Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Gallium, Jan 1, 2010.
we're thinking about going back (but not to Kingston)
who put the ocean at the end of a runway?
He overshot by faaar.
A lot of people do that all over the world.
I'm waiting for a similar occurance at St. Maarten...with all the toursits gathered onthe beach to watch.
When I flew into St. Thomas, the runway was the same. Looking out, you get REAL nervous watching the water get so close. It freaked me out bad, I thought we were ditching.
Anybody else notice that gully at the end of the overrun that he slid over, instead of into.
I don't have a link but I saw it on a news cast somewhere. If that plane had nosed down into the gully instead of sliding over it, things would have really been bad. Planes don't like sudden stops.
Not close enough.
That KLM 747 pilot would be seriously screwing up in the above photo if it's real, because you're never supposed to touch the part of the runway marked with yellow V's during a landing.
I'm calling BS though, because of the small fence that he would not have cleared, right in front of the runway - yet it's still standing. I think he'd have hit it. Depending on the length of the over-run section marked with the yellow V's, this could be a perfectly safe runway, and I'm sure typical approaches are no where near this low over the fence.
I've landed in that airport. It is the real deal.
It was like water....water.....water.....waves.....waves....waves.... tires screeching.....land..........
OK these two photos look real because the plane is much higher and would not be hitting the fence. He's got plenty of height to clear the over-run section of the runway in these two, but I still think the KLM picture is fake.
The 1st picture is taken from an angle in the air. Even on a good day I would not be able to state what the clearance is.
The other two are pics from ground level. The "AOM" bird is real frigging close.
ST Maarten is a 7100' runway - quite short for a 744.
The displaced threshold is <100 feet.
A 744 only has to undershoot by 25 feet to put this plane where you see it.
From a 747 captain's perspective, it's better to be short than long. If the pilot goes long and has to go-around, he has a mountain to cope with. Much like the runway at Quito, EQ...it's a land-or-else approach.
Yes, the photo is real.
So are these:
Here's a takeoff from the same RWY:
St. Maarten was a hell of a landing in an AA 767 . . . damn near kissed the ground when I got off.
+1 to Speedydave. Absolutely . . .
There are some reports that the runway lights in Kingston had not worked for over a month . . . nice.
Love the runway on Saba - 100 foot drop on either end. Even the STOL craft they were flying had issues . . .
The KLM shot isn't fake, with a long lens that compresses perspective it may appear fake but anyone who's landed at that airport likely wouldn't second guess that shot (or anyone that knows anything about optics).
Okay, so could someone please tell me why you try to land in abhorrent weather on a runway that has a plus or minus 25 feet, "OH MY G-d!" factor?
Wait, I get it... "PILOT ERROR."
Here are a couple more.
Welp, looks like some good scrap metal there!