Challenger crash at KASE
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right traffic to 33 would have put us near the severe turbulence area so stayed high on downwind using left traffic concurring with tower and using visual avoidance of terrain to set up a normal approach. Since some have to land on 15 I guess they would just proceed to alternate and call it a day.
I guess its normal not to recall the runway numbers and other details on what you term a "normal" approach from 30 years ago. That you can remember where the "localized" turbulence report was three decades later on an otherwise "normal" approach is very curious.
I appreciate you have a story for every thread, but this whopper isn't ready for prime time.
I appreciate you have a story for every thread, but this whopper isn't ready for prime time.
Last edited by West Coast; 27th Jan 2014 at 22:20.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used the term localized because the turbulence was only reported at one location so merely avoided it and had a smooth approach. Wind swirles around certain terrain but is local in nature and since flying through a zone of know severe turbulence is illegal chose not to do so and the only option to still land at Aspen was circle VFR to 33. You would have to have gone to your alternate because you couldn't have landed without flying through an area of severe turbulence. Then how do you know when it is gone?
There were not so many op specs back then so the pilots were given a lot of latitude. Now with magenta lines and rules I know some operators can't do that.
Amazingly 23,000 hrs later, no bent metal, no violations and no injured passengers or close calls. We flew our way, you fly any way you want.
There were not so many op specs back then so the pilots were given a lot of latitude. Now with magenta lines and rules I know some operators can't do that.
Amazingly 23,000 hrs later, no bent metal, no violations and no injured passengers or close calls. We flew our way, you fly any way you want.
Give it up, there is no conceivable way to fly a left downwind to land on 33 at KASE in a jet. Downwind would have to be flown about 7,000' above the runway. There isn't anything like room enough to fly downwind below the ridges on the west side.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Paso Robles
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That you can remember where the "localized" turbulence report was three decades later on an otherwise "normal" approach is very curious.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting pilot discussion relative to landing a jet on 33 instead of coming up the valley or following the Roaring Fork River to land on 15. My daughter has lived down valley for 25 years and has worked in Aspen for this time period. She says it is rare that a jet circles to land on 33, there is little room to safely do it given the nearby terrain, no matter what the charts might look like. Smaller turbo-props and pistons do it more frequently. So if you have done it in a jet, you are one of the rare ones who have. Aspen proper folks are really not keen on the jet noise approaching 33, either. West Coast has the prevailing winds during the day correct. In the summer time in the afternoon or early evening, be prepared for thunderstorms that generate nearly everyday when the monsoon season reigns, moisture from the Southwest.
Mrs TD and I have taken to flying into Eagle, more reliable to get in and out.
Mrs TD and I have taken to flying into Eagle, more reliable to get in and out.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Original Quote by porterhouse: Typical gibberish from wannabe pilots on this forum.
Last edited by Turbine D; 27th Jan 2014 at 22:45. Reason: Wording correction
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, TD, tough croud here. Please send me a personal message because I don't know who you are.
I spent the last several years flying to Tegucigalpa, Honduras TGU which makes a circle to 33 at Aspen a cake walk. After over 600 landings with no problems was able to do my retirement flight there 10 years ago.
I loved the airport, the challenge and the people there. No magenta lines there, strictly visual with reference to terrain as your only guidance.
Flightlevel350.com shows my last approach and landing there on my retirement flight with my wife in the jump seat and my two neighbors, both pilots as FO and video operator. Search MHTG and look about 7 videos down with the picture out the cockpit of the 757. My usual copilot who has a family house down there cleared me to land.
Yes, we did left traffic to 33 in a Lear Jet with no problem referencing terrain.
It was a lot easier than this approach.
I spent the last several years flying to Tegucigalpa, Honduras TGU which makes a circle to 33 at Aspen a cake walk. After over 600 landings with no problems was able to do my retirement flight there 10 years ago.
I loved the airport, the challenge and the people there. No magenta lines there, strictly visual with reference to terrain as your only guidance.
Flightlevel350.com shows my last approach and landing there on my retirement flight with my wife in the jump seat and my two neighbors, both pilots as FO and video operator. Search MHTG and look about 7 videos down with the picture out the cockpit of the 757. My usual copilot who has a family house down there cleared me to land.
Yes, we did left traffic to 33 in a Lear Jet with no problem referencing terrain.
It was a lot easier than this approach.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ porterhouse
As I observed and commented on, this is an interesting discussion among pilots flying into Aspen, is there anything you would like to contribute?
And how do you know that, what's your evidence counsel
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I did. Did flightlevel350.com search MHTG and look about 7 videos down with the cockpit view out the 757 look like it was photo faxed? Yes, I was what I said and he tried to back me up. You can't make this stuff up.
Winter Wonderland. Aspen, Colorado in the Rocky Mountains | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
The far side of the runway would be the left downwind that blubbery flew to a "normal" landing. The two mil left base puts you on the ski lift.
The far side of the runway would be the left downwind that blubbery flew to a "normal" landing. The two mil left base puts you on the ski lift.
Left downwind to 33 isn't something I'd like to be seen doing in the jets I've flown into ASE! (Lear 60, Hawker and Westwind) A C-185 or PA-18 on floats though, yeah I've done terrain following approaches like that into back country rivers and lakes. That's for fun. Yee Haw!!!
But flying into the mountain resort airports in bizjets is... well... business! While there are times, places and situations which might call for some skillful flying, prudent planning and flight operations standards generally seek to reduce these instances to a minimum.
Landing at ASE on a nice day need not especially challenging when you know the airport and have properly planned the arrival. But it's certainly more demanding than your average flatland aerodrome. Now throw in some weather and things can get a bit more interesting. The day this accident happened was one of those days where the wind was variable in direction and intensity. Some airplanes got in. Some of them might have landed during a lull in the wind and some of then may have used up some of their runway safety factor landing with a tailwind component in excess of 10 kts. That can definitely turn up the heat for a mission oriented pilot to take on more than they should.
From my comfortable chair here at home after the fact, and knowing what the outcome was, the decision to bag it and divert somewhere else is an easy one to make. But up there in the airplane on the day, it takes real discipline to make the safer call and divert when you're getting in a little too deep.
Now the way I see it, that's what you're really being paid for as a pilot. Prudent judgment resulting in safe outcomes that were never in serious doubt. But there is sometimes great temptation to allow prudent decision-making to be overridden by "go-mission syndrome" (gethtereitis) in the heat of the moment. The NTSB reports are rife with a wide variety of examples of this particular human failing. Like any working pilot, I've felt that temptation to push harder and even pushed a little more than (upon further reflection) was really prudent at times. Any pilot who says they haven't is either lying or completely devoid of any capacity for introspection. Neither should be trusted! The question is: Can other pilots truly learn from the mistakes of others or do they have to learn prudent judgment by scaring the hell out of themselves? Like Forrest Gump said in the movie: I think it's a little of both...
But flying into the mountain resort airports in bizjets is... well... business! While there are times, places and situations which might call for some skillful flying, prudent planning and flight operations standards generally seek to reduce these instances to a minimum.
Landing at ASE on a nice day need not especially challenging when you know the airport and have properly planned the arrival. But it's certainly more demanding than your average flatland aerodrome. Now throw in some weather and things can get a bit more interesting. The day this accident happened was one of those days where the wind was variable in direction and intensity. Some airplanes got in. Some of them might have landed during a lull in the wind and some of then may have used up some of their runway safety factor landing with a tailwind component in excess of 10 kts. That can definitely turn up the heat for a mission oriented pilot to take on more than they should.
From my comfortable chair here at home after the fact, and knowing what the outcome was, the decision to bag it and divert somewhere else is an easy one to make. But up there in the airplane on the day, it takes real discipline to make the safer call and divert when you're getting in a little too deep.
Now the way I see it, that's what you're really being paid for as a pilot. Prudent judgment resulting in safe outcomes that were never in serious doubt. But there is sometimes great temptation to allow prudent decision-making to be overridden by "go-mission syndrome" (gethtereitis) in the heat of the moment. The NTSB reports are rife with a wide variety of examples of this particular human failing. Like any working pilot, I've felt that temptation to push harder and even pushed a little more than (upon further reflection) was really prudent at times. Any pilot who says they haven't is either lying or completely devoid of any capacity for introspection. Neither should be trusted! The question is: Can other pilots truly learn from the mistakes of others or do they have to learn prudent judgment by scaring the hell out of themselves? Like Forrest Gump said in the movie: I think it's a little of both...
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I see words of wisdom about mountain airports,I think we should put nice strobe lights in well thought out tracks to lead to such airports final approach.
They might be similiar to those lights at JFK or Missoula , Montana.
And if a community wants an airport, and want it quiet, then they really don't want an airport that functions with safety first.
They might be similiar to those lights at JFK or Missoula , Montana.
And if a community wants an airport, and want it quiet, then they really don't want an airport that functions with safety first.