If that is the 747 pic can anyone vouch for it's authenticity :-) ?
Keith Hendy
DCIEM, North York, ON
Canada
--------------------------------------
Date: 8/20/97 10:19 AM
To: Keith Hendy
From: crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu
Received: by gatormail with SMTP;20 Aug 1997 10:17:11 U
Received: (from majordom_at_localhost) by smtp.db.erau.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) id
KAA25861 for crm-devel-outgoing; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:06:39 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp.db.erau.edu: majordom set sender to
owner-crm-devel using -f
Received: from TheWall.navcanada.ca (nc.navcanada.ca [207.216.54.65]) by
smtp.db.erau.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA25857 for
<crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu>; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:06:34 -0400
Received: from gatewaysrv.navcanada.ca (gatewaysrv.navcanada.ca
[172.20.7.142])
by TheWall with SMTP (DuhMail/3.0)
id KAA28891; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:00:14 -0400
Received: by gatewaysrv.navcanada.ca with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server
Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63)
id <01BCAD50.C83EA970_at_gatewaysrv.navcanada.ca>; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:06:52
-0400
Message-ID:
<c=CA%a=_%p=NAVCANADA%l=NAVCANADA/NCR/0009B463_at_gatewaysrv.navcanada.ca>
From: "Breen, John" <IMCEAMS-TRANSPORT_WESTHQ1_BREENJO_at_NAVCANADA.CA>
To: "crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu" <crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu>
Subject: RE: Go-Around Limitations?
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:07:06 -0400
X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version
4.0.994.63
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu
X-Organization: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
X-List: CRM Development List
X-Listserver: Majordomo 1.93
Good Morning Gang:
Through the CRMDEEN posting, I was reminded of a photo I had been shown
in the spring.
When I learned to fly, one of my best instructors told me to remember:
"There ain't no landing worth saving." - a rule I've kept stored in my
instant recall file for those days when things aren't as pretty as they
should be. The photo came to me some twenty years after that instructor
gave me that useful warning.
Have a look at http://visualatours.com/cail/45degree.htm
This one photo sure brings it home for me.
Still having fun...
John G Breen
NAV CANADA
ATS-Team Resource Management
>----------
>From: CRMDEEN_at_aol.com[SMTP:CRMDEEN_at_aol.com]
>Sent: August 19, 1997 11:43 AM
>To: crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu
>Subject: Go-Around Limitations?
>
>Hi gang,
> Yesterday in a CRM refresher class I was asking the students why a
>co-pilot would not tell the other pilot to go-around from a poor final
>approach. One of the answers I got was "we are allowed only one go-around."
>
> Explanation: When a pilot is receiving a flight check, he is allowed
>to take himself around on the first attempt at landing. If his second
>attempt at landing results in a go-around, he fails the landing skill portion
>of the evaluation.
> How many "go-arounds" do the flying organizations on this net allow?
> Is this really a hidden signal to the pilots? Should this really be the
>excuse for allowing a poor final approach to continue through to a failed
>landing?
> Tell me it ain't so!
>
>Greg Deen
>HTI
>