AA61hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13975 posts, RR: 59 Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1317 times:
i know what your talking about bigphil. but you could be the pessimist and think that something may happen, or be the optimist and be glad that nothing has happened, and hopefully it will stay that way
Janne From Sweden, joined Sep 2001, 379 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1220 times:
Let's forget about the crashes, shall we, Big Phil.
I can understand your PAIN.
To cut all the crap, I liked your postings maybe half a year ago,
the photos of your toy planes when you where a kid and how
your shots did'nt make it to a.net.
I mean, THE PAIN!!!
I like your style. Keep it up. Let's get some more of that python style
of yours. Keep it up, Phil (no, I'm not talking about, everybody know's what).
Rai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1173 times:
I live right by LGA, so this is a major concern for me. It could be that airliners are using more modern aircraft into LGA these days which don't require as much runway for take-offs of landings. LGA has a new ATC system in place which would prevent incursions, etc. These are just my theories. Maybe someone at jfktower.com would know.
Jcs17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 43 Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1110 times:
I dont really think that the ATC crew at LGA is the problem there, it is pilots and crew making poor decisions. Certainly, the airport is bursting at the seams, but it used to be a lot worse in terms of crowding during peak periods. The bottom line is that if a flight crew doesnt feel safe at some point during approach/takeoff (before decision speed)/taxi it is their job to notify ATC and take corrective measures. The only time I worry about being at LGA is during bad weather, but I could say the same thing about any crowded airport (not that I really worry about it though).
Jcxp15 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 996 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1088 times:
I think LGA definately learned after those crashes, and has put in extra safety measure to prevent skid-offs etc.. but they can still occur. I also think a lot of those accidents had to do with
a) either airport conditions which the pilot cannot control
b) more likely, bad pilot decision
I do know for sure that LGA has had several "near-incidents" to which the result could have been tragic (i.e. midair collisions etc..) I believe they have tightened up on how close they space aircraft, and the way they use the perpendicular runways.
Phil, I know what you mean though... It seems that LGA is due sometime for a big accident.. Hopefully that won't happen, but many people believe LGA is a living time bomb, set to go off at any moment...
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1075 times:
To my way of thinking, LGA hasn't had that many accidents. The US F-28 (1992) and more recently, the DL flight that bellied in are accidents (and the DL amazingly fatality-free). Some others (while technically accidents due to their exceeding the damage cost threshold), were essentially incidents turned into accidents due to the unforgiving nature of LGA's cramped space.
I mean, US 5050 hydroplaning off the end at any other airport would have been in the mud, and no big deal as far as a hull-loss, but LGA's pier and runway lights supports changed that. Ditto for the CO MD-80 that slid off via going up the blast wall. Another aircraft that would have been in the mud anywhere else.
So it's not so much that LGA has "accidents", it just tends to magnify complace incidents into accidents.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7695 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1014 times:
I think they want more experienced pilots flying in and out of LGA due to the tricky ATC situation and also the relatively short runways at that airport. It's probably the respect for the dangers at LGA that has kept the incident rate there down recently.
Jcxp15 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 996 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 913 times:
I dunno about that because many DASH-8 and CRJ/ERJ turboprop planes are flown into LGA, and usually those captains and F/O's have the least amount of experience at that airline.
It's just a matter of landing safely. Landing at LGA is like landing anywhere else, but as a flight officer, you have to be more aware of your "surroundings" and weather conditions.
ContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 15 Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 897 times:
I personally fear LGA and yet, still fly out of it, when I can't get to Newark. I was in college in 1992 when a US Airways Fokker F28 (or was it an F100) I don't remember) skidded off the snowy runway and plunged into the icy water killing around 28 of the 50 odd people on board. That flight was operating LGA to CLE and had my spring break been a week earlier than scheduled, a lot of my class mates and I would have been on that flight.
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 890 times:
>>> I was in college in 1992 when a US Airways Fokker F28 (or was it an F100) I don't remember) skidded off the snowy runway and plunged into the icy water killing around 28 of the 50 odd people on board.
That was US405, and it actually tookoff, stalled, and then crashed. Turns out that it had had been too long since it had been deiced, and it should have gone back for another deicing. Afterwards, FAA conducted an industry-wide conference on deicing and winter ops (I was there), and we have not seen another similar type of accident, not counting the customary runway excursions, which are far less deadly...