Arpster, perhaps 1900's thoughts were of the terrain implications of engine out missed approach procedures or engine out departure procedures of Jackson Hole, compared to such in Alaska. I don't think (don't know for sure) that there are any airports at all in Alaska over 3300 feet elevation. Additionally, I think perhaps the approach/departure briefings and the detailed procedures add up in work load.
Doors to Automatic :
ust out of interest what would (roughly) the equivalent length of Jackson Hole's runway be if the airport was located at sea level rather than at 6,000ft elevation?
I will SWAG (scientific wild-ass guess) of converting JAC's 6,300' runway length to a sea level equivalent. I would equate it to a 7,300' sea level airport. (Note that is significantly longer than the 5701 feet at KSNA. I don't
recall any AA overuns at KSNA in the decades AA has flown there.)
Some of the many variables:
1. about a 10% difference in TAS versus IAS. Their approach speed was probably somewhere close to 130 knots indicated, which would be about 143 knots true or groundspeed + or - wind component.
2. The density altitude with the RH and temp was probably around 6800 feet.
3. Downslope of JAC runway 19 ( my equivalent runway has no slope)
For a standard day at sea level, there will be no difference between TAS and IAS, the denser air will offer more drag to aerodynamic braking. The engines will perform better in the denser air, providing quicker spool-up and more reverse thrust.