Modesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2739 posts, RR: 6 Posted (11 years 9 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1238 times:
I flew into OAK on Friday and the winds dictated a runway 11 arrival. From my previous 11 arrival, I was expecting the Hadly Two arrival. However, I spoke to the first officer after the flight and he enlightened me about the Commo One arrival. After looking at the chart, it closely resembles the new Marvn One arrival (for 29) that replaces the Panoche Two. Can anyone shed some light on the Commo arrival? When was it introduced and why? My understanding is that the Marvn was implemented to keep OAK arrivals away from SFO arrivals. Can I assume that the Commo has the same intentions? Any insight is appreciated. Thanks!
Barney captain From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 836 posts, RR: 13 Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1135 times:
Insight? It blows. They started they Marvin/Commo @ 6 months ago for the reasons you stated, and the general opinion is it's horrible. Just flew it again last night (I'm based in OAK), and on either arrival, you're basically down at 10k feet 65 miles from the airport. They should just rename them the "Fuel Burn 1" and the "VFR Conflict 2". Unfortunately, OAK is not alone. Because of the secondary airports we serve (OAK vs SFO, MDW vs ORD etc), we frequently are decended early to avoid the main flow of traffic.
Modesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2739 posts, RR: 6 Reply 11, posted (11 years 8 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 984 times:
First, I appreciate those members who have appropriately answered my question. However, I never fathomed such a misunderstanding. Continental and ThirtyEcho: no, I am not an airline pilot. As my profile (and Timz) explicitly says, I am a mechanical engineering student at UCLA. I'm not sure where your misunderstanding finds its roots, but if you read my original post, it says: "I spoke to the first officer after the flight." Hawkeye2, had I been flying UA, your assumption most likely would have been correct! And OPNLguy, as always, I appreciate your professionalism and willingness to share your wealth of knowledge.
I hope this serves as a reminder that in the future, please carefully read each post and don't jump to conclusions. It really detracts from the potential knowledge gain of this great forum. Thank you!
Flygga From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (11 years 8 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 979 times:
Please igonore the children in the group. There are lots of them out there. When they post stupid stuff like that, just ignore it. I have read and responded to alot of your post over time and I never got the impression that you were a pilot. I actually enjoy a lot of your post, since we share a common interest in SIDS and STARS. Not too many non-pilots out there have interest this kinda stuff.
Have a good one
PS: There is probably going to be another SID for OAK that is a noise abatement procedure.
Flygga From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (11 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 932 times:
Well if you read the post more carefully you would see that he did not say "I spoke to MY first officer". Instead it says, "I spoke to THE first officer". As for him expecting a certain arrival, I believe he a frequent flyer on that route and knows what to expect. When I fly on familiar routes, I too expect certain arrivals and departure routes. Some of us actually enjoy studying SIDS, STARS, and ATC procedures.
Flygga From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (11 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 909 times:
Continental, You may have lots of knowledge but it seems you do not have much wisdom. As far as I am concerned you are welcome to post here, but if you are going to acuse someone of something you better know what you are talking about. Instead of being critical of people in your post, why dont you stick to technical issues that you have knowledge of and where you can share your expertise.