Comments on: Rolled

By: stinky

stinky — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:34:39 +0000

Wake, shmake. I was four minutes away from where the plane dropped. Before the Mexican government censored everything the next day, the news media reported the truth. The Mexican Secretary of the Interior was on that plane and was MURDERED. Probably shot down or bombed. There is a drug war (in reality a civil war) in Mexico, and it’s taking a huge toll. Dozens upon dozens of witnesses said the plane was on fire before it fell. Perhaps the reason why there is a voice recorder “transcript” but no recording shown to the public. I’m not going to get into speculations, but there is A LOT more than meets the eye to this story, including a drug laundering investigation in Spain. One thing it WASN’T: WAKE, for damned sure.

By: MAG

MAG — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:22:40 +0000

Bruce, I think you made a very good desicion!.
And for Mr.Hooper,not a very wise comment.

By: Albert

Albert — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 08:03:59 +0000

For those of you who wish to see what went on. Go to youtube and type XC-VMC that is the tail # and you will see the acual radar video and hear the CVR as it happened.

God bless their souls.

By: Fernando Russek

Fernando Russek — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:34:45 +0000

I have as an attachment all the Mexican Learjet 45 report including pilots voice recording transcript.
Tell me how or where can I send my file to share.
My email is frussek@yahoo.com

By: kerry caramanis

kerry caramanis — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:34:42 +0000

Very interesting comments, resurrected memories of an encounter I had at 1000 feet in Southern Cal in the early 80′s. A pilot friend and I where over the Catalina channel in a rented C172 a few miles west of the coastline looking forward to our anticipated $100. buffalo burger at Catalina Island.

It was a beautiful CAVU day and we were enjoying the beautiful SoCal coastline views with Catalania Island about 20 miles ahead at our 12 o’clock, when the aircraft made a violent roll to the right, about 20 degrees then whipped to the left almost vertically. The turbulence lasted less than five seconds. I regained control and my thoughts immediately went to CAT as the cause, when we suddenly spotted a heavy at 10 o’clock high estimated to be at about 10,000 and climbing. We had no further doubts as to the cause of our unintended acrobatic maneuver.

That was an e-ride I hope not to repeat and have since paid close attention to avoid close encounters of that kind.

By: Eric Davis

Eric Davis — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 17:31:10 +0000

As a low-time VFR private pilot flying near the Hartsfield class B (PDK is my home airport), I have developed an appreciation for separation and avoidance.

Sadly, I log way more time annually in a commercial cabin. As a passenger, with knowledge of the dangers of wake turbulence, I am concerned by what I perceive to be a lack of spacing on departure at ATL.

Many times I’ve been in the cabin of a CRJ following a much heavier aircraft in just the time it takes for the pilot of the CRJ to roll across the holding line, line-up on center, and accelerate. I realize that the CRJ is going to take to the air much sooner than the heavier aircraft before it, but to Airline Pilot’s point about multiple problems on take-off, it seems that this practice leaves little margin for error.

I understand the business reasons for such tight spacing. However, I would feel better knowing what contingencies exist, or practices are in use, to prevent encounters with wake turbulence in this environment.

By: Bill Seymour

Bill Seymour — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 23:04:21 +0000

Bruce, on a typical arrival into Charlotte (CLT) the airliners are kept at 11,000 and turboprops at 10,000. I often watch as a big Boeing or Airbus flies directly overhead of my Pilatus PC-12 by a 1,000 feet and perhaps 40 knots faster. This eventually places the airliner out in front and above me. This would seemingly place my aircraft in position to experience wake turbulence, though I have been fortunate not to encounter same in the arrival environment. Charlotte controllers are alert to warn of wake turbulence but might this procedure be a dangerous one. Your thoughts please.

By: Francisco

Francisco — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 20:43:53 +0000

Bill:

I am not a Lear Jet rated pilot, but I have talked to some Lear 45 rated pilots and all of them think that was not the cause. What do you think?
Was the lear 45 flying lower than the Boeing 767? It seems that if the Lear was 4 miles apart in bound for landing, then it was higher than the boeing 767.

By: Greg McIntyre

Greg McIntyre — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 16:21:49 +0000

I fly a Cessna 310R. It seems we are always vectored in behind the heavys with keep max speed and caution wake turbulence cleared to land etc. As soon as you accept the clearence, contollers are no longer responsible for any consequences.

I have had several minor encounters with wake turbulance over the years and it is very unnerving.

You have to ask, why do the controllers place us in this situation?

I know airports are busy and everyone wants to be on time but is it worth the lives of crew and pax?

Would better understanding and more education be warranted?

By: Paul S.

Paul S. — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 14:55:50 +0000

Five or so years ago, while on the Expressway Visual to 31L at JFK, I was in a King Air several miles bedind a Boeing of some description. I was instructed to cross a fix at a certain altitude, the same instruction given to the Boing in front of me. As I descended, I was thinking that maybe it would be good idea to stay a tad higher. Unfortunately I did not stay higher, and descended to the altitude just before the fix. When I got there I felt the hardest single thump I have ever felt in an airplane. It really shook up the passsengers. From then on If I have an idea that ATC instruction may not be in my best interest, I begin to negotiate an alternative immedately and DO NOT blindly accept the clearance.