A Theory of Mountain Flying
I don’t like mountain flying because it’s objectively dangerous, and it’s subjectively frightening.
That might be the best answer I’ve seen yet on why I have an ambition to remain a flatlander pilot in practice. (It’s bumpy enough flying across the Appalachians!)
Curtis Olson August 22, 2013 11:10
Neat video in the link. I’ve had a chance to do some flying as a passenger in Peru and their is some crazy places to get in and out of there. We visited Cuzco/Machu Picchu in 1999 and our flight out of Cuzco was in an old 727. The procedure is to take off, fly down the valley, do a 180 still inside the valley and then fly back up and out. A full 5 minutes from lift off I was still looking out the window and seeing terrain to the side and above us. I have a picture I snapped from the front right seat of a Helio Courier on floats where we ducked below a cloud bank, but above a ridge … with about a 50’ gap if I’m generous. There is no visible gap in the picture I took but the pilot found a way through. On the way back he chose to circle climb for about 20 minutes to get above the cloud layer so he had a clear visual over it (even though it was obvious we were above the ridge right away, I guess there’s no point in taking chances in the remote jungles.)
David Megginson August 22, 2013 16:34
Like Mr. Fallows, I will likely try some mountain flying some day, but I wouldn’t make a habit of it. I fly mainly for transportation, not thrills, so I need to have a reasonable dispatch success rate (80-90%). With a normally-aspirated, 160 hp plane, that’s simply not realistic in the mountains; I doubt even 50% is.
Imported from Google+ — content and formatting may not be reliable