"License to taxi"

Mxsmanic wrote
FIRST 1800 FT OF RY 18 DETERIORATING WITH POT HOLES AND SEVERE
CRACKING.
From this I inferred that the entire runway was just a thin layer of
asphalt.

Ah yes...That 1800' is the extansion that was added after I left,
and one of the reasons that I did leave.

At light weights, the original r/w was long enough to accommodate
the required accelerate/stop distance for a B-707, but not long
enough to reach Vmcg before reaching V1, so V1 had to be increased
to the higher Vmcg speed. Arthur Jones, although a pilot himself,
did not seem to understand this concept. We argued about the safety
issue. The Cuban pilot who replaced me seemed unaware of the issue.

In a Google Earth view, one can see that the extension (dark) was
added at an angle to the original (light) pavement. It was added
only to allow stopping from the higher (Vmcg) V1 speeds, and is
indeed marked as stopway with a displaced threshold. The displaced
threshold on the other end is to clear the rather high circular
concrete blast fence.

Bob Moore

Mxsmanic wrote:
In the movie _Airport_ (1971), the airport manager mentions that Joe
Patroni, the miraculous mechanic who gets a stuck 707 off the runway,
is "licensed to taxi." Is there really such a thing as a license to
taxi??

No,
However the airline I used to work for we had to have Run/taxi
authorization for each type of aircraft. I eventually became an instructor.

Michelle P

Bob Moore wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote
Which sends me off on a bit of a tangent again: John Travolta has a
707 of his own. How can he fly it without a copilot and engineer?

He can't and doesn't.

Bob Moore
As a matter of fact for the longest time he had no 707 type
rating. He was never pilot in command.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Ron Natalie writes:

That movie is pretty accurate for the day (the PAR approach at the
end seems pretty word for word right0.

Does PAR predate ILS? Watching the movie I wondered why they didn't
use ILS, so I presume it simply didn't exist in 1971 (?).


No they had both, but they had a stricken aircraft after the
depressurization and they had a lot of things to worry about.
Doing the PAR approach lessens the pilot workload.


I thought _Airplane_ was funny.


It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.
It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.

Ron Natalie wrote:
Bob Moore wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote
Which sends me off on a bit of a tangent again: John Travolta has a
707 of his own. How can he fly it without a copilot and engineer?

He can't and doesn't.

Bob Moore
As a matter of fact for the longest time he had no 707 type
rating. He was never pilot in command.

What's the point? If I had a 707 and his money, I'd sure work on
getting the rating!

Emily wrote:
Ron Natalie wrote:
Bob Moore wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote
Which sends me off on a bit of a tangent again: John Travolta has a
707 of his own. How can he fly it without a copilot and engineer?

He can't and doesn't.

Bob Moore
As a matter of fact for the longest time he had no 707 type
rating. He was never pilot in command.

What's the point? If I had a 707 and his money, I'd sure work on
getting the rating!

If you had the time, but if since you can't fly the thing solo
anyhow, you have all the benefits and publicity of calling yourself
the pilot even though you're only SIC.

Ron Natalie wrote:
Emily wrote:
Ron Natalie wrote:
Bob Moore wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote
Which sends me off on a bit of a tangent again: John Travolta has a
707 of his own. How can he fly it without a copilot and engineer?

He can't and doesn't.

Bob Moore
As a matter of fact for the longest time he had no 707 type
rating. He was never pilot in command.

What's the point? If I had a 707 and his money, I'd sure work on
getting the rating!

If you had the time, but if since you can't fly the thing solo
anyhow, you have all the benefits and publicity of calling yourself
the pilot even though you're only SIC.

Me personally, I'd take the few weeks or whatever at Flight Safety. :-)

You're right though, I don't think the general public knows or cares...

Emily writes:

What's the point? If I had a 707 and his money, I'd sure work on
getting the rating!

I'd prefer something smaller but more modern for the same amount of
money. A 707 is a bit dated these days.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Ron Natalie writes:

No they had both, but they had a stricken aircraft after the
depressurization and they had a lot of things to worry about.
Doing the PAR approach lessens the pilot workload.

Did things like autopilot ILS approach and autoland exist back then?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

B A R R Y wrote
Doesn't the B707 have (3) required crew? Don't you need a TR to act
as a required crew member? Or is that stuff only when the acft is
operated in revenue service?

Nope, not even in revenue service. The PIC must have a type rating,
the SIC must meet certain training requirements, and the FE must
have a turbojet rating on his Flight Engineer Certificate.

Bob Moore
ATP B-707 B-727
PanAm (retired)