28 Mar 2024, 12:52 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 07 Jan 2018, 22:09 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/04/09 Posts: 352 Post Likes: +149
Aircraft: Dakota
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The Three most Useless things to a Pilot:
• Fuel on the Ground
• Runway behind you
• Sky above you I had always heard the 3 most useless things in aviation were: *The Runway behind you *The Blue sky above you *Rental Insurance But yes, fuel in the truck would work too-
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 07 Jan 2018, 22:42 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4573 Post Likes: +3298
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The FAA is firm on Runway Safety Area lengths. My little airport has 30 foot drop offs at both ends of the runway, and the runway is 3000 feet long, but with only about a hundred feet from the thresholds to the drop offs.
This makes for inadequate Runway Safety Area lengths, and we have to comply with the FAA "fix", which is to move the threshold markings each 200 feet inwards to provide the 300 foot RSA at each end.
What this means is that pilots will now be landing 200 feet further down the runway and being even closer to running off the other end, which has been a problem at this airport multiple times. This whole issue reminds of a seminar I heard on the faa's stance on stall training held for a long time. Heard it at PROP by a test pilot, forgot his name.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 07 Jan 2018, 22:48 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23612 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This makes for inadequate Runway Safety Area lengths, and we have to comply with the FAA "fix", which is to move the threshold markings each 200 feet inwards to provide the 300 foot RSA at each end. So why would you get by with 300 ft and KSBS needs 800 ft to the cliffs? Quote: What this means is that pilots will now be landing 200 feet further down the runway and being even closer to running off the other end, which has been a problem at this airport multiple times. Yes, it does seem backwards to take away runway in the name of safety. If you use the displaced threshold you are MORE likely to NEED the runway safe area at the other end. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 07 Jan 2018, 22:49 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 4946 Post Likes: +4780
Aircraft: G44, C501, C55, R66
|
|
Thread shift. Anyone fly model airplanes and think flying models has impacted your ability to fly full scale airplanes? I vote model aviation has a huge impact on youth entering full scale aviation. Encourage this. I also believe that flying any model airplane (aerobatic, glider, helicopter, jet, seaplane) absolutely helps your full scale flying abilities. Not much exciting left in my fleet, I have a 1/3 scale Ultimate biplane, 1/3 scale cub, a 25lb non scale jet, a 1/4 scale glider and some random electric machines.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 07 Jan 2018, 23:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/29/13 Posts: 13578 Post Likes: +10961 Company: Easy Ice, LLC Location: Marquette, Michigan; Scottsdale, AZ, Telluride
Aircraft: C510,C185,C310,R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Thread shift. Anyone fly model airplanes and think flying models has impacted your ability to fly full scale airplanes? I vote model aviation has a huge impact on youth entering full scale aviation. Encourage this. I also believe that flying any model airplane (aerobatic, glider, helicopter, jet, seaplane) absolutely helps your full scale flying abilities. Not much exciting left in my fleet, I have a 1/3 scale Ultimate biplane, 1/3 scale cub, a 25lb non scale jet, a 1/4 scale glider and some random electric machines. Perhaps you should start a new thread. Would probably get more interest.
_________________ Mark Hangen Deputy Minister of Ice (aka FlyingIceperson) Power of the Turbine "Jet Elite"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 00:23 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23612 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Example of Guido W flying the short and steep approach at DXR. No wonder type rating courses take so long, half of it must be voice lessons so you can talk like a jet pilot. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 00:29 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/29/13 Posts: 13578 Post Likes: +10961 Company: Easy Ice, LLC Location: Marquette, Michigan; Scottsdale, AZ, Telluride
Aircraft: C510,C185,C310,R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Example of Guido W flying the short and steep approach at DXR. No wonder type rating courses take so long, half of it must be voice lessons so you can talk like a jet pilot. Mike C.
Consider that a worthy investment for the ladies. They love it.
_________________ Mark Hangen Deputy Minister of Ice (aka FlyingIceperson) Power of the Turbine "Jet Elite"
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 11:15 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/28/17 Posts: 6625 Post Likes: +7925 Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This makes for inadequate Runway Safety Area lengths, and we have to comply with the FAA "fix", which is to move the threshold markings each 200 feet inwards to provide the 300 foot RSA at each end. So why would you get by with 300 ft and KSBS needs 800 ft to the cliffs? Quote: What this means is that pilots will now be landing 200 feet further down the runway and being even closer to running off the other end, which has been a problem at this airport multiple times. Yes, it does seem backwards to take away runway in the name of safety. If you use the displaced threshold you are MORE likely to NEED the runway safe area at the other end. Mike C.
Mike,
I'm not sure why the difference in Runway Safety Area lengths except it might have to do with the category of aircraft that the airport is certified for.
This change is going to be an expensive one, as the PAPI's will now have to be relocated. On top of that is the FAA's new runway pavement maintenance program. Our neighboring airport has a 150 foot wide runway. That will be narrowed to 75 feet which means a new runway edge light system to be moved in board. My little airport has a 75 foot wide runway that will be narrowed to 50 feet, also requiring a new runway edge light system. This is all being done to reduce runway pavement maintenance costs.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 11:18 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/28/17 Posts: 6625 Post Likes: +7925 Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Example of Guido W flying the short and steep approach at DXR. https://youtu.be/zUmfLRepTUIWhat's with the FO? He doesn't copy clearances?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 11:22 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23612 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This change is going to be an expensive one, as the PAPI's will now have to be relocated. On top of that is the FAA's new runway pavement maintenance program. Our neighboring airport has a 150 foot wide runway. That will be narrowed to 75 feet which means a new runway edge light system to be moved in board. My little airport has a 75 foot wide runway that will be narrowed to 50 feet, also requiring a new runway edge light system. This is all being done to reduce runway pavement maintenance costs. I don't understand why these changes are mandatory. What happens if you don't do them? Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 11:33 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/28/17 Posts: 6625 Post Likes: +7925 Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: This change is going to be an expensive one, as the PAPI's will now have to be relocated. On top of that is the FAA's new runway pavement maintenance program. Our neighboring airport has a 150 foot wide runway. That will be narrowed to 75 feet which means a new runway edge light system to be moved in board. My little airport has a 75 foot wide runway that will be narrowed to 50 feet, also requiring a new runway edge light system. This is all being done to reduce runway pavement maintenance costs. I don't understand why these changes are mandatory. What happens if you don't do them? Mike C.
In California the airports operate on a permit from California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, CalTrans Aero. They do the airport safety inspection for the FAA and also contribute to Airport Improvement Program grant funding. Most small airport operators can't afford to maintain an airport with their own funding, and rely on these grants.
Pavement maintenance programs are a big deal to FAA, and should a runway deteriorate to an unsafe condition, CalTrans could pull the airports operating permit, so airports just go along with the program. Both of the airports mentioned are in need of runway pavement maintenance. In the long run it will save repaving costs. Another neighboring airport had a 40 foot wide runway in need of maintenance, and it was widened to 50 feet with a grant, no lights though.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 12:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23612 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Most small airport operators can't afford to maintain an airport with their own funding, and rely on these grants. Ah, got it. The people with the money said do it. Well, if they pay for it... Still, seems odd that we are making runways smaller in the name of "safety". Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Citation at Steamboat Posted: 08 Jan 2018, 12:41 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/28/17 Posts: 6625 Post Likes: +7925 Location: N. California
Aircraft: C-182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Most small airport operators can't afford to maintain an airport with their own funding, and rely on these grants. Ah, got it. The people with the money said do it. Well, if they pay for it... Still, seems odd that we are making runways smaller in the name of "safety". Mike C.
It's not exactly that "they pay for it", "we" pay for it with our aviation fuel taxes.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|