Operation: Fly, Go Fly America is LIVE

Just found out about Operation: Fly/Go Fly America is back up and running. And Alaska is included this time! I get home next week and I'll starting knocking some airports out! Wish I'd found out sooner, I flew up to Coldfoot a week ago. Fun to see my original write-ups and photos are on the new site too.

Looking forward to getting home!

Karl
 
thumperak said:
Just found out about Operation: Fly/Go Fly America is back up and running. And Alaska is included this time! I get home next week and I'll starting knocking some airports out! Wish I'd found out sooner, I flew up to Coldfoot a week ago. Fun to see my original write-ups and photos are on the new site too.

Looking forward to getting home!

Karl
Click to expand...

Yeehaw! Can't wait to see 'em.
 
Flew out to nab KLBF from the Nebraska slackers today. ;) ha ha.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N1279M

aefdb655-7bff-66aa.jpg


Gotta upload it later after dinner. ;)
 
Snagged KFLY (amazed no one had that one), A50, and 5V4 in 79M today.

A50 was dead... the little narrow asphalt strip is good "keep it on the centerline" practice.

5V4 is a "working" airport... bunch of heavy machinery stored at the north end. Interesting thing was (and this is in the AF/D also... never saw it before)... 1500' of the gravel runway is covered in AstroTurf!

Never landed or took off on that before. That was interesting! (Bet that's god-awful slippery when it's wet!) Bone dry, I landed to the north on the gravel and rolled up onto the astroturf at the end, then parked in the gravel to go get a photo. Then took off south and was off the ground before the end of the AstroTurf. Winds were light and variable. Was kinda neat.
 
Pictures of the AstroTurf or it didn't happen.
 
Ahhh damn it. I'll have to go back out there. I wasn't thinking...

It's BEHIND me in this shot...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/den_pilot/6086788321/in/set-72157627533378502

Most of the runway looks like that "taxiway" there, gravel with weeds growing through the gravel.

An aerial shot should be easy to go get sometime.

Actually that brings up a question -- most of the time to get a "qualifying" shot of the airport one goes and finds a big dumb sign of some sort and puts the piece of paper on it... like so...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/den_pilot/6086787691/in/set-72157627533378502

But it doesn't really give much of a "feel" of the airport itself. Even though it'd eat drive space, should there be a way to upload more than one photo? (Not trying to sign you up for new coding, Nick... just something I thought about while I was shooting this shot at Springs East...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/den_pilot/6087333036/in/set-72157627533378502

A building and a back-hoe aren't very exciting. :)
 
denverpilot said:
Ahhh damn it. I'll have to go back out there. I wasn't thinking...

It's BEHIND me in this shot...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/den_pilot/6086788321/in/set-72157627533378502

Most of the runway looks like that "taxiway" there, gravel with weeds growing through the gravel.

An aerial shot should be easy to go get sometime.

Actually that brings up a question -- most of the time to get a "qualifying" shot of the airport one goes and finds a big dumb sign of some sort and puts the piece of paper on it... like so...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/den_pilot/6086787691/in/set-72157627533378502

But it doesn't really give much of a "feel" of the airport itself. Even though it'd eat drive space, should there be a way to upload more than one photo? (Not trying to sign you up for new coding, Nick... just something I thought about while I was shooting this shot at Springs East...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/den_pilot/6087333036/in/set-72157627533378502

A building and a back-hoe aren't very exciting. :)
Click to expand...

You could always do something like this:
1068.jpg

Claim by C. Edward Irvin, L06, Furnace Creek
 
Both were claimed a loooooooooooooooooong time ago.

You could log them as a visit though.
 
EdFred said:
Both were claimed a loooooooooooooooooong time ago.

You could log them as a visit though.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought, and that's why I didn't get out and make a little Go Fly America sign.

Not sure if I can log them as a visit without a little hand held sign. Darn.
 
EdFred said:
Both were claimed a loooooooooooooooooong time ago.

You could log them as a visit though.


Does a visit show up as another claim?

Where do the visits show up at on the website?
Click to expand...
 
If you search an airport it should show claims and visits.
 
EdFred said:
If you search an airport it should show claims and visits.
Click to expand...

Yep.

I've gotten a lot of questions about the difference lately, so I might need to make them a little more distinct then they are at the moment...

Lemme chew on that for a bit.
 
I finally got to claim one. KPUW. Actually remembered to take a picture with the sign for the claim. Now, you have to recognize the view in the picture (Judypilot could confirm, she's based there). It's looking down to the approach end of rwy 5 (great view of the WSU campus as you come in, I'd take pictures but I'm usually busy with that PIC stuff :D ).
 
I was looking at Hawaii. Haven't flown there since 2007, but if this had been going then and I could count airports where I've landed or shot T&Gs I've got 7 of the 14 airports listed, including HNL. Oh well...
 
Just curious:

"The flight must be conducted under part 91, part 103 or part 135 rules."

Why is part 135 allowed and Part 121 not?
 
BellyUpFish said:
Just curious:

"The flight must be conducted under part 91, part 103 or part 135 rules."

Why is part 135 allowed and Part 121 not?
Click to expand...

The main reason is that this is intended to be a GA challenge. We opened it up to Part 135 operations because most Part 135 ops are flown in General Aviation airplanes with General Aviation pilots. Most Part 121 operations are flown by airliners.

In other words - part 91 covers mostly GA flights. Part 103 covers the most fun of GA flights (I kid, of course). Part 135 covers the GA flights where the pilot happens to be getting compensated. Part 121 covers airlines.
 
Any chance of getting 121 included?
 
BellyUpFish said:
Any chance of getting 121 included?
Click to expand...

I'd propose allowing 121 postings, but not have them serve as "claims" on airports.

Sort of a cake and eat it thing.
 
BellyUpFish said:
Any chance of getting 121 included?
Click to expand...

The problem, I think, is that whatever you find when flying a 121 operation into a particular airport is going to be completely irrelevant for the rest of us.

I do think there's a site where airline pilots share that sort of stuff, though... But not being an airline pilot, I can't remember where it is.
 
No worries.

On a side note, I've never gotten the cake and eat it thing.. I need to google maybe. I always thought the point of having a cake was to eat it. ;)
 
BellyUpFish said:
No worries.

On a side note, I've never gotten the cake and eat it thing.. I need to google maybe. I always thought the point of having a cake was to eat it. ;)
Click to expand...

If you eat your cake, you no longer have it. Thus you can't have your cake and eat it too. The phrase is generally meant to mean that in a zero-sum system you can't gain something without a tradeoff being made.

I think Spike's comment was to mean that you *can* have your cake and eat it in this context because you can make everyone happy with no (okay, little) trade-off. You get to submit a visit, but the airport is still open to be claimed by a 91, 103, or 135 pilot.
 
bluesky74656 said:
If you eat your cake, you no longer have it. Thus you can't have your cake and eat it too. The phrase is generally meant to mean that in a zero-sum system you can't gain something without a tradeoff being made.
Click to expand...

Ahh.. Well that makes total sense. ;) I totally forgot to Google that last night.. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top