Instagram Tuesday: Coming Along

Every Tuesday, I feature my favorite Instagram photos from around the lift world.


12 thoughts on “Instagram Tuesday: Coming Along

    • Ryan September 24, 2020 / 6:24 pm

      And next time, if it’s not a Boeing, don’t be going! Damn Airbus. :P


      • Peter Landsman September 24, 2020 / 6:58 pm

        I fly a lot to take all of the pictures on this site and finally got a flight where something exciting happened. I was sitting right next to the engine that failed just before takeoff. There was a big thud but we were going too fast to stop at that point. Takeoff was more gradual and quiet than normal with only one engine. Came back around and landed with fire trucks standing by just in case. Delta had a new plane lined up before we even landed and I made it home to Jackson only a few hours late.

        Having well-trained people who can perform under pressure is why air travel is so safe. All the airlines that service Jackson use Airbus models because of their great performance on short runways. I grew up in a house with a view of the Boeing 737 factory but I must say Airbus makes a solid product. Not unlike the fine ski lifts which also come over from Europe.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Ryan September 24, 2020 / 9:35 pm

          They do make a great product indeed. I like the new 220 (not designed by Airbus but Airbus purchased Bombardier and gets that nice product as a result) I’ve come to like them over the years, the “If it’s not a Boeing, I’m not going” thing was just a quote from a sticker i saw on a pilots luggage once. When you heard the thud, did the engine go into a compressor stall with backfiring? Or was it just a thud and then shut down? Wondering if it was a bird strike which depending on the bird size usually results in the compressor stall type of noise or something similar to this:

          If it was just a thud and then it shut down (or reduced to idle) then likely an internal component failure with automatic shut down by the onboard computer.
          I’ve been on 2 in-flight mechanical failures including engine shut down due to low oil pressure on an old 727 back in the 90s and another one with a bird strike during climb out at SFO. Was handled very professionally both times and on the 727 we didn’t know there was an issue and engine shut down until the pilot told us when we were on approach into KDEN, letting us know why we would see emergency equipment on the ground next to the runway when we landed. But the 727 was a 3 holer (3 engine) so still 2 loud classic Pratt and Whitney JT8Ds to keep the noise up. I miss those old girls. And am going to miss the MD-88s and 90s from Delta (now retired)


        • ALT2870 September 25, 2020 / 12:02 am

          “All the airlines that service Jackson use Airbus models because of their great performance on short runways.”

          Alright, who told you this? That’s a load of non-sense. :P That’s pretty far from the truth if we are being honest. Yes, most airlines who service Jackson Hole (or any western resort airport, see Eagle County (Vail), Montrose (Telluride), and Hayden (Steamboat Springs)) mainly use A319’s for those routes if they are around the 90 minute mark, maybe two if they are feeling frisky. Longer flights are reserved for the 757, since it is the only aircraft that can have that performance and range. (And no, the A321 will not be able to handle these “hot and heavy” routes so a lot is, pun intended, up in the air once the 757 is retired.)

          The reason you see the A319 at these airports is because it is the smallest mainline aircraft that airlines can get in there without much performance loss. The alternate, 737-700 is there but only United operates the type out of the major ski resort carriers. (Apart from Southwest who until this coming season doesn’t typically fly to ski destinations.) This is shown on the Houston-Eagle route where United operates the -700 rather then the A319. Both aircraft have the same performance at this altitude. I couldn’t find the exact engine specs Delta uses for the A319’s but is appears to be around at most 22k of thrust verses the 24k of thrust that United has on it’s -700’s.

          The A320 and 737-800 you won’t see much as performance takes enough hit usually that it doesn’t make sense financial to do so unless it is a short hop. (See SLC to Jackson Hole, Denver to Eagle though the E175 has taken that over and probably soon for Jackson Hole.) American has started experimenting with the A319 on the DFW to Eagle route but that has killed capacity near half. A320 simply can’t load full doing it and the A321 forget about it.

          In short, both the A319 and 737-700 are capable of these routes it’s just only United uses the -700 and they relegate those to other flights a lot with the A319 being the swing aircraft. All I’m trying to say is that anyone telling you that Airbus preforms better at high altitude airports or shorter runways is full of non-sense. Most of my experiences the Airbus tends to take much longer take-off rolls the 737 but a lot has to be factored in.

          /End Rant

          End note is that we should be worried if a true 757 replacement ever comes. Boeing keeps twiddling its fingers regarding it but we are all in for it if something with the performance of it doesn’t come out within the next 10 years. Otherwise routes from East Coast, Midwest, and the South could be discontinued due to lack of suitable aircraft.


        • Peter Landsman September 25, 2020 / 8:05 am

          We are down to only one 757 and one 737 flight a day in Jackson this winter. Some days will see 15 A319s coming in from all over the country. The pandemic seems only to have accelerated air service expansion here.


        • Ben Wegrzyn September 25, 2020 / 8:00 am

          why were you in SLC?


  1. Andy September 25, 2020 / 6:54 am

    (commenting on the commenting about Delta DL2913 depart KSLC Sept 23 , 2020 blown engine incident )

    Pardon the need to comment but give me a bit more substance. Give me raw numbers to compare the aircraft. The things that matter to the captain of the aircraft at point of takeoff. How much runway does he have in front of me? How much does this aircraft weigh now? How much runway, given the current aircraft and it’s weight , does he need to safely take off?. In this instance, once this aircraft (DL 2913 depart KSLC Sept 23 , 2020) was past the point of abort takeoff, how much runway does he need to get the aircraft, with a blown engine safely back on the ground, with a full load, and pretty full fuel tanks and only one engine to slow the airplane? Those are the performance numbers that matter, In addition to fuel economy and cost to operate per passenger mile etc . The rest, well. Do agree that if 757 replacement not airborne within ten years, certain US airports may no longer be served in the same way. The ski industry as we know it will be turned on it’s head, (If Covid-19 and the 2020 2021 2022 fallout does not take ski resorts down first. ) just my two cents


    • Ryan September 25, 2020 / 11:30 pm

      Got this info off of Wikipedia. Keep in mind the 757-200 started flying passengers in 1983 vs the A319 which came out in 1996. There is not a true 757 replacement. The A321 NEO probably comes the closest right now. The airlines will fly in what they can that makes the most sense. Right now with reduced passenger loads, the A319 makes sense. The 757 will still be around for awhile yet, but the aircraft are being retired as they hit 30 years old or close to that by the major airlines. The 757 is one of my favorite aircraft. Takes awhile to load and unload but it’s comfortable.

      Boeing 757-200
      MTOW 255,000 lbs
      Max Payload- 57,160
      Fuel Capacity 11,489 gallons
      Cruise Speed Mach 0.80
      Range: 3915
      Takeoff 6800ft
      Ceiling 42,000 ft
      Thrust: Rolls Royce RB-211 40,200
      Pratt & Whitney PW2000 36,600 lbs (Delta and United only flies the 757s with the P&W engines)
      Seating Max 221 in 1 class seating 200 in 2 class seating

      MTOW 166,000 lbs
      Range- 3750 miles
      Takeoff: 6070 ft
      Landing: 4460 ft
      Thrust: 22,000 – 27,000 depending on engine type
      (CFM56 or IAE V2500)
      Fuel Cpacity: 6400-7980 gallons
      Seating Max: 156 (in one class configuration)


    • ALT2870 September 26, 2020 / 12:54 pm

      What raw type of number are you looking for Andy? Those like Ryan posted? And what two aircraft? The issue is that raw numbers don’t provide a complete story. A lot depends on that certain flight and the numbers with it. Fuel, passengers, cargo, etc all change per flight and will factor in what the best choice is.

      In the case of DL2913 they were past V1 and on the way to VR (rotation speed). V1 is the max speed that the plane can safely abort takeoff. Anything past it and they are dedicated to takeoff regardless of engine failure such as shown with this incident. The flight took off on Rwy 34L which is 12,000 feet. In many cases V1 and VR are within a few knots of each other for smaller aircraft since runways are long at major airports. DL2913 must of been pretty loaded to have such a low V1 speed. But it also shows the weaker takeoff power of the aircraft. I didn’t want to bring up that point in the first post but that continues to disprove that Airbus’s preform better on short runways. (See Alaska’s comparable 737-700 that does milk runs in Alaska on sub 6,000 foot runways and uses around half that for takeoff.)

      I do agree that the A321NEO and more specifically the longer range variants are the closest thing to the 757. It still suffers from lack of performance though at many of the airport the 757 is common to. Boeing’s answer by stretching the 737 (see 900ER and MAX 10) suffer from the same problem. The fact is that airlines are taking the 737 out of it’s normal role of 3 hour and lower flights and putting them on transcon’s. Boeing of course wants to please those airlines. Plus airlines are penny pinchers and love to see aircraft of the some family for cost reducing. The article Andy points towards alludes to the -800 variant having long takeoff rolls on transcon’s. No kidding, it was never meant for that.

      There is a reason even though all three major carries in the US have the A321 (or in United’s case,in five’ish years), they very much want Boeing to get a 757 replacement on the market. Lets see if Boeing can get that 757 Plus out there.


      • skitheeast September 26, 2020 / 4:06 pm

        To not veer too far off-topic.. although the 757 is going away soon without a 757 2.0/Max/Plus replacement, it should not be too big of a problem for ski towns because most (if not all routes) can be replaced with a combination of A220/A320/B737 family aircraft.


  2. Andy September 26, 2020 / 1:39 pm

    OK OK. I cry uncle This is a ski lift discussion page not a airplane geek page. I started it. . i know. So I am ending it. enough on airplanes already..


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s