Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet?
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #230864] |
Sat, 23 November 2013 03:08  |
 |
hnielsen2
Messages: 1434
Registered: February 2004
Location: Alpine CA
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken
Me being a none pilot.
You information was very interesting.
Thank You
Howard
Alpine Ca
All is well with my Lord
> On Nov 23, 2013, at 0:51, Ken Burton <n9cv@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Johnny Bridges wrote on Fri, 22 November 2013 19:24
>> You'd think. One piece I read was comments from an ex ATC who worked at Embry - Riddle. He said aiming for the wrong airport in KC was about a monthly occurance, but the usually corrected the pilot. It's easy to do in an unfamiliar area, I had a nice approach going on a amll they were building in Atlanta once when the PDK tower corrected me. They were real nice about it.
>>
>> --johnny
>
> Flying the airplane is the responsibility of the flight crew (primarily the pilot). The controllers' responsibility is to establish separation between aircraft in his zone or sector. That said flight controllers usually help out when an aircraft strays from the assigned, or normal, or expected path.
>
> Non-pilots assume that controllers can see everything aircraft are doing. This is not necessarily true. Some locations with towers have no approach control which means there is no radar at that facility. The tower only has a responsibility for a 5 mile radius from their airport. Separation is done visually and verbally. Even in areas with approach control, the radar room is in a separate area from the tower controller. The tower may or may not have a slave radar screen as an additional asset in the tower to look at if it is co-located with the approach control. I can see how a tower controller at McConnell would not realize that the aircraft was descending too soon. Even if he did have a screen available to him, these two runways McConnel and Jabara are basically lined up and it would be easy to see how a controller would not realize that the pilots are looking at and flying to the wrong airport.
>
> ATC control usually goes from the enroute facility, to the approach / departure control, to the tower controller, and the ground controller.
>
> I looked a the Wichita area control areas and the flight would have been it would have been Kansas City Center (located in some where near KC) up to the last 20 miles from Wichita. Then to Wichita Approach last 20 miles to the last 5 miles and McConnell Tower for the last 5 miles. It is doubtful that McConnell even had any active radar turned on and then a slave in the tower because they were not doing any active military approaches and they only have control of a 5 mile radius. We know from the audio recording that they were talking to McConnell tower at the time they landed at the wrong airport 9 miles away outside of the McConnell's area of responsibility.
>
>
> I just looked at the recorded flight profile and the last recorded fix is shown as 2300 feet and 153 knots on a heading of 238 degrees. This was observed by Kansas city Center radar.
>
> So do not blame the controller. He was not flying or navigating the airplane. At most he probably said "Clear to land on runway 18. Wind is xxx at xx. Verify gear down." The last statement is military only thing. Civilians are suppose to be intelligent enough to drop the gear on their own. Occasionally someone does forget.
> --
> Ken Burton - N9KB
> 76 Palm Beach
> Hebron, Indiana
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
All is well with my Lord
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #230877 is a reply to message #230864] |
Sat, 23 November 2013 07:16  |
Kingsley Coach
Messages: 2691
Registered: March 2009
Location: Nova Scotia Canada
Karma: -34
|
Senior Member |
|
|
...and interesting for a guy who doesn't like to fly! <VBG>
Mike
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:08 AM, Howard Nielsen <hnielsen2@cox.net> wrote:
> Ken
> Me being a none pilot.
> You information was very interesting.
> Thank You
> Howard
> Alpine Ca
>
>
> All is well with my Lord
>
>
>
> > On Nov 23, 2013, at 0:51, Ken Burton <n9cv@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Johnny Bridges wrote on Fri, 22 November 2013 19:24
> >> You'd think. One piece I read was comments from an ex ATC who worked
> at Embry - Riddle. He said aiming for the wrong airport in KC was about a
> monthly occurance, but the usually corrected the pilot. It's easy to do in
> an unfamiliar area, I had a nice approach going on a amll they were
> building in Atlanta once when the PDK tower corrected me. They were real
> nice about it.
> >>
> >> --johnny
> >
> > Flying the airplane is the responsibility of the flight crew (primarily
> the pilot). The controllers' responsibility is to establish separation
> between aircraft in his zone or sector. That said flight controllers
> usually help out when an aircraft strays from the assigned, or normal, or
> expected path.
> >
> > Non-pilots assume that controllers can see everything aircraft are
> doing. This is not necessarily true. Some locations with towers have no
> approach control which means there is no radar at that facility. The tower
> only has a responsibility for a 5 mile radius from their airport.
> Separation is done visually and verbally. Even in areas with approach
> control, the radar room is in a separate area from the tower controller.
> The tower may or may not have a slave radar screen as an additional asset
> in the tower to look at if it is co-located with the approach control. I
> can see how a tower controller at McConnell would not realize that the
> aircraft was descending too soon. Even if he did have a screen available
> to him, these two runways McConnel and Jabara are basically lined up and it
> would be easy to see how a controller would not realize that the pilots are
> looking at and flying to the wrong airport.
> >
> > ATC control usually goes from the enroute facility, to the approach /
> departure control, to the tower controller, and the ground controller.
> >
> > I looked a the Wichita area control areas and the flight would have been
> it would have been Kansas City Center (located in some where near KC) up to
> the last 20 miles from Wichita. Then to Wichita Approach last 20 miles to
> the last 5 miles and McConnell Tower for the last 5 miles. It is doubtful
> that McConnell even had any active radar turned on and then a slave in the
> tower because they were not doing any active military approaches and they
> only have control of a 5 mile radius. We know from the audio recording
> that they were talking to McConnell tower at the time they landed at the
> wrong airport 9 miles away outside of the McConnell's area of
> responsibility.
> >
> >
> > I just looked at the recorded flight profile and the last recorded fix
> is shown as 2300 feet and 153 knots on a heading of 238 degrees. This was
> observed by Kansas city Center radar.
> >
> > So do not blame the controller. He was not flying or navigating the
> airplane. At most he probably said "Clear to land on runway 18. Wind is
> xxx at xx. Verify gear down." The last statement is military only thing.
> Civilians are suppose to be intelligent enough to drop the gear on their
> own. Occasionally someone does forget.
> > --
> > Ken Burton - N9KB
> > 76 Palm Beach
> > Hebron, Indiana
> > _______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Michael Beaton
1977 Kingsley 26-11
1977 Eleganza II 26-3
Antigonish, NS
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #230891 is a reply to message #230864] |
Sat, 23 November 2013 09:23 |
GeorgeRud
Messages: 1380
Registered: February 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Glad they got that plane out of there safely! I wonder if they emptied the plane's cargo at the airport before trying to take off, as I would assume that lighter is better than heavier.
When I see the size of that fuselage, I'm amazed that traveling air molecules can lift something that large.
Neat engineering!
George Rudawsky
Chicago, IL
75 Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #230896 is a reply to message #230891] |
Sat, 23 November 2013 10:04 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
One piece said it was a 787 fuselage inside, I suspect they left it in. Bulky but light for the bulk.
--johnny
From: George Rudawsky <GeorgeRud@aol.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet?
Glad they got that plane out of there safely! I wonder if they emptied the plane's cargo at the airport before trying to take off, as I would assume that lighter is better than heavier.
When I see the size of that fuselage, I'm amazed that traveling air molecules can lift something that large.
Neat engineering!
--
George Rudawsky
Chicago, IL
75 Palm Beach
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #230986 is a reply to message #230896] |
Sun, 24 November 2013 05:00 |
Ken Burton
Messages: 10030
Registered: January 2004
Location: Hebron, Indiana
Karma: 10
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The report I saw said they kept the cargo and dumped the fuel. (If you can believe the newspapers) Another report said the takeoff weight was around 600,000. Normal maximum is around 875K to 910K. Empty is a little over 400K. They had a strong north wind right down the runway and its was cold out. Both of these helped a lot. I wanted to see a good TV shot of the plane at lift off and the end of the runway. We never go it.
Ken Burton - N9KB
76 Palm Beach
Hebron, Indiana
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #231039 is a reply to message #231036] |
Sun, 24 November 2013 10:55 |
Ken Burton
Messages: 10030
Registered: January 2004
Location: Hebron, Indiana
Karma: 10
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I did not see any markers. I did see a windsock sticking straight out which means the wind was over 15. I will take your word that it was 4500 feet.
Some of my pilot friends were betting that he would hit the fence. I'm sure Boeing knew what their plane would do and if it was close they would not have even tried it.
4500 feet for a 600,000 pound aircraft isn't too bad.
I'll bet Colonel Ken could have done it in 2000 in his C-130.
Ken Burton - N9KB
76 Palm Beach
Hebron, Indiana
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #231057 is a reply to message #231048] |
Sun, 24 November 2013 11:56 |
Ken Burton
Messages: 10030
Registered: January 2004
Location: Hebron, Indiana
Karma: 10
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| Matt Colie wrote on Sun, 24 November 2013 11:27 |
Ken, (either one)
While I am very aware that landing and takeoff capability is always published as over a 50' obstacle,
Why do so many airport feel the obligation to have the 50' obstacle there?
Matt
|
It is there to challenge the pilot.
lol
Actually I think the spec is to simulate an initial rate of climb. I came out of Anaconda, Montana one time headed to Alaska. I was over weight with a full fuel load on a hot day and I could not get it to climb. I almost hit a set of electric lines almost a mile off the end of the runway. I actually turned away from them before reaching them. So getting it off the ground is only part of the picture. Getting up enough speed to climb out of ground effect is also important.
Ken Burton - N9KB
76 Palm Beach
Hebron, Indiana
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #231122 is a reply to message #231048] |
Sun, 24 November 2013 19:55 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Supposedly to get out of ground effect. But since that's nominally
effective to a height equal to the wing span, large aircraft could still be
in it.
Lovely benefit, that ground effect. During pilot training in the T-37, I
was doing repeated touch and go landings. Boredom had set in when I
"touched and went", automatically raising the gear and flaps (too soon).
The buzzing in my headset was the stall warning, set to alarm at 72 knots
-- barely above stall speed. Fortunately, I had several thousand feet of
runway ahead and that lovely ground effect held me off of the pavement
until I'd accelerated 20-30 knots. :-)
Ken H.
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Matt Colie <matt7323tze@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Ken, (either one)
>
> While I am very aware that landing and takeoff capability is always
> published as over a 50' obstacle,
>
> Why do so many airport feel the obligation to have the 50' obstacle there?
>
> Matt
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #231128 is a reply to message #231039] |
Sun, 24 November 2013 20:30 |
Ken Henderson
Messages: 8726
Registered: March 2004
Location: Americus, GA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
It's been a LONG time since I flew, but this may give someone an idea of
just what the performance CAN be:
http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c130_forrestal.asp
Roughly comparable, proportionately, to the 747's takeoff, on the Forestal,
the C130, at 122,000 lb (vs 135,000 max), with a 40 kt headwind, the
takeoff roll was 745 ft.
During routine operations, our TOR in JC-130H's and MC-130E's (which had
the more powerful H-model engines) was 1500'-2000'.
Ken H.
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Ken Burton <n9cv@comcast.net> wrote:
> ...
>
> I'll bet Colonel Ken could have done it in 2000 in his C-130.
> --
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Ken Henderson
Americus, GA
www.gmcwipersetc.com
Large Wiring Diagrams
76 X-Birchaven
76 X-Palm Beach
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet? [message #231156 is a reply to message #231128] |
Mon, 25 November 2013 01:12 |
 |
USAussie
Messages: 15912
Registered: July 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Karma: 6
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think I've told this story before.
I got sent up to Tuy Hoa for a TDY with the 39th ARRS which operated HC-130P's. I got a ride up to Vung Tau where they picked me up
and we headed for Tuy Hoa in one of their aircraft.
All a sudden I felt the aircraft shudder and make a horrendous banging noise; I thought we had been hit by a SAM or something and
was looking for the hole in the aircraft.
Turns out the crew did a combat assault landing where they throw the props into reverse the instant the aircraft hits the ground and
it stops on a dime.
Scared the hell out of me; it thought it was all over! Loadmaster was sitting across the fuselage from laughing like crazy. Turns
out that was their initiation for anyone coming into their squadron.
Regards,
Rob M.
-----Original Message-----
From: gmclist-bounces@temp.gmcnet.org [mailto:gmclist-bounces@temp.gmcnet.org] On Behalf Of Ken Henderson
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 1:30 PM
To: gmclist
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Can a 747 take off in 6000 feet?
It's been a LONG time since I flew, but this may give someone an idea of
just what the performance CAN be:
http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c130_forrestal.asp
Roughly comparable, proportionately, to the 747's takeoff, on the Forestal,
the C130, at 122,000 lb (vs 135,000 max), with a 40 kt headwind, the
takeoff roll was 745 ft.
During routine operations, our TOR in JC-130H's and MC-130E's (which had
the more powerful H-model engines) was 1500'-2000'.
Ken H.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Regards,
Rob M. (USAussie)
The Pedantic Mechanic
Sydney, Australia
'75 Avion - AUS - The Blue Streak TZE365V100428
'75 Avion - USA - Double Trouble TZE365V100426
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Nov 04 12:57:47 CST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.13161 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
