Crownvic From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 6 Posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 12778 times:
In addition to the thread talking about the China 744 visit to PHX, it appears that the same aircraft made a visit to the Grand Canyon Aiport! Not the first 747 into there as I believe Air Force One has been in there too on a few occasions...I bet that raised a few campers eyebrows!! Anyone with photos???
Lexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2362 posts, RR: 9 Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 12450 times:
Quoting Crownvic (Thread starter): I bet that raised a few campers eyebrows!! Anyone with photos???
I bet it did too!! WOW! I need to make a few calls and see if I can find some pics.
FLYjoe From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 250 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 12359 times:
Tiger119 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1919 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10706 times:
With an altitude of such a field, what kind of weight restrictions would be placed on a 747?
Flying is the second greatest thrill known to mankind, landing is the first!
SkyguyB727 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 589 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 9990 times:
And I thought it was a big deal years ago when I saw a Republic DC-9 land there!
The list of arrivals at GCN lists a flight CCA18 and CAA18, both departing PDX at 0931 MST, but arriving at GCN four minutes apart, both on 744 equipment.
Were there two 747s at GCN, or was this a typo?
CAA (Atlantic Southeast Airlines) does not operate 747s. Could CAA be some sort of ad hoc code for the CAAC (Civil Aviation Administration of China)?
NBGSkyGod From United States of America, joined May 2004, 596 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 7375 times:
Quoting B2468 (Reply 7): The list of arrivals at GCN lists a flight CCA18 and CAA18, both departing PDX at 0931 MST, but arriving at GCN four minutes apart, both on 744 equipment.
Were there two 747s at GCN, or was this a typo?
Looks like dispatch made a typo since the outbound flight was CCA18. This happens alot more than people like to admit. I was not there, but more than likely there was only 1 747 at GCN that day.
"I use multi-billion dollar military satellite systems to find tupperware in the woods."
Aussieindc From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 437 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5150 times:
Looks like it's been a busy a/c over the past week or so, starting in Havana and now on its way to Andrews AFB today.
Isitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 26 Reply 10, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3402 times:
I know the runway there is long.
Its not a Poe-dunk USA-sized piece of concrete. More like it was built for the heavy metal.
safe
If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
Tjwgrr From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2296 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3309 times:
Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 10): I know the runway there is long.
Its not a Poe-dunk USA-sized piece of concrete. More like it was built for the heavy metal.
8999 X 150 ft - asphalt/ grooved, in good condition.
Direct KNOBS, maintain 2700' until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 26 left approach.
...for reference. This lightly loaded 747 (the Evergreen Supertanker) was easily able to land and takeoff from my hometown airport - CYQL (Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada). So, obviously 8999 feet is more than adequate at the Grand Canyon!
Cessna 172; King Air 100; Twin Otter; SAAB 340; Dash 7; Dash 8-100,-200,-300,-400; CRJ-200,700,900; ERJ-170; F-28; DC 9-
Lexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2362 posts, RR: 9 Reply 14, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2830 times:
CI used to land here at BNA on a +/- 8,000 foot runway almost everyday for a number of years. 8,000 feet is plenty for a 747, even a heavily loaded 747. I will admit though, I spoke to a CI pilot once at BNA who landed on runway 20R (7,773 feet long) and he said that landing on that runway takes everybit of the stopping power a loaded 744 has. Ironically, this is the runway they used the most alongside runway 13-30 which is right at 11,000 feet long. LOL!! They would often takeoff on this runway (20R-2L) as well along with AF1 using it almost everytime. Very fun to watch!
Currently, this runway is under reconstruction and won't open for a few months atleast. This is the oldest runway at BNA.
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6201 posts, RR: 43 Reply 15, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2645 times:
Quoting Lexy (Reply 14): 8,000 feet is plenty for a 747, even a heavily loaded 747
Grand Canyon is a hell of a lot higher and warner than Nashville though. However, an empty 747 can take off from MZJ on a 105 degree day so GCN would not be a problem for these light 747s.
What is it with all the "is there a possibilty airline X will.." threads? The answer it'll is possible.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, RR: 24 Reply 16, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2403 times:
Quoting Rikkus67 (Reply 13): This lightly loaded 747 (the Evergreen Supertanker) was easily able to land and takeoff from my hometown airport - CYQL (Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada). So, obviously 8999 feet is more than adequate at the Grand Canyon!
However GCN airport is 6,609 feet above sea level, more than 1,000 ft. higher than "mile-high" DEN, and DEN has no runway shorter than 12,000 ft., and the longest 16,000 ft.
413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2331 times:
Quoting Lexy (Reply 14): CI used to land here at BNA on a +/- 8,000 foot runway almost everyday for a number of years. 8,000 feet is plenty for a 747, even a heavily loaded 747.
The only way that was able to work is most of the freight loads are coming into the states. The China Airlines cargo 747-400F would not have much freight on it departing, otherwise that runway length for taking off would be an issue if it had big loads and a lot of fuel
Lexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2362 posts, RR: 9 Reply 18, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2217 times:
Quoting 413X3 (Reply 17): The China Airlines cargo 747-400F would not have much freight on it departing, otherwise that runway length for taking off would be an issue if it had big loads and a lot of fuel
There were days it went out of BNA full. I knew the station manager there.
They never had to put much fuel in it because it would continue on to ORD, IAH, DFW, or SFO from BNA. Never did they leave with a full load of Jet A. Trust me, 8,000 feet is plenty.
413x3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2123 times:
That explains it then. What do you mean full though, what would their lbs load be?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1593 posts, 
From South Korea, joined May 2004, 2315 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1461 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
