|
This morning: Girlfriend: I'm having an amaretto coffee, want one? Me: What? No way, I can't have any alcohol within 8 hours before flying! Girlfriend: Oh, ok. New rule then, you can't have any alcohol for 8 hours before seeing me, too. Me:  Practiced more landings today, and I have a "stage check" tomorrow with a chief instructor to go over my pre-solo proficiency. We did 10 landings yesterday in calm winds and I did great. I'm at 11.5 hours, I got my medical and if the weather holds up I'll be soloing within the next week or two! ProFootballGuy fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Sep 17, 2013 |
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
ProFootballGuy posted:This morning: Out of curiosity what region are you in? We had a thunderstorm roll through this evening, curious if its the same one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
Shavnir posted:Out of curiosity what region are you in? We had a thunderstorm roll through this evening, curious if its the same one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
ProFootballGuy posted:Atlanta, GA. I'm taking lessons out of KRYY in Kennesaw. ATP? If so I probably know your instructor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 13:11
|
|
|
ProFootballGuy posted:Good practice though (the lightning was 1-2 miles away from the runway; I'd never fly in those conditions on my own but with the CFI and wanting practice I chose to go ahead with it until the storm was too close to continue). Yeah, don't do this. This is not OK, even with an experienced CFI. (I *have* done it, landing with a storm right off the field, and it was not safe for me and the students, just got lucky that day and didn't kill us I guess, and on further reflection decided I was never going to do that again). If wind shear doesn't scare you, microbursts should, as one of those can easily slam you into the ground and there is no go around. If you're doing pattern work it's irresponsible to wait until the storm is that close to the field, as depending on the winds it can throw stuff quite far away from the thunderstorm (which is why deviating around t-storms by at least 25nm on the upwind side is my recommendation although that's not always possible obviously). I hate to be the safety sally, but if the CFI is pressuring you to do this kind of thing, say no. It's your life. The Slaughter fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Sep 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
The Slaughter posted:Yeah, don't do this. This is not OK, even with an experienced CFI. (I *have* done it, landing with a storm right off the field, and it was not safe for me and the students, just got lucky that day and didn't kill us I guess, and on further reflection decided I was never going to do that again). If wind shear doesn't scare you, microbursts should, as one of those can easily slam you into the ground and there is no go around. If you're doing pattern work it's irresponsible to wait until the storm is that close to the field, as depending on the winds it can throw stuff quite far away from the thunderstorm (which is why deviating around t-storms by at least 25nm on the upwind side is my recommendation although that's not always possible obviously). I hate to be the safety sally, but if the CFI is pressuring you to do this kind of thing, say no. It's your life. Whats the worst that can happen?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
Yep, thunderstorms are bad times. Also, didn't realize DFW tower used to call themselves "Regional Tower." Makes sense that the approach is now "Regional Approach." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKwyU1RwPto
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
Holy poo poo... that's my airport. I wonder if it was an engine failure (total guess). That place always makes me wonder because there is pretty much nowhere to go if you lost it at a low altitude - the area is either dense, or wooded, or highway, not many open fields or farms. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-plane-crash-20130902,0,3335473.story
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 02:49
|
|
|
The Slaughter posted:(which is why deviating around t-storms by at least 25nm on the upwind side is my recommendation although that's not always possible obviously). I hate to be the safety sally, but if the CFI is pressuring you to do this kind of thing, say no. It's your life. The Air Force has guidance on this. The overarching distances were removed, leaving it to pilot discretion, however Air Combat Command put the old guidance back in, and is what a lot of us still fall back on. 5.26.3. (ACC) Flight Planned Route. Avoid thunderstorm activity by any means available by at least: 5.26.3.1. (Added-ACC) 20 NM laterally at or above FL 230. 5.26.3.2. (Added-ACC) 10 NM laterally below FL 230. However, the 11-203v1 Weather for Aircrews has more restrictive guidance for bigger storms: 13.15.14.5. Avoid by at least 20 miles, any thunderstorm identified as severe or giving an intense radar echo. This is especially true under the anvil of a large cumulonimbus. Unless you have other guidance (which I'm sure you might!) 25 miles might be a bit extreme for low flying. If there is other guidance on it, I'd love to read up on it. Secondly, there is a website that was pointed out to me called http://radar4pilots.com/ - excuse the antiquated layout, but it is a GREAT resource for thunderstorms/weather/radar education. It's updated monthly and has fantastic insight into stuff like this. Also, I partly made this post for other users education, so feel free to add on. I consider reading radar4pilots standard professional upkeep (not really applicable to VFR flying.) For all the VFR flyers, the Weather For Aircrews should have everything you'd ever want to know about aviation and weather. xaarman fucked around with this message at 04:49 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Yep, thunderstorms are bad times. Also, didn't realize DFW tower used to call themselves "Regional Tower." Makes sense that the approach is now "Regional Approach." Isn't this the crash that also took off the top part of some poor guy's car, killing him, while he was driving on the highway that went behind the approach end of the runway? This was just an absolutely horrifying crash if its the one I am thinking of. I think it was a huge contributing factor for the LWAS system too. Tommy 2.0 fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 04:44
|
|
|
Yeah that was the one ground fatality. More disturbing should be that mother nature punched the plane out of the sky.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Yeah that was the one ground fatality. More disturbing should be that mother nature punched the plane out of the sky. Mother nature doesn't surprise me any more. I'm just amazed at the amount of people that try to fly bug smashers through that crap still.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
Tommy 2.0 posted:Mother nature doesn't surprise me any more. I'm just amazed at the amount of people that try to fly bug smashers through that crap still. [cough]southwest[/cough] We flew this earlier today. See that zig/zag right over the PA/NJ border? Guess who decided they didn't need to zig or zag? They're the same ones that called back a few seconds later asking for an immediate turn because they were getting their rear end kicked. Also, Delta 191 was doomed the second it was named flight 191. Don't believe me? look at the number of crashes that happen to have a callsign ending in 191. KodiakRS fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Sep 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 07:23
|
|
|
And Delta 5191 crashed too. A flight I'd been on many times...
hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 13:25 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:look at the number of crashes that happen to have a callsign ending in 191. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_191 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 15:55
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:[cough]southwest[/cough] SWA get's a free pass with the small amount of times they are actually stupid compared to the amount of times they will fly however you want from a controller standpoint. ASQ on the other hand...no. No, you will not be getting 380. Taking, literally, what is the equivalent of an 8 hour drive to get to FL 240....you are the worst. The. Worst. <3 SWA
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Tommy 2.0 posted:ASQ on the other hand...no. No, you will not be getting 380. Taking, literally, what is the equivalent of an 8 hour drive to get to FL 240....you are the worst. The. Worst.  Not even us on the CRJ-700/900?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Wow. I knew of AA, DL, and OH 191, but didn't know about the others. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
I had my windscreen shatter during an approach when the weather was right at the minimums. That was fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
Tommy 2.0 posted:SWA get's a free pass with the small amount of times they are actually stupid compared to the amount of times they will fly however you want from a controller standpoint. ASQ on the other hand...no. No, you will not be getting 380. Taking, literally, what is the equivalent of an 8 hour drive to get to FL 240....you are the worst. The. Worst. Yea the CRJ200 is a dog in the summer. If you don't manage your energy right you'll never get up there. In the winter we struggle to descend quickly because in icing we cannot use idle thrust. AWSEFT fucked around with this message at 13:31 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Animal posted:
I'm pretty sure half the guys who fly them haven't figured out they're no longer in the CRJ2 and can actually climb at 1000+ fpm.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
I wish we had the turbo 206s instead of the normal, now that'd be an impressive climb rate  (My SJS is not improving, although its not as bad as some as I know. I have a acquaintance (former coworker) who isn't applying to Skywest because he might get a Brasilia. He'd rather go to republic or Mesa ahahahahahaa). Jesus I don't get the turboprop hate at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
The Slaughter posted:I wish we had the turbo 206s instead of the normal, now that'd be an impressive climb rate I doubt he'd be on it long. So many senior FOs are going to be leaving there soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 15:27
|
|
|
The Slaughter posted:I have a acquaintance (former coworker) who isn't applying to Skywest because he might get a Brasilia. The Slaughter posted:He'd rather go to republic or Mesa ahahahahahaa).
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Seriously. He's a huge moron. And never mind that at Skywest the Brazilia can actually go senior because its such a great aircraft and the domiciles are awesome. I *WISH* I had been able to fly a Brazilia for a while before the RJ, just so I could have turboprop experience and the type rating on my resumé, you never know where you are gonna end up a few years down the line.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
I've tried to convince him, he's a moron. Dude is one of those guys who you actually feel dumber for having spoken with him at times. Just makes me laugh my rear end off...
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
Wouldn't something like the Brasilia be easier to fly on regional routes than a CRJ200? What with being able to climb and have bleed air and turn and stuff?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
Also cheaper to operate. Brasilias are pretty small though. Horizon is all q400 and they seem to do fine, I've heard the q can be a mx queen though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Wouldn't something like the Brasilia be easier to fly on regional routes than a CRJ200? What with being able to climb and have bleed air and turn and stuff? "regional routes" doesn't mean the same thing it used to. At my "regional" airline it's pretty common to operate flights on 1000nm+ legs. Also, pilots aren't the only ones who get SJS. For whatever reason the general public thinks that since props are "old" that they're somehow less safe and less desirable than a "newer" jet airplane.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
AWSEFT posted:Yea the CRJ200 is a dog in the summer. If you don't manage your energy right you'll never get up there. In the winter we struggle to descend quickly because in icing we cannot use idle thrust. I know the CRJ2 is a dog, but I have also wondered if it is a part of the company policy also contributing to the absurd climb rates for ASQ? It's a pretty common thing for us to throttle them back to only 250 off departure if we want them to climb at anything resembling a normal climb rate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 12:27
|
|
|
Tommy 2.0 posted:I know the CRJ2 is a dog, but I have also wondered if it is a part of the company policy also contributing to the absurd climb rates for ASQ? It's a pretty common thing for us to throttle them back to only 250 off departure if we want them to climb at anything resembling a normal climb rate. We do 200 to 1,000 AGL, then 250 to 10k, then the PROFILE is 290/.70 until TOC. The airplane CAN do it but it struggles and if you're asked to expedite you lose too much energy to do that without leveling off. We recently added an exemption to that though if ATC asks for a better climb and X, Y, Z conditions exists. I've flown with one person who'd actually do it.... as if less than 250 the plane will fall out of the sky. What I've found helps is using pitch mode, setting it (bottom of the wings on the horizon or just below), and letting the speed do whatever it wants. I'll usually get to 300-310 before it starts slowing, then at 290 I lower it to about 2.5 degrees nose up and don't touch it again. It'll hold 290-270 before hitting .70, then add a notch up to keep .70. It's more comfortable in turbulence because the plane holds a pitch rather then chasing the VS. My company had a huge "You can't use pitch mode" kick when I started and some still subscribe to it. I just tell them the book doesn't say I can't. Flying the airplane > the book AWSEFT fucked around with this message at 14:07 on Sep 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 14:01
|
|
|
This is making the rounds on aviation boards. Excellent emergency landing by a CFI. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUZI69FSDag
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:This is making the rounds on aviation boards. Excellent emergency landing by a CFI. That's some quick thinking. They were low and the ground is very cluttered. Awesome job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
The whole time I was watching it I was thinking "drat I hope he sees something I don't." It didn't look like there were a lot of options.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
How many of you 121 guys commute? Any commuters on reserve? From a crew scheduler's perspective I try to be sympathetic because I can't even imagine how much that sucks, but so many of our commuting crews make it seem like it is our problem that they do so. I understand that it is not necessarily a choice, but I feel like we shouldn't be held responsible for getting you home. I really am sympathetic to new FOs making poo poo cash commuting to reserve. Seems like they are paying to come to work...
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 07:11
|
|
|
Yes, commuting to reserve can be a nightmare. Its the reason I simply moved to domicile on my first year. Some other people don't have that choice though. I don't know what policies and liberties you schedulers have, but when you seem sympathetic and like you are at least trying to give me a chance to live my life, I will remember your name and your voice and if you call me needing me to be flexible I will certainly help you back. In my company and domicile I can say that this is the attitude of most crew members. However, last week I had a crew planning supervisor try to shaft me, and I felt no pity bringing the union and two chief pilots down on him. The sad part is that if he had been nice about what he wanted me to do, instead of forceful and treating me like an ignorant serf (reading parts of the contract at me in a condescending way even though he was wrong), I probably would have helped him out. Animal fucked around with this message at 07:26 on Sep 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 07:19
|
|
|
b c n u posted:How many of you 121 guys commute? Any commuters on reserve? From a crew scheduler's perspective I try to be sympathetic because I can't even imagine how much that sucks, but so many of our commuting crews make it seem like it is our problem that they do so. I understand that it is not necessarily a choice, but I feel like we shouldn't be held responsible for getting you home. Some pilots are just like that. It's obviously your fault they are missing their 2pm to Honolulu. *rolleyes* Honestly, its a give and take (at least it was for me). I had to commute up early and I'd call and ask if they need anyone since I was already there (free reserve). They rarely took me up on it but every scheduler knew me as "that guy" and when I called in favors they were granted. Don't get me wrong, I was screwed plenty of times but it was worth it for the small victories. Also, try not to forget that reserves typically spend 5-6 days a week living in a crash pad seeing their family very little. When its time to go home, there is NOTHING they want more. During the week, use the poo poo out of us, hell time us out so we can bounce early. Seriously, nothing matters but the last day and going home. The couple times I got REALLY mad I had 1 hour of flight time left (I was 29/7) and they wouldn't release me. The other was when they wouldn't release me from a late pm reserve on my last day when I told them I'd refuse any overnight (all the out/backs had already left). Commuting blows. I love where I live and have no intentions of moving for a regional airline that pays me poo poo. I've dealt with it and all I ask is for some give and take. - 6+ year commuter (including 1.5 years of reserve)
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 08:58
|
|
|
I have a 3.5 hour west-> east commuter that is notoriously bad and I've been on reserve for the last year. I knew I didn't want to commute to reserve so I moved to my base for the first year, at which point I was off reserve. I then moved back and things were ok for about 4 months. Then the poo poo hit the fan, we closed 2 bases, shut down a fleet type, and had a number of displacements which dropped my relative seniority into the toilet putting me back on reserve. Commuting to reserve has been awful. I spend maybe 8 days at home a month, it's kicking my rear end financially, my circadian rhythm is so far out of whack that I'm constantly exhausted and to make matters worse our schedulers are being told to ignore parts of the contract pertaining to the use of reserves. I desperately want to move to base, but with things being so uncertain there's no guarantee that my base is going to stay my base for longer than a month or two. Generally speaking I don't snap at the schedulers unless they're doing something they're not supposed to in which case I just pull out the contract and tell them what section they're violating. Most of the time they know it's wrong but they've been told by their bosses "Do it anyway and tell the pilots to fly it and file a grievance." It's not their fault that upper level management is either massively incompetent or just doesn't give $.02 about running an airline.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
I just try and think about things like that any time I get SJS, Kodiak. That sounds really lovely and I'm sorry, I hope you get a line soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
The Slaughter posted:I just try and think about things like that any time I get SJS, Kodiak. That sounds really lovely and I'm sorry, Edit: On second though, if you want to read bitter thread making GBS threads rants go to APC. I'm happy to have a job in aviation that allows me to fly an airplane instead of sit behind a desk while corporate America tries to crush my soul. It may not be a bed of roses at the moment but it's going to get better eventually...right? KodiakRS fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Sep 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 21:13
|
|