If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
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?? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
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?? As far as the FAA is concerned, no. However the airlines typically have their own rules. Usually mechanics are authorized to reposition airplanes in addition to pilots. A 707 of the era of that movie doesn't have a lot of automation. You need more than just the guy in the left seat to get it fired up and moving so I'm pretty sure Patroni is just asking for someone who is qualified to perform the right seat role in moving the aircraft. That movie is pretty accurate for the day (the PAR approach at the end seems pretty word for word right0. The book it's based on is fabulous as well, you should dig it up. Arthur Hailey writes "insider" books for a number of fields. This is perhaps his best. The sequels were pretty much all wacko however. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
Ron Natalie wrote
You need more than just the guy in the left seat to get it fired up and moving so I'm pretty sure Patroni is just asking for someone who is qualified to perform the right seat role in moving the aircraft. Probably a Flight Engineer instead of a 'right seater'. In that generation airplane, the copilot played almost no role during the engine start and taxi. Bob Moore |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
Bob Moore writes:
Probably a Flight Engineer instead of a 'right seater'. In that generation airplane, the copilot played almost no role during the engine start and taxi. 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? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
Bob Moore writes:
He can't and doesn't. So he has to hire some veteran 707 pilots to go with him every time he flies? Doesn't sound like much fun. Then again, I don't suppose there are too many jet airliners that can be flown by one person. I note also that the real estate development where he parks the plane has a very fragile runway. I wonder how he manages to take off and land on a runway that is composed of only two inches of asphalt. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
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. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
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 (?). The book it's based on is fabulous as well, you should dig it up. Arthur Hailey writes "insider" books for a number of fields. This is perhaps his best. I did read the book (while actually on a TWA plane to St. Louis, in fact), and it was excellent ... better than the movie. The movie wasn't too bad, either, at least for the aviation parts. Times have changed, though! The sequels were pretty much all wacko however. I thought _Airplane_ was funny. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"License to taxi"
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. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|