling by air but the passengers around you in an airplane these days become incredibly tedious. It's not usually that they want to talk directly to you but rather they feel at ease holding loud conversations with their travelling companions seated nearby. My routine air travel is for work and the unspoken rule for my colleagues is we don't sit together and we don't discuss work on an airplane so I like to be quiet. The one discussion with a stranger seated next to me which I found remotely interesting in three decades of air travel was with a man who was the director of the oncology department at a hospital in Chicago returning from serving as the keynote speaker at a professional seminar. I'm sure he found me tedious.

I've had the window seat with a woman next to me go into full flailing her arms panic attack mode just as the crew throttled up for takeoff on the runway. I've had the screaming children near me. I've had the old people who never seem to understand going with the flow (including my mother once). I've had the superheroes around me whose goal in life has been to be the first person to exit an airplane at an arrival gate. I've explained too many times that no airline ever just loses your luggage and says "sorry". My overnight return flight from Honolulu to the mainland a few years ago was wonderful with my headphones and music. I definitely recommend them.

As for communication from the crew, the common practices seem okay. I don't really need to know the names of the flight crews and attendants but it's not a big deal. I'm going to say "thank you" to the attendants. I'm not going to say "thank you, Susan. I'm Bob, your customer." I do like to pick out landmarks along the way, especially at night, so it wouldn't be a problem for a pilot to say "we'll remember to take that tricky left turn at Albuquerque".

Modern travel by air is bad enough as it is what with the lack of control of the environment you're in and the need to pack as many people into a plane as possible but with the seating on Amtrak trains and Greyhound buses taking on an air of luxury these days when compared to a regular airplane the only benefit to air travel is speed. That part I appreciate just enough to tolerate the negatives. There have been times in the past decade when I've travelled in large groups on charter buses for school events my kids have been involved in and I've found the buses to be quite nice. The modern Prevost Touring Coaches are limousines compared to the old Greyhound of days gone by. When I'm on my own time, driving myself on the back roads when possible is a pure, liberating joy.



LOL. That made me laugh a little. "Just roll the cost into the plane tickets..."

Except that the consumer doesn't agree. They vote for the cheapest ticket 100% of the time. So if airline A rolls it into the cost of the ticket (as used to be the case for food, inflight movies, reserved seating, free luggage, more seat space, hot towels, pillows, blankets, free drinks, etc) then people jumped on airline B as soon as it was $.10 cheaper.

It's actually prescient that you mention the bus here because the reality is that flying sucks as badly as it does because the consumer has gotten EXACTLY what they were willing to pay for, and in that I have not 1 ounce of sorrow for them. You want cheap crap product with no room, no service and no free items, here you go...

Case in point. When Southwest was "no frills" (meaning they offered less than "legacy" carriers) and had the cheapest fares as a result, they grew like weeds. Now that they have matured into a "real" airline and you have likes of Spirit and Frontier coming in with even cheaper tickets (and shittier product), THEY are the ones growing like weeds. Each time this happens, every other airline is forced to adapt so you get the pay-for-everything policies that almost all airlines have had to adopt. Personally, I LUV Southwest, but they are allowed to do what they do because of their other strong attributes, namely their culture and customer service, which everyone else can't do. Want more seat room? Don't buy the cheapest ticket you can find. Want more inflight services? Pay more for your ticket. Almost every airline has big, spacious, perks added seats in the front of the airplane that they would love to sell you for an added fee. But guess what? Most of them get filled up domestically by people who bought a coach ticket and are hoping to use their "status" to get put into an empty first class seat, rather than paying for it. Everyone else just chooses to take the cheapest fair they can while simultaneously complaining about the cost AND the service attached to it.

I also have zero sympathy because before airline management figured out they could go after the customer's perks for cost reductions, they went after our pay, our benefits, our job security, our retirement, our pensions and any other little bit of lint they could dig out of our families' pockets in order to save a buck. This is why there is a massive looming pilot shortage. They finally succeeded in making the industry so unsustainably crappy to work in that it makes more sense to go be a minimum wage employee rather than spend $100K+ so you can earn the ratings to still be a minimum wage employee. There IS a pilot shortage coming and wages are going to go up and massively. Expect to see the cost transferred directly to your ticket price; which when adjusted for inflation is STILL cheaper than 1980, even with recent cost increases. The employees have nothing left to give.

The reason you are having to be packed in is that some of those airlines are literally transporting you for cheaper than a bus ticket and they are doing it in a device that costs somewhere around $20K+ per hour to operate versus a couple hundred bucks per hour and they are doing it under many more layers of regulation. This allows busses to keep the same relative seating density and still make money, while there is no hope or expectation of companies like Amtrak ever making money. If airlines got to live off the teet of subsidy and regulation (as they did prior to 1978) the air travel experience would be far different than it is today.

Consider the irony in the fact that most people will spend $300-400 a month willingly on Starbucks coffee (what is that like $3400-4800 a year?), but they will bitch about having to pay an extra $50 to strap themselves into an aluminum tube that is filled with gas, lit on fire and hurtled through the sky 7 miles above the Earth at near the speed of sound...

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-22-2018 02:44
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
...
I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking......



Well, they panicked because they realized that you were planning on landing in New Jersey after all. Maybe they were hoping you'd land at La Guardia, JFK, Miami... anywhere but New Jersey.

I have no issue with flying myself. I finally learned that communication is the key to flying in a cabin filled with people.

If the fellow in front reclines his seat, and the seat stop is broken and allows it to bump on your face, instead of sabotaging his/her flight, calmly get up ( try to ) and let them know about it. 99.9999% of people will readjust the seat.

Don't ask the stewardess to relay the info.

Indeed, I've gotten free drinks from the crew when I handled the situation in my own hands (figuratively that is... not by throttling the other passenger's neck).

If children kick you seat and scream.. then, again, get up and face the kids and parents. Again, the odds ( 100% ) for me, they will handle it. Likely they are simply bad parents and let their kids get away with crap like that all the time.

Other than that, I find the hum of the transformers in the Boeing Cabin Systems to be very relaxing. Heck, I have a hearing notch in my right ear from spending way too much time in labs filled with such transformers... whatever, they lull me to sleep.

Only use headphones, no need for music, if theres' a loud baby near by.

Although, I must say the horrendous gear noise those A320s make when they lower the flaps... Ay! In one such flight, one of the passengers commented very loudly: "Well, doesn't that sound reassuring".. Almost the whole cabin started laughing at that one. It was REALLY funny.

And now, with the current flying systems -fog? what fog?- the only time I pay attention is when the pilot handles the controls at the last 2 feet above the runway... specially with a heavy cross wind.

We did one such landing at SeaTac... rain, storm, heavy cross winds, landing from the North. Winds from the West with big gusts. The plane crabbed down facing right with no problem.. the second it hit the runway, the pilot took over and suddenly we were rotating left... and bouncing. You could feel it in your inner ear. Anyhow, pilots did well. Caught it, kept the plane level. We all applauded the landing.

On the way out, as the pilots were out greeting the passengers, I congratulated them on a fine Navy Landing. ;-)






Tony, no offense, but I am not sure where this assumption that it is always an autoland comes from. It is actually very rarely an autoland. Unless it is a CATIII landing (in which case you would have no idea which way you were crabbed), then it was probably not an autoland. Even on a CATII the pilots take it off of autopilot at 100' AGL.

As to the sensation you described when the pilot "took over," he didn't take over, he was flying it the whole time. That is a standard maneuver where the airplane is "decrabbed" from the crosswind to align with the runway because it is extremely uncomfortable to land with a side load, which is what happens if you drive it on in a crab. The preferred method is to kick the rudder just prior to touchdown (literally at about 10-15') so that the airplane aligns with the centerline, but minimizes drift. This is especially true in an airplane with low, wing mounted pod engines as you may only get 2-5* of bank before you start dragging engines on the ground. Since you either have to have a crab or lower a wing in order to maintain centerline alignment, and you can't lower a wing much, you kick it out just prior to touchdown. As for the "firmness" of the landing, you don't grease heavy, gusty crosswind landings because that is how you run out of control authority and end up in a ditch or floating halfway down the runway. You stick it and stop it.

I had some a**hat going into Seattle once tell me that he had "worked for Boeing" (in what capacity?) for 50 years and our airplane was definitely "damaged" because the landing was hard and we had better "write it up." Except that it wasn't hard, it was very firm. The tires didn't blow and the bins didn't open (which was McD's criteria for a "hard" landing on the MD-80), so it didn't require a write up. But just to make sure he cemented his douchebaggery, he actually emailed the company to let them know about it.

Too bad the airplane was built by McDonnell-Douglas, which obviously means it was a lot stronger than a Boeing. That goes back to my story about the tail falling off of the prototype because the landing was so hard, but they simply re-attached the tail and sold the airplane. I'm not kidding when I say that thing was built like a battleship or a Sherman tank.

As for Newark, can't say I disagree. I did love New Yorkers in general though. Great people. I also LOVED flying out of Newark. Such a pretty part of the country, good flying, good routes, lots of challenge and the best controllers on Earth.

longhorn
Profile for longhorn
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-22-2018 10:47
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
...
I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking......



Well, they panicked because they realized that you were planning on landing in New Jersey after all. Maybe they were hoping you'd land at La Guardia, JFK, Miami... anywhere but New Jersey.

I have no issue with flying myself. I finally learned that communication is the key to flying in a cabin filled with people.

If the fellow in front reclines his seat, and the seat stop is broken and allows it to bump on your face, instead of sabotaging his/her flight, calmly get up ( try to ) and let them know about it. 99.9999% of people will readjust the seat.

Don't ask the stewardess to relay the info.

Indeed, I've gotten free drinks from the crew when I handled the situation in my own hands (figuratively that is... not by throttling the other passenger's neck).

If children kick you seat and scream.. then, again, get up and face the kids and parents. Again, the odds ( 100% ) for me, they will handle it. Likely they are simply bad parents and let their kids get away with crap like that all the time.

Other than that, I find the hum of the transformers in the Boeing Cabin Systems to be very relaxing. Heck, I have a hearing notch in my right ear from spending way too much time in labs filled with such transformers... whatever, they lull me to sleep.

Only use headphones, no need for music, if theres' a loud baby near by.

Although, I must say the horrendous gear noise those A320s make when they lower the flaps... Ay! In one such flight, one of the passengers commented very loudly: "Well, doesn't that sound reassuring".. Almost the whole cabin started laughing at that one. It was REALLY funny.

And now, with the current flying systems -fog? what fog?- the only time I pay attention is when the pilot handles the controls at the last 2 feet above the runway... specially with a heavy cross wind.

We did one such landing at SeaTac... rain, storm, heavy cross winds, landing from the North. Winds from the West with big gusts. The plane crabbed down facing right with no problem.. the second it hit the runway, the pilot took over and suddenly we were rotating left... and bouncing. You could feel it in your inner ear. Anyhow, pilots did well. Caught it, kept the plane level. We all applauded the landing.

On the way out, as the pilots were out greeting the passengers, I congratulated them on a fine Navy Landing. ;-)






A320s hydraulics do make a "barking dog" type noise as they cycle through that can be dis concerning to the non Av geek. Its pretty loud.

And remember, doesn't matter how "greased" the landing is, as pilots state, any landing you can walk away from was a good landing.

longhorn
Profile for longhorn
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-22-2018 10:57
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
...
I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking......



Well, they panicked because they realized that you were planning on landing in New Jersey after all. Maybe they were hoping you'd land at La Guardia, JFK, Miami... anywhere but New Jersey.

I have no issue with flying myself. I finally learned that communication is the key to flying in a cabin filled with people.

If the fellow in front reclines his seat, and the seat stop is broken and allows it to bump on your face, instead of sabotaging his/her flight, calmly get up ( try to ) and let them know about it. 99.9999% of people will readjust the seat.

Don't ask the stewardess to relay the info.

Indeed, I've gotten free drinks from the crew when I handled the situation in my own hands (figuratively that is... not by throttling the other passenger's neck).

If children kick you seat and scream.. then, again, get up and face the kids and parents. Again, the odds ( 100% ) for me, they will handle it. Likely they are simply bad parents and let their kids get away with crap like that all the time.

Other than that, I find the hum of the transformers in the Boeing Cabin Systems to be very relaxing. Heck, I have a hearing notch in my right ear from spending way too much time in labs filled with such transformers... whatever, they lull me to sleep.

Only use headphones, no need for music, if theres' a loud baby near by.

Although, I must say the horrendous gear noise those A320s make when they lower the flaps... Ay! In one such flight, one of the passengers commented very loudly: "Well, doesn't that sound reassuring".. Almost the whole cabin started laughing at that one. It was REALLY funny.

And now, with the current flying systems -fog? what fog?- the only time I pay attention is when the pilot handles the controls at the last 2 feet above the runway... specially with a heavy cross wind.

We did one such landing at SeaTac... rain, storm, heavy cross winds, landing from the North. Winds from the West with big gusts. The plane crabbed down facing right with no problem.. the second it hit the runway, the pilot took over and suddenly we were rotating left... and bouncing. You could feel it in your inner ear. Anyhow, pilots did well. Caught it, kept the plane level. We all applauded the landing.

On the way out, as the pilots were out greeting the passengers, I congratulated them on a fine Navy Landing. ;-)






Tony, no offense, but I am not sure where this assumption that it is always an autoland comes from. It is actually very rarely an autoland. Unless it is a CATIII landing (in which case you would have no idea which way you were crabbed), then it was probably not an autoland. Even on a CATII the pilots take it off of autopilot at 100' AGL.

As to the sensation you described when the pilot "took over," he didn't take over, he was flying it the whole time. That is a standard maneuver where the airplane is "decrabbed" from the crosswind to align with the runway because it is extremely uncomfortable to land with a side load, which is what happens if you drive it on in a crab. The preferred method is to kick the rudder just prior to touchdown (literally at about 10-15') so that the airplane aligns with the centerline, but minimizes drift. This is especially true in an airplane with low, wing mounted pod engines as you may only get 2-5* of bank before you start dragging engines on the ground. Since you either have to have a crab or lower a wing in order to maintain centerline alignment, and you can't lower a wing much, you kick it out just prior to touchdown. As for the "firmness" of the landing, you don't grease heavy, gusty crosswind landings because that is how you run out of control authority and end up in a ditch or floating halfway down the runway. You stick it and stop it.

I had some a**hat going into Seattle once tell me that he had "worked for Boeing" (in what capacity?) for 50 years and our airplane was definitely "damaged" because the landing was hard and we had better "write it up." Except that it wasn't hard, it was very firm. The tires didn't blow and the bins didn't open (which was McD's criteria for a "hard" landing on the MD-80), so it didn't require a write up. But just to make sure he cemented his douchebaggery, he actually emailed the company to let them know about it.

Too bad the airplane was built by McDonnell-Douglas, which obviously means it was a lot stronger than a Boeing. That goes back to my story about the tail falling off of the prototype because the landing was so hard, but they simply re-attached the tail and sold the airplane. I'm not kidding when I say that thing was built like a battleship or a Sherman tank.

As for Newark, can't say I disagree. I did love New Yorkers in general though. Great people. I also LOVED flying out of Newark. Such a pretty part of the country, good flying, good routes, lots of challenge and the best controllers on Earth.



Owe, maybe you can answer this question for me about EWR. Why when departing to the south usually on 22R, do airlines turn left and then right? What are they are to avoid flying over south of the Newark Airport? I've heard an urban myth about a church with big stain glass.

vh2k
Profile for vh2k
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-22-2018 11:32
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
longhorn wrote:
owequitit wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
...
I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking......



Well, they panicked because they realized that you were planning on landing in New Jersey after all. Maybe they were hoping you'd land at La Guardia, JFK, Miami... anywhere but New Jersey.

I have no issue with flying myself. I finally learned that communication is the key to flying in a cabin filled with people.

If the fellow in front reclines his seat, and the seat stop is broken and allows it to bump on your face, instead of sabotaging his/her flight, calmly get up ( try to ) and let them know about it. 99.9999% of people will readjust the seat.

Don't ask the stewardess to relay the info.

Indeed, I've gotten free drinks from the crew when I handled the situation in my own hands (figuratively that is... not by throttling the other passenger's neck).

If children kick you seat and scream.. then, again, get up and face the kids and parents. Again, the odds ( 100% ) for me, they will handle it. Likely they are simply bad parents and let their kids get away with crap like that all the time.

Other than that, I find the hum of the transformers in the Boeing Cabin Systems to be very relaxing. Heck, I have a hearing notch in my right ear from spending way too much time in labs filled with such transformers... whatever, they lull me to sleep.

Only use headphones, no need for music, if theres' a loud baby near by.

Although, I must say the horrendous gear noise those A320s make when they lower the flaps... Ay! In one such flight, one of the passengers commented very loudly: "Well, doesn't that sound reassuring".. Almost the whole cabin started laughing at that one. It was REALLY funny.

And now, with the current flying systems -fog? what fog?- the only time I pay attention is when the pilot handles the controls at the last 2 feet above the runway... specially with a heavy cross wind.

We did one such landing at SeaTac... rain, storm, heavy cross winds, landing from the North. Winds from the West with big gusts. The plane crabbed down facing right with no problem.. the second it hit the runway, the pilot took over and suddenly we were rotating left... and bouncing. You could feel it in your inner ear. Anyhow, pilots did well. Caught it, kept the plane level. We all applauded the landing.

On the way out, as the pilots were out greeting the passengers, I congratulated them on a fine Navy Landing. ;-)






Tony, no offense, but I am not sure where this assumption that it is always an autoland comes from. It is actually very rarely an autoland. Unless it is a CATIII landing (in which case you would have no idea which way you were crabbed), then it was probably not an autoland. Even on a CATII the pilots take it off of autopilot at 100' AGL.

As to the sensation you described when the pilot "took over," he didn't take over, he was flying it the whole time. That is a standard maneuver where the airplane is "decrabbed" from the crosswind to align with the runway because it is extremely uncomfortable to land with a side load, which is what happens if you drive it on in a crab. The preferred method is to kick the rudder just prior to touchdown (literally at about 10-15') so that the airplane aligns with the centerline, but minimizes drift. This is especially true in an airplane with low, wing mounted pod engines as you may only get 2-5* of bank before you start dragging engines on the ground. Since you either have to have a crab or lower a wing in order to maintain centerline alignment, and you can't lower a wing much, you kick it out just prior to touchdown. As for the "firmness" of the landing, you don't grease heavy, gusty crosswind landings because that is how you run out of control authority and end up in a ditch or floating halfway down the runway. You stick it and stop it.

I had some a**hat going into Seattle once tell me that he had "worked for Boeing" (in what capacity?) for 50 years and our airplane was definitely "damaged" because the landing was hard and we had better "write it up." Except that it wasn't hard, it was very firm. The tires didn't blow and the bins didn't open (which was McD's criteria for a "hard" landing on the MD-80), so it didn't require a write up. But just to make sure he cemented his douchebaggery, he actually emailed the company to let them know about it.

Too bad the airplane was built by McDonnell-Douglas, which obviously means it was a lot stronger than a Boeing. That goes back to my story about the tail falling off of the prototype because the landing was so hard, but they simply re-attached the tail and sold the airplane. I'm not kidding when I say that thing was built like a battleship or a Sherman tank.

As for Newark, can't say I disagree. I did love New Yorkers in general though. Great people. I also LOVED flying out of Newark. Such a pretty part of the country, good flying, good routes, lots of challenge and the best controllers on Earth.



Owe, maybe you can answer this question for me about EWR. Why when departing to the south usually on 22R, do airlines turn left and then right? What are they are to avoid flying over south of the Newark Airport? I've heard an urban myth about a church with big stain glass.



In 1951 and 1952, there were three plane crashes over the city of Elizabeth, within just a few months, killing people who were both on the planes and also on the ground. While the planes' routing did not cause the crash, the lives on the ground that were lost would not have been at risk had the planes not been flying over the city. So, departure routes were changed and have remained that way ever since.

longhorn
Profile for longhorn
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-22-2018 15:50
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Hmm...Interesting, thank you.
owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-23-2018 00:20
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
longhorn wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
...
I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking......



Well, they panicked because they realized that you were planning on landing in New Jersey after all. Maybe they were hoping you'd land at La Guardia, JFK, Miami... anywhere but New Jersey.

I have no issue with flying myself. I finally learned that communication is the key to flying in a cabin filled with people.

If the fellow in front reclines his seat, and the seat stop is broken and allows it to bump on your face, instead of sabotaging his/her flight, calmly get up ( try to ) and let them know about it. 99.9999% of people will readjust the seat.

Don't ask the stewardess to relay the info.

Indeed, I've gotten free drinks from the crew when I handled the situation in my own hands (figuratively that is... not by throttling the other passenger's neck).

If children kick you seat and scream.. then, again, get up and face the kids and parents. Again, the odds ( 100% ) for me, they will handle it. Likely they are simply bad parents and let their kids get away with crap like that all the time.

Other than that, I find the hum of the transformers in the Boeing Cabin Systems to be very relaxing. Heck, I have a hearing notch in my right ear from spending way too much time in labs filled with such transformers... whatever, they lull me to sleep.

Only use headphones, no need for music, if theres' a loud baby near by.

Although, I must say the horrendous gear noise those A320s make when they lower the flaps... Ay! In one such flight, one of the passengers commented very loudly: "Well, doesn't that sound reassuring".. Almost the whole cabin started laughing at that one. It was REALLY funny.

And now, with the current flying systems -fog? what fog?- the only time I pay attention is when the pilot handles the controls at the last 2 feet above the runway... specially with a heavy cross wind.

We did one such landing at SeaTac... rain, storm, heavy cross winds, landing from the North. Winds from the West with big gusts. The plane crabbed down facing right with no problem.. the second it hit the runway, the pilot took over and suddenly we were rotating left... and bouncing. You could feel it in your inner ear. Anyhow, pilots did well. Caught it, kept the plane level. We all applauded the landing.

On the way out, as the pilots were out greeting the passengers, I congratulated them on a fine Navy Landing. ;-)






A320s hydraulics do make a "barking dog" type noise as they cycle through that can be dis concerning to the non Av geek. Its pretty loud.

And remember, doesn't matter how "greased" the landing is, as pilots state, any landing you can walk away from was a good landing.



The "barking dog" sound is actually the hydraulic PTU maintaining the the system pressure in the green or yellow hydraulic systems. Anytime there is a pressure differential of more than 500PSI (such as in the case of landing gear movement, or single engine taxi when only one system is pressurized), you will hear that thing barking away down in the cargo hold. Not sure why Airbus made them so loud as most other airplanes manage to do it without making a racket. You will also hear it "test" and bark a few times whenever the second engine start is initiated as that is part of Airbus logic to make sure it is working. You MIGHT also hear it when taxiing single engine, but most airlines have worked out various schemes and configurations to keep it quiet. On the old airplanes, the nose wheel steering is on the Green system, which runs off of engine #1. The newer planes moved it to the Yellow system which runs off of number 2. Seems like a trivial change, but the big factor there is that the Yellow system also has an electric hydraulic pump that can be turned on to keep the nose wheel steering powered with #1 shutdown. I have also seen airlines that will just turn the PTU off while taxiing on the older planes so that basically the yellow system doesn't have pressure on the ground. It is one of the weird French things with the A320 family.

For the hard landing thing, I find it funny when people comment about it but it was bad weather or a short runway. LaGuardia is a good example. I can assure you that a firm landing is a lot more enjoyable than what happens if you try to milk it and run off the end of the runway to end up in Flushing Bay. Plus, I am not sure most people have even really experienced a "hard" landing per se.


owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-23-2018 01:06
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
vh2k wrote:
longhorn wrote:
owequitit wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
owequitit wrote:
...
I remember having to do a go around in Newark because we were landing on the short crosswind runway and the airplane landing on 4L wasn't going to be timed right for it to work out. ATC told us to go around, so we did. By the time we were able to get the airplane cleaned up, headed in the right direction and moving back around for another go in the pattern, the flight attendant had called and wanted to know what was up because people in the back were panicking......



Well, they panicked because they realized that you were planning on landing in New Jersey after all. Maybe they were hoping you'd land at La Guardia, JFK, Miami... anywhere but New Jersey.

I have no issue with flying myself. I finally learned that communication is the key to flying in a cabin filled with people.

If the fellow in front reclines his seat, and the seat stop is broken and allows it to bump on your face, instead of sabotaging his/her flight, calmly get up ( try to ) and let them know about it. 99.9999% of people will readjust the seat.

Don't ask the stewardess to relay the info.

Indeed, I've gotten free drinks from the crew when I handled the situation in my own hands (figuratively that is... not by throttling the other passenger's neck).

If children kick you seat and scream.. then, again, get up and face the kids and parents. Again, the odds ( 100% ) for me, they will handle it. Likely they are simply bad parents and let their kids get away with crap like that all the time.

Other than that, I find the hum of the transformers in the Boeing Cabin Systems to be very relaxing. Heck, I have a hearing notch in my right ear from spending way too much time in labs filled with such transformers... whatever, they lull me to sleep.

Only use headphones, no need for music, if theres' a loud baby near by.

Although, I must say the horrendous gear noise those A320s make when they lower the flaps... Ay! In one such flight, one of the passengers commented very loudly: "Well, doesn't that sound reassuring".. Almost the whole cabin started laughing at that one. It was REALLY funny.

And now, with the current flying systems -fog? what fog?- the only time I pay attention is when the pilot handles the controls at the last 2 feet above the runway... specially with a heavy cross wind.

We did one such landing at SeaTac... rain, storm, heavy cross winds, landing from the North. Winds from the West with big gusts. The plane crabbed down facing right with no problem.. the second it hit the runway, the pilot took over and suddenly we were rotating left... and bouncing. You could feel it in your inner ear. Anyhow, pilots did well. Caught it, kept the plane level. We all applauded the landing.

On the way out, as the pilots were out greeting the passengers, I congratulated them on a fine Navy Landing. ;-)






Tony, no offense, but I am not sure where this assumption that it is always an autoland comes from. It is actually very rarely an autoland. Unless it is a CATIII landing (in which case you would have no idea which way you were crabbed), then it was probably not an autoland. Even on a CATII the pilots take it off of autopilot at 100' AGL.

As to the sensation you described when the pilot "took over," he didn't take over, he was flying it the whole time. That is a standard maneuver where the airplane is "decrabbed" from the crosswind to align with the runway because it is extremely uncomfortable to land with a side load, which is what happens if you drive it on in a crab. The preferred method is to kick the rudder just prior to touchdown (literally at about 10-15') so that the airplane aligns with the centerline, but minimizes drift. This is especially true in an airplane with low, wing mounted pod engines as you may only get 2-5* of bank before you start dragging engines on the ground. Since you either have to have a crab or lower a wing in order to maintain centerline alignment, and you can't lower a wing much, you kick it out just prior to touchdown. As for the "firmness" of the landing, you don't grease heavy, gusty crosswind landings because that is how you run out of control authority and end up in a ditch or floating halfway down the runway. You stick it and stop it.

I had some a**hat going into Seattle once tell me that he had "worked for Boeing" (in what capacity?) for 50 years and our airplane was definitely "damaged" because the landing was hard and we had better "write it up." Except that it wasn't hard, it was very firm. The tires didn't blow and the bins didn't open (which was McD's criteria for a "hard" landing on the MD-80), so it didn't require a write up. But just to make sure he cemented his douchebaggery, he actually emailed the company to let them know about it.

Too bad the airplane was built by McDonnell-Douglas, which obviously means it was a lot stronger than a Boeing. That goes back to my story about the tail falling off of the prototype because the landing was so hard, but they simply re-attached the tail and sold the airplane. I'm not kidding when I say that thing was built like a battleship or a Sherman tank.

As for Newark, can't say I disagree. I did love New Yorkers in general though. Great people. I also LOVED flying out of Newark. Such a pretty part of the country, good flying, good routes, lots of challenge and the best controllers on Earth.



Owe, maybe you can answer this question for me about EWR. Why when departing to the south usually on 22R, do airlines turn left and then right? What are they are to avoid flying over south of the Newark Airport? I've heard an urban myth about a church with big stain glass.



In 1951 and 1952, there were three plane crashes over the city of Elizabeth, within just a few months, killing people who were both on the planes and also on the ground. While the planes' routing did not cause the crash, the lives on the ground that were lost would not have been at risk had the planes not been flying over the city. So, departure routes were changed and have remained that way ever since.



Curious if you have a source for that. I did some digging and could only find some vague references to the airport being closed for 9 months as a result, and I would not doubt your story at all. Not only would it have been a politically plausible solution, but would have been likely.

That would explain the left turn to a heading of 190* at 500', as that would keep you mostly clear of Elizabeth when you make the turn back to the right. I suspect with modern jets, noise abatement also plays a role in that, as the procedure keeps you over the turnpike and industrial areas during initial climb.

I also know that the right turn following the left turn is a result of Kennedy and LaGuardia which both have departures that head toward Manhattan. By having Newark traffic ALWAYS turn right off of 22, they essentially keep traffic on the west side of the Hudson until the get altitude and can head back to the east safely. Of course, Kennedy and LaGuardia departures are designed to account for that too. It was always weird to turn right, even if you were going east. It was splendid on the days when we got to cut right across upper Manhattan though and the weather was clear.


vh2k
Profile for vh2k
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-23-2018 10:24
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply

Here is some congressional testimony from 1999 during which they were discussing the departure procedures at EWR:

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/Trans/hpw106-57.000/hpw106-57_1.HTM

cksi1372
Profile for cksi1372
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-23-2018 12:16
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
vh2k wrote:

Here is some congressional testimony from 1999 during which they were discussing the departure procedures at EWR:

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/Trans/hpw106-57.000/hpw106-57_1.HTM



Interesting. Is there a site for landing/departure patterns or requirements? I live south of PHL (15 miles-ish) and close enough that on many landing approaches it seems like I could touch the plane or they are going to land in my backyard. The landing patterns seem to change all the time and I'm guessing it has to do with noise...and safety, but they usually come in from the west and turn north towards PHL. Makes sense.

On my flights out, taking off to the South, it seems like they usually follow the DE River and turn right (west) somewhere around 10-15k feet maybe. If heading to somewhere like MCO, they usually hug the coastline down. Taking off to the North, the turn west is similar to taking off to the South and if heading to somewhere like BOS, they can either take the coastline in or go a bit west of NJ/NY/CT and back in.

It's funny, I've always been fascinated by flying/airplanes and would love to learn to do it...in a Cirrus with a chute, Ha, but also have something of a flying phobia and don't like heights.

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-24-2018 01:35
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
cksi1372 wrote:
vh2k wrote:

Here is some congressional testimony from 1999 during which they were discussing the departure procedures at EWR:

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/Trans/hpw106-57.000/hpw106-57_1.HTM



Interesting. Is there a site for landing/departure patterns or requirements? I live south of PHL (15 miles-ish) and close enough that on many landing approaches it seems like I could touch the plane or they are going to land in my backyard. The landing patterns seem to change all the time and I'm guessing it has to do with noise...and safety, but they usually come in from the west and turn north towards PHL. Makes sense.

On my flights out, taking off to the South, it seems like they usually follow the DE River and turn right (west) somewhere around 10-15k feet maybe. If heading to somewhere like MCO, they usually hug the coastline down. Taking off to the North, the turn west is similar to taking off to the South and if heading to somewhere like BOS, they can either take the coastline in or go a bit west of NJ/NY/CT and back in.

It's funny, I've always been fascinated by flying/airplanes and would love to learn to do it...in a Cirrus with a chute, Ha, but also have something of a flying phobia and don't like heights.



If you are ever bored, search the FAA website for "TERPS". Those are the standards by which all approaches, departures, arrivals and SID's (Standard Instrument Departure) procedures must be designed. Then there is a layer of local input (what works in New York, won't work in LA for example) and then there is community input (NIMBY's, concerned citizens, local politics, etc).

The biggest thing to keep in mind is that ALL procedures are designed primarily for safety and then make attempts to account for noise, traffic, pollution etc. So really, everything that is done in an airliner is based on a minimum level of performance, usually with only 1 engine operative (in the case of a 2 engine airplane). They give us minimum performance requirements on the charts, and if for any reason, we can't do it, then we have to lighten the airplane until we can. This is why there are time in hot weather, high altitudes, heavy payloads where airplanes will be "weight restricted." If we were to can an engine at V1, we have to be able to continue the takeoff, climb and go somewhere on the performance that one engine will allow us. Some smaller airplanes can't accept certain procedures because they simply don't have the performance.

Keep in mind too that most airplanes are quite large, so even if they look close (like on Maho beach on St. Marten), they are not actually as close as they appear. There are places very close to the airport where they will actually be really low, but they are still on a "normal" glide path to the airport. If the airplane were to lose ALL engines, it still wouldn't just drop from the sky, as even the heaviest of airplanes can glide some distance. And that possibility is extremely remote.

*I can't remember if the engine out procedure in Newark is to turn left to a heading of 190* or to continue straight out on runway heading, but it seems to me it was still a left turn.

bigblue
Profile for bigblue
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-24-2018 06:03
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
owequitit wrote:
If the airplane were to lose ALL engines, it still wouldn't just drop from the sky, as even the heaviest of airplanes can glide some distance. And that possibility is extremely remote.


If I remember correctly, that BA 777 with iced up somethings-or-other in the engines ended up gliding to just a little short of the runway at LHR ? Don't recall for how long they were actually out of power though. Technically feasible or not, gliding a 777 with little or no power to an attempted landing is a bit of a scary thought !

owequitit
Profile for owequitit
Re: Alaska Airlines plane hijacked    (Score: 1, Normal) 08-25-2018 03:07
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
bigblue wrote:
owequitit wrote:
If the airplane were to lose ALL engines, it still wouldn't just drop from the sky, as even the heaviest of airplanes can glide some distance. And that possibility is extremely remote.


If I remember correctly, that BA 777 with iced up somethings-or-other in the engines ended up gliding to just a little short of the runway at LHR ? Don't recall for how long they were actually out of power though. Technically feasible or not, gliding a 777 with little or no power to an attempted landing is a bit of a scary thought !



Actually, as long as airspeed is maintained, a gliding airplane flies just like normal. You simply have to convert your potential energy (altitude) into kinetic energy (airspeed) in order to maintain normal flight.

Check out the Air Transat A330 that had to glide to the Azores because the crew mis-managed a fuel leak and then the Air Canada 767 in the 80's that had to glide to a military airfield because the fuel was loaded incorrectly due to a mistake converting lbs to KG. That is still the longest gliding flight by any turbine powered airplane. A final great example is US Airways 1549 where they glided into the Hudson and landed perfectly fine. In fact, all three of those flights resulted in zero fatalities and only minor injuries (due mostly to other issues).

It definitely limits your options, but it completely doable. One that didn't end so successfully was Southern Airways Flight 242 *I think that's the number* where a DC-9 penetrated a severe thunderstorm and the hail and rain FODDED out both engines and smashed the windscreens. They actually would have been able to successfully glide to Dobbins AFB, but they changed their mind and turned away and then turned back. Had they not had that change of heart, they would have made it safely. It is always amazing to me how seemingly small decisions can put that final nail in the coffin, and you really have no way of knowing that at the time you have to make that decision.


 
Thread Page - 1 [2]
Go to:
Contact TOV | Submit Your Article | Submit Your Link | Advertise | TOV Shop | Events | Our Sponsors | TOV Archives
Copyright © 2018 Velocitech Inc. All information contained herein remains the property of Velocitech Inc.
The Temple of VTEC is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. TOV Policies and Guidelines - Credits - Privacy Policy
30 mobile: 0