Page 2 of 2

Posted: 29 Dec 2006, 08:00
by steve p
DispatchDragon wrote:hehehehe very little grass at PDK Steve.....and what there is , is usally waterlogged


Leif
Cheers Leif. That explains it.

Best wishes
Steve P

Posted: 29 Dec 2006, 08:15
by DispatchDragon
Bugger

I meant to post this aerial shot of the runways at PDK its a little more
self explanatory

Image


Leif

Posted: 29 Dec 2006, 08:21
by DispatchDragon
In All seriousness I think PDKs days are numbered due to the NIMN ijiots
as I said PDK has had its share of "spectacular" accidents - the worst of which was a Lear that departed through a flock of birds and wound up on the Buford Highway which runs pararell to the runway


Leif

Posted: 29 Dec 2006, 17:21
by cstorey
Chris Trott - I was not expecting foam to be deployed, but I would have expected the Fire Services with their infra red sensing equipment to be available a.s.a.p. so that any incipient outbreak of fire could be foreseen - quite apart from anything else, this has a radical bearing on the method and route of evacuation - see the tragic Manchester 737 fire of 22.8.1985 for a prime example of why this is now regarded as important

Posted: 29 Dec 2006, 21:00
by Chris Trott
As I said Chris, they were on hand, just not hovering over the aircraft as it's not needed. The IR cameras are mounted on the truck, so why get any closer than you have to? The water/foam/chemical cannon on the trucks can reach out well over a hundred feet, so it shouldn't be surprising not to see them with as closely shot as the video was.

Lief - I was speaking of foaming down the aircraft and engines after the aircraft stopped, not the runway. I do understand that foaming the runway in preparation for such a landing is frowned upon and not practiced within North American and most of Europe anymore.

Posted: 30 Dec 2006, 18:37
by cstorey
Chris - ah, I see - thanks for the explanation. Happy New year to you and everyone on this board