@himalaya
question.
I saw an approach chart to Lukla, only it did not look very official. However, it was some sort of an instrument let down, starting at an IAF named Fluffy, then proceeding north to a missed approach point at DME 4 Lukla (I did not realize Lukla HAD a DME, does it or is that a GPS fix?
Do you know if there is an official such chart or is there a source for this? Is the Nepali AIP online and open?
@Dani
You don't want to assume or imply that safety is the same in every type of operation? Traffic rate in those extreme airports is just so small because there is less traffic. If you would move as many pax as in the western world, you would have an accident every second day.
There are many such operations, not only in Nepal, which certainly would not gain your seal of approval. Have you ever been to the Maldives? The "barefoot pilots" there and their Twin Otters do a great job flying their seaplanes, yet also there you have other standards than on the flight deck of a jet over Europe. Their accident rate is minimal, in terms of loss of life it's basically zero. Would you fly with them? At the same time, would you fly with airlines who are perfectly modern equipped, fly only airways and huge airports but have smashed several jets over the last few years?
ecureilx, of course the PC-6 (Turbo Porter) is better suited for Lukla, but you cannot compare the Porter with the Twotter, that is about double in size.
Hmm. Would I be more comfortable flying in this terrain with a single or a twin? I like the Porter, but in this environment I'd prefer to take a Twin Otter anytime. Maybe you know but as we write here, a Turbo Porter IS up there, they operate from Syangboche, which in comparison with Lukla is one step further into the land you don't want to go. I know one of the guys and frankly, at the moment I take on a slight shade of green with envy not to be there with them.
Be it as it is, if it would work all the time, they would even build an airport in more remote areas, maybe if 600m and 10° upslope is enough, we can make it on 300m and 15°? Where is the limit? What do we want to accept as a "normal" accident rate?
Look, here in Europe there is no need for this, even tough I can tell you I have taken the aircraft mentioned in my user name to some places where I would have appreciated the "comforts" of Lukla, not in our common homecountry, but "interesting" nevertheless. The fact is, there are people who climb mountains or who simply want to have a look at the Himalaya. I personally think the ops into Lukla is a sight safer than maybe a road-bound ops in this area, not to speak of going up there by Yak (the animal, not the plane
). Also, for the people who live up there, it is a lifeline.
I would never ever go on such a trip. OK, so I cannot visit Nepal. Well, I have to live with that.
That is your decision to which you are perfectly entitled. I would not climb Everest or even the Säntis on foot, because I am not a mountaineer. Does not mean I tell everyone else they should not do it either.
I also don't want to do Base Jumping or play russian roulette.
Interesting comparison.
What is worse is that every accident counts towards to normal airline operation, so people are afraid even if they have to board a plane that operates on standard airports.
So do I get this right, because you are concerned about the
PR of YOUR airline, you'd like regulators to ban places like Lukla? I don't think that many people who go up to Lukla are the pax you have on your European city hoppers, not many anyhow. Who goes up there will have other things to worry about, the flight maybe being the least dangerous of them all.
I wish the public would be more aware of the risks of out-of-area operation and difficult airports. It starts by saying "no, I don't go there". Period.
Again, it is up to you to decide for yourself. But to imply that because YOU feel that anything with less than a 10'000 ft runway with CAT IIIc installed is hazardous and for cowboys only, does not mean everyone else should be prohibited to go where they want to go. Sir Hillary and all the folks crawling up to mountains or other explorers must be nitwits in your picture then? Well, be happy with what you do, just do me a favour and don't think of a career change to work with EASA, even tough you'd fit perfectly.
After all, they are the reason I most probably need to put an EX- in front of my username if they get their way quite soon....
Best regards
AN2 Driver