BMIFlyer From United Kingdom (England), joined Feb 2004, 8170 posts, RR: 71 Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 854 times:
Phatfarmlines From United States, joined Sep 2001, 1037 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 763 times:
Quoting FaroeFlyer (Reply 2): It's not that hard with good visibility and calm winds
And GOOD PLANNING. ASE is one of the few airports in FS2004 I believe people should really plan before arriving/departing. A good study of SIDs and STARs will not only make your experience easier but may save some souls in the process. Even during good visibility someone could screw up a takeoff on runway 15 if he or she does not realize the terrain rises quickly.
AirWillie6475 From United States, joined Jan 2005, 2447 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 739 times:
The first time I flew into Aspen was a few years ago with an HPexpress DASH 8. I also flew it at night. Descent was fine but I remember when it came time to land ATC told me clear for the visual and report runway in sight. A few moments later I crashed into the mountains. I was really upset because I NEVER unintentionally crash in FS. ASE is also not a good airport to land at because ATC has to be perfect in their calls, and FS ATC isn't. After a few day time runs I got the hang of it.
Phatfarmlines From United States, joined Sep 2001, 1037 posts, RR: 7 Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 700 times:
Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 4): The first time I flew into Aspen was a few years ago with an HPexpress DASH 8. I also flew it at night. Descent was fine but I remember when it came time to land ATC told me clear for the visual and report runway in sight. A few moments later I crashed into the mountains. I was really upset because I NEVER unintentionally crash in FS. ASE is also not a good airport to land at because ATC has to be perfect in their calls, and FS ATC isn't. After a few day time runs I got the hang of it.
In addition, take FS2004's ATC system directions with a grain of salt when landing/departing at ASE. Use approach plates, and during nighttime, land only on runway 15 and takeoff on runway 33, even if ATC tells you otherwise. In real life, that nighttime configuration is used.
Woodreau From United States, joined Sep 2001, 774 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 664 times:
A few things about Aspen:
Takeoffs from runway 15 aren't authorized in the real life Aspen airport, day or night.
After sunset, none of the published instrument approaches are authorized into Aspen.
And just in general not just for Aspen but for all airports:
Once ATC clears you for a visual approach, the pilot is responsible for terrain clearance. You cannot accept a visual approach if you don't have the airport and surrounding terrain in sight.
Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from surviving bad judgement.
AirWillie6475 From United States, joined Jan 2005, 2447 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 526 times:
Actually flying with FS2002 also might have had something to do with it since the terrain and ATC calls might not be as exact because I swear the ATC made me smash into the mountain. I just tried flying to aspen with FS04 and everything was fine.
Beowulf From Singapore, joined Jul 2003, 679 posts, RR: 25 Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 525 times:
Quoting AirWillie6475 (Reply 10): Actually flying with FS2002 also might have had something to do with it since the terrain and ATC calls might not be as exact because I swear the ATC made me smash into the mountain.
Yeah, FS2K2's ATC is after you. However, I agree that ATC is far from precise.
Now I am wondering how are real life approaches into Aspen flown?
Just as shown on that approach plate. Namely, fly outbound on the 164 radial from the Red Table VOR, following the descent profile, until you have visual contact on the runway, at which point you make a visual approach. The weather minimums are a ceiling of 2400ft AGL (10200ft MSL) and a visibility of 2 miles. Should you not have visual on the runway by that time, you have to fly the missed approach proceedure.
This one isn't authorized at night, for obvious reasons. It also has some pretty extreme weather minimums.
Quoting Woodreau (Reply 6): After sunset, none of the published instrument approaches are authorized into Aspen.
Seeing as the visual approach is also not available, how does one get into Aspen at night? I know it can be done, since I was on a UA Express flight that landed there at night last winter.
Beowulf From Singapore, joined Jul 2003, 679 posts, RR: 25 Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 483 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 12): Just as shown on that approach plate. Namely, fly outbound on the 164 radial from the Red Table VOR, following the descent profile, until you have visual contact on the runway, at which point you make a visual approach. The weather minimums are a ceiling of 2400ft AGL (10200ft MSL) and a visibility of 2 miles. Should you not have visual on the runway by that time, you have to fly the missed approach proceedure.
Thank you, Mir. Ah, I don't know if I understand the approach plate really because I can't make out what the preferred runway is.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Jan 2005, 2447 posts, 
.gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Feb 2004, 8170 posts, 
From Faroe Islands, joined Aug 2005, 87 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Jul 2003, 679 posts, 
However, I agree that ATC is far from precise.
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
