Originally Posted by
EWR764
What of the short runway (for the field elevation of 7800')? Or the terrain considerations? Or the inevitable icing conditions limiting performance during the winter when demand is highest?
To put it differently, at or around MGTOW, the E175 needs ~7000' standard day, sea level. Without looking at the charts for 175, my guess is there is a precipitous dropoff in available payload for ASE's operating parameters, which would likely negate any economical uplift for the eastbound flight.
Oh, I don't disagree -- I don't have the charts at my disposal, nor do I know the real-world performance of the E175 vs. the published maxima. My point was merely that the plane nominally has a 30% range buffer compared to the distance, which makes me think it's worth somebody's time at UA to do the calculations and model it out.
Originally Posted by
Herb687
Airline finance and planning is usually interesting but every once in a while a truly scintillating presentation crosses your desk and raises the fascinating question: just what constitutes an acceptable rate of CFIT.
LOL, I mean, I hope it's zero?
