It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Twentynine Palms F-18 crash caused by low hours, poor runway lighting

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Cauliflower

The pilot didn't have the skills to make a good decision and go around.


Surely skill shouldn't be a factor .. surely common sense comes into play. If I was a pilot and had the fuel, wasn't sure about landing or where to land I'd stay in the air until I have a solution or the runway lights are switched on.

It's like when I go mountaineering, if the peaks are covered in terrible weather then I delay myself or come up with another plan. Something's just aren't worth risking. I'm appreciate mountaineering and flying are totally different things but it's the danger factor. If you are unsure .. don't do it, if you risk it, it may be the last thing you risk in your life




posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: ThePeaceMaker

That's not pilot mentality. So many crashes have been caused by the "I can make it" mentality that it's not even close to being funny. And not just fighter pilots. The pressure is to get it in there and on the ground, or get to your destination on time, or prove that your poor skills were a fluke, or.....



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Everyone is hearing about the upcoming commercial pilot shortage that they can't get them into the military in the first place, and the ones that are in can't get out fast enough. It's created a major pilot shortage in the military now. Couple that with aircraft availability numbers that are so low only the best pilots get flight time when it's available and you no longer have an opportunity for the weaker pilots to get better.



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Delta recently announced that you can become a Captain at something ridiculous like 6 months, if you were willing to fly the MD-80 because everyone wants the new gee whiz planes.



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Delta recently announced that you can become a Captain at something ridiculous like 6 months, if you were willing to fly the MD-80 because everyone wants the new gee whiz planes.


Delta doesn't have any MD-80s left. They do have a few 88s, but those are going away in less than 36 months. One guy did make captain in 6 months by choosing the 88, but he'll be back in the right seat when the 88s go away since his seniority is so low. Making captain isn't the only way to make money. A 10 year First Officer ("?Co-pilot") on a 747 makes the same as a new Captain on the 'baby Boeing 717 (about $221,000/year). Seniority on equipment also gives better odds of bidding the "line" you want, allowing you to pick routes and scheduling days off. A fellow airshow pilot chose to remain a co-pilot for years, turning down captain upgrades, because he made more f lying airshows and needed to control his schedule to keep doing that. Regs limit flying to 30 hours in any 7 day period, and you can get that on a single Asia turn. So you work a Tuesday-Thursday 3 day trip each week and you are off Friday through Monday. The mad dog 88 is a short haul aircraft so you end up working every day to get your 30 hours and your layovers are in spots like Allentownm PA or Des Moines, IA instead of the Ginza or Bangkok. As a contract 747 pilot for various carriers, I get the best of all worlds. I can pick the specific trips I want, when I want, for the particular carrier I want. And I get to see wonderful places like Kinshasa, Sao Paolo, Tripoli, Ubatuba, Brazil (what a party town!) And some of the aircraft even have wi-fi, so I can keep up with ATS at 40,000 feet over darkest Africa.



posted on Jan, 18 2018 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: F4guy

Yes, I know, but it's easier to use MD-80 for most of them, since the differences are relatively small. Yes it's incorrect, yes they're all different aircraft, and yes I'm going to keep doing it.
edit on 1/18/2018 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: F4guy

Yes, I know, but it's easier to use MD-80 for most of them, since the differences are relatively small. Yes it's incorrect, yes they're all different aircraft, and yes I'm going to keep doing it.


The differences are huge if you're used to the 80 and find yourself in an 88 at full reverse trying to keep the thing on the centerline of the runway. All of the 80 series were built using amendments to the old DC-9 FAA Type Certificate. The cockpits are way different with the 80 using analog steam gauge technology and the varients going with glass cockpits.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: F4guy

And just about everyone else in this forum won't see that difference, and will only see the external differences.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join