Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Chicago Tribune today......re(Montrose accident)

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Quimby said:
But Dave Kampa, a pilot and president of Denver Air, a charter aircraft referral service, said the Challenger's engines were so powerful it could have taken off even with icy wings.

"The extra weight of ice and snow shouldn't have made a difference; it should have been able to bully its way through," Kampa said. "It looks like the plane aborted takeoff. Something mechanical probably happened, and they figured it was better to stay on the ground."
There's really no way he said that, is there? It had to be taken out of context?
 
That's what I thought too........that was word for word out of the article regarding the accident in yesterday's Trib. (Apparently it came from the LA Times originally.)
 
runway

It was reported in Avlash that the captain bypassed the 10,000 foot runway for the 7500 foot one as he did not want to wait for the big runway to be plowed.

While I do not want to condemn any pilots decision, what I said on one of these threads rings true too many times. Hi performance aircraft into airports not used to this type traffic, weather, with high profile clients whose schedule we do not want to interrrupt.

In thirty years, I have seen many that worked out that should not have been tried. There was a Gulstream I saw two years ago where the captain did the best salvage job I have ever witnessed of a wind shear turbulance landing where he was sideways.

The point is while he did a great salvage job, he never should have tried the approach in a thunderstorm which passed in 10 minutes.

The first thing we should all learn is patience. Cutting corners kills.
 
Publishers said:
In thirty years, I have seen many that worked out that should not have been tried. There was a Gulstream I saw two years ago where the captain did the best salvage job I have ever witnessed of a wind shear turbulance landing where he was sideways.

The point is while he did a great salvage job, he never should have tried the approach in a thunderstorm which passed in 10 minutes.
And in my experience, what he took away from the incident was NOT an "oh crap, we got lucky that time", it was most likely, " Dang I'm good, see landing in that crosswind wasn't so bad".

I've seen all too many pilots, especially part91 corporate, who mistake luck for skill, who equate a successful outcome with lack of risk and try it again because they got by with it the first time. These guys convince themselves that an operation must be safe because they got by with it, instead of vowing to never attempt it again.

I hope their luck holds, if not they got some grief to deal with.

enigma
 
Enigma,

Exactly who defines the line between luck and skill? In your opinion, do part 91/corporate pilots do anything more risky than 135 or 121 pilots? Or are 135/121 more skilled than part 91/corporate pilots??

Z-
 
For the record, the pilot of the Gulfstream came on the radio to ground control and could barely speak his voice was quivering so bad. He knew that he had gotten away with a bad decision and could not stop shaking when he came to the FBO.

I think the experience thing works both ways. Corporate by its nature does things that an airline driver would not do as it is an in grained system in the airlines and the corporate guy makes more of his own decisions in situations not like airlines or even 135.

Sometimes the yooung guy with no experience that realizes it is better than the cocky experienced one who thinks he can fly through anythhing
 
Publishers said:
For the record, the pilot of the Gulfstream came on the radio to ground control and could barely speak his voice was quivering so bad. He knew that he had gotten away with a bad decision and could not stop shaking when he came to the FBO.

I think the experience thing works both ways. Corporate by its nature does things that an airline driver would not do as it is an in grained system in the airlines and the corporate guy makes more of his own decisions in situations not like airlines or even 135.

Sometimes the yooung guy with no experience that realizes it is better than the cocky experienced one who thinks he can fly through anythhing
What Gulfstream are you talking about?
 
Publishers said:
For the record, the pilot of the Gulfstream came on the radio to ground control and could barely speak his voice was quivering so bad. He knew that he had gotten away with a bad decision and could not stop shaking when he came to the FBO.
Sounds like he got the right kind of experience out of it then.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top