Are commuter planes more dangerous?-OCR

[chperplt]

as a lrjet captain??

If the hours in his profile are accurate, I hope he's not a learjet captain.

 

[Lrjtcaptain]

what i said was i had lack of real world expierience with shearing. Ive only been flying professionaly for a year and 2 months and the wx doesn't get all that bad here. No, im not a lrjet captain.

 

[LearLove]

O my god they are soooo dangerous....

Yeah thoes prop jobbies are so dangerous that the east coast is just covered in prop plane aluminum.

Yep so dangerous that the 30+ year seniority commuter capts. I fly with day in and out must lieing about their records to be flying here since the late 60 early seventies and never as much as put a scratch on a plane not to mention a passenger.

Yep us prop guys are just falling out of the air....

WHATEVER

 

[TurboS7]

In light of this conversation I want to qualify myself. Yes in windshear a lighter airplane is better and does not have the inherant problems of weight and momentum that a large aircraft has. Since it was brought up a friend of mine landed in a LR24 just before the L-1011 in Dallas. He said it was no big deal . I have successfully flown in the sim through the Dallas windshear both with a 727 and a 737-800, no big deal, I knew it was coming and was ready.If I had the choice I would rather do it in a 777, the FD itself runs through all the "majic" and does all the figuring for you, all you have to do is follow it. This is not true on earlier model aircraft.Plus if I am going to die it might as well be in the worlds greatest airliner and at least I'll make the front page of the news----sick huhhh. Seeya.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Are "commuter" planes more dangerous?

No.

Any more asinine questions?

 

[cl-65link]

In a microburst, I'd much rather be on the ground!

 

[T-Gates]

in rebutle to my 1900 comment, i only made that comment due to the fact that my sim partner at Riddle in the 1900 over tourqued both one day and didn't do anything about it, we didn't survive that one. That was where that came from.

As for shearing, your right, i dont know a whole lot. Riddle didn't teach much about that crap and i ve never really had to expierience any of it. The flying i do now, well i haven't encountered anything more then plus or minus 10 on final and never had a loss of alt.

If anyone would like to enlightenme on microburst theory that would be great. It was help me much better then just blatenly calling me a dumbass on the matter. That may be true in that case.

In my experience the 1900 has plenty of power to get it's self out of a windshear situation. Also the 1900's limitations state that you can use 5000 lbs. of torque for 20 seconds then you can reduce to MCP which is 3750 lbs. Thats plenty of power. I've had a few experiences with the 1900 in windshear and it handles very well. The problem with a 777 or equiv. large aircraft in windshear is that you have to deal with arresting a very rapid descent in a relatively short amount of time. And in an aircraft that large with that much momentum, I'd much rather be in the 1900.

Just my .02,

--03M

 

[propilot150]

Well i would rather be in a smaller jet myself. Theyre lighter , and they have a good enough ammount of thrust. I know a pilot for ASA who was on approach in the CRJ to DFW when he first started , he was flying with one of the senior captains , and the captain said to give her a faster speed for this approach , so he did not knowing what was going on ? then sure enough , they got caught in windshear and lost a good bit of altitude and speed. But they made it. Now try that situation in a bigger jet , the 777 perhaps. You got the strong engines of course. But what yall are forgetting is the mass and weght. Just the weight of the plane alone could make it hard to get out of a burst. Then put an extra few thousand pounds for passenger load , ya know. Yeah i take the small jets any day! Take Care
Captain Landry.