Aspen Co. Ops

[Guest B1900 Mech]

After reading this G-III NTSB accident report,http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2002/AAB0203.pdf I tried some 767 ops into and out of this field. My questions are #1, even at light weights would this be out of the performance envelope with a rwy 7006 long by 100 feet wide at a elevation of 7280 MSL. #2 Shooting the VOR/DME or GPS-C how would one set up the a/c? Would you be at landing V-ref at the FAF? Thank's From Jim! P.S. I programed the waypoint/ altitudes into the FMS, but I seemed to be high on the papi's on final.

[Guest NWB009]

I have tried this airport in both turbo-prop and in the Lear, and with weather conditions duplicated.....this is very, very challenging. To fly a visual is absurd, IFR would be the only way. The speed that's typically necessary in the Lear or G-III during approach, makes this very scary....very sad what happened to those persons....

[Guest]

HiI have flown to Aspen on a turboprop in 5 mile visibility and believe me, it's tough...I remember I did this flight on the 767 PIC when the accident happened a while back. The 767 is CatD. On the chart it says CatD not applicable. So maybe with prior authorization (i'm not sure if the runway can take it) you could come into the airport but only visually. The Gulfstream is Cat C so at 3 mile visibility requirement they were not legal unless they thought flight visibility was better or equal to 3 miles but the controller said that visibility to the North was 2 miles (tough sell). Since the approach is very steep and the a/c is hard to slow down I would be flaps 30 and 140 knots by DBL. Use VS (1200ft/min min) and heading control while display the VOR on raw data (in the mountains you are not going to steer the airplane without raw data and be subject to map shifts, so no LNAV...). By 9.5 DME if you don't have the runway in sight get out!. The 200 foot step down is in the chart but is a death trap. The problem on the 767 is that to descend 2000 feet in three miles (from 9.5 DME) you'll be coming down on a 6 degree slope, so it'll be tough to stop the descent rate. You can still do it. You literally have to dive down to recover the descent rate and land. The go-around on the 767 is doable as long as the engines were already spooled up. Even if you make it, the PAX will hate you. BTW any VOR/DME or GPS-C promises you to be high on final. That's why only circling minimums are published!. That's what the -C means, more than 400 feet per nautical mile from the last fix to the runway... Pedro

[Guest B1900 Mech]

Thankyou for the reply's! It took me 3 try's to get in!

[Guest]

Though it's a challenge to try flying into ASE in large aircraft, it really is impossible and impractical to expect to safely land at this airport using more than a 737-size aircraft. Especially so if strictly following the descent profile (it's near 10 degrees, over 3 times the normal descent angle than a standard ILS).The airport itself is restricted to a max wingspan of 95 feet. I'm not sure whether that's waiverable either. Part of it is performance, and part is the fact that the airport is darned narrow!The largest commercial aircraft to fly into the airport is a Bach Jet. For GA aircraft, even the G5 is right on the edge of reasonable size for flights into the airport!My suggestion for larger aircraft is Eagle Airport (EGE) which is a little farther north of the airport. Various airlines fly 757s into Eagle multiple times daily during ski season... though, again, it seems that the size (8000'x150') and altitude (6535') of the airport would prevent an airline from flying people in on larger aircraft. Especially an aircraft full of pax near gross weight!Oh well... just an explanation as to why it's so difficult to land at ASE in a large aircraft!