Johnboy

Members
  • Content count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Johnboy last won the day on November 9 2015

Johnboy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

48 Excellent

About Johnboy

  • Rank
    1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

3,125 profile views
  1. SFO Incident

    This my friend is exactly explains how the aircraft ended up where it did. Is this an AC Procedure for this approach..I do not know. Approach plates and approach briefings can be a real gotcha even in VMC conditions/transitional approaches.
  2. SFO Incident

    If I am reading the approach plate correctly the only guidance available is the GP for 28R and no LOC available for guidance. But not privy to AC SOP for flying this type of approach. Flying the LOC would put left of the desired the desired flight patch (Quiet App).
  3. SFO Incident

    No where near being a subject matter expert but offering this in the interest of discussion only. The NTSB reports AC759 was cleared for the FMS bridge visual runway 28R approach. This approach places the aircraft in a right of centerline (28R) on a somewhat converging course to the runway (see attached plates) vs an ILS 28R approach which of course places you on the LOC/GS. The weather conditions were VMC and SFO was in a somewhat unusual configuration with DEP and ARR on 28R. I assume that the runway lighting system for 28L was off (reduced setting) due to the runway closure. All of these factors sets the aircraft up in a position to line up with taxiway C bearing in mind close proximity of the parallels at SFO 28/01's. The crew is convinced there are lined up with the correct runway (visual approach) with no ILS backup and the aircraft on the taxiway are more than likely invisible to the crew until closer in (aircraft taxi lights would be off). Please note AC would be using Jeppesen charts but the comparison would be a very close comparison. Not sure at what point back would the blue lighting of the taxiway become evident to the PF. The visual and the (jedi mind trick) leading you into thinking all is good. This video of the FMS bridge visual runway 28R approach is DVFR fast forward to the 8:54 mark.
  4. B17-g

    I would say with confidence that it was The Commemorative Air Force "Sentimental Journey". It has been floating around Kingston Ontario for the last couple of days. She is a beauty..... https://www.azcaf.org/tour/
  5. 150 years young

    Agreed they missed the boat on this one. Snowbirds have added a "Toot" in 150 scheme ..... https://twitter.com/CFSnowbirds/status/879312912954912769
  6. Interesting departure pattern for eastbounds... https://twitter.com/AirlineFlyer/status/871914479805755393
  7. Elvis Presley Jet

    I nice shot of the hanger line at Dome in the heyday. My wife says the G2 had camel suede upholstery. The days of Smiling Jack Gallagher.
  8. Is this section of the report the impetus for the lawsuit undertaken by AC towards Airbus? 1.18.2 Flight path angle guidance mode "The Airbus FCOM does not offer guidance on how to make adjustments to the FPA; for example, it does not indicate how large the adjustment should be or for how long the adjustment should be made in order to return an aircraft to the selected flight path. For a flight in FPA guidance mode, Air Canada's practice was that, once the aircraft was past the FAF, the flight crews were not required to monitor the aircraft's altitude and distance from the threshold, nor to make any adjustments to the FPA." I recall an extensive discussion on this forum about cold temp correction but headwind played a significant role as well in placing the aircraft where it should not have been. It would appear that the "cold temp correction" was not an Airbus procedure but one discovered by TC in 2009. "In 2009, while working with Air Canada, TC identified a discrepancy involving all Airbus A320, A330, and A340 series aircraft when a non-precision approach was carried out in cold temperatures. " In my humble opinion the bulk of the holes in the Swiss cheese align with this FPA procedure and how it is used and was implemented into SOP. Worth some discussion I believe.
  9. Kip: Great memories, good times. My wife always tells the story of walking to the Stores Dept. on the hanger floor to ask for them to page "Herman Nelson"! Not so sure it's as much "fun" in today's "P.C." world. Thanks for the share.
  10. Westjet Go Around SXM

    Sooner or later...... https://twitter.com/PTZtv/status/853300491802902528
  11. Six Turning Four Burning

    Outstanding Kip great memory. My memory of the CV550/440 was living in the east end of Windsor On, multitudes of then flying into DET (Detroit City) airport very distinctive sound and approach angle loaded with auto parts and who knows what else.
  12. Thanks to Eric Dumigan for turning me on to this little gem. That's Jimmy Stewart at the engineers position and I'm pretty sure that's Harry Morgan (M*A*S*H) all filmed in beautiful 70MM. Great example of technology trying to keep up military requirements.
  13. Amazing indeed. 4948 ft runway with 3934 ft available for take off and 394 ft available for stopway! The question begs what was the payload that was carried/available ? I always thought Porter's plans for this aircraft at YTZ was pie in the sky (LAX SFO etc) perhaps I need to eat crow. This thing is an A318 on steroids. Note older Jeppy 2006.
  14. Westjet Go Around SXM

    My half-ass attempt from a video screen shot taken during first approach. My only comment on this "incident" is how was it reported and handled at Westjet (under SMS guidelines) and was a discussion made about procuring the DFDR and DCVR data prior to departure SXM? According to the Westjet press release and the CADORS filling this was nothing more than a GA. Nothing to see hear ....move on! http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/saf-sec-sur/2/cadors-screaq/rd.aspx?occdtefrom%3d2017-03-07%26occdteto%3d2017-03-08%26srchfldcd%3d4%26txt%3dWESTJET%26srchtype%3d1%26rt%3dWS%26hypl%3dy%26cnum%3d2017H0051
  15. Westjet Go Around SXM

    Unable to find any CADOR's report for this incident. Pretty sure it would have met the criteria for filing one. http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/cadors-screaq/q.aspx?lang=eng