all of these are reasons I'll avoid the place when I go up to Caveman. We got enough rules and regulations in our lives... just when you have memorized all the rules and think you've complied up pops... Oh shit.. and Mr Fed wants you to submit paperwork... end of fun flight...besides I've seen the canyon and been there numerous times...no big deal...

Another Caution about flying the Grand Canyon - With High winds we've had for last few days aircraft over
or near the Canyon get you really get beat around. Lower altitude AGL= rougher ride. Since terrain goes from 6-8 MSL expect to be 9-10k or more for smooth ride in windy conditions. When the tour operators stop flying in and out wait until there going. try this http://bcnvawos.bcnv.org:82/ and this
http://www.findlocalweather.com/pinpoin ... 55523.html
and this -read notes http://www.airnav.com/airport/1G4
and this http://www.weatherforyou.com/weather/KGCN.html

iceman wrote:all of these are reasons I'll avoid the place when I go up to Caveman. We got enough rules and regulations in our lives... just when you have memorized all the rules and think you've complied up pops... Oh shit.. and Mr Fed wants you to submit paperwork... end of fun flight...besides I've seen the canyon and been there numerous times...no big deal...

Ice - the rules for Grand Canyon overflights aren't really all that complicated, and they're designed to make it safe to fly when there's a huge number of aircraft - both tour operators and private flights - trying to share the same airspace safely. The prohibited overflight areas in the canyon are design to keep aircraft noise out of pristine areas in which millions of annual visitors on foot, muleback, or in rafts want to experience nature and not experience the noise typical of a busy major airport.

Since you've been there, seen the Grand Canyon, and don't want to be subjected to the rules again, that's understandable.

But if someone isn't bored by the sight of one of the most majestic natural features on our planet, and is willing to do a little flight planning (not much different than flight planning to anywhere else where a helluva lot of aircraft congregate) then the rules are really no big deal.

I'd much rather the FAA make some fairly basic rules than to decide it's just not worth the significant risk of an airborne collision to see the Grand Canyon from the air.

58Skylane wrote:I'm not sure when this was (about 10-15 years ago), I was on a airline flight from SoCal to Chicago and once we approached the Grand Canyon area the Pilot announce on the P.A. he would bank the plane to the left and right to give most all the passengers a view of the Grand Canyon. That was one of the coolest things I've seen an airliner pilot do for his passengers!

Just a tad off topic
The second coolest thing I noticed a airline pilot do was last summer I was on a flight from Boise to Denver. The pilot made a nice smooth landing at Denver, but kept the nose off the runway for as long as he could (same thing I like to do in my Skylane ). When parked at the gate and deplaning, I asked him about that. He replied, "You noticed that??". I said, "Yeah, I have a Cessna 182 and do the same thing all the time".

58Skylane...

...perhaps you were on one of my flights. I flew across the canyon scores of times; into and out of LAS and southern Calif. When the skies were clear...I'd decend to a low altitude and cruise up the canyon banking both ways so folks could get a good look. Especially when coming out of LAS headed east. The canyon came up early and it was easy to stay low. ATC would give me freedom to chose my own headings within a certain range.

Going into SFO from the east...I'd decend early over Yosemite...offering fantastic views of the park. The same for Yellowstone, when Old Faithful was about to erupt....and even Devil's Tower from time to time. Often when departing SEA on a clear day I'd get a VFR climb to 14,000 feet for a close up of Mt. Ranier. I'd bank left and follow the peak around for a couple of minutes before climbing and heading out on course. My retirement trip out of SFO three years ago was a VFR departure to 2,500 ft. ATC gave me freedom to fly any way I wanted in the area at 2,500 ft. I took off west, climbed at max power (5,000 fpm) for a quick level off and massive power reduction at 2,500 ft. and 250 kts. Cruised west out over the shoreline, turned north up over the Golden Gate Bridge and Treaure Island. Circle half way around Alcatraz, cruised by the City of SFO, headed west until the mountains filled the windscreen. The first officer then requested a climb over the mountains and up to 41,000 ft. I gave a running comentary to my passengers who were thilled. My wife and our son sitting in first class got the royal tour. Always tried to put some of the old romance and magic into airline travel that high altitude jets and industry/FAA restrictions have almost eliminated.

As for landing and holding the nose off. Used to do that a lot. It's called aerodynamic braking. It was hard to do in a 767 or 757 but very easy in a 727, MD-80 or DC-9. The technique was completely out of favor with airline management. But thats the nice thing about being the captain....one could have a fit of fun. It was always my intention to use very little reverse if any and minimum braking. I'd try to make the transitions so smooth that the passengers would feel little or no decelleration. It never ceases to amaze me how many pilots apply max reverse and slam on the brakes.... throwing all the passengers forward....even when landing on a 12,000 runway. Oh well....

My generation were dinosaurs for sure. But did we ever have fun. Sorry to get off on the airline stuff. You just stirred some memories.

Now back to Backcounty Flying. Our greatest passion.

Bob

Granted, I'm a bit below the min altitude here, but I could HEAR the rapids. Even heard rafters whooping it up down there. This is Toroweap Overlook, just east of the Bar 10 airport which is used for a lot of rafter traffic. The area around Bar 10 is well west of the heavy tour traffic. I've crossed there many times listening for other traffic and seldom hear anyone. But it's the kind of terrain that will have you touching your PLB every couple of minutes to make sure it hasn't slipped out of your pocket.



You can tell the north rim is out of the tourist area by the total lack of barriers or handrails. You can go right to the edge and see the canyon like it was meant to be seen. If you don't or can't fly over it to see it, you can tackle the 100 miles of bad road to get there. Either way, it's worth the effort.



YB

Yellowbelly wrote: You can tell the north rim is out of the tourist area by the total lack of barriers or handrails. You can go right to the edge and see the canyon like it was meant to be seen. If you don't or can't fly over it to see it, you can tackle the 100 miles of bad road to get there. Either way, it's worth the effort.

YB

It used to be easyer to get there. My son Roy and I flew in to Tuweep International a few years before the pricks got together and decided to close one of the best strips in the west. We took bikes for the seven mile ride to the rim. Just too much fun.

Gate number 1 above


Great views

Tim

Hey Tim

The Terminal Building is still there. I'm parked in the zone designated for "the immediate loading and unloading of passenger only..."


The runway is looking pretty sad though and there are some white painted "X"s made out of rocks at the ends. Nothing that some ABW's couldn't handle.


YB

nmflyguy wrote:

iceman wrote:all of these are reasons I'll avoid the place when I go up to Caveman. We got enough rules and regulations in our lives... just when you have memorized all the rules and think you've complied up pops... Oh shit.. and Mr Fed wants you to submit paperwork... end of fun flight...besides I've seen the canyon and been there numerous times...no big deal...

Ice - the rules for Grand Canyon overflights aren't really all that complicated, and they're designed to make it safe to fly when there's a huge number of aircraft - both tour operators and private flights - trying to share the same airspace safely. The prohibited overflight areas in the canyon are design to keep aircraft noise out of pristine areas in which millions of annual visitors on foot, muleback, or in rafts want to experience nature and not experience the noise typical of a busy major airport.

Did I say anything about the rules being complicated or why they are what they are....My original post was"Pilots rattin out pilots and feds looking over your shoulder"...add to that too much machinery all trying to motivate in a confined space and like I said...."it's over there"....

You should fly up to Big Bear (KL35) while you are in the desert, probably a little late but the Banning pass gets a little bumpy and the best fuel prices are at Borego Springs (as well as a good Italian, but cooked by chinese) or Big Bear or Banning.

YB: is that a picture of the airstrip? i was hoping to land my trike there this fall. doesn't look landable

triker wrote:YB: is that a picture of the airstrip? i was hoping to land my trike there this fall. doesn't look landable

Yep, that was centerline of the strip looking down the runway. A friend has been back there after that visit and told me the strip had been bladed. That was over a year ago, so that information is cold AND third hand. I suspect the strip is still officially closed or we would have heard the victory celebration by now.

YB

Got a email from a "Lee Schimit lurker" About flying Grand Canyon in weight shift sail wanting information . I fly the Grand Canyon a lot --- in over 250 HP Cessna's only. It can be done in 172-or pipers under extream caution.
My advise to and others like him is stay out with there ultra light - LSA airspace lawn darts.

So, the heavier the plane the better? What about the power to weight ratio? What about climb rates double or triple a 182? What about a turn radius a fraction of a 182?

Just a knee jerk reaction from an old ultralight pilot who flew any and all mountainous areas with no problem. Not at 2 in the afternoon though. Some gen av pilots back then (early 80's) had a very dismissive attitude towards ultralights, and rightfully so in SOME cases. The biggest problem being untrained/incompetent "pilots" flying a perfectly good aircraft into the ground. In steep tight and high conditions there is nothing better then a high (relative to it's weight) powered ultralight. Granted, the higher wing loading of the 182 will make for a smoother ride in bumpy air.

courierguy wrote:So, the heavier the plane the better? What about the power to weight ratio? What about climb rates double or triple a 182? What about a turn radius a fraction of a 182?

Just a knee jerk reaction from an old ultralight pilot who flew any and all mountainous areas with no problem. Not at 2 in the afternoon though. Some gen av pilots back then (early 80's) had a very dismissive attitude towards ultralights, and rightfully so in SOME cases. The biggest problem being untrained/incompetent "pilots" flying a perfectly good aircraft into the ground. In steep tight and high conditions there is nothing better then a high (relative to it's weight) powered ultralight. Granted, the higher wing loading of the 182 will make for a smoother ride in bumpy air.

If you want I'll send you the email address and you talk to him- It's all about performance --out in the Grand Canyon Density Altitudes will go in to the teens during hot days .Violent up and down drafts will bring everything into prospective.When the tour operators( With Helicopters and twin otters)shut down because of abnormal conditions it's time to set it out. I fly into the canyon in early morning (say before 9am) and get out to calmer pastures .

We're on the same page here Bill, no question it would be treacherous to fly in an ultralight when the big boys are shutting down. Early morning, VERY early is when the little guys are at their best. He'll figure this out......hopefully not the hard way. I was instructing and selling ultralights back then, and I quickly realized that a conventional pilot presented special problems, many had to have it demonstrated to them first hand what a very light wing loaded aircraft can be like to handle in the wrong conditions, conditions that would be a minor blip in a, for instance, 182. I am still pleased and somewhat surprised how much more inclement conditions (wind, turbulence etc) my "heavy" (as compared to an ultralight) S-7S handles routinely. That increased utility is even better in a 182 I'm sure. Frankly if this person is asking around as to the how and the wherefore relative to Canyon flying, he probably shouldn't do it!