Are commuter planes more dangerous?-OCR

[Dieterly]

The reason i pick the 777 in a burst over the b1900 is weight. Its ping pong ball/bowling ball theory. You get a big shear your screwed, but the 777 spools fast enough to give you a chance, the 1900 is so light and those Pt6's don't spool all that quick, and when you do fire wall anyways you over tourque the motor, and then loose them both, anyways that has nothing to do with this topic.

Spoken like a true dum bass...

 

[metrodriver]

commuter planes more dangerous? no. They only leave or approach the ground more often than the big ones. And most accidents are the variety where an airplane hits the ground at the wrong place at the wrong time. By the time the commuter pilots have made 7 t/o and landings in a prehistorically equipped airplane in bad weather at little airports with lousy equipment, the 777 crew has just finished their meal on their way to their first landing

 

[chperplt]

Lrjtcaptain,

Someone reminded us in another post recently that no one knows what an idiot someone is until they start writing.... this applies to you in this thread.

Do not speak of what you obviously do not know, and then continue to spew crap trying to back it up.

You get a big shear your screwed, but the 777 spools fast enough to give you a chance, the 1900 is so light and those Pt6's don't spool all that quick, and when you do fire wall anyways you over tourque the motor, and then loose them both, anyways that has nothing to do with this topic.

I especially love that last part.... You over torque the motor and then lose both of them.. Yea.. That's what will happen.

 

[Lrjtcaptain]

in rebutle to my 1900 comment, i only made that comment due to the fact that my sim partner at Riddle in the 1900 over tourqued both one day and didn't do anything about it, we didn't survive that one. That was where that came from.

As for shearing, your right, i dont know a whole lot. Riddle didn't teach much about that crap and i ve never really had to expierience any of it. The flying i do now, well i haven't encountered anything more then plus or minus 10 on final and never had a loss of alt.

If anyone would like to enlightenme on microburst theory that would be great. It was help me much better then just blatenly calling me a dumbass on the matter. That may be true in that case.

 

[328jetdriver]

Hey Patriot328, I agree 100%. It's a little rocket (in the climb). Cruise is another story.

 

[JBcrjca]

Wow, I didn't know that Riddle provided students with B777 sim training. How else would Lrjtcaptain know that those engines spool up a lot faster than a Beech 1900s? Do you get a 777 type rating as well as a 1900 type while getting the CFI?

Since thread is easily hijacked, I'll add my two cents worth. I'd also prefer to be in a B1900 or a Lear 25 in a microburst. It's not just a question of weight, but also a thing in physics called 'inertia'. A heavy jet on final has a LOT of weight and downward momentum...couple that with slower fan spoolup times, it takes a little while for the descent to be halted and a climb initiated. Remember the L1011 at DFW back in '85? The crew added power for a missed approach, but even with three mighty RB-211s being pushed all the way up, it was too little/too late. I guess Riddle training isn't as great as a grad would have you believe.

My humble opinion of course, feel free to flame away.

Oh, one more thing...it's spelled 'rebuttal', and 'overtorqued'... it amazes me how poorly people spell these days.

 

[NJA Capt]

If anyone would like to enlightenme on microburst theory that would be great.

A prop is going to spool faster than a jet engine, period (fighter aircraft excluded).
Heavier aircraft+jet engines+tons of thrust does NOT = microburts recovery. Do a search for Delta 191(L1011) and USAir 1016(DC-9).

 

[saabcaptain]

Lrjtcaptain you are getting an unfairly rough time from others who could be kinder. That said please do realize when you comment on a topic like this and use examples to back your point of view and your examples are ones which you admit you don't know much about you might get burned.

Commuters I feel have an excellent although not equal to mainline safety record IMHO because of (in order of importance)...

1. Number of takeoffs and landings.
2. General time spent at lower altitude in harsher weather.
3. Quality of airfields (in terms of approach type, runway length etc.) they operate into.
4. Lesser aircraft capability in terms of automation, radar, ice protection, excess thrust etc.
5. Lesser pilot experience.

Considering the 5 points above it is a fantastic fact that safety is as good as it is at commuters and is a testiment to pilots and airlines and their hardwork and careful attention to detail.

 

[Lrjtcaptain]

hey JBcrjca
i don't remember ever saying i have any sim time in a 777. I was using an example.

I was agreeing with another post ontop of this thread saying that they would rather have the 777 over the 1900 in a microburst.

my comment on the sim was with respect to something some dip**CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** did when i was in the sim with him. Over tourqued and we lost them both. I was just adding that. had nothing to do with any of this.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

did he say he never had more than +/- 10kts on final and never any altitude loss or gains??

as a lrjet captain??

I must be missing something.....again....or I just have to fly where this guy flies!