Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Airports that require special qualifications

I checked. They did indeed mess with that table in the meantime.

This is what it used to look like until last year:

Maybe a nasty airport has just got even nastier…
Anyway, if I were fly310, I would enquire with the airport again. After all, the table has really not changed much and I have it in writing, from last year, that any FI (not a CRI) may fly there, provided he/she has previously completed the online test.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 17 Aug 18:51
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

After a series of accidents and incidents the Swiss CAA and the airport were under massive pressure to do “something”. If they did it right is debatable. Anyway, a couple of years ago I witnessed with many others the near catastrophic outcome of a Robin taking off at MTOW on a hot summer day. At the end of the runway it didn’t gain more than three or four meters in height and touched on the backwind leg the ground.
Do your maths, and the 1800 meters can get really short.

LSZG

If “doing something” would mean to have a very close look at the licence of somebody who continues a t/o run in a SEP for 1800 metres (!!!), that would actually make sense.

But cleary, they neither want nor need the business of somebody like me and this regulation is their way of saying it

LOAN Wiener Neustadt Ost, Austria

Actually, they’re right !!

The setup is far from easy.

On the Bever side there is a hill that produces wind shear and can cause huge problems for an SEP under hot conditions when taking off of 03, especially so when the departure route leads back towards St. Moritz over Celerina. The approach into the 21 is tricky as it requires flying pretty close to and over a hump of the Corvatsch, before Pontresina, on the left downwind.

Apart from that, it is the highest airport in the alps, 5.600ft, and one of the most challenging concerning the routing. I know that region very well, from living there, and will fly there in the winter again. Some very unfortunate accidents happened there, throughout the years.

So, yes, I can understand that they want to make sure someone understands the meaning of the word density altitude when going there.

Last Edited by EuroFlyer at 17 Aug 22:42
Safe landings !
EDLN, Germany

Feels good to go there in a turbocharged aircraft! :)

ESSZ, Sweden

This is just an expression of a sad feeling.

Regulations or measures like these basically close an airport to everyone who has no reason for going there frequently.

I’m all for distributing vital information by all possible means but I’m really against anything that makes is next to impossible to use something that is available.

I’ve been to St Moritz frequently as a youngster and would like to take my family there once in a while because the place is nice. But for an occasional trip the hassle is too much. Yes, I understand the measures are there to protect me and my family from my own stupidity – but maybe that should be our own concern?

Bring a suitable aircraft and/or understand density altitude seems to be helpful to avoid the worst following by being current by flying frequently enough. There is a lot of space between almost no risk and a lot of risk …

Frequent travels around Europe
I understand the measures are there to protect me and my family from my own stupidity

Forget it. As has been rightly pointed out, the regulations are there to reserve the place for the intended/desired public – those with lots of money.

EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

In the case of Samedan I understand what they did. Having gone there once as the Copilot in an MEP i had the feeling that this airport can be very dangerous for the unexperienced. 5600 ft Elevation is a lot, and if you go there on a hot summer day (as i have on the right seat) you’ll be surprised how marginal the performance of a non-turbo SEP/MEP can be.

Zell am See, LOWZ, is only 2400 ft high, but even there you sometimes see “interesting” takeoffs …

PS: I’ve been to St. Moritz once when we were skiing nearby. I see no reason to go there, .. but my wife is not interested in $ 5000 purses, and i can’t stand anything noveau riche anyway ;-)

Last Edited by Flyer59 at 18 Aug 18:49

I can only talk about 3600 ft in turbo-normalized. The difference, as can be expected, to a “normal” take-off is non-existent. Plus I don’t want to go to these places in any other weather than blue skies. Let people think for themselves but keep them informed and make it easy to get the information – straight into their faces if necessary. “No, you cannot” is simple CYA

Frequent travels around Europe

Well, of course in a TN Cirrus you’ll not see much difference. Try Samedan in a 200 hp NA on a warm summer day …

I can understand your argument, but you should take into consideration the really low level if proficiency of a big part of the pilot population. Of course one can argue “let them decide themselves”… but i hesitate.

Maybe they should allow SOLO flights of private pilots and let them bring passengers after 3 or 5 landings?

Sign in to add your message

Back to Top