EltonInAtlanta
None of the six passengers on board was injured.
Six? Epic carbon pounds per passenger mile up there.
1 reply
None of the six passengers on board was injured.
Six? Epic carbon pounds per passenger mile up there.
1 reply
I fee bad for the bears but that must have been a very comfortable flight with so few people on it!
Unfortunate accident – the 737 looks bear-ly dented. Sorry!
That may not work. I understand those bears are smarter than the average.
David is correct, a lot of the in-state air traffic in Alaska carries cargo first and passengers second. I’m not sure how many, but some of the 737s used up there have the passenger area walled off to allow more cargo room on the upper deck. Flights to the north slope usually had 15-20 passengers in a small cabin area and the rest was full of freight. Towns down the coast toward Juneau are accessible only by boat or air.
Good thing they weren’t taking off, hitting a black bear with full power and high speed!
The Air Force spokesperson said they did indeed get approval for this arrival, and it was based on the number of wheels that distribute the load on the C17. Who knows.
1 reply
Damn good question.
In fairness, training is training, whether there’s a legitimate task associated with it or not. Aircrews need hours/code currency, so they fly around, practice landings, takeoffs, touch-and-gos, loading/unloading cargo/passengers, aerial refueling, air drops, whatever… The same taxpayer dollars are used whether ferrying a basketball team around or flying nothing around.
Yeah, unlikely they didn’t clear it ahead of time, since the crew would want to ensure the field could support the aircraft. Plus, tower wouldn’t have cleared the aircraft to land, likely, without prior clearance.
1 reply
It is my experience that towers at civilian airports are not the airport’s administrative police. Unless ATC flow or those type procedures are in effect, if you want to take off or land below minimums, or are too heavy for the runway, or need a PPR for admin or airport operational reasons, it is the pilot’s responsibility to comply, not the tower’s function to enforce those rules. In this case a PPR notam for aircraft with a wingspan of more than 75ft was not the tower’s concern.
Aircrew needs raining, basketball team needs transport.
Seems like a win for the tax payer. If the basketball team was from a state sponsored school, then it’s a win-win for the tax payer.
As mentioned, military planes and crews are going to fly a certain number of hours a month/year for proficiency whether passengers are on board or not. I assume when the bells ring and sirens blow you do want your military folks to be capable at 100% if possible. Have to train to do be there.
1 reply
“The airport authority said that last fall it denied a request by the Air Force to BRING ITS MEN’S BASEBALL TEAM (emphasis mine) to the area.” Sounds like this was an internal team to the Air Force. Perhaps the Air Force Academy cadets get rides on AF hardware. Also sounds like there is some history there, and may a bit of bad blood.
Yes, it was the Air Force women’s team. They played OSU on Dec. 20. https://okstate.com/sports/womens-basketball/schedule/2022-23
I wonder if the airfield didn’t used to be a military base. I suspect it was built mostly with federal money 50 years ago and the old concrete is crumbling from age and the city can’t afford to replace it. I suspect that a C-17 with enough wheels to land on a dirt road, and with a handful of people as cargo did not cause that damage, which looks like old spalling in the concrete hidden by some sealing coat that did not adhere properly. Just my guess an old airfield manager.
“airport authorities” Hmm? an unnamed public official who wishes to duck accountability for public assertions? Fishing for unspent covid relief funds to fix an aging infrastructure?
I have a hard time accepting C-17s just “drop in” unannounced. I can’t imagine any Air Force pilot simply ignoring proper landing authorization particularly given the logistics required for such a visit.
Where do I apply to get my son’s youth group a ride on a C-17 for “training”? As a patriotic citizen I would like to do more than just pay my taxes to ensure that our armed forces are kept honed to a razor’s edge…
The Giant Report shows that there is a TRT (2T) weight limit of 509,000 pounds.
1 reply
It was the Air Force Academy basketball team. So let’s work this out here:
C-17 crew is going to fly for currency on x day.
Basketball team needs transportation on the same day.
Why not use the C-17 that is flying for currency/training already?
This saves the Air Force from having to charter another flight just for the basketball team. Turns out, this actually saves money. Novel idea!
Do you really think the AirForce conducts initial training with passengers on board? Do you think they use general aviation airports, that don’t want them there and don’t have the ARFF equipment for that category of aircraft, to conduct training flights, with or without passengers? There’s this thing called: common sense, heard of it?
Its maximum takeoff weight is 585,000 lbs. With no cargo and having burned fuel, I would assume it was under that.
Its maximum takeoff weight is 585,000 lbs. With no cargo and having burned fuel, I would assume it was under that.
If the pilots or their OPS would have taken a quick look at the runway information for this airport, they would have clearly found that DDT (Dual Double Tandem) Landing Gear is N/A for this airport.
There is no need for permission or guessing at the aircraft weight, etc, etc. It was N/A for landing at this airport.
So I’m missing something. Did they land on the taxiway? Or just taxi so as to damage the concrete on the taxiway edge yet miss the light? (The paint and yellow light tells me it is a taxiway) I’d say they passed training for being so precise.