Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2  
User currently offlinemoderators From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 513 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 26069 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Due to length, here is part two. Please stay on topic and follow forum rules as the last thread got way off topic.

Previous thread: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA (by pit Jul 22 2013 in Civil Aviation)

[Edited 2013-07-25 17:45:55]


Please use moderators@airliners.net to contact us.
133 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13138 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 26134 times:

So, we have some preliminary disclosures of a 'nose first' landing. This leads to several questions: was there a problem with the systems they use during landing, were winds or traffic factors on the approach or was there just a misjudgment by the pilots ? I guess that will be only found in the final report.

User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8181 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 25861 times:

From what's known at this point, there are signs of an unstabilized approach. Therein the question is what environmental factors may have influenced that, in terms of weather, crew, ATC - they have to look at the whole picture. The responsibility to continue or go-around lies with the crew though, and if other pilots who witnessed the event are saying it was a three-point landing with no flare, that's a pretty big issue.

I wonder if this will quiet the peanut gallery on other boards who were waving red-white-and-blue flags claiming Koreans lack airmanship. This stuff can happen to anyone - and any pilot needs to be vigilant. That's kinda the point of epaulets and such, no?



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinejayspilot From United States of America, joined May 2001, 298 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 25674 times:

60 seconds out to go to flaps 40 still prob had them configured and stable by the min altitiude in their ops specs to be stable by...

Does anyone know what the last 2 departures off the intersecting runway were before their arrival? if one was a 757 we could be looking at an example of wake turbulence causing the rapid pitch change and nose first landing...


User currently onlinemoose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2345 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 25583 times:

Quoting jayspilot (Reply 3):
Does anyone know what the last 2 departures off the intersecting runway were before their arrival? if one was a 757 we could be looking at an example of wake turbulence causing the rapid pitch change and nose first landing...

The intersection is at the other end of Rwy 4. This is what a proper Rwy 4 landing looks like. Rwy 13/31 is closer to the departure end of Rwy 4. It's a good 4,000 feet from that touchdown zone to the intersection.

http://www.moose135photography.com/Airplanes/Airliners-and-Airport-Spotting/LaGuardia-Airport/i-dkPbRW7/0/XL/JM_2009_06_27_N939WN_LGA_004-XL.jpg

[Edited 2013-07-25 19:27:41]


KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
User currently offlineseven3seven From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 318 posts, RR: 23
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 25204 times:

Quoting MCDU:

"Flaps in transit from 30 to 40 less 56 seconds before landing. Add to the pitch change it looks like the FDR backs up an unstabalized approach. This should have been a go around but instead they tried to force it onto the runway with what was fortunately a non-fatal accident. They were lucky the nose gear collapsed, if it had held they could have ballooned like the FedEx MD11 at NRT."

You're a professional pilot, supposedly for United Airlines, and yet you are so biased towards Southwest you would make this offensive comment condemning the flight crew before the facts are even out. Something beyond their control could have happened.

The 737 can automatically move the flaps from 40 to 30 due to an overspeed. Could have been a wind gust that finally lessened, returning the flaps to 40. That could explain the flaps returning to 40 later on. There also could have been a windgust in the flare.

Regardless of what happened, your biased speculation on a public forum is offensive and repugnant.

[Edited 2013-07-25 21:19:50]


My views are mine alone and are not that of any of my fellow employees, officers, or directors at my company
User currently offlineT prop From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 1029 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 24768 times:

What happens if the pilots seat slides forward just as he/she is about to flare? I've been on the jump seat when the Captains seat slid all the way aft on a take off roll. The captain, who was pilot flying, lost control of the airplane and instantly said "your airplane" to the F/O who took over and aborted the take off. Good thing it didn't happen on rotation, that would have been interesting.

Not saying something like this is the cause, but before we blame the crew, as quite a few of our resident A net 'experts' seem to be doing, maybe we should wait for all the facts?


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8181 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 24377 times:

Quoting T prop (Reply 6):
Not saying something like this is the cause, but before we blame the crew, as quite a few of our resident A net 'experts' seem to be doing, maybe we should wait for all the facts?

What kind of pie-in-the-sky world are you living in? This is a.net  



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1473 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 23998 times:

Quoting T prop (Reply 6):
Not saying something like this is the cause, but before we blame the crew, as quite a few of our resident A net 'experts' seem to be doing, maybe we should wait for all the facts?

Hardly plausible. The crew was unstable inside 1,000 feet (flaps 30-40) 56 seconds before impact. That's not a seat. I would bet it turns out the crew got behind the airplane and realized it was a short runway and tried to force the airplane on.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11414 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 23358 times:

Quoting seven3seven (Reply 5):
You're a professional pilot, supposedly for United Airlines, and yet you are so biased towards Southwest

For what it's worth, over the years I have heard many pilots of other airlines being critical of the piloting at Southwest, some even going as far as saying they would be uneasy in their jumpseats.
Is that repugnant and offensive to note? I've stayed out of this conversation this far, but I have to admit that what happened on that flight seems to align with the criticisms I have heard, as well as my own observations of WN pilots coming in noticeably hotter than other airlines' pilots do.

Of course, there are many variables, and applying various hypotheses to the variables will often appear to show many of the hypotheses fitting the variables -- until enough data points are added that disqualify some of the hypotheses. That's why it's not okay to jump to the conclusions at this point. But it is almost worst to immediately rule out hypotheses that do fit the known variables just because they are offensive.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinejayspilot From United States of America, joined May 2001, 298 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22650 times:

thanks for the configuration clarification Moose. I haven't flown into LGA in 10+ yrs and had the intersection location backwards in my head thinking this happened near the 13/22 intersection. To exhaust the wake turbulence angle did anything large land before them? I thought I saw the last landing being a 737-800 from AA but I didn't print or save the flight aware log.

I fly the 75/767 and when we come in light or tight behind someone we can get rocked by a wake from almost anything 737/A320 and up if the winds and conditions are right to make the wake settle into our path.

I'm asking these questions b/c the easy answer these days seems to be to blame the crew but that rate of pitch change on such short final from the data shared by the NTSB makes me think this was more then a pilot induced pitch change error. I hope its not the case that they were just a little long in the flare and wanted to make sure to stop before the intersection of the runway to avoid a longer taxi, hold and the forced it on with very negative results.


User currently offlinealberchico From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2923 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 22222 times:

So of it turns out that this was a simple case of pilot error what would happen to the pilot ? Would the airline discipline him in any way ?


short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
User currently offlinebrucek From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 22096 times:

Quoting jayspilot (Reply 10):
I'm asking these questions b/c the easy answer these days seems to be to blame the crew but that rate of pitch change on such short final from the data shared by the NTSB makes me think this was more then a pilot induced pitch change error. I hope its not the case that they were just a little long in the flare and wanted to make sure to stop before the intersection of the runway to avoid a longer taxi, hold and the forced it on with very negative results



Were there LAHSO ops in use that day, that could have induced the pilots to "put her down" more aggressively than usual- maybe in a situation of excessive landing speed?


User currently offlinehivue From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 1096 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 22084 times:

Can 2 deg nose up at 32 ft AGL to 3 deg nose down at 0 ft AGL be explained by any weather or wake turbulence phenomena? How many deg/sec pitch down is that?

User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 21647 times:

I know weather conditions had created the backlog at LGA that day.

I haven't seen a METAR for the time of the accident. Anyone?


User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3100 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 21480 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 14):
I know weather conditions had created the backlog at LGA that day

The videos released had small puddles present in drainage areas on the taxiway but the runway and taxiways appeared dry.
I am suspecting that the storm had moved off the property at least 20-30 minutes earlier if not longer.
My first thought was of a micro-burst or something along that line. Wake turbulence could come into play. Of course none of that is visible but would be recorded on the FDR with quick airspeed changes.

My only thought is if those quick airspeed changes were recorded that the NTSB would have mentioned that in there press release.

Okie


User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1473 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 21440 times:

Quoting seven3seven (Reply 5):
The 737 can automatically move the flaps from 40 to 30 due to an overspeed.

The way I read the report the flaps were selected from 30 to 40 versus flap load relief activation. There is a difference and if you find yourself on a short runway with load relief operating due to the conditions it is probably a good idea to go-around.

I am not picking on WN. I have strong opinions on the lack of flying skills exhibited by the Asiana crew too. This WN approach most likely went bad well before the nose gear hit first. Congested airspace, enroute holding, schedule etc will probably all a role in the decision to continue the approach.

If these same type of incidents didn't occurr at WN it would not get the attention it seems to create. It is a self fulfilling prophecy when the same phase of flight

Quoting brucek (Reply 12):
Were there LAHSO ops in use that day, that could have induced the pilots to "put her down" more aggressively than usual- maybe in a situation of excessive landing speed?

No LAHSO


Quoting hivue (Reply 13):

Can 2 deg nose up at 32 ft AGL to 3 deg nose down at 0 ft AGL be explained by any weather or wake turbulence phenomena? How many deg/sec pitch down is that?


Wake turbulence induces roll oscillations. Generaly not pitch changes. In he video there is no eveidence of a wake encounter.


User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4643 posts, RR: 19
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 19946 times:

This is not good.


Southwest has a long history of trying to 'make a landing work' where they should have thrown it away and gone
missed approach with several accidents over the years sharing this common theme.


They are fortunate to have 'only' had one fatality.


There seems to be a real cultural problem with their operation that needs to be fixed quickly.


They were lucky this time.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3100 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 19685 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 17):
Southwest has a long history of trying to 'make a landing work' where they should have thrown it away and gone
missed approach with several accidents over the years sharing this common theme
WN is operating 4,000 flights per day roughly. 1.46M landings per year.
I would guess if you put a pencil to it you find WN on the low end of the scale on accident rates from botched approaches.

Okie

Edit Had to get my eraser out and move my decimal point  Wow!

[Edited 2013-07-26 13:15:11]

User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2122 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 19295 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 18):
I would guess if you put a pencil to it you find WN on the low end of the scale on accident rates from botched approaches.

Simply because they pull it off, does not mean that it was safe. I'm not picking on WN here, simply the concept that no accident = safe.


User currently offlinen92r03 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 19249 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 17):
Southwest has a long history of trying to 'make a landing work'

Got any factual data on that one?


User currently offlineusxguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 19164 times:

what kind of facts do you want? He's pointing out that you don't see United, American, Delta, USAirways, Frontier, JetBlue, America West, Continental, Northwest, Western Pacific, Allegiant, Southeast, Piedmont, Republic, North-Central, Air Florida, Allegheny, Midwest, TWA, Ozark, Britt, People Express... etc blow through runways like we have seen Southwest. It would be a challenge to state that Max Q & others are WRONG if we had all those other airlines doing this more often.

There is a common denominator at Southwest that has resulted in botched landings that is not present at other airlines.



xx
User currently offlineNBGSkyGod From United States of America, joined May 2004, 826 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 19040 times:

Quoting usxguy (Reply 21):
what kind of facts do you want? He's pointing out that you don't see United, American, Delta, USAirways, Frontier, JetBlue, America West, Continental, Northwest, Western Pacific, Allegiant, Southeast, Piedmont, Republic, North-Central, Air Florida, Allegheny, Midwest, TWA, Ozark, Britt, People Express... etc blow through runways like we have seen Southwest. It would be a challenge to state that Max Q & others are WRONG if we had all those other airlines doing this more often.

There is a common denominator at Southwest that has resulted in botched landings that is not present at other airlines.

You want facts...look at USAir in the late '80s and '90s, they put 2 off the runways at LGA. DAL ran one off the runway at NAS Jacksonville last week. In WN's history there have been 3 high profile runway accidents. But to say that it is systemic within WN is plain wrong. Are there safety issues at WN sure, but this is not the accidents that highlight them. Every carrier has had incidents around the runways, hell United had a jet run out of fuel in the '70s near PDX.

While there appears to evidence that the pilots screwed up in this case, all the facts are not in yet, and this certainly is not evidence of a systemic problem with the highly professional and well trained pilots of WN and the rest of the airline pilot corps of the US.



"I use multi-billion dollar military satellite systems to find tupperware in the woods."
User currently offlineusxguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 18932 times:

NBG - and those takeoffs at LGA - 1 was a drunk pilot (I think, the 737-400) and the other was a Fokker 28 with ice on the wings. The NTSB did realize the Fokker 28 incident had a common demoninator: the thing doesn't deice well. The common denominator was never pointed at USAirways flight ops, crew training, etc.

So dig up more facts please and show where there has been a consistent COMMON item at an airline. You won't find it.

Southwest is great in that they have never killed anyone (well, on their airplanes) and have never had a hull loss. For that you are correct. But there is something different in how Southwest operates compared to other airlines that very well COULD be that common denominator....



xx
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3100 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 18888 times:

Quoting usxguy (Reply 21):
Allegheny,

Try Flights 736 and 737 at Erie, Pa within two weeks of each other.

Quoting usxguy (Reply 21):
Air Florida

Landing on a bridge, well you get the point.

It would be pretty easy to blow holes through that post.

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 22):
While there appears to evidence that the pilots screwed up in this case, all the facts are not in yet, and this certainly is not evidence of a systemic problem with the highly professional and well trained pilots of WN and the rest of the airline pilot corps of the US.

I will stick with that NBG.

I suspect that the Captain and FO had a pretty good idea what happened when the soles of their shoes started smoldering from the heat generated by the nose of the aircraft being ground off by the runway. Okay a little dramatic license.

Okie


25 SSTeve : Don't forget American off the end of the runway in Jamaica.
26 usflyguy : In the last week, UA23 had a cabin decompression and UA 58 (IAH-AMS) had an engine shutdown immediately after takeoff. Must be because of UA's sub-par
27 infiniti329 : Dont forget the Caribbean Airlines 738 off the runway at GEO
28 Post contains links NBGSkyGod : AAL1420 - pilot landed in winds that exceeded the maximum crosswind component for the MD-80 http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...euznuqsert1fl1/U07
29 usxguy : And again, lets go to basic english. com·mon de·nom·i·na·tor Noun A shared multiple of the denominators of several fractions. A feature shared b
30 okie : Sorry a 133kts at LGA in this incident seems to be right on the money. Okie
31 NBGSkyGod : Alright USX...lets play a game...I showed you mine, now show me yours. Show me your evidence of a COMMON DENOMINATOR at WN. Where all of their inciden
32 usxguy : but MDW and BUR have a common denominator: 737, southwest airlines, too fast, didn't stop in time. And we'll probably hear from NTSB if this guy was c
33 NBGSkyGod : The problem with your argument is that because of 3 incidents, decades apart, there is a systemic issue at Southwest, and only Southwest. I am trying
34 XT6Wagon : No no, you see since it all happened at one airline, with one plane type, the 737 AND southwest are huge safety risks needing to be grounded FOREVER t
35 usxguy : but see, that's where you aren't seeing my point. I'm in no way advocating for changes at Southwest or saying there is an inherent safety culture prob
36 mcdu : Approach speed is based on weight not runway length/location. Do you know what the weight and ref speed were for a 40 flaps approach for this particu
37 okie : Correcto, unfortunately you forgot to read the post that referenced BUR/LGA and the LGA reference was to separate the two. Yes, we do not know the ex
38 SSTeve : Here's some more English for you, bucko: You always get rude and pedantic when you are very specifically too far out on a limb? You could be right th
39 Max Q : Problem is, their reputation of always pushing the limit, taxiing too fast, making the landing 'work' no matter what is well deserved and accurate. I
40 Aaron747 : Could very well be true, but even if so, the FAA won't do anything about it. In any case, if that is all true, WN drivers deserve a good hard pat on
41 roseflyer : May I also remind you that southwest pilots perform more landings each day than any other airline in the world? They have an almost impeccable safety
42 Barney Captain : Interesting you choose Pan Am 759 at MSY in your example. Are you aware that a WN flight was cleared for takeoff just prior to that crash? The WN cre
43 Post contains links christopherwoo : Apologies if it has already been posted (Couldn't see it) but here's a video a passenger took of the crash http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=14e_13748918
44 mcdu : That video confirms idle thrust way early in the approach.
45 Barney Captain : It does? I hear a reduction in thrust as they cross the fence - which can be completely normal.
46 Maverick623 : Wow. People choking on smoke in the cabin, and they still refuse to evacuate? Guess we haven't learned a damn thing from KT 28M.
47 Post contains images usflyguy : Or maybe something was learned from the Asian crash 3 weeks ago where a young lady was run over by a firetruck. I'm sure her family and herself would
48 mcdu : You don't go idle at that height unless you are too high or too fast. I believe it will be revealed that both of these were present. If this turns ou
49 EASTERN747 : The scary part was the F/A on the intercom saying "Please keep your seats, we are not at the gate yet" WTF????? I have to ask....where was he front cr
50 AirlineCritic : What is it with a.net that whenever we have an accident we make the most generalised conclusion? An Asian airline crashes in SFO => all Asian pilot
51 Viscount724 : Not quite that long. WN's first flight was June 18, 1971, a little over 42 years.
52 nutsaboutplanes : That video is amazing, hadn't seen that one yet. I have only seen the airport video showing the aircraft skidding with the NLG already collapsed and n
53 AirlineCritic : Wow. That was one hard impact. IANAP, but speed before landing seemed on the high side.
54 nm2582 : I also hear the power reduction starting at 0:03 in the video and ending at 0:05. It's impossible to be sure (due to the instability of a hand held ca
55 nm2582 : I haven't seen if this information has been released or not, but between this video (what is seen outside the window) and google maps, you can estimat
56 dashman : I dont see anything way out of the ordinary in the video. I have ridden way too much in back of a 737's and a number of the times in the JS of WN 737.
57 Maverick623 : From the first video (which unfortunately is a video of a video...), it looked like they hit ~150 feet from the 1000' markers. Let's see; stay on an
58 rfields5421 : The news media reported and Live ATC tapes verified that tower told the pilots to delay the evacuation until the fire crew could extinguish the flame
59 Post contains images airtechy : Looking at the destruction of the electronics bay by the nose wheel gear, I'm surprised that the pilots were able to still talk to the tower. The comm
60 hivue : As was pointed out in the first part of this thread, there is another PA shortly after telling everyone to remain seated. It sounds like it could hav
61 nm2582 : In the first video, the solid white of the 1000ft markers seems to disappear under the #2 engine about 1.5 seconds (time measured with a stopwatch ag
62 usflyguy : For someone that wasn't on this plane or witness the crash in any other way, you sure do have a lot to say about it.[Edited 2013-07-27 21:27:53]
63 HAWK21M : The NLG shear bolt is supposed to shear to prevent further damage to the primary structure....in case of higher than normal impact.
64 TrnsWrld : Holy crap that thing hit HARD!! Man, I will tell ya with how many cameras that are filming almost everything these days, its almost traumatizing for a
65 whitewasp : I don't know what SWA FA training is, but where I worked, we where told if we had a major incident where we knew we had a massive problem with the air
66 D L X : WOW!!!! That is a hard landing! Thanks for sharing this one. This is a very different video from the earlier in-cabin video posted here. Because in b
67 rfields5421 : The FA's heard the pilot's announcement for people to stay in their seats (which is clear on the video), in response to the Tower telling the pilots
68 Silver1SWA : In my opinion the difference is likely due to the person holding the camera, how they held the camera and how they reacted to impact rather than a di
69 ltbewr : I wonder if there has been major structural damage to this a/c from this hard landing. From some reports, parts of the NLG went into electronics bay a
70 XT6Wagon : Evacuations can kill people. Panic can kill people. Panic during evacuations will kill people. Far better for the FA's to ensure the conditions outsi
71 Maverick623 : Oh, yes, I wasn't aware the 4 videos from 4 different angles don't qualify as having "witnessed" the accident.
72 whitewasp : Ok, either I'm deaf or something... Because I played back this video 4 times. twice with speakers twice with headphones. I did not hear the pilots say
73 mcdu : The quick remain seated PA is from the female pilot. Confirmed on another forum it was PA made by female Capt
74 whitewasp : Ah thank you. I couldn't tell the difference. I didn't know what gender the cockpit crew was.
75 cornutt : The FA's wording ("we are not at the gate yet") perhaps can be attributed to her being a little stunned by the impact, and not yet having fully absorb
76 ikramerica : Once, again, the "protect the pilot at all cost" brigade is out in full force. It's fine to suggest ATC errors, mechanical errors (due to poor mainte
77 Barney Captain : And that is exactly why the NTSB should not be releasing preliminary data without supporting information - it causes many to draw premature conclusio
78 mcdu : I bet the two people in the cockpit know why......They are just trying to find a way to defer the blame away from themselves. The NTSB has enough dat
79 737tdi : Now why was that the first on your list of possibilities? Kind of a Freudian slip?? We keep your aircraft very reliable and safe. Yes things can fail
80 usxguy : The pilot on the radio is a female. So not sure who is saying what. But typically, before you blow the slides, you assess the situation. Fire wasn't
81 Post contains links moose135 : Update courtesy of Newsday: http://www.newsday.com/news/new-york...ent-at-laguardia-airport-1.5843037
82 Post contains links hivue : This has more info: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...mmand-before-crash.html?cmpid=yhoo "While the first officer had experience flying to LaGuar
83 Post contains links hivue : From Aviation Herald: http://avherald.com/h?article=465c1158&opt=0 "The crew reported, they had the runway in sight about 5-10nm out, the aircraft
84 ikramerica : Unfamiliar with the airport due to WN's newness to LGA and lack of coordination between the crew. Sounds very similar to the muck-up in SFO. FO: wow,
85 mcdu : Change of control below 400'. Wonder why that occurred? What the chances the FO wanted to go around the the Captain didn't? The CVR will prove very in
86 Cubsrule : The CVR will be interesting, indeed, but it seems to me that what pilots' intentions were is rank speculation with the information we have now.
87 ltbewr : Interesting...I wonder if the claimed wind pattern can be proven or the pilots were just making up something to cover their mistakes. I also wonder i
88 mcdu : Perhaps, but I would say in over 20,000 hours I have never nor have I ever seen a transfer of controls below 400' unless we were conducting a monitor
89 Cubsrule : I don't necessarily disagree with any of this, but I don't see how we get from "hazardous situation" to "f/o wanted to go around and captain did not.
90 wjcandee : On other forums, the snarkers referred to the PF as "she", and others questioned how people knew to make the gender reference, as well as pointing out
91 Mir : Wow. I can't think of any reason for that to happen, barring a monitored approach (which the weather was too good for), that should not result in an
92 quickmover : Just curious. What happened to the aircraft? Who does that type of repair at LGA?
93 D L X : So, was the captain the woman we hear in the recordings?
94 PassedV1 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R37wFYS_SDM Don't forget this one. And the SWA that landed right before this one, damn near did the same thing. I was
95 mcdu : I think most airlines advocate a go around command from the NFP if the approach becomes unstable. Change of control below 400' is definitely not a co
96 Cubsrule : Is there any evidence that WN has a statistically significantly greater rate of landing incidents than other carriers (say AA)?
97 hivue : According to the NTSB information released yesterday the captain was the PNF (until 400 ft). The PNF generally handles the radios. It appears the cap
98 Post contains links RL757PVD : One example of an unstable approach gone bad was the US CRJ that bit it on landing at PVD. Difference in that case was it was a main gear rather than
99 Mir : But not to then continue the approach. -Mir
100 ozark1 : I've said this before and I'll say it again. The only thing abnormal is the inactivity of the FA's. We are taught at a different carrier: If we hear b
101 hivue : Apparently it was the captain who said that -- possibly, as another poster has pointed out in the first part, going through a checklist. What would y
102 trex8 : Do you check with the flight crew or even look out the window to make sure there is no fire and the engines are off first??
103 sphealey : When I wore a younger man's clothes I used to watch landings intently, sometimes pressing my forehead against the window. A few years ago I realized
104 chrisair : A pilot friend of mine said he once had a sudden dizzy spell/spatial disorientation while he was the PF on departure. He said he handed control off,
105 wjcandee : Great. Just in time for ARFF to hit you, the slide and the pax with a blast of foam/fluid from the engine. The reason the evac was delayed was that A
106 wjcandee : Yes. As the pilot's union repeatedly reminds us, there are potential explanations, in the wildest of our dreams, for why the CAPT would take over at
107 Mir : It would explain why the captain might take control, but not why the approach would be continued. -Mir
108 PassedV1 : I agree with what you have been saying in principle, but not quite in the black/white tone that is coming out in your posts. I believe they were at 4
109 rfields5421 : You would have opened the door right into the fire !!!! Remind me to never fly your airline.
110 usflyguy : Delete Delete Delete[Edited 2013-08-07 21:03:12]
111 ozark1 : Thanks for your feedback. I am now reading directly from my inflight manual: F/A AND FLIGHT DECK CREW AUTHORITY In a life threatening situation, e.g.
112 ozark1 : Thanks for your feedback. I am now reading directly from my inflight manual: F/A AND FLIGHT DECK CREW AUTHORITY In a life threatening situation, e.g.
113 wjcandee : It potentially becomes one when she lands it on the nose.
114 wjcandee : Ozark: You might be interpreting your manual a little differently than I. It seems to say that you "will" attempt to contact the flight deck first. Th
115 Mir : I don't know what WN's stabilized approach criteria are. But if I were in charge of an airline's standards department, I would set them at 1000' (whi
116 Post contains images chrisair : Absolutely. And again, I want to make it clear that I'm not commenting on why the capt continued the approach. I was just offering an anecdotal story
117 twinotter : Unstable at 400 feet? Then you go around. Under no circumstances do you continue the landing. Mir is speaking in black-and-white tone because it is b
118 rfields5421 : There was fire outside the aircraft on both sides near the front doors - along with smoking hot metal parts when the aircraft stopped. The various vi
119 hivue : This is a no-brainer. I can't imagine it's not the practice at all airlines including WN. Your company's manual is not at odds with pax remaining in
120 aluminumtubing : For us, it is landing flaps at 1000' and vref plus additives at 1000' IFR and 500' VFR That is the airline I work for, not SW.[Edited 2013-08-08 08:2
121 71Zulu : So is the cockpit crew still flying or is this a mandatory leave period until the investigation shows something?
122 trex8 : I knew a pilot who didn't "feel right" landing his 747 and had to let the FO land, That was the first symptom of his brain tumor!!
123 okie : I believe there were some dynamics going on in the cockpit that will probably show up on the CVR. At this point what information we have is that the F
124 skyguyB727 : I would believe that. About six years ago, while waiting for my WN flight PHX-LAS in the early evening, I saw my plane taxiing into the gate without
125 rwessel : I think the point is that any such occurrence, for whatever reason, should have resulted in a go-around at 400ft.
126 okie : We do not even know for sure if they were out of the parameters at 400', we do not know the reason for the transfer. I am just suggesting there may b
127 wncrew : Ummm.... while I could see ANY pilot "forgetting" to turn on the FSB signs on at the top of descent, or whatever their SOP dictated, the aircraft (sp
128 a320fan : Wouldn't that depend on whether the switch was in the Auto or Off position?
129 apfpilot : A) as already stated this depends on the switch being in auto, on, or off. B) I would hope NO pilot would forget to turn on the FSB sign as everywher
130 wncrew : I suppose that's possible, but as a WN FA I undoubtedly have more WN flights under my belt than anyone on this board and I haven't ever landed withou
131 Post contains images barney captain : Well, not quite.........
132 wncrew : True Barney....true ; )
133 n471wn : May I ask the question that if it has been answered on these many threads I must have missed it-----was the FO also female?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA posted Mon Jul 22 2013 14:57:35 by pit
DHL A300 Nose Gear Collapse At Bratislava posted Fri Nov 16 2012 01:11:54 by alespesl
US Air Nose Gear Collapse At PIT posted Thu Jul 27 2006 16:42:08 by LUVRSW
Nose Gear Collapse At DCA UA 604 posted Wed Sep 24 2003 18:20:35 by TransGlobal2
Air Bridge Collapse At HKG Part 2 posted Fri Jun 28 2013 21:08:27 by zeke
Global Air Landing Gear Collapse At PVR? posted Thu Nov 4 2010 19:48:00 by rgreenftm
Beech Nose Gear Collapse posted Thu Jun 3 2010 14:36:33 by JetJeanes
Malaysian 737-400 Gear Collapse At Gate posted Tue Oct 6 2009 06:33:13 by Clydenairways
CO 764 Gear Collapse At EWR posted Fri Sep 18 2009 08:18:36 by B6Contrails
WN Seeking More Slots At LGA posted Thu Mar 26 2009 10:58:50 by Enilria