35 Pilots Share The Worst Airports To Deal With In This Viral Thread
Most of us would happily acknowledge that being a pilot is no easy task. Besides a massive responsibility, they have to be vigilant and accurate while guiding a massive metal bird into a populated airspace. And, unfortunately, not all airports are created equal.
Someone asked, “As an airline pilot, which airport would you choose never to land at again if you could help it?” People with flying experience shared the airstrips, airports, and even cities they absolutely hated flying into. So get comfortable, if you are on a flight, look out for your destination here, upvote your favorites, and share your thoughts in the comments section below.
Aspen (ASE) airport. Everything about it is frustrating. The approach requires going out of your way, and if you miss the approach it takes a bit of time to re-position for another try. Once on the ground, dealing with parking and the ground staff is frustrating, too. But, maybe that part has changed… I haven’t been to ASE in a few years. There is no such thing as landing at an unsafe airport… unless you’re a pilot with exceedingly poor judgement. If it’s truly unsafe, then you don’t land there. However, iffy procedures and trying to cram an airplane that doesn’t fit into the airport can certainly make it dangerous.
USS Lexington – not only is it an aircraft carrier that move, pitches, rolls, heaves, has winds coming around the island causing a cross wind, and wind falling off the back end (burble) causing a suck down just before landing – it is SMALL even in aircraft carrier standards. And with hydraulic cats that kick your butt, literally.
Well, the Lake Tahoe Airport is pretty bad. I would never land there because there is a much safer Airport not far away which is called Douglas County Airport. Flying into Lake Tahoe is like flying into a toilet bowl. Flying out of Lake Tahoe it’s like flying out of a toilet bowl. However, there may be some Pilots who like the challenge of difficult airports.
I’m always alert when we operate at DCA, National Airport in Washington DC. The river visual approach isn’t particularly dangerous but any deviation gets you into restricted airspace and the consequences are embarrassing and newsworthy. I always pay a lot of attention there.
My least favorite is Narita’s New Tokyo International Airport. Not because of terrain, or runway lengths, but because of the frequent, dangerous, unstable ‘wind events.’ Winds of 50–80+ knots suddenly come out of nowhere, and they can wreak havoc with landing aircraft. Diverts to nearby airports happen often, because of dangerous wind conditions.
La Guardia. Most dangerous airport in the world. With the runway configuration and the Port Authorities’ ongoing desire to stuff 10 pounds into a 5 pound bag, it is inherently dangerous when landings are interspersed with takeoffs on the crossing runway. I had a near miss in the early 90s and it left me angry and disillusioned with the process when the tower personnel defended their mistakes.
Practically almost any airport near LAX. The problem is not landing, but leaving. John Wayne is the worst. You have to climb out steeply then pull your power back and almost level off, all the while staying in a very narrow departure corridor. Frankly, if you buy a house near an airport you should expect to hear airplanes. They didn’t doze down a bunch of homes to put the airport in. It was there first.
Juneau, Alaska is pretty scary. There’s this big honkin’ mountain at the end of the runway. You land going one way and fly out going the other.
Paro in Bhutan can accept twin engine jets, but only seven pilots in the world are certified to make the complex approach between the mountains.
Gibraltar. To stay out of Spanish airspace, you have to fly very tight around the rock. If the wind is blowing, it is incredibly turbulent… Scary.
Here’s a situation I don’t want to repeat. I was flying into Zaragoza Air Base on a military plane, a C-21. I’d been sitting in the jump seat chatting on intercom with the pilot the whole flight. He was a neighbor back at our base.
Notice there are parallel runways. We always landed on the Northern one, the military Air Base side. The Southern one was a civilian commercial airport.
We’re set up for the landing with the co-pilot doing the landing. We’re coming from screen left so we see the wrong runway first. I’m looking out the windshield and notice we’re lined up for the wrong one.
I ask, “Which runway are we landing?”
Co-pilot responds, “12”.
I ask, “12 Right or 12 Left?”
At that moment we all see a large commercial plane on take-off roll heading our way on the runway we’re set to land on.
Pilot says “My Plane”, flips some switches, Yells to the guys in the back, “Hold on back there!”, and puts the C-21 into max power / max climb. I didn’t even know that plane could climb that fast. We complete a missed approach /go around and the pilot lands us on the correct runway with a co-pilot still white as a ghost.
Needless to say, I didn’t buy a beer for that whole mission; they were all on the co-pilot’s tab.
Not a pilot, but as a passenger, Lukla in Nepal was, as my dad says in the video, “seriously interesting”. The runway has a 12% gradient (which is a lot more than it sounds!) with a sheer drop at the bottom and a rock face at the top. I was sitting next to my dad in the front row of the Twin Otter. Luckily I hadn’t researched this airport’s legendary reputation before the trip.
Have you guys ever heard of Santos Dumont Airport in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) or Congonhas Airport in São Paulo (Brazil)? Not a pilot but I HATE those places. Landings and take-offs are just terrifying. In São Paulo you can actually see people in their couches watching TV inside the apartments of tall buildings that surrounds the airport. In Rio, one mistake and your airplane will take a swim like the pic below (and you can stay at the very end of the 2 runaways while aircrafts come and go… that’s amazing)
As an old (85 now) private pilot, I found both landing and taking off at the Catalina airport on Catalina Island both challenging and fun.The runway is atop a plateau, so your approach is over the water. While you are very high over the water you are much lower relative to the airport runway. Then when you take off, the runway is humped in the middle. Sitting at the end of the runway, it looks like it ends a few hundred feet in front of you due to the bow, but as you accelerate more and more runway appears as you get neat the top of the hump. You have to trust your chart for the runway length as it’s not visible from the end of the runway.
Los Angeles International. It’s not a bad airport to land in, but you have so many restrictions and airspace overlaps that it is just stressful to land there. I’m just glad we have to be on a flight plan with instructions from ATC when we do have to land there.
THE most difficult airport to fly in and out of is the Tenzing-Hillary airport in Lukla, Nepal. On one end is a cliff; on the other is a mountain wall. On the way, you are flying between mountains, and there are often clouds.
I fly ATR 42 and 72. I have never hated any of the airports I have landed on, but some require more attention than others. Here is my personal list:
Sandane, Norway: This is a 800 meters long runway squeezed between fjords and mountains. The approach to either runway takes you very close to near vertical mountain sides, and the turbulence can be bad. I have only landed there in nice weather with a light aircraft.
Florø, Norway: Before 2001 was the runway 800 meters long and had a 5.4 degrees steep approach slope. (Today is the runway 1200 meters.) The airport has mountains in close vicinity. One of the runways do not have straight-in approach, so you have to fly a circling approach. After a landing at late night in rain and strong wind is it hard to sleep because the adrenalin is still flowing in your veins.
Caticlan/Boracay, Philippines: The runway is 900 meters long, and the apron is very small. You have to taxi in and out with just centimeters clearance to other aircraft parked on the apron. And the apron is full of passengers walking to and from the aircraft.
Catarman, Philippines: The airport splits the town in two, and people are used to cross the runway where it is most convenient. After all, there’s just a few aircraft movements a day. I have seen kids running on the runway in front of me.
Manila, Philippines: The airport has two runways, and they cross each other. Two times have I been given clearance to take-off and then been ordered to stop because of crossing traffic. The quality of the radio equipment used by ATC is questionable, and sometimes can you hardly understand what they say. And there’s too much traffic on the frequency, making it hard to send your message. At one occasion did ATC forget me after take-off, and I ended up on a collision course with a mountain. At another occasion did the use of non-standard phraseology cause conflict with other traffic.
Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport, in Dhaka, Bangladesh is far by the worst place I have ever landed on. I really do not know where to start. When you are in Dhaka, you keep your eyes and ears open. Most of the airport vehicle operators are highly incompetent. They are under trained and do long duty hours. A few months back, a flap fairing of one of our A320s was torn off by a high loader. I had a close call as well. Got almost hit by a reversing baggage loader while I was doing the walk around.
The air traffic control is also terrible. I do not know whether it is the fault of the controllers or the equipment they are using. There is usually one controller controlling the entire air space, and when it gets busy things go haywire. Particularly, the handover from Dhaka FIR to Kolkata FIR is horrible. We have to keep the Dhaka frequency on one of the radios and the other radio tuned to Kolkata frequency. It is a two pilots job. One pilot listens to Kolkata and the other listens to the Dhaka. And mind you, these are busy air spaces. There is no silence even for a minute. And the worst part is weather deviation requests. Dhaka is known for its tropical storms. You might have to ask them twice or even three times for a deviation. And the time they come on they might say ‘standby.’ They have no clue of the intensity of the situation.
Of all the major airports that have existed to date, there has to be one right answer: Kai Tak Airport, specifically Runway 13, in Hong Kong.
I have had too many pilot friends and friends and family mentioning the apparent nightmare landing in that airport used to be.
It was apparently so difficult to land in that airport that as a pilot you needed to have a special permit to authorise you to even make the journey… and accidents still kept happening.
The reason why it was so hard was basically because of the airport’s surrounding terrain. A short heads up to architects of the future – please don’t build your airport in the middle of a densely-populated city centre surrounded by mountains. It is generally not a good idea. That said, Hong Kong grew extremely quickly, so it was entirely possible that the original designers of Kai Tak Airport did not envision such rapid urban growth.
I am not a pilot but as a long standing airline employee, I cannot believe anyone has yet to mention CR7 International Airport in Funchal, (FNC) Madeira. I visited that gorgeous paradise once. Love, love the island of Madeira, but my first experience landing there happened on rainy, foggy, mid February day in 1989 when the single runway was much shorter, less wide than it currently is. On windy days (which are most days) the aircrafts ride the currents like goshawks, balancing left and right, at times barely avoiding slamming against the flank of the mountain, or on the runway if low enough. Do this on a windy, gray, foggy day, or worst still at night, and it can be a real nightmare. With little or nill visibility, if you overshoot the runway or get hit by a downward wind spiral, you are toast. The famous crosswinds of Madeira can kill an aircraft and even on a good day, FNC can get any stone assed pilot s**ting bricks on 1st landing attempt, usually aborted.
Years ago I remember a “60-Minutes” news program about the San Diego Airport. Something about a tall building in the way. I just checked, and it’s still there.
South Lake Tahoe Airport, CA. If you’re attempting to land and have to make a missed approach or taking off heading south (view is to the south) you’ll obviously have to do some serious climbing to avoid running into the nearby mountains. I was the nav on a C-141 that made a touch-and-go in just this direction, and the pilot was not anticipating the elevation increasing so rapidly, so I had to give him some very quick vectoring to make it out safely. Although not too obvious from this view, there is a sort-of valley that can be followed that makes it much easier than simply climbing right over the dead-ahead peak. We were there because we had flown a Local out of Travis AFB and had completed all the requirements for that day with flight time left over (we had to log 4.0 hrs), so the A/C said, “Let’s go to Tahoe!”.
It’s not the worst in the world by far. But Lindbergh Field, the international airport in San Diego in Southern California (designation: SAN) is one that will make sure that the pilots stay awake on final approach.
We’ve got hills 200 feet high within a mile of both ends of the one and only runway with no possibility of aligning it any differently.
Akureyri, Iceland. It’s located at sea level down in a fjord that curves, meaning in the days before GPS approaches, you had a choice of either a) flying an approach that stopped above the rim of the fjord, or b) receiving radar instructions throughout your descent to the airport.
Under actual instrument conditions, flying down through clouds trusting purely on controller guidance was always unnerving. Iceland has a sterling domestic safety record, so there never was any worry on that score. However, if you’d ever been there before in good weather and seen just how narrow portions of the approach path actually were, a few palpitations were forgivable.
Alton Bay in January/February. It’s the only FAA authorized ice-runway in the lower 48 states. You’re landing on a frozen lake and trying to steer and slow to a stop in an airplane, which is already difficult to maneuver on the ground, let alone adding in the complexities of doing it on ice.
The ones that are supposed to be the hardest are the most fun.
There’s nothing interesting about getting lined up 10 miles out on a radar vector straight-in approach to a 10,000 runway.
THE FUN ONES
Luckily I spent most of my career flying the Eastern Shuttle between Washington National (DCA) and NY La Guardia (LGA). Those two airports have probably the most interesting and challenging approaches in the country. It was a fun way to be an airline pilot—and I slept at home every night.
At National, for example, we would be in a descending turn until about 200-300 feet above the runway. We liked to point out that if we made that exact approach to any other airport, we would get reported to the FAA by the tower and our licenses would be suspended for a while.
Landing on Runway 33 at DCA—which was rare to get—was so much fun I couldn’t believe it was legal to do that in a jet with paying passengers on board. People who rode through that approach in window seats have stopped by the cockpit on the way out and—still a little breathless from thinking they were about to die—say they thought we were ditching in the Potomac River until about the last two seconds when the runway suddenly appeared below. It was so much fun.
San Diego Lindbergh (SAN) is a close third. If we flew that low over houses anywhere else in the country, we’d definitely be violated, fired, and our licenses would have been revoked rather than just suspended—but it’s the norm at SAN.
SO, WHICH WOULD I NEVER LAND AT AGAIN IF I COULD HELP IT?
Every airport with wide, parallel 10,000+ runways with long straight approaches.
It’s hard enough to stay awake while cruising at altitude on autopilot—the last thing I need is to fall asleep on a long, droning approach on autopilot.
LaGuardia aka LaGarbage. It’s awful. The nickname says it all.
Newark, also not the most pleasant airport to fly in to. I spent 4 hours taxiing there. Well, we left the gate, came back to the gate for more fuel after 90 minutes, after fuel and additional supplies, we taxied back out, only to have the airport turn around. It was miserable. The captain I was flying with said that is fairly common.
Chicago O’Hare is one of my least favorites. It’s laid out terribly.
I personally hate flying in the Aspen, Colorado. The approach is complicated, and often times you have to fly a holding pattern because traffic is one way in, one way out.
While I wasn’t flying for an airline, the Moscow, Russia airports are not fun.
Those are the only ones that stick out for me.
Hanada, Japan is a procedural headache, at least compared to Narita.
Kaului, Maui can be a pain. The runway is on the shorter side at 7000 ft and it’s not unusual for the winds to be reported something like “280 variable 030 degrees ,15 gusting 25 kts” , lots of fun.
Pendleton, Oregon has a runway with a significant dip which can play heck with a smooth landing if you land long on the upslope
Just some of the ones that come to mind.
Recently it’s Burbank because we land there at close to max landing weight sometimes and we have to go below the GS, hit the 1,000-foot mark, and lock up the brakes… It’s got mountains around it, lots of traffic, and many times they don’t clear us to land until a couple miles out, and I have to figure out what the tailwind is really quick.
Several pilots I know have told me that in the US, Yeager Airport, Charleston, West Virginia, is one of the hardest. It is a very short runway tucked away on a flattened mountain top. Having flown in as a passenger a number of times, this is the one where the pilots attempt to decelerate the fastest (faster than Midway is how it felt to me). The weather can also be a bit tricky here I would think as well.
I’m not an airline pilot but since getting my licence ( earned at a 200 x 7000 ft runway ) I’ve made an effort to expand my horizons, shorter, narrower strips, some not even paved. Been to grass, gravel, & sand.
The challenging strips are by far the most interesting. If I had to choose, I’d lose the 7000 x 200……..
I’ve done some aerobatics ( about 8 hrs so far ) – that is awesome flying ! ( more to come, for sure )
[ad_2]
Most of us would happily acknowledge that being a pilot is no easy task. Besides a massive responsibility, they have to be vigilant and accurate while guiding a massive metal bird into a populated airspace. And, unfortunately, not all airports are created equal.
Someone asked, “As an airline pilot, which airport would you choose never to land at again if you could help it?” People with flying experience shared the airstrips, airports, and even cities they absolutely hated flying into. So get comfortable, if you are on a flight, look out for your destination here, upvote your favorites, and share your thoughts in the comments section below.
Aspen (ASE) airport. Everything about it is frustrating. The approach requires going out of your way, and if you miss the approach it takes a bit of time to re-position for another try. Once on the ground, dealing with parking and the ground staff is frustrating, too. But, maybe that part has changed… I haven’t been to ASE in a few years. There is no such thing as landing at an unsafe airport… unless you’re a pilot with exceedingly poor judgement. If it’s truly unsafe, then you don’t land there. However, iffy procedures and trying to cram an airplane that doesn’t fit into the airport can certainly make it dangerous.
USS Lexington - not only is it an aircraft carrier that move, pitches, rolls, heaves, has winds coming around the island causing a cross wind, and wind falling off the back end (burble) causing a suck down just before landing - it is SMALL even in aircraft carrier standards. And with hydraulic cats that kick your butt, literally.
Well, the Lake Tahoe Airport is pretty bad. I would never land there because there is a much safer Airport not far away which is called Douglas County Airport. Flying into Lake Tahoe is like flying into a toilet bowl. Flying out of Lake Tahoe it's like flying out of a toilet bowl. However, there may be some Pilots who like the challenge of difficult airports.
I’m always alert when we operate at DCA, National Airport in Washington DC. The river visual approach isn’t particularly dangerous but any deviation gets you into restricted airspace and the consequences are embarrassing and newsworthy. I always pay a lot of attention there.
My least favorite is Narita’s New Tokyo International Airport. Not because of terrain, or runway lengths, but because of the frequent, dangerous, unstable 'wind events.' Winds of 50–80+ knots suddenly come out of nowhere, and they can wreak havoc with landing aircraft. Diverts to nearby airports happen often, because of dangerous wind conditions.
La Guardia. Most dangerous airport in the world. With the runway configuration and the Port Authorities’ ongoing desire to stuff 10 pounds into a 5 pound bag, it is inherently dangerous when landings are interspersed with takeoffs on the crossing runway. I had a near miss in the early 90s and it left me angry and disillusioned with the process when the tower personnel defended their mistakes.
Practically almost any airport near LAX. The problem is not landing, but leaving. John Wayne is the worst. You have to climb out steeply then pull your power back and almost level off, all the while staying in a very narrow departure corridor. Frankly, if you buy a house near an airport you should expect to hear airplanes. They didn't doze down a bunch of homes to put the airport in. It was there first.
Juneau, Alaska is pretty scary. There’s this big honkin’ mountain at the end of the runway. You land going one way and fly out going the other.
Paro in Bhutan can accept twin engine jets, but only seven pilots in the world are certified to make the complex approach between the mountains.
Gibraltar. To stay out of Spanish airspace, you have to fly very tight around the rock. If the wind is blowing, it is incredibly turbulent... Scary.
Here’s a situation I don’t want to repeat. I was flying into Zaragoza Air Base on a military plane, a C-21. I’d been sitting in the jump seat chatting on intercom with the pilot the whole flight. He was a neighbor back at our base.
Notice there are parallel runways. We always landed on the Northern one, the military Air Base side. The Southern one was a civilian commercial airport.
We’re set up for the landing with the co-pilot doing the landing. We’re coming from screen left so we see the wrong runway first. I’m looking out the windshield and notice we’re lined up for the wrong one.
I ask, “Which runway are we landing?”
Co-pilot responds, “12”.
I ask, “12 Right or 12 Left?”
At that moment we all see a large commercial plane on take-off roll heading our way on the runway we’re set to land on.
Pilot says “My Plane”, flips some switches, Yells to the guys in the back, “Hold on back there!”, and puts the C-21 into max power / max climb. I didn’t even know that plane could climb that fast. We complete a missed approach /go around and the pilot lands us on the correct runway with a co-pilot still white as a ghost.
Needless to say, I didn’t buy a beer for that whole mission; they were all on the co-pilot’s tab.
Not a pilot, but as a passenger, Lukla in Nepal was, as my dad says in the video, “seriously interesting”. The runway has a 12% gradient (which is a lot more than it sounds!) with a sheer drop at the bottom and a rock face at the top. I was sitting next to my dad in the front row of the Twin Otter. Luckily I hadn’t researched this airport’s legendary reputation before the trip.
Have you guys ever heard of Santos Dumont Airport in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) or Congonhas Airport in São Paulo (Brazil)? Not a pilot but I HATE those places. Landings and take-offs are just terrifying. In São Paulo you can actually see people in their couches watching TV inside the apartments of tall buildings that surrounds the airport. In Rio, one mistake and your airplane will take a swim like the pic below (and you can stay at the very end of the 2 runaways while aircrafts come and go… that’s amazing)
As an old (85 now) private pilot, I found both landing and taking off at the Catalina airport on Catalina Island both challenging and fun.The runway is atop a plateau, so your approach is over the water. While you are very high over the water you are much lower relative to the airport runway. Then when you take off, the runway is humped in the middle. Sitting at the end of the runway, it looks like it ends a few hundred feet in front of you due to the bow, but as you accelerate more and more runway appears as you get neat the top of the hump. You have to trust your chart for the runway length as it’s not visible from the end of the runway.
Los Angeles International. It’s not a bad airport to land in, but you have so many restrictions and airspace overlaps that it is just stressful to land there. I’m just glad we have to be on a flight plan with instructions from ATC when we do have to land there.
THE most difficult airport to fly in and out of is the Tenzing-Hillary airport in Lukla, Nepal. On one end is a cliff; on the other is a mountain wall. On the way, you are flying between mountains, and there are often clouds.
I fly ATR 42 and 72. I have never hated any of the airports I have landed on, but some require more attention than others. Here is my personal list:
Sandane, Norway: This is a 800 meters long runway squeezed between fjords and mountains. The approach to either runway takes you very close to near vertical mountain sides, and the turbulence can be bad. I have only landed there in nice weather with a light aircraft.
Florø, Norway: Before 2001 was the runway 800 meters long and had a 5.4 degrees steep approach slope. (Today is the runway 1200 meters.) The airport has mountains in close vicinity. One of the runways do not have straight-in approach, so you have to fly a circling approach. After a landing at late night in rain and strong wind is it hard to sleep because the adrenalin is still flowing in your veins.
Caticlan/Boracay, Philippines: The runway is 900 meters long, and the apron is very small. You have to taxi in and out with just centimeters clearance to other aircraft parked on the apron. And the apron is full of passengers walking to and from the aircraft.
Catarman, Philippines: The airport splits the town in two, and people are used to cross the runway where it is most convenient. After all, there’s just a few aircraft movements a day. I have seen kids running on the runway in front of me.
Manila, Philippines: The airport has two runways, and they cross each other. Two times have I been given clearance to take-off and then been ordered to stop because of crossing traffic. The quality of the radio equipment used by ATC is questionable, and sometimes can you hardly understand what they say. And there’s too much traffic on the frequency, making it hard to send your message. At one occasion did ATC forget me after take-off, and I ended up on a collision course with a mountain. At another occasion did the use of non-standard phraseology cause conflict with other traffic.
Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport, in Dhaka, Bangladesh is far by the worst place I have ever landed on. I really do not know where to start. When you are in Dhaka, you keep your eyes and ears open. Most of the airport vehicle operators are highly incompetent. They are under trained and do long duty hours. A few months back, a flap fairing of one of our A320s was torn off by a high loader. I had a close call as well. Got almost hit by a reversing baggage loader while I was doing the walk around.
The air traffic control is also terrible. I do not know whether it is the fault of the controllers or the equipment they are using. There is usually one controller controlling the entire air space, and when it gets busy things go haywire. Particularly, the handover from Dhaka FIR to Kolkata FIR is horrible. We have to keep the Dhaka frequency on one of the radios and the other radio tuned to Kolkata frequency. It is a two pilots job. One pilot listens to Kolkata and the other listens to the Dhaka. And mind you, these are busy air spaces. There is no silence even for a minute. And the worst part is weather deviation requests. Dhaka is known for its tropical storms. You might have to ask them twice or even three times for a deviation. And the time they come on they might say ‘standby.’ They have no clue of the intensity of the situation.
Of all the major airports that have existed to date, there has to be one right answer: Kai Tak Airport, specifically Runway 13, in Hong Kong.
I have had too many pilot friends and friends and family mentioning the apparent nightmare landing in that airport used to be.
It was apparently so difficult to land in that airport that as a pilot you needed to have a special permit to authorise you to even make the journey... and accidents still kept happening.
The reason why it was so hard was basically because of the airport's surrounding terrain. A short heads up to architects of the future - please don't build your airport in the middle of a densely-populated city centre surrounded by mountains. It is generally not a good idea. That said, Hong Kong grew extremely quickly, so it was entirely possible that the original designers of Kai Tak Airport did not envision such rapid urban growth.
I am not a pilot but as a long standing airline employee, I cannot believe anyone has yet to mention CR7 International Airport in Funchal, (FNC) Madeira. I visited that gorgeous paradise once. Love, love the island of Madeira, but my first experience landing there happened on rainy, foggy, mid February day in 1989 when the single runway was much shorter, less wide than it currently is. On windy days (which are most days) the aircrafts ride the currents like goshawks, balancing left and right, at times barely avoiding slamming against the flank of the mountain, or on the runway if low enough. Do this on a windy, gray, foggy day, or worst still at night, and it can be a real nightmare. With little or nill visibility, if you overshoot the runway or get hit by a downward wind spiral, you are toast. The famous crosswinds of Madeira can kill an aircraft and even on a good day, FNC can get any stone assed pilot s**ting bricks on 1st landing attempt, usually aborted.
Years ago I remember a “60-Minutes” news program about the San Diego Airport. Something about a tall building in the way. I just checked, and it’s still there.
South Lake Tahoe Airport, CA. If you’re attempting to land and have to make a missed approach or taking off heading south (view is to the south) you’ll obviously have to do some serious climbing to avoid running into the nearby mountains. I was the nav on a C-141 that made a touch-and-go in just this direction, and the pilot was not anticipating the elevation increasing so rapidly, so I had to give him some very quick vectoring to make it out safely. Although not too obvious from this view, there is a sort-of valley that can be followed that makes it much easier than simply climbing right over the dead-ahead peak. We were there because we had flown a Local out of Travis AFB and had completed all the requirements for that day with flight time left over (we had to log 4.0 hrs), so the A/C said, “Let’s go to Tahoe!”.
It’s not the worst in the world by far. But Lindbergh Field, the international airport in San Diego in Southern California (designation: SAN) is one that will make sure that the pilots stay awake on final approach.
We’ve got hills 200 feet high within a mile of both ends of the one and only runway with no possibility of aligning it any differently.
Akureyri, Iceland. It’s located at sea level down in a fjord that curves, meaning in the days before GPS approaches, you had a choice of either a) flying an approach that stopped above the rim of the fjord, or b) receiving radar instructions throughout your descent to the airport.
Under actual instrument conditions, flying down through clouds trusting purely on controller guidance was always unnerving. Iceland has a sterling domestic safety record, so there never was any worry on that score. However, if you’d ever been there before in good weather and seen just how narrow portions of the approach path actually were, a few palpitations were forgivable.
Alton Bay in January/February. It’s the only FAA authorized ice-runway in the lower 48 states. You’re landing on a frozen lake and trying to steer and slow to a stop in an airplane, which is already difficult to maneuver on the ground, let alone adding in the complexities of doing it on ice.
The ones that are supposed to be the hardest are the most fun.
There’s nothing interesting about getting lined up 10 miles out on a radar vector straight-in approach to a 10,000 runway.
THE FUN ONES
Luckily I spent most of my career flying the Eastern Shuttle between Washington National (DCA) and NY La Guardia (LGA). Those two airports have probably the most interesting and challenging approaches in the country. It was a fun way to be an airline pilot—and I slept at home every night.
At National, for example, we would be in a descending turn until about 200-300 feet above the runway. We liked to point out that if we made that exact approach to any other airport, we would get reported to the FAA by the tower and our licenses would be suspended for a while.
Landing on Runway 33 at DCA—which was rare to get—was so much fun I couldn’t believe it was legal to do that in a jet with paying passengers on board. People who rode through that approach in window seats have stopped by the cockpit on the way out and—still a little breathless from thinking they were about to die—say they thought we were ditching in the Potomac River until about the last two seconds when the runway suddenly appeared below. It was so much fun.
San Diego Lindbergh (SAN) is a close third. If we flew that low over houses anywhere else in the country, we’d definitely be violated, fired, and our licenses would have been revoked rather than just suspended—but it’s the norm at SAN.
SO, WHICH WOULD I NEVER LAND AT AGAIN IF I COULD HELP IT?
Every airport with wide, parallel 10,000+ runways with long straight approaches.
It’s hard enough to stay awake while cruising at altitude on autopilot—the last thing I need is to fall asleep on a long, droning approach on autopilot.
LaGuardia aka LaGarbage. It’s awful. The nickname says it all.
Newark, also not the most pleasant airport to fly in to. I spent 4 hours taxiing there. Well, we left the gate, came back to the gate for more fuel after 90 minutes, after fuel and additional supplies, we taxied back out, only to have the airport turn around. It was miserable. The captain I was flying with said that is fairly common.
Chicago O’Hare is one of my least favorites. It’s laid out terribly.
I personally hate flying in the Aspen, Colorado. The approach is complicated, and often times you have to fly a holding pattern because traffic is one way in, one way out.
While I wasn’t flying for an airline, the Moscow, Russia airports are not fun.
Those are the only ones that stick out for me.
Hanada, Japan is a procedural headache, at least compared to Narita.
Kaului, Maui can be a pain. The runway is on the shorter side at 7000 ft and it's not unusual for the winds to be reported something like “280 variable 030 degrees ,15 gusting 25 kts” , lots of fun.
Pendleton, Oregon has a runway with a significant dip which can play heck with a smooth landing if you land long on the upslope
Just some of the ones that come to mind.
Recently it’s Burbank because we land there at close to max landing weight sometimes and we have to go below the GS, hit the 1,000-foot mark, and lock up the brakes... It’s got mountains around it, lots of traffic, and many times they don’t clear us to land until a couple miles out, and I have to figure out what the tailwind is really quick.
Several pilots I know have told me that in the US, Yeager Airport, Charleston, West Virginia, is one of the hardest. It is a very short runway tucked away on a flattened mountain top. Having flown in as a passenger a number of times, this is the one where the pilots attempt to decelerate the fastest (faster than Midway is how it felt to me). The weather can also be a bit tricky here I would think as well.
I’m not an airline pilot but since getting my licence ( earned at a 200 x 7000 ft runway ) I’ve made an effort to expand my horizons, shorter, narrower strips, some not even paved. Been to grass, gravel, & sand.
The challenging strips are by far the most interesting. If I had to choose, I’d lose the 7000 x 200……..
I’ve done some aerobatics ( about 8 hrs so far ) - that is awesome flying ! ( more to come, for sure )
Read original article here
Denial of responsibility! Techno Blender is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – [email protected]. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.