For sure. I think this is one that I need to see in person because in this shot, the blue looks pretty close to the old canyon blue. Apparently they're using some magical paint that's more reflective to keep the plane cooler and more durable to resist fading. Also, I don't know why they didn't paint the bottom part of the scimitar like they did on the canyon blue planes.
Any YYC RC/drone operators, keep your craft the HELL away from the airport and approach areas:
Quote:
A Westjet Boeing 737-800, registration C-GWSV performing flight WS-1565 from San Diego,CA (USA) to Calgary,AB (Canada), was on RNAV RNP Y17R approach to Calgary at 7000 feet between waypoints OVEBI and YC434, when the crew reported a remote controlled vehicle crossing their flight path at the same altitude in front of them. The crew continued the approach for a safe landing on Calgary's runway 17R a few minutes later.
The Canadian TSB reported an unmanned aerial vehicle crossed the flight trajectory of the Westjet Boeing.
Any YYC RC/drone operators, keep your craft the HELL away from the airport and approach areas:
Wow. The stupidity in this world is astounding.
So, this begs the question, what would the likely result be if this thing came into contact with the plane? I'm guessing that causing the plane to crash could be theoretically possible but still quite unlikely?
Either way, it is ridiculous that someone would even consider flying anything like that near an airport.
At 7000 feet, he wouldn't be that close to the airport, would he? Point still stands however.
I've recently taken up the hobby and usually fly the extreme west end of South Glenmore park.
I noticed on my 3rd time out that a helicopter seems to fly near the area almost every day. I rarely go over 400 ft and every time I hear that chopper coming my way, I get that sucker on the ground ASAP.
Last edited by GoinAllTheWay; 09-09-2014 at 04:48 PM.
Remember that the airport is at 3,555 feet, so 7,000 feet is only 3,500 AGL (above ground level). I don't know anything about these drones but apparently they can fly at 3,500 AGL.
As far as how close he was to the airport, they're about 11 miles to touchdown at that point, heading NE bound abeam those twin stack things just north of Stoney Trail, getting ready to swing east and then south to land southbound. Worse, they were flying a specific approach that doesn't allow deviations so evasive action to avoid a drone means bailing on the approach.
Could one of these bring a plane down... most likely scenario is that you lose whatever engine that thing gets sucked into and you're calling mayday to get down ASAP. God help the sorry son of a bitch whoever causes that, if they find him.
Hit one in a single engine plane in the right spot? Better hope there's some soft grass or a road to put her down on.
As far as how close he was to the airport, they're about 11 miles to touchdown at that point, heading NE bound abeam those twin stack things just north of Stoney Trail, getting ready to swing east and then south to land southbound. Worse, they were flying a specific approach that doesn't allow deviations so evasive action to avoid a drone means bailing on the approach.
There is an Airdrie RC club directly north of the Nexen Plant (where the twin stacks are), I imagine they weren't that close to it, but if they were I know a couple guys in that club (I am a member) have those quadrotor things. Wouldn't be a far stretch to believe it might have been one of them. Which would basically ruin the club as there are a ton of MAAC (Model Aeronautics Association of Canada) regulations that prohibit flying anywhere near any type of aircraft. *Just reread Acey's post, looks like they were traveling in the wrong direction and landing 17R would put them on the opposite site of Highway 2, really far away from the Airdrie Club*
Speaking of which GoinAllTheWay, please get your MAAC membership and find a local club in the city (there are many) where it is legal to fly that type of aircraft. At the moment it is against the law (only a bylaw, but still applies) to fly any RC aircraft within the city not at a MAAC approved field. There are always plenty of helpful people there willing to show you how to fly your aircraft safely and teach you some new things. Our club has a fun fly this weekend and it is open to the public, so PM me if you would like details. As long as the snow isn't still around it should be an awesome time!
Last edited by stazzy33; 09-10-2014 at 10:22 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to stazzy33 For This Useful Post:
This is the approach they were flying and I circled in red what I suspect is the twin stacks... they were between OVEBI and YC434 so you can see where those are here.
The Following User Says Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
Aljazeera aired an investigative report today, claiming proof of serious safety violations at it's South Carolina plant, which build some of the 787 Dreamliners.
There are some workers that seem to be worried about structural integrity of the aircraft from poor craftsmanship.
I have to fly on one of these in a couple months. Should I be worried?
Aljazeera aired an investigative report today, claiming proof of serious safety violations at it's South Carolina plant, which build some of the 787 Dreamliners.
There are some workers that seem to be worried about structural integrity of the aircraft from poor craftsmanship.
I have to fly on one of these in a couple months. Should I be worried?
The program (Charleston in particular) has had some problems but meh, I would still feel 1000% safe boarding one. If it's an Air Canada 787 you'll be flying and Charleston violations have you worried, look at the number on her nose gear door before you board:
Fins 801, 802 and 803 were built in Washington, and 804/805/806 are Charleston birds. Tell the gate agent you to refuse to fly fins 804-806 because they were built in South Carolina. If she even knew what you were talking about, I wonder what she'd say...
The Following User Says Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
Flying JAL. through Narita to Bangkok. They used to use 767s on both legs but now the YVR - NRT is 787. I wished they hadn't changed. I really like the 767. Oh well. Roll the dice I guess.
Of JAL's 15 frames, I see only one out of Charleston, though I didn't parse the list particularly closely. It's two at most so I like your chances, though it was Everett planes that dropped tons of fuel and went up in smoke at Logan in Boston. Nahh... you'll be fine!
+1 on the 767. Nothing beats 2-3-2 seating. There's something about it for me, has the spacious feeling of two aisles so you have the movement flexibility of a widebody, but no "double excuse me" of climbing over two people.
The Following User Says Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
