Non-Military Aviation

[Shyster]

[dodint]

It's cheaper than sportscar racing.

[tifosi77]

A minor incident at PIT a couple weeks ago. On June 21st, a United Boeing 737-9 Max performing flight UA-2627 from Chicago O'Hare to Pittsburgh was originally told to expect a visual to Runway 32. That was then changed to a visual to Runway 28C, which the pilots accepted. On approach, the pilots report that the FMC "blanked" on them, and in the process of dealing with the issue they aligned with Runway 28L and not 28C. The flight crew were cleared to land on 28C and read back their clearance for 28C, but they landed on 28L. The tower controller did notice the aircraft was lined up for the wrong runway when it was on short final, but decided that it was more appropriate to allow the airplane to land rather than go around. Traffic was light at the time, so there were no conflicts. Weather was clear and the time was around 09:00.

I think I would put this on the pilots. Yeah, a computer glitch on final could be very distracting, but the aircraft was cleared for a visual approach, and that means the pilots looking outside the aircraft and flying the plane. I don't know how familiar the pilots might have been with PIT, but Runways 28L and 28C are directly adjacent to one another, and if one is cleared to land on a runway with "Center" in its name, then that cannot possibly be a runway that doesn't have another runway over farther to its left, and that should have been obvious on a nice clear morning.

http://avherald.com/h?article=4fb1fae4&opt=256

Well, I mean at least it was a runway.

[dodint]

And other famous Harrison Ford quotes.

[Shyster]

Just a little more braking, and he would have been right down the center of the exit.

[shafnutz05]

Landing on a bend... That's solid

[tifosi77]

Wasn't there a (in)famous aerodrome proposal from the 40s or 50s that had one gigantic circular runway?

[Beveridge]

The cars right in front as he is about to land and the cars coming the other way after he landed.... Nope, I would have been off the road or into the siderail.

[Shyster]

Wasn't there a (in)famous aerodrome proposal from the 40s or 50s that had one gigantic circular runway?

I think so, yes, and I've seen articles every once in a while that bring the concept back up, although not really seriously.

[dodint]

I've recently gotten hooked on the AOPA Air Safety Institute youtube page: https://www.youtube.com/user/AirSafetyInstitute

They have an Accident Case Study series that is really well done. It's the same concept of stuff like Air Disasters but with smaller GA aircraft and with the sensationalism dialed back.

This is one of the more interesting ones for a casual viewer:

Despite the serious-sounding names and whatnot the whole channel is full of well-presented analysis in digestible chunks.

[Shyster]

Love those AOPA videos. I think I've seen them all. Although it's sad just how many of them can be boiled down to "Don't fly VFR into IMC, dummy."

I wonder of there might be some generational issue with GA pilots and technology. I mean, it boggles my mind that pilots would take off on long cross-country trips into questionable weather without flying IFR and using modern navigation capabilities. Yeah, modern GPS nav units and coupled autopilots from companies like Garmin, BendixKing, Dynon, etc. can be very expensive to add back into an older aircraft (everything about aviation is expensive), and IFR navigation is much harder without the modern GPS gizmos and coupled autopilots. But when it might be a matter of getting there safety versus crashing and dying, and I'd personally much rather be monitoring the instruments as the GPS nav system and autopilot follow my programmed IFR flight plan than trying to fly visually. But I'm also someone who grew up using and trusting computers and technology, and I wonder if older GA pilots might be less trusting of technology.

[Shyster]

[shafnutz05]

This has quickly become one of my favorite channels. Those Aerosucre guys are nuts.

[dodint]

Yeah, shaf, I watched a few of their videos and it's pretty neat. I like Youtube content that I can watch really quick like that, seems every channel wants to stretch into that 10-15min+ window to maximize monetization.

Love those AOPA videos. I think I've seen them all. Although it's sad just how many of them can be boiled down to "Don't fly VFR into IMC, dummy."

I wonder of there might be some generational issue with GA pilots and technology. I mean, it boggles my mind that pilots would take off on long cross-country trips into questionable weather without flying IFR and using modern navigation capabilities. Yeah, modern GPS nav units and coupled autopilots from companies like Garmin, BendixKing, Dynon, etc. can be very expensive to add back into an older aircraft (everything about aviation is expensive), and IFR navigation is much harder without the modern GPS gizmos and coupled autopilots. But when it might be a matter of getting there safety versus crashing and dying, and I'd personally much rather be monitoring the instruments as the GPS nav system and autopilot follow my programmed IFR flight plan than trying to fly visually. But I'm also someone who grew up using and trusting computers and technology, and I wonder if older GA pilots might be less trusting of technology.

I'm a little worried that I'll be spoiled by my trainer plane. If I end up joining the club I want to be a member of their plane is equipped with really nice avionics. It's IFR certified and TAA qualified. I fear that I'll fly in that for a few years and then not be able to afford something nearly that nice when I buy my own.

That said, tablet apps are really pretty amazing for what they are. Garmin Pilot and Foreflight do a lot of the heavy lifting that the glass cockpit systems are doing. If you buy a specialty one directly from Garmin it will tap into the datalinks in the plane as well. Pretty neat.

[Shyster]

Delta joins the other big two US airlines in ordering the 737 MAX, with a new order for 100 MAX 10s, plus 30 options.



I would imagine these aircraft are to replace the 737-800s in Delta's fleet (which are approaching 20 years old) and also to replace some of the 757-200s on shorter legs. I'm thinking Delta will be using MAXes for short-range 757 replacements and A321neos for longer-range 757 replacements. For example, Delta flies a lot of 757s back and forth between Atlanta and Miami due to route density. That's a 90-minute flight that certainly doesn't need the full range of the 757 or even an Airbus A321neo. The MAX 10 would work well on routes like that, with the A321neos used on longer routes, and maybe some of the A321 orders converted into -LR or -XLR versions for transatlantic operations.

[tifosi77]

Tbh I never would've guessed the flight time between Miami and Atlanta was 90 minutes.

[Shyster]

It's actually a little longer than that, maybe an hour and 45 or so. In terms of flight time, Atlanta is almost equidistant from both Miami and Pittsburgh. When I flew down to Miami years ago for a conference, the flight from PIT to ATL (on an MD-80 both ways) was right around the same time as the flight from ATL to MIA (on a 757 both ways). I somehow thought Atlanta was much closer to Miami than to Pittsburgh, but I learned that it's not.

[tifosi77]

I somehow thought Atlanta was much closer to Miami than to Pittsburgh, but I learned that it's not.

Yup, this is totally what I was getting at. People really underestimate just how far it is to drive from JAX to MIA, but I guess I never really thought of that in terms of air travel too lol.

Just one of those goofy bits of U.S. geography that you don't realize until you're confronted with it in a practical way. Like there are certain parts of Connecticut where going N, S, E, and W all lead to New York. Or that Alaska is the farthest north state, but it is also simultaneously the farthest west and the farthest east. Or there are more Californians than Canadians.

[dodint]

The western border of NC being about as far west as the OH/IN border is the one that always gets me.

[shafnutz05]

The western border of NC being about as far west as the OH/IN border is the one that always gets me.

Yep, that always throws me for a loop. My mom and sister live outside of Mobile, and it's always a mind-blower that Mobile is west of Chicago.

[Shyster]

One of the attractions about the A350 was that its 9-abreast seating was better than 10-abreast in the 777. Now Airbus is "slimming" the cabin walls to make it easier to cram in 10-seat rows. Considering the A350's fuselage is narrower than both the 777 and the upcoming 777X, there is no freaking way that 10-abreast in the A350 is not going to be narrower seats than either of those other options. Ten wide on the A350 should also result in narrower seats than nine wide on the Boeing 787.

Basically, Airbus just made it much easier for A350 carriers to even further poopify the economy experience, and in this climate I doubt that many carriers would not choose to cram in the extra seat per row. Although, the only US operator of the A350 is Delta, so this doesn't affect US flyers all that much, unless they are flying internationally on other A350 operators.

[NTP66]

“We’ve made record profits… it’s time to give back to ourselves by making it less enjoyable for everyone to fly.”

[dodint]

Good thing there is plenty of overhead bin space.

[tifosi77]

I have exactly two flights in 350s, and they were great passenger experiences.

[dodint]

I signed up for an online ground school and am reading through the various handbooks and manuals that the curriculum is based on. I wanted to pre-read everything first before diving into the classes themselves. In the meantime I have been sorting out my simulator, often repurposing sim racing gear when possible:



I used some RAM camera mount items to put the button box to an overhead position. I use the box for tuning the radios so that's a somewhat realistic reach.
The new throttle quadrant is setup in a single-engine config and repurposing some of the axis for other items like carb heat, flaps, and parking brake.
The most exciting bit is the cell phone on the left. It's running Garmin Pilot and is connected to the sim. So the portable GPS that I'll use in the real plane is available to me now while I'm training, it's pretty awesome. It will help me beat down that learning curve a good bit by having full confidence in that flying aid before I ever take off in the real plane.
I just need to buy a kneeboard to put the phone/tablet into. That's how I'll be flying in real life so no need to wait. They have some really nice designs that allow you to flip between a clipboard and the tablet as needed.

In the bit of simulator flying I've done I notice the same issue I have with sim racing. Without the plane moving around under me there is a real lack of connection to the experience. But I'm using this to learn how to read gauges, buttonology, familiarization with the GPS equipment, the visual navigation process, and how to talk to ATC. So it should help a considerable amount with that. The sim will likely add value all the way through earning my instrument rating in a few years.