Jump to content

Canoehead

Members
  • Posts

    377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Canoehead

  1. That was very interesting. Led me to search a few names online after watching. There are, and have been, some very dumb people on this earth. (Besides the controversy, what a great airplane.)
  2. These are the kinds of threads that keep me coming back here. Thanks Greg, Kip and all!
  3. Hi conehead. I only heard this second hand, but north of 3.
  4. If the G factor achieved at touchdown (that I heard) is correct, it will explain a lot. More than just a tail-scrape involved.
  5. Definitely more than a scrape... there’s a hole through the structure as a result of a hard landing. I have heard the number (of G’s) and suffice it to say, I’m fairly certain it’s going to need that heavy maintenance facility for the work likely required. At least we shouldn’t have to wait 4 years for the report as the TSB has nothing to do with it.
  6. All good... I look at it as a great opportunity for discussion. Good ol' "hangar flying"! Something I miss these days...
  7. Hi Moon, The manual/alternate pump is only a part of the main gear extension system. The nose gear alternate extension is completely reliant on pulling up on the release handle in the floor (adjacent the pump handle for the mains). It basically releases the uplock allowing the nose gear to free-fall. No hydraulic back up for the nose, only the mains. All things being equal, all 3 gear should free-fall. As the mains extend forward into the relative airflow, the pump is used to aid in locking them down, and only if required. Confusion can be from the fact that there are two separate locations for Alt Gear Extension controls that are all integral to the entire alternate extension system. The pump handle in the floor (directly adjacent to the nose gear release handle) has nothing to do with the nose gear. As you stated, there are some "gotchas" with the alternate system (both on the 100/300, and Q400). I know of 2 incidents (one in Europe and one in New Zealand) where DH8's landed with the nose gear retracted due to system unfamiliarity, or not pulling up hard enough on that release handle. Both cases, if handled correctly, would not have ended up with embarrassing pictures posted on Google. The QRH's have been re-worded over the years to convey the fact that there may be high forces required to overcome the uplocks. As I always sum it up in training, "pull until you achieve the desired result". Hence my cable on the CP's desk comment Regardless, this was minor. We have seen worse brought on by landing gear issues (thinking Eastern L1011 in the Everglades).
  8. Hopefully the crew walked into the Chief Pilot's office and put the alternate extension handle and cable on his desk
  9. Brochure yes, but it's also published policy at Jazz. It's not being followed correctly by many.
  10. Personally, I think it was a mistake to allow them. Notwithstanding the above, there is little to no enforcement of the published grooming standards. As a result many (not all) look like an embarrassment to the profession. The policy doesn't mean you don't have to shave, yet many treat it as such. I've started calling guys out on it. Just my opinion.
  11. The equipment available to them is a moot point if there was no attempt to use it to remove the contaminant.
  12. Bob Fowler, one of the test pilots in the film; was he not one of the Dash 8 test pilots?
  13. Did it in a 1900 once. Had a caution or warning light distract us just as we got airborne. Going through about 11,000' I commented to my captain about how "this thing is really climbing like a dog tod...... oh crap...... positive rate...."
  14. Love to be a fly on the wall when the "Gear Down" call was made... (assuming that's when it was discovered).
  15. They can't do that anymore?? Why? BTW, nice to see the service members make a visit to cancer patients at Royal Victoria Hospital in the afternoon to simply try and brighten up some otherwise dark days... That is the coolest part of the show in my opinion. BZ!!
  16. Free wifi on board? BYODevice?
  17. Perhaps it's time for some additional disclaimers or "side effects of flying" to be added to the safety video or the safety cards in the seat pockets. Because I'm sure Mr. Fuller read his safety card and watched the video intently right? We could list all of the possible scenarios that pax may be subject to on any flight, ranging from uncontained engine failures to RTO's to go-arounds. We should also include information on Fatigue Units and Kinetic Brake Energy charts. Let's tell them what steps we will take in the event of a baggage smoke indication, or even tell them that I'm doing line indoc on a new FO- it's his first revenue flight. We should provide our company ops manuals to the news outlets too so they can critique us on our daily activities. Someone has to keep us accountable. I vote for the CBC first. And we could list all possible consequences to flying like an obnoxious American medication advertisement- everything from "sweaty palms to motion sickness to injury or even death". The nerve. Maximum braking! Geez Captain.... ease up on that! I'd rather go off the end at 40 knots so I can try out the fancy slides and video tape me with my new selfie stick and my carry-on items running away from the plane screaming so it looks great on YouTube. I'm with GTFA here. It's getting ridiculous.
  18. Gabor should stick to his day job. He gets far too much attention IMO.
  19. Oh the humanity... Stop the press everyone!! Some subcharter flights had to stop for fuel (the bottom line). A couple of things- yeah not cool to add "MCI" on the boarding pass and not tell the pax prior to departure if they knew there would be a tech-stop. However how is the CBC getting "emails" from the Flair DFO to his crews, or TS ops people to Flair? Someone should be losing their job over that alone- I don't care how benign it might be (from a safety/security POV). Furthermore, why is it suddenly okay to quote or source information from social media (LinkedIn... really?) when citing a person's position or credentials? I used to really prefer CBC reporting, and I still do think they have some (a very few) incredible journalists. But, they are becoming less noticeable. I suppose a function of age/retirement maybe? I feel Canadian news is becoming more and more like the cheap Fox/CNN junk we've been laughing about for years. I'm not impressed. As for the "unimpressed pax" (esp this Gabor Lukacs clown)... look up Louis CK's thoughts on the "miracle of human flight (you non-contributing zero)"
  20. Not nit-picking IMO. A valid point that I see more and more. Back to the point made elsewhere about the need to be the "first to get the story out". Do editors not edit anymore?
  21. Dozens, and likely hundreds of folks at 705 carriers sitting in the right seat for any number of reasons that have nothing to do with level of competency. I know many (and sometimes envy their decisions!)
  22. From NavCanada: Effective 0000z May 20th 2017, ATC clearances shall not include the phrase VIA SID/STAR.
  23. Watch the A320 (321?) at 1:15. Maybe it's just the camera angle/depth of field, but sure looks like inches from a tailstrike. Can't make it embed
  24. He's lucky it wasn't May of 2002. He might not have come off the airplane alive...
×
×
  • Create New...