DCA, GIB, nothing scary about them. Been in to/out of both. Nothing to it.
Wanna get your panties in a wad over a runway . . .
Try DUT or SIT.
Dutch has a mountain at the end of the "usual" departure runway that DEMANDS an immediate left turn or your world is certainly gonna get ugly. And it's only 3700' long. Try that in a 737!
SIT is built on a manmade island in the middle of a bay . . . try watching the plane get lower and lower and lower - being able to read what's written on the hat of a local fisherman before "Poof" there's the runway - 10 feet below you . . .
Tegucigalpa? Nothing to that one either . . . Been there and done that.
UltimateDelta From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2064 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 6636 times:
That was so stupid. National isn't really scary, just tricky to get into/out of. I think Stehekin (6S9) in Washingotn state takes the cake. It is in a tiny bowl in the Cascades, with mountains rising up on all sides about 1,500 feet from the end of the super-short runway. I have only visited it on FSX, but that is enough to keep me away in reality.
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11572 posts, RR: 61
Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 6634 times:
I don't agree with all of those, there is nothing scary about a runway with an ILS installed, so I really don't see why some of them are in there other than to make the general public think that they have probably flown from incredibly dangerous places, when they haven't.
I'd put forwards Khorog in Tajikistan as being one of the most dangerous, along with many in Nepal and perhaps also Caticlan in the Philippines if we're talking about their BAe 146 service to that airport.
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
BA787 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (6 years 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6499 times:
I'm surprised Courcehevel Airport isn't listed there. Suppose it's not really big enought to be listed.
Also, from a passengers perspective, both CMF amd TRN are interestingly scary approaches.
TRN is quite good fun as you sweep over the Alps at some daunting altitudes
CMF is nothing special unless you're in a fully loaded 737-700ER or an -800. The approach is steep as it is, and then you slam onto the runway and get thrown forward as full brakes are applied . Those on the right of the aircraft have the most heart wrenching experience as they realise how little runway is left after you stop.
Shows how much of a joke that article is. This Farhad Heydari, the author, is just silly.
Agreed, those don't deserve to be there.
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 8): SIT is built on a manmade island in the middle of a bay . . . try watching the plane get lower and lower and lower - being able to read what's written on the hat of a local fisherman before "Poof" there's the runway - 10 feet below you
Japonski Island wasn't man-made, there are a couple of causeway extensions but the island there has been there a while.
Besides it isn't that difficult, I would rank Juneau, Skagway and Valdez all as much tougher.
TristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3930 posts, RR: 34
Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6299 times:
I would like to add Shiraz in Iran.
When I worked for Gulf Air we flew there. In the B737 it was daylight only. Only the VC10 was allowed there in darkness. The airport was in a bowl of mountains. The standard departure was to turn at 500 ft on departure and continue in a rate 1 turn until you had climbed about 8000 ft above airport elevation before heading home. In the B737 it took about 3-4 360deg circles to get above the mountains.
I was last there in 1981 just after the Iran Revolution and we were evacuating Shell employees. I was glad to leave as there was gunfire and explosions in the city only a couple of miles away!
BoeingOnFinal From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6182 times:
Quote: Because of the diminutive 1,312-foot-long runway perched at the edge of a couloir at 7,550 feet, becoming airborne at the end of the tarmac is virtually impossible. Instead, you drop down the face of a 2,000-foot cliff until you start flying.
You really should have thought of that before landing at that particular runway, shouldn't you? I surely hope this was an exaggeration for the sake of the article!
: Thanks for the links re: Dutch Harbor. I recall reading about that in some aviation magazine several months ago. You guys ought to email T+L magazine
: Here you have it in a puddle jumper, tosses out the anchor real quick.
: The 'article' states that the Twotters which land at Barra are "specially rigged". Does anyone know in what way? One other thing; Does anyone see anyt
: I would guess that they have larger tires which would give them better traction when breaking on the sand.
: Landing at KLAL (went to Sun-n-Fun) this weekend was pretty scary, "Maule turn final NOW, Maule land on green dot, Maule land between green and orange
: While there is nothing scary about sitting in the back and enjoying the view out the window, inside the cockpit the 2 pilots are hard at work trying
: Probably referring to the up and coming takeover of Loganair by Flybe. I thought the same when I first read it! First I've heard of Lesotho though, l
: Quito. ANCFlyer, have you flown an airliner in and out of Tegoose, or ridden in back??? Wouldn't one have had to actually flown an aircraft in/out of
: Whilst I agree that the journalist is a layman, and whilst I agree that there are some other airports where pilots are challenged more than at a usual
: Indeed, and the fact that it's next to the Barents Sea doesn't make it any easier. For those who are not familiar with ENHV, check out the charts her