Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Fedex tests it's new mid-air delivery system   (twitter.com) divider line
62
    More: Scary, shot  
•       •       •

3951 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Feb 2023 at 2:45 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



62 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
Original [TotalFark]
2023-02-04 10:26:32 PM  
Original Tweet:
 
Redh8t [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-04 10:58:38 PM  
And that Son, is how babby 737Max is made.
 
MaudlinMutantMollusk [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-04 11:23:12 PM  
I said, MOVE
 
fragMasterFlash [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-04 11:35:02 PM  
Don't roll with the bigboys if it bothers you to trade paint occasionally.
 
Warthog [TotalFark]
2023-02-04 11:50:42 PM  
Jesus, it doesn't get any closer than that without having an episode of Air Disasters filmed about your last-ever day at the office.
 
potierrh [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-05 12:21:53 AM  

Redh8t: And that Son, is how babby 737Max is made.


They do it like they do on the Discovery Channel
 
abb3w [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 1:42:15 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: I said, MOVE


Light house.

Your call.
 
Ivo Shandor [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-05 1:51:24 AM  
pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
 
SpockYouOut [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-05 2:47:27 AM  
I learned this move from watching Top Gun.
 
leeksfromchichis [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 2:53:29 AM  

abb3w: MaudlinMutantMollusk: I said, MOVE

Light house.

Your call.


Damn the torpedos Lighthouse! Full speed ahead!
 
Ivo Shandor [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-05 2:56:52 AM  
Also (unless they fix the headline),
eloquentscience.comView Full Size
 
phishrace
2023-02-05 3:02:10 AM  
To be fair, the yellow plane was dressed like it wanted it. Who wears yellow to the airport?
 
Archie Goodwin
2023-02-05 3:03:05 AM  
"In case of emergency, oxygen masks and FedEx packages will drop from the ceiling."

/Where the hell were the air traffic controllers during this?
 
Ganon D. Mire
2023-02-05 3:05:08 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Unda
2023-02-05 3:19:02 AM  

Ivo Shandor: Also (unless they fix the headline),
[eloquentscience.com image 500x265]


Its a big problem, everyone get's it wrong.
 
ZMugg [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 3:24:35 AM  
DHL wasn't so lucky in 2002.
 
robodog
2023-02-05 3:31:04 AM  
It's a good thing that was an older design that FedEx was using, modern high bypass turbofans (these were basically first generation "high bypass" with a 5:1 ratio, Ge9x used on 777x are 10:1) have enough inertia that a jet with modern engines probably wouldn't have been able to get back into the power before they collided based on that tracking data.
 
DannyBrandt [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 4:10:53 AM  
Gross vehicle weight might mean something if you're in a Honda Civic and considering cutting off a fully loaded dump truck.

Two planes colliding on the ground?

That's just negligence.
 
Lsherm [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 4:28:13 AM  
I'm not an airline pilot, but even I know you have to ask before going in the back door.
 
cyberspacedout
2023-02-05 4:40:20 AM  

ZMugg: DHL wasn't so lucky in 2002.


They were serious about that "or else" part.
 
Sebas [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 5:32:43 AM  

robodog: It's a good thing that was an older design that FedEx was using, modern high bypass turbofans (these were basically first generation "high bypass" with a 5:1 ratio, Ge9x used on 777x are 10:1) have enough inertia that a jet with modern engines probably wouldn't have been able to get back into the power before they collided based on that tracking data.


I recognize all the words you wrote, but don't understand it at all. As I have no idea about engines, jets or any of the forces involved, is what you're saying basically that a new fedex jet would have blown the southwest plane into the ground?

Serieus question!
 
fzumrk [BareFark]
2023-02-05 6:04:29 AM  
This could have been avoided if those planes had horns and blind spot mirrors. The cheap airlines are to blame for skimping on basic safety equipment.
 
daffy
2023-02-05 6:06:36 AM  
Yup, works just as well as I thought it would. I've never seen two planes humping before. That should really come with a warning.
 
Kiribub
2023-02-05 7:37:33 AM  
So what actually happened? This seems to show on aircraft rolling over another, from which both emerge unscathed.
 
Kiribub
2023-02-05 7:38:29 AM  

Kiribub: So what actually happened? This seems to show aircraft rolling over another, from which both emerge unscathed.


*one
 
thealgorerhythm
2023-02-05 7:57:31 AM  

Kiribub: Kiribub: So what actually happened? This seems to show aircraft rolling over another, from which both emerge unscathed.

*one


Zoom in and watch the altitude readout. The FedEx plane was landing and was only 70 feet above the other plane when they pulled up again.

IANAP but it looked like the on ground plane was also about to lift off when they suddenly veer to the screen left at high speed and start gaining altitude. Seems like their choice was take off at an angle or drive on the ground straight into whatever was at the end of the runway.
 
dantanner
2023-02-05 8:27:53 AM  
it's = it is. For Christ's sake!
 
Kiribub
2023-02-05 8:38:55 AM  

thealgorerhythm: Kiribub: Kiribub: So what actually happened? This seems to show aircraft rolling over another, from which both emerge unscathed.

*one

Zoom in and watch the altitude readout. The FedEx plane was landing and was only 70 feet above the other plane when they pulled up again.

IANAP but it looked like the on ground plane was also about to lift off when they suddenly veer to the screen left at high speed and start gaining altitude. Seems like their choice was take off at an angle or drive on the ground straight into whatever was at the end of the runway.


Thank you for the help. Holy cow, that must have been terrifying.
 
wildsnowllama
2023-02-05 9:00:58 AM  

Ivo Shandor: [pbs.twimg.com image 850x619]


🎵I need Brazil

The throb, the thrill

I've never been there, but someday I will!

Adventure and danger, love from a stranger

Let me be surprised!🎵
 
GhostOfSavageHenry
2023-02-05 9:01:28 AM  
They had a few hundred feet to spare.
 
Gassy Snake
2023-02-05 9:01:46 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
iron_city_ap
2023-02-05 9:05:30 AM  
The controller is in some shiat. They notoriously cut corners for Southwest, give them preferential treatment or otherwise go out of their way to make SW special. There is a minimal amount of required spacing between aircraft. The controller ignored that, since they absolutely knew FedEx was inside the Final Approach Fix (5.3 miles in this case) and the weather was really bad. He/she (I haven't listened to the audio yet) assumed Southwest would haul ass, as usual, and get out of there quick. They were very wrong. Luckily no metal got bent, but that controller should be lucky if they are allowed near an ATC facility any time soon, if ever.
 
Richard Corinthian-Leather
2023-02-05 9:05:54 AM  

thealgorerhythm: Kiribub: Kiribub: So what actually happened? This seems to show aircraft rolling over another, from which both emerge unscathed.

*one

Zoom in and watch the altitude readout. The FedEx plane was landing and was only 70 feet above the other plane when they pulled up again.

IANAP but it looked like the on ground plane was also about to lift off when they suddenly veer to the screen left at high speed and start gaining altitude. Seems like their choice was take off at an angle or drive on the ground straight into whatever was at the end of the runway.


Heavy jet planes do not react very quickly when a landing needs to be suddenly re-scheduled.

IANAPE, but from my viewing, the first frame of the video is about when the FedEx pilot must have hit the go-around switch and spent the rest of the time pushing prayers out one end and dusty red building materials out the other end.

Captain probably didn't know if they'd even hit the switch in time to avoid a touchdown, and couldn't risk turning because you do not want to touchdown anywhere other than a runway.
 
Warthog [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 9:15:16 AM  

iron_city_ap: The controller is in some shiat. They notoriously cut corners for Southwest, give them preferential treatment or otherwise go out of their way to make SW special. There is a minimal amount of required spacing between aircraft. The controller ignored that, since they absolutely knew FedEx was inside the Final Approach Fix (5.3 miles in this case) and the weather was really bad. He/she (I haven't listened to the audio yet) assumed Southwest would haul ass, as usual, and get out of there quick. They were very wrong. Luckily no metal got bent, but that controller should be lucky if they are allowed near an ATC facility any time soon, if ever.


The audio is even worse than you think, if you understand what you are hearing:  https://twitter.com/haemaker/status/1622093686963343365?t=o90mWpZ1kZvshy8S1rCT2g&s=19

Bear in mind, they had ground fog and icing, so visibility was dildos.  With that:

Fedex gets clearance to land, while SWA is holding short.

When Fedex is three miles out, ATC clears SWA, tells them there's traffic, but doesn't say expedite or move it or hurry.

Fedex, hearing this, asks ATC if they're still clear.   ATC confirms.

ATC asks SWA if they're rolling yet.   SWA says they're starting to.

FEDEX initiates a go-around, and FEDEX tells SWA to abort their takeoff.

SWA does not abort the takeoff, even though data suggests they were still under V1 and could have done so, and instead proceeds to take off underneath the 767 that's climbing directly over their heads.

FedEx pilot maintains total composure and perfect coms throughout.

Both the ATC controller and SWA pilot have a LOT of explaining to do.

The FedEx pilot deserves a day off, a beer, and a raise.
 
Strummer [TotalFark] [SwearJar]
2023-02-05 9:24:02 AM  
Years ago I was riding in a 737 on approach to Omaha and everything's normal, people are jabbering away, we're almost home, woohoo! I'm looking out the window at the familiar sights, Council Bluffs, the river, oops, now we're not landing. BAM the plane is pointed what seemed like straight up, and I'm pushed back in the seat and the engines are ROARING. The entire character of the plane changed, it was scary as shit. We went around and landed. The pilot came on the intercom and apologized for the rough ride and said something like he didn't like the looks of where another plane was and being told to get too close.

On the way out I thanked him for keeping us safe. He said that they tended to put planes too close together there and it had happened before.
I'm glad this turned out to be a scary video and nothing worse
 
iron_city_ap
2023-02-05 10:03:37 AM  

Warthog: iron_city_ap: The controller is in some shiat. They notoriously cut corners for Southwest, give them preferential treatment or otherwise go out of their way to make SW special. There is a minimal amount of required spacing between aircraft. The controller ignored that, since they absolutely knew FedEx was inside the Final Approach Fix (5.3 miles in this case) and the weather was really bad. He/she (I haven't listened to the audio yet) assumed Southwest would haul ass, as usual, and get out of there quick. They were very wrong. Luckily no metal got bent, but that controller should be lucky if they are allowed near an ATC facility any time soon, if ever.

The audio is even worse than you think, if you understand what you are hearing:  https://twitter.com/haemaker/status/1622093686963343365?t=o90mWpZ1kZvshy8S1rCT2g&s=19

Bear in mind, they had ground fog and icing, so visibility was dildos.  With that:

Fedex gets clearance to land, while SWA is holding short.

When Fedex is three miles out, ATC clears SWA, tells them there's traffic, but doesn't say expedite or move it or hurry.

Fedex, hearing this, asks ATC if they're still clear.   ATC confirms.

ATC asks SWA if they're rolling yet.   SWA says they're starting to.

FEDEX initiates a go-around, and FEDEX tells SWA to abort their takeoff.

SWA does not abort the takeoff, even though data suggests they were still under V1 and could have done so, and instead proceeds to take off underneath the 767 that's climbing directly over their heads.

FedEx pilot maintains total composure and perfect coms throughout.

Both the ATC controller and SWA pilot have a LOT of explaining to do.

The FedEx pilot deserves a day off, a beer, and a raise.


Jesus Christ. Those SW cowboys absolutely need to be sweating bullets right now. They should definitely be looking at serious time off, and not the good kind.
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 10:31:48 AM  

Sebas: robodog: It's a good thing that was an older design that FedEx was using, modern high bypass turbofans (these were basically first generation "high bypass" with a 5:1 ratio, Ge9x used on 777x are 10:1) have enough inertia that a jet with modern engines probably wouldn't have been able to get back into the power before they collided based on that tracking data.

I recognize all the words you wrote, but don't understand it at all. As I have no idea about engines, jets or any of the forces involved, is what you're saying basically that a new fedex jet would have blown the southwest plane into the ground?

Serieus question!


Turbofan engines have the huge fan and jet core that rotates and the mass of all that stuff has inertial. It's slow to spool up from idle. From about 40% throttle and above it can quickly spool up to 100% thrust, but at idle or low thrust settings it takes time for everything to start spinning faster.

The largest jet engines in the world can be at idle or low thrust as the plane approaches for landing and if the pilot hits the TOGO (TAKE-OFF GO AROUND) button that requests 100% thrust for an emergency abort of the landing, it will take some seconds for the engines to spool up and start producing thrust. If the plane is already losing altitude for landing and there is only a couple seconds to prevent a disaster, the engines might not spool up fast enough to give the airplane thrust to start climbing.
 
Warthog [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 10:40:59 AM  

mrmopar5287: Sebas: robodog: It's a good thing that was an older design that FedEx was using, modern high bypass turbofans (these were basically first generation "high bypass" with a 5:1 ratio, Ge9x used on 777x are 10:1) have enough inertia that a jet with modern engines probably wouldn't have been able to get back into the power before they collided based on that tracking data.

I recognize all the words you wrote, but don't understand it at all. As I have no idea about engines, jets or any of the forces involved, is what you're saying basically that a new fedex jet would have blown the southwest plane into the ground?

Serieus question!

Turbofan engines have the huge fan and jet core that rotates and the mass of all that stuff has inertial. It's slow to spool up from idle. From about 40% throttle and above it can quickly spool up to 100% thrust, but at idle or low thrust settings it takes time for everything to start spinning faster.

The largest jet engines in the world can be at idle or low thrust as the plane approaches for landing and if the pilot hits the TOGO (TAKE-OFF GO AROUND) button that requests 100% thrust for an emergency abort of the landing, it will take some seconds for the engines to spool up and start producing thrust. If the plane is already losing altitude for landing and there is only a couple seconds to prevent a disaster, the engines might not spool up fast enough to give the airplane thrust to start climbing.


Good write up.   See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214

Engines were at idle for approach because the pilots misunderstood how the auto throttle system worked. Seven seconds before impact they mashed on the gas, but the engines didn't spool up quick enough to avoid hitting the sea wall.
 
Yaw String [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 10:42:54 AM  
While we always prepare for the possibility of a go-around, sounds to me like FedEx had an inkling when they reconfirmed their landing clearance after hearing SW's takeoff clearance. Props to FedEx.

I know of no regulation that says that one aircraft can order another to abort a takeoff. While I would consider it a good suggestion, I see nothing regulatory that can be leveled against the SW pilots.

I think the controller is on the hook for everything.
 
germ78
2023-02-05 11:09:37 AM  
Looks like someone's got a busy Cities:Skylines airport.
 
wxboy
2023-02-05 11:11:14 AM  

Warthog: iron_city_ap: The controller is in some shiat. They notoriously cut corners for Southwest, give them preferential treatment or otherwise go out of their way to make SW special. There is a minimal amount of required spacing between aircraft. The controller ignored that, since they absolutely knew FedEx was inside the Final Approach Fix (5.3 miles in this case) and the weather was really bad. He/she (I haven't listened to the audio yet) assumed Southwest would haul ass, as usual, and get out of there quick. They were very wrong. Luckily no metal got bent, but that controller should be lucky if they are allowed near an ATC facility any time soon, if ever.

The audio is even worse than you think, if you understand what you are hearing:  https://twitter.com/haemaker/status/1622093686963343365?t=o90mWpZ1kZvshy8S1rCT2g&s=19

Bear in mind, they had ground fog and icing, so visibility was dildos.  With that:

Fedex gets clearance to land, while SWA is holding short.

When Fedex is three miles out, ATC clears SWA, tells them there's traffic, but doesn't say expedite or move it or hurry.

Fedex, hearing this, asks ATC if they're still clear.   ATC confirms.

ATC asks SWA if they're rolling yet.   SWA says they're starting to.

FEDEX initiates a go-around, and FEDEX tells SWA to abort their takeoff.

SWA does not abort the takeoff, even though data suggests they were still under V1 and could have done so, and instead proceeds to take off underneath the 767 that's climbing directly over their heads.

FedEx pilot maintains total composure and perfect coms throughout.

Both the ATC controller and SWA pilot have a LOT of explaining to do.

The FedEx pilot deserves a day off, a beer, and a raise.


FedEx caused confusion with his call for SW to abort. ATC thought that was SW calling a rejected takeoff, and directed him to turn off the runway when able. It doesn't excuse ATC's mistakes, but it certainly didn't help the situation.
 
Charlie Freak [OhFark]
2023-02-05 11:49:43 AM  

wxboy: Warthog: iron_city_ap: The controller is in some shiat. They notoriously cut corners for Southwest, give them preferential treatment or otherwise go out of their way to make SW special. There is a minimal amount of required spacing between aircraft. The controller ignored that, since they absolutely knew FedEx was inside the Final Approach Fix (5.3 miles in this case) and the weather was really bad. He/she (I haven't listened to the audio yet) assumed Southwest would haul ass, as usual, and get out of there quick. They were very wrong. Luckily no metal got bent, but that controller should be lucky if they are allowed near an ATC facility any time soon, if ever.

The audio is even worse than you think, if you understand what you are hearing:  https://twitter.com/haemaker/status/1622093686963343365?t=o90mWpZ1kZvshy8S1rCT2g&s=19

Bear in mind, they had ground fog and icing, so visibility was dildos.  With that:

Fedex gets clearance to land, while SWA is holding short.

When Fedex is three miles out, ATC clears SWA, tells them there's traffic, but doesn't say expedite or move it or hurry.

Fedex, hearing this, asks ATC if they're still clear.   ATC confirms.

ATC asks SWA if they're rolling yet.   SWA says they're starting to.

FEDEX initiates a go-around, and FEDEX tells SWA to abort their takeoff.

SWA does not abort the takeoff, even though data suggests they were still under V1 and could have done so, and instead proceeds to take off underneath the 767 that's climbing directly over their heads.

FedEx pilot maintains total composure and perfect coms throughout.

Both the ATC controller and SWA pilot have a LOT of explaining to do.

The FedEx pilot deserves a day off, a beer, and a raise.

FedEx caused confusion with his call for SW to abort. ATC thought that was SW calling a rejected takeoff, and directed him to turn off the runway when able. It doesn't excuse ATC's mistakes, but it certainly didn't help the situation.


FedEx was the only person(s) in this situation that had eyes on both aircraft. Everybody else's situational awareness was based on position reports and/or radar.
 
Yaw String [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 12:19:05 PM  

Charlie Freak: wxboy: Warthog: iron_city_ap: The controller is in some shiat. They notoriously cut corners for Southwest, give them preferential treatment or otherwise go out of their way to make SW special. There is a minimal amount of required spacing between aircraft. The controller ignored that, since they absolutely knew FedEx was inside the Final Approach Fix (5.3 miles in this case) and the weather was really bad. He/she (I haven't listened to the audio yet) assumed Southwest would haul ass, as usual, and get out of there quick. They were very wrong. Luckily no metal got bent, but that controller should be lucky if they are allowed near an ATC facility any time soon, if ever.

The audio is even worse than you think, if you understand what you are hearing:  https://twitter.com/haemaker/status/1622093686963343365?t=o90mWpZ1kZvshy8S1rCT2g&s=19

Bear in mind, they had ground fog and icing, so visibility was dildos.  With that:

Fedex gets clearance to land, while SWA is holding short.

When Fedex is three miles out, ATC clears SWA, tells them there's traffic, but doesn't say expedite or move it or hurry.

Fedex, hearing this, asks ATC if they're still clear.   ATC confirms.

ATC asks SWA if they're rolling yet.   SWA says they're starting to.

FEDEX initiates a go-around, and FEDEX tells SWA to abort their takeoff.

SWA does not abort the takeoff, even though data suggests they were still under V1 and could have done so, and instead proceeds to take off underneath the 767 that's climbing directly over their heads.

FedEx pilot maintains total composure and perfect coms throughout.

Both the ATC controller and SWA pilot have a LOT of explaining to do.

The FedEx pilot deserves a day off, a beer, and a raise.

FedEx caused confusion with his call for SW to abort. ATC thought that was SW calling a rejected takeoff, and directed him to turn off the runway when able. It doesn't excuse ATC's mistakes, but it certainly didn't help the situation.

FedEx was the only person(s) in this situation that had eyes on both aircraft. Everybody else's situational awareness was based on position reports and/or radar.


At the time : METAR KAUS 041053Z 00000KT 1/2SM R36R/1800V2400FT FG SCT002 02/M01 A3043 RMK AO2 SLP308 T00221006

FedEx probably wouldn't have seen anything until Decision Height. Remember in addition to the weather, it was dark. Probably only caught sight of the strobes on the SW.
 
robodog
2023-02-05 1:12:07 PM  

Sebas: robodog: It's a good thing that was an older design that FedEx was using, modern high bypass turbofans (these were basically first generation "high bypass" with a 5:1 ratio, Ge9x used on 777x are 10:1) have enough inertia that a jet with modern engines probably wouldn't have been able to get back into the power before they collided based on that tracking data.

I recognize all the words you wrote, but don't understand it at all. As I have no idea about engines, jets or any of the forces involved, is what you're saying basically that a new fedex jet would have blown the southwest plane into the ground?

Serieus question!


The fans inside of jet engines have gotten bigger and bigger over time in the search for higher efficiency. The engines on a 777x for example are the size of the fuselage of a 737. These bigger engines take more time to spool up due to the ratio between the engine core and the size and mass of the fan blades. The 767-300 used by FedEx for this flight is a nearly 40 year old design and so the engines were much more responsive to the pilots request for full power allowing it to fly over the SW jet instead of running into the back of it as would possibly have happened with a more modern jet in the same situation.
 
Yaw String [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 1:23:49 PM  
According to FlightAware, there was an ADS-B altitude hit for the FedEx at 150 ft. with a climb of 47 fpm. So if they did start the go-around at Decision Height (200ft) then it took them 50 feet of drop before a positive rate of climb could be established.
 
robodog
2023-02-05 1:25:54 PM  
To put things in perspective the tail height of the 737 is 41', the minimum height of the FedEx jet reported by ADS-B in the recording was 75' with the nose of the FedEx jet overlapping with the tail of the SW jet for a clearance of ~30' and the FedEx jet would have been nose up meaning the back of the FedEx jet might have been at the height of the SW tail at that moment. This is as close as you can get without an actual crash.
 
Yaw String [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 1:44:07 PM  

robodog: To put things in perspective the tail height of the 737 is 41', the minimum height of the FedEx jet reported by ADS-B in the recording was 75' with the nose of the FedEx jet overlapping with the tail of the SW jet for a clearance of ~30' and the FedEx jet would have been nose up meaning the back of the FedEx jet might have been at the height of the SW tail at that moment. This is as close as you can get without an actual crash.


Assuming a category 1 approach to minimums: if one of the following can be seen at 200 ft AGL, then they can descend to 100 ft agl.

(i) Elements of the approach light system;
(ii) The threshold;
(iii) The threshold markings;
(iv) The threshold lights;
(v) The threshold identification lights;
(vi) The visual glide slope indicator;
(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings;
(viii) The touchdown zone lights; or
(ix) Runway edge lights.

They probably did. Then seeing the SW plane they commenced the go-around. Going around from 100 ft., I can see them easily having parts below 75' before going back up. Robodog is entirely right, it doesn't get any closer without folding metal.
 
Charlie Freak [OhFark]
2023-02-05 1:51:09 PM  

Yaw String: robodog: To put things in perspective the tail height of the 737 is 41', the minimum height of the FedEx jet reported by ADS-B in the recording was 75' with the nose of the FedEx jet overlapping with the tail of the SW jet for a clearance of ~30' and the FedEx jet would have been nose up meaning the back of the FedEx jet might have been at the height of the SW tail at that moment. This is as close as you can get without an actual crash.

Assuming a category 1 approach to minimums: if one of the following can be seen at 200 ft AGL, then they can descend to 100 ft agl.

(i) Elements of the approach light system;
(ii) The threshold;
(iii) The threshold markings;
(iv) The threshold lights;
(v) The threshold identification lights;
(vi) The visual glide slope indicator;
(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings;
(viii) The touchdown zone lights; or
(ix) Runway edge lights.

They probably did. Then seeing the SW plane they commenced the go-around. Going around from 100 ft., I can see them easily having parts below 75' before going back up. Robodog is entirely right, it doesn't get any closer without folding metal.


If I see (ii) thru (ix), have the required flight visibility for the approach, and I'm in a continual position to make a normal descent to landing, am cleared to land (for this type of airport), then I'm landing, barring a damn 737 on the runway.

Only (i) gives you the ability to descend to 100' AGL.
 
Yaw String [TotalFark]
2023-02-05 1:58:28 PM  

Charlie Freak: Yaw String: robodog: To put things in perspective the tail height of the 737 is 41', the minimum height of the FedEx jet reported by ADS-B in the recording was 75' with the nose of the FedEx jet overlapping with the tail of the SW jet for a clearance of ~30' and the FedEx jet would have been nose up meaning the back of the FedEx jet might have been at the height of the SW tail at that moment. This is as close as you can get without an actual crash.

Assuming a category 1 approach to minimums: if one of the following can be seen at 200 ft AGL, then they can descend to 100 ft agl.

(i) Elements of the approach light system;
(ii) The threshold;
(iii) The threshold markings;
(iv) The threshold lights;
(v) The threshold identification lights;
(vi) The visual glide slope indicator;
(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings;
(viii) The touchdown zone lights; or
(ix) Runway edge lights.

They probably did. Then seeing the SW plane they commenced the go-around. Going around from 100 ft., I can see them easily having parts below 75' before going back up. Robodog is entirely right, it doesn't get any closer without folding metal.

If I see (ii) thru (ix), have the required flight visibility for the approach, and I'm in a continual position to make a normal descent to landing, am cleared to land (for this type of airport), then I'm landing, barring a damn 737 on the runway.

Only (i) gives you the ability to descend to 100' AGL.


Under Part 91.175 (c) (unless your op specs say otherwise) any of those are fair game to descend (not just i).

Reread the reg and prove me wrong.
 
Charlie Freak [OhFark]
2023-02-05 2:02:48 PM  

Yaw String: Charlie Freak: Yaw String: robodog: To put things in perspective the tail height of the 737 is 41', the minimum height of the FedEx jet reported by ADS-B in the recording was 75' with the nose of the FedEx jet overlapping with the tail of the SW jet for a clearance of ~30' and the FedEx jet would have been nose up meaning the back of the FedEx jet might have been at the height of the SW tail at that moment. This is as close as you can get without an actual crash.

Assuming a category 1 approach to minimums: if one of the following can be seen at 200 ft AGL, then they can descend to 100 ft agl.

(i) Elements of the approach light system;
(ii) The threshold;
(iii) The threshold markings;
(iv) The threshold lights;
(v) The threshold identification lights;
(vi) The visual glide slope indicator;
(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings;
(viii) The touchdown zone lights; or
(ix) Runway edge lights.

They probably did. Then seeing the SW plane they commenced the go-around. Going around from 100 ft., I can see them easily having parts below 75' before going back up. Robodog is entirely right, it doesn't get any closer without folding metal.

If I see (ii) thru (ix), have the required flight visibility for the approach, and I'm in a continual position to make a normal descent to landing, am cleared to land (for this type of airport), then I'm landing, barring a damn 737 on the runway.

Only (i) gives you the ability to descend to 100' AGL.

Under Part 91.175 (c) (unless your op specs say otherwise) any of those are fair game to descend (not just i).

Reread the reg and prove me wrong.


That's a narrow interpretation. Yes, technically being able to descend below minimums all the way to landing in inclusive of 100' AGL, but that's not the way I'd answer that on a test or to a DPE.
 
Displayed 50 of 62 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

$10 a month since 19 aught diddly.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.