Las Vegas McCarran

[Guest]

Some pictures I took on our mini vacation to Las Vegas over Thanksgiving week. 

 

Images are large so I did NOT link via image reference nor Attach, direct link to my web site:

 

http://robainscough.com/images/6c3d33e209c10d1c077f972622aef439.jpg

 

 

http://robainscough.com/images/43bbc1c26a59f054d6377741f98eefca.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/99a3b13a6734d1c83de5a8029d0c9869.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/0c7b40a9db92d3f4ca08df4b72df7dd3.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/b86204d2323ec39620c4438d2f0d5b8c.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/829cc8602cd26834b04d5737fd0f1829.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/f9a9283f2fe9a20acd178ef44faca851.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/e61db00823ae83dd3910c2a0d196502a.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/31383e45b91084930f4226e30ab3ff03.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/143d59b1b401eff0db7a000cb1943d92.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/f35a2c9b28fdc4931b838e07b2a0e8bb.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/df98e0a41922022ce0ab1e315e2b043e.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/5f9f983c4d650c3ba45466122eda0d2c.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/4fec60eb6e29b42a8675e78d9cd2e5f1.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/b7c7dbbf3bb0a6005f20b5eb259a47d5.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/c439ebf9c703e8ab434a1cc2091338ed.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/4159ded3fae72621793170da752165ce.jpg

 

http://robainscough.com/images/7b01fcda27e75bcd7a34d452b5b96dbd.jpg

 

Happy Holidays!

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

[skully 1,045]

Those are some fantastic shots Rob!

We were there about 2 months ago.

We flew in on Allegiant non stop from XNA. Love those MD's!

You did stay at least 4 feet away from that fence didn't you?!

I took some vids and got the hell out of there.. :ph34r:

[JaimeHorton 3]

Man 

 

i love vegas 

 

Someday ill live there, great pics 

 

JHo

[Pharlophus 1]

My office is in the warehouses just off the end of runway 25, when heading out for jobs I travel up Sunset Rd. and oftenwondered about what drew folks to park in that small lot with their telephoto lenses. Those are some nice examples of why.

[Guest]

 

 

when heading out for jobs I travel up Sunset Rd. and oftenwondered about what drew folks to park in that small lot with their telephoto lenses.

 

It's a great vantage point ... my camera and lens aren't what I would consider "Pro" quality, more consumer grade, but even with only a 300mm lens I was surprised at how well it captured the shots I took.  I think the first one ... the "Spirit" is perhaps my favorite, just love the color and lighting.  With a close second to the reverse thrusts in operation pics.

[JAT 185]

Nice shots.

 

nebojsa

[A320FAN 370]

Amazing shots!

[Guest]

Thanks gents.  I should do some more from KCCR and/or KSFO ... lots of good spots to get some nice aircraft shots from.

[Robert McDonald 167]

Were these shots taken using FSX or XPlane?

 

:lol:

 

Seriously, great job, Rob!  My favorite airport, just a notch above KSAN and KSFO.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Robert McDonald

[Guest]

Thanks Robert, as a passenger arriving at KLAS it appears they pickup some wicked surface crosswinds ... we had a perfectly smooth flight from KSFO to KLAS but the pilot was warning us about high winds ... didn't feel a thing until about <500 ft then holy cow, I was looking out the window and could see the end of the runway we we're going to land on ... pilot did a great job landing it.

[Robert McDonald 167]

I don't care what ANYONE says... 

 

We can never expect people flying commercial airliners from a remote location to have the 'feel' of the plane when experiencing wind shear, crosswinds, and a host of other unexpected 'issues' moments before landing... or shortly after takeoff. Picture Sully Sullenberger's dual-engine bird-strike flameout being flown from the ground by a guy who has 7 minutes from takeoff to putting the plane in the Hudson.  I can't see that having a good outcome with a 'drone pilot' in charge of the airliner. 

 

With 0 power and no hope for a go-around, I don't think ANYONE could have flown that plane into the water 'remotely' the way Sully did it... and let's face it... you WANT a guy that calm and collected in the cockpit...

 

I am aware of the stats for "Pilot Error", but those numbers are misleading.  I believe the astronomical number of potential crashes that were AVOIDED by "pilot solutions" would far exceed the errors.  But since no catastrophe occurred, the stats are skewed.  In the same way you can't 'prove a negative', you cannot statistically prove the disasters that were PREVENTED by onboard pilots.  Sorry, but the guy on the ground arguing with his wife on the cellphone when the birds hit my plane simply leaves me cold.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Robert McDonald

[Guest]

With 0 power and no hope for a go-around, I don't think ANYONE could have flown that plane into the water 'remotely' the way Sully did it... and let's face it... you WANT a guy that calm and collected in the cockpit...

 

Hmmm...sounds like you think "I want drones" ... I may have suggested that drones would be an inevitable distant future (probably after I'm dead) for commercial aircraft, but to be clear it's not necessarily a future "I want".  From what I understand of current aircraft automation systems (and that's limited) is that they are mostly about fuel conservation and accuracy allowing for more aircraft to fly in less space.  I look at an FMC and go OMG, who designed this user interface, it's about as user friendly as programming a 1980's VCRs. 

 

But let me present this scenario to you in a "future" aircraft that detects all objects (birds included) within a specific radius of the aircraft (we actually already have this tech in cars today), calculates their position and trajectory and makes adjustments to the aircraft and hence avoids the bird strike.  Humans have good eyes, but a computers sensors can be that much or accurate, cover a much longer distance, take in a 360 degree radius, and perform trajectory calculations a lot faster while all the time controlling the aircraft. 

 

But to be clear, I don't want human pilots to go away, but at the same time I know technology moves forward.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Guest

[Robert McDonald 167]

Hmmm...sounds like you think "I want drones" ... I may have suggested that drones would be an inevitable distant future (probably after I'm dead) for commercial aircraft, but to be clear it's not necessarily a future "I want".  From what I understand of current aircraft automation systems (and that's limited) is that they are mostly about fuel conservation and accuracy allowing for more aircraft to fly in less space.  I look at an FMC and go OMG, who designed this user interface, it's about as user friendly as programming a 1980's VCRs. 

 

But let me present this scenario to you in a "future" aircraft that detects all objects (birds included) within a specific radius of the aircraft (we actually already have this tech in cars today), calculates their position and trajectory and makes adjustments to the aircraft and hence avoids the bird strike.  Humans have good eyes, but a computers sensors can be that much or accurate, cover a much longer distance, take in a 360 degree radius, and perform trajectory calculations a lot faster while all the time controlling the aircraft. 

 

But to be clear, I don't want human pilots to go away, but at the same time I know technology moves forward.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

I wasn't intimating that you personally were in favor of commercial aircraft being flown remotely, Rob.  It has been discussed on Avsim quite a bit.  I just recalled after reading about your 'exciting landing' once the plane was below 500 feet at KLAS, that there simply is no technology devised that can 'feel' the plane, and factor in thousands of hours of 'by the seat' feedback in real time.

 

Also, no matter HOW reliable and redundant the automation is, NOTHING is 100% (not even pilots) reliant.  I just think considering what the planes themselves cost, not to mention the souls aboard and on the ground who could be adversely impacted (in a very real way) by an automation failure, the idea on NO ONE on the flight deck curdles the blood, at least for me.

 

I grant that it is possible to program computers to handle various scenarios and combinations of flight factors.  I admit that computers have a greater capacity to make decisions in a shorter amount of time than a human.

 

Still, I think the automation alone is simply not enough, and a drone pilot on the ground may be just fine for COMBAT MISSIONS with no passenger load, but I can't honestly accept robot control of passenger planes.

 

Like some import car owners, the urban legend has it that (computers, foreign cars) never break.  You and I know that's a fallacy.  As an IT manager, I could tell you stories about fail-safe systems that break down all the time!  I agree with you, the FMC interface is primitive beyond words.  Most pilots aren't in love with VNav descents!  In fact, the entire cockpit could stand some major tech innovation (e.g. Dreamliner).  You are quite right- technology continues to improve and should do so.  It'd be great if some of that new stuff could be added to new planes.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Robert McDonald