Joe defends the Island Airport
RE: "Thankfully no one lost their life in the accident on Friday night at the Island Airport when a small plane overshot the runway and landed in the water, but it demonstrates what CAIR has been saying about the Island Airport for some time."
OK - Please tell me what EXACT role that the location or make up of the TCCA contributed to this accident?
Could this exact scenario not have occurred at Buttonville with runways that are the same length?
Unfortunately, some items on your list don't tell the whole story because you have left out the necessary context. For example:
1) RE: Q400 runway length requirements. In this case, You acknowledged the Porter explanation then go ahead and ignore the information you just presented. For each and every flight, either the pilot or a dispatcher calculates the exact amount of runway required for a flight to take off. This is based on runway conditions, weather (including crosswinds and temperature) and actual load of the aircraft. Given that Porter has been flying close to 100 flights a day for almost a year, isn't it moot to imply that the Q400 cannot be safely operated at the TCCA?
How much more evidence do you need? Doesn't the real world application count for something? The figures you quote from Bombardier are for a MAXIMUM load of passengers and cargo and fuel.
2)RE: pilot cautions. How is it a HAZARD to avoid overflying particular neighborhoods, the CNE and Ontario Place? Also, banner towing aircraft are possibly the easiest aircraft to see and avoid which makes them anything but a hazard. AND again, in the many decades of operation at the TCCA, including a time when it was the 3rd busiest airport in Canada, has anyone HIT any of the perceived hazards? How much real world data do you need to see that these pilot cautions are not nearly as severe as CAIR would like them to be? Have you asked any pilots if they think the TCCA is dangerous? I mean, would you drive on a stretch of road if it was dangerous? Therefore, why would pilots continue to utilize the TCCA if it was an accident waiting to happen? I asked the President of the Canadian Owners and Pilots Assoc. (Kevin Psutka) and he was very adamant that his membership does NOT believe that the TCCA is a dangerous airport - period.
3) Weather - I agree that the TCCA has to deal with more weather issues than airports away from the shoreline. However, if the Q400 can only accept a 60km/h crosswind then they wouldn't have been able to operate at Pearson either. Again, Porter has been operating at the TCCA for many years and have spent their own money to upgrade the equipment used for approaches + landing during poor weather. Yes, there are days when even their improved equipment is not sufficient, but these are clearly the exception and not the rule.
It's fine to ask questions and have concerns but, at some point, we need to acknowledge that the day to day operations at the TCCA paint a very different picture than CAIR's.
Joe.
OK - Please tell me what EXACT role that the location or make up of the TCCA contributed to this accident?
Could this exact scenario not have occurred at Buttonville with runways that are the same length?
Unfortunately, some items on your list don't tell the whole story because you have left out the necessary context. For example:
1) RE: Q400 runway length requirements. In this case, You acknowledged the Porter explanation then go ahead and ignore the information you just presented. For each and every flight, either the pilot or a dispatcher calculates the exact amount of runway required for a flight to take off. This is based on runway conditions, weather (including crosswinds and temperature) and actual load of the aircraft. Given that Porter has been flying close to 100 flights a day for almost a year, isn't it moot to imply that the Q400 cannot be safely operated at the TCCA?
How much more evidence do you need? Doesn't the real world application count for something? The figures you quote from Bombardier are for a MAXIMUM load of passengers and cargo and fuel.
2)RE: pilot cautions. How is it a HAZARD to avoid overflying particular neighborhoods, the CNE and Ontario Place? Also, banner towing aircraft are possibly the easiest aircraft to see and avoid which makes them anything but a hazard. AND again, in the many decades of operation at the TCCA, including a time when it was the 3rd busiest airport in Canada, has anyone HIT any of the perceived hazards? How much real world data do you need to see that these pilot cautions are not nearly as severe as CAIR would like them to be? Have you asked any pilots if they think the TCCA is dangerous? I mean, would you drive on a stretch of road if it was dangerous? Therefore, why would pilots continue to utilize the TCCA if it was an accident waiting to happen? I asked the President of the Canadian Owners and Pilots Assoc. (Kevin Psutka) and he was very adamant that his membership does NOT believe that the TCCA is a dangerous airport - period.
3) Weather - I agree that the TCCA has to deal with more weather issues than airports away from the shoreline. However, if the Q400 can only accept a 60km/h crosswind then they wouldn't have been able to operate at Pearson either. Again, Porter has been operating at the TCCA for many years and have spent their own money to upgrade the equipment used for approaches + landing during poor weather. Yes, there are days when even their improved equipment is not sufficient, but these are clearly the exception and not the rule.
It's fine to ask questions and have concerns but, at some point, we need to acknowledge that the day to day operations at the TCCA paint a very different picture than CAIR's.
Joe.
Comments