BeenThereDoneIt

If so, does your company have any particular rules or safety precautions for takeoff given the hazardous nature of that airport's runway and its surroundings?

BoilerUP

Don't think there are many fractional carriers that operate aircraft with enough performance to get in/out of there...Sovereign and maybe the XLS/CJ3?

Looking at APG data for our CJ2+, RW16 is the only runway that meets calm wind 80% factored landing distance numbers; its also the runway allowing the most weight for takeoff. Off 16, we'd only be able to go about 600nm (calm wind) with 800lb payload at 24 degrees C...and at 30C 300nm.

sweptwing

Not too bad an airport. I have been there many times. Most of the time in a KA200 and most recently in a CE550. Lots of BIG terrain east and west. Not sure if mentioned anywhere but if departing on rwy 34, there is a large rise in terrain about 500 yards from the end. KMSO only about 30-40 miles to north...much better and safer.

Mitch

Great burger joint in town.

KarlHungus

Flew a LR35 in there several months ago. Pretty routine but it helps to be light and not hot out obviously.

KarlHungus

Having adequate performance for the runway length and conditions. Of course it's a shorter runway but very doable if your numbers work out for the plane you're flying.

BeenThereDoneIt

I am a firm believer that the "numbers" aren't the only consideration that a pilot should use when flying out of a place like Hamilton. Rising terrain, sub-divisions in the flight path.....etc are also very important. The people whom I now fly Part 91 for have never questioned ANY judgement call. If I say we can't do it without a fuel stop, then the discussion is over. A previous employer of mine that uses Hamilton made up it's own "numbers" for Hamilton's airport (even though they require either A/S or A/G as well as runway length). MANY pilots have complianed that they didn't have the "numbers" for that airport, or they were uncomfortable with some aspect of the flight parameters... but they are told that perhaps they shouldn't be flying that particular plane then. How's THAT mentality for a tragedy waiting to happen. Part 91 flying is certainly the way to go.

BoilerUP

While I agree and I've never been pushed by my owner, I'd say there's FAR more part 91 operations that push "the numbers" for marginal airports than 135 or 121 operations. At the very least, "The other pilots did it" or "We did it in the old plane, why can't we do it in this one?" are fairly common.

Me? I'd rather not set a precedent...