Thanks, pilot141 - a quick further question: are there actually any civilian airports (that you know of) where the terrain alone has an implication on the climb used?
Yes, there are several. Reno, NV. El Paso, TX. Smaller airports like Vail and Aspen, CO. When you go outside the US you get all kinds of wild requirements - Quito, Ecuador and Kathmandu, Nepal both have some demanding departures. Even places like St Thomas, US Virgin Islands can have a special departure. There is a large hill at the departure end of the runway when taking off (east? I can’t remember).
Anyplace where they cram a runway into inhospitable terrain will give you some sort of problems.
Like runway 13 approach at Kai Tak perhaps?
Do you guys experience the same sensation of near-verticality during a steep ascent that we sometimes do, or is it all old hat to you?
Also, what about sharp banking? Sometimes I could swear the pilot is auditioning for “Top Gun II.” Do you guys sometimes lean it a tad hard just to get that old feeling back again?
John Wayne Airport in Orange County, CA.
By far the steepest takeoff I’ve ever encountered. Feels like a damn rocket.
The pilots warned the passengers every trip I’ve taken though, something about noice pollution.
While I can’t remember if Honduras is considered North or South America (I want to say that Latin America is considered part of the North American Continent), one place where the terrain has an effect is Toncontin, the aiport for Tegucigalpa, Honduras (link goes to flash animation of the landings required).
Noise abatement requirements. They also have to cut their engines once they reach a certain elevation, for the same reason. And, AFAIK, there are no flights out of John Wayne after about 10 p.m., but I could be misremembering.
I hate flying out of John Wayne. I do it every six months or so, but it is NOT enjoyable.
No worries, that makes it a bit clearer.
Whereas I just love it. I don’t like roller coasters or other carnival rides, but you get me in a huge plane, and I can enjoy the sensation.
If I remember correctly, another feature of this particular takeoff is that you follow the course of a river until you get to the coast. Is that right, or am I making it up?
I love roller coasters and carnival rides, and would never set foot in a plane again if I had the option, so there you go.
What that proves, I dunno. 
Someone else will have to help you out there - I’m generally too busy focusing on my knitting/reading so I can ignore the takeoff to know the answer.
I’m fine once I’m in the air, but I do not care for takeoffs and landings.
Heh…Honduras has always been Central America to me, but I guess technically it’s part of the North American continent. And Tegucigalpa is an excellent example of terrain dictating both departures and arrivals.
Carnac re: the maneuvering. I will say that up front it doesn’t feel like we are doing anything unusual. The deck angle might be a little higher, but it’s no big deal. As far as banking goes, you should never get above 30 degrees of bank. Most of what feels like wild maneuvering is nothing of the sort - it just might be lower to the ground than you are used to. The roll rate might be a bit faster at times as well - but all that means is that you get to 30 deg of bank in 3 seconds instead of 5 seconds. Again, no big deal.
And Vetch you know that they closed Kai Tak, right? Mostly because of the crazy positions airplanes got into on final, like this MD-11 turning onto short final. Here is another picture of how sporty that approach was. Man, I hated that approach!
I know you asked about take-offs, but in my travelling-assed opinion, LaGuardia Airport in Queens is without doubt the most hair-raising for landings.
Wanna land going south? Sure. You got a LITTLE BIT O RUNWAY BABY then you’re in danger of getting to know the Grand Central Parkway too well.
Coming in landing from the east? Not only is that runway so damned short as to make passengers freak out, but a few years ago on take-off, there was a crash on that east-west runway. From an Internet source:
Excuse please, Mr. pilot141, have you ever flown out of San Jose heading to LAX? Can you explain why, after a fairly pleasant take-off, the pattern suddenly forces us to make one steep-ass turn to starboard? I get a wonderful birds-eye view of the old 3COM building along Highway 237, and it feels like we’re doing a starboard turn on the point of the right wingtip.
Can’t figure that one out, unless it’s to avoid traffic inbound towards SFO from the East. I know that stuff comes in almost dead over Mission Peak in Fremont; climb to the top of that peak on a clear night and you’ll get buzzed by just about every type of aircraft you can think of.
It can’t be Moffett Field; there’s almost no traffic in or out any more.
Ditto Baltimore, IIRC. On one recent departure, it seemed like we were pivoting on the wing tip.
BTW pilot141, I long ago landed at Kai Tak, in Hong Kong. Many times.
::Shudder::
Well, I obviously can’t explain what happened on everyone’s specific flight, but I’ll take a stab at it.
What most people don’t realize is that as technology becomes better the flight path of airplanes becomes more erratic.
Really.
Years ago the clearance out of LAX might have been “fly runway heading to 1500’ then turn left direct xxx navaid”. It sounds precise, but it really isn’t.
Now we have “RNAV” departures, which means that the airplane knows where it is at all times. Along with these RNAV departures came “noise monitors”…literally sound detectors placed on the departure corridors of certain airports. They are placed over “noise sensitive” areas, and if the monitor goes off…whoever triggered it gets a nice fine from the FAA. The pilots on your flight will do whatever they can (within reason) to avoid triggering one of these monitors.
These fines are not like traffic fines…the minimum “noise violation” fine that I know of is $10,000.
So if you are flying out of SFO, BUR, SAN or any other place that has some crazy noise restrictions…the pilots on your flight are trying to avoid the noise monitor for that runway. If you feel that the maneuvering is unsafe or too radical… please tell someone about it. I’m all for decreasing the impact of airplanes landing, but I will NOT compromise safety for it, and some of these procedures come awfully close.
I’ve flown out of John Wayne several times. The first time they almost needed a cleanup in seat 3F.
Reno is nasty, too. And the weather around Reno causes the worst turbulence I’ve ever been in. Feels like the plane suddenly drops about 50 feet.
Just for clarification…if I trigger a noise monitor in San Fran I will not get a bill in the mail…my company will.
However, my name will go on a list of pilots who can’t seem to depart SFO without costing the company a lot of money. Eventually that will have very bad consequences for me.
[aside]
Gawd, I love steep takeoffs, at least in a plane with a thrustline roughly centered on the fuselage, like a DC-10/MD-10 or a 727. Feeling the vibrations, like 10,000 horsepower in my spine, that’s SWEET! 747s and other planes with all of the engines on the wing, that’s different. It feels like the wings are leaving without me.
[/aside]
Well yes I did know that, but it doesn’t detract from the bottom clenching feeling of seeing those houses and flats very adjacent to the wingtips.
I can also remember being in an almost empty and lightly fuelled VC10 when the pilot decided to put on a show for the spectators and do his best to emulate a fighter aircraft- very impressive.
The radio show Mountain Stage comes from Charleston, West Virginia. Performers on the show sometimes joke about the thrilling landing at the airport. I gather it’s a steep approach.