tercer
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:55 pm

SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:16 am

The following is an excerpt from the linked story

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051209/nyf103.html?.v=19

Quote:
Mr. Rose indicated that, as a cost-savings method, SWA had also decided to disconnect an automatic braking system, which would have stopped the aircraft on the runway in Burbank. As at Midway, the Burbank aircraft ran off the runway, broke through the airport barriers, 20 feet tall steel blast fences, and ran onto Hollywood Way, a busy multi-lane road, crashing into a car and injuring its occupants. Kreindler was the lead attorney in the case on behalf of the 20 families involved in the Burbank crash.

"No less important is the fact that an especially high level of caution is required whenever severe weather that could compromise a safe landing is obvious and when runway conditions deteriorate," said Marc S. Moller, an aviation attorney and partner at Kreindler & Kreindler. "Weather doesn't cause accidents; people do. The fact that other aircraft safely landed last night before Flight 1248 and that the runway condition was reported as 'fair' would seem to suggest that there was something different about this plane's approach and landing. The 737-700 involved in the Midway crash should have had the auto brake system installed and, if used, that should have stopped the aircraft, given a normal and stable approach by the flight crew. Yesterday's crash is not the first in bad weather that should never have happened."

I have been reading this forum for some time but decided to finally chime in when I saw this news story. Mr Moller seems to believe that weather does not cause accidents, well he might want to go back and check the NTSB database of official causes! The question I have is for the SWA folks here, do you have auto-brakes installed on your new gens and/or was this just a case of an MEL? The reason I ask is that the article starts out by saying that the airline disconnected the ABS for cost savings and then later stated it is not installed. If the system is on placard and the requirements of the MEL are met then the flight is safe to operate. These law firms like to solve the puzzle before it is taken out of the box and me, well I like the facts.

Regards
Tercer
It's politically sensitive, but it's going to happen.
 
darrenthe747
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:40 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:55 am

see:
Sharks Are Circling (WN/MDW) (by Foxecho Dec 9 2005 in Civil Aviation)

Darren
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:01 am

I would read a press release written by plaintiff's attorneys with the highest degree of skepticism possible. If interested in facts, wait until the NTSB speaks.
 
bucky707
Posts: 954
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 2:01 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:04 am

I don't know the all the facts here. I don't know if SW 737s have autobrakes or not. If they do have them I don't know if that crew was using them. None of us know yet and we need to find out.

I do know if I am flying an aircraft that has autobrakes, I will not ever be explaining to the NTSB why I went off a snow covered runway with the autobrakes turned off.

[Edited 2005-12-10 17:11:14]
 
jeb94
Posts: 587
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 9:19 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:16 am

Autobrakes are not the same as anti-skid on an airliner. Autobrakes apply the brakes automatically, that's all. It doesn't prevent skids anymore than having the pilot pressing on the pedals himself. Think of autobrakes more as another part of the autopilot and less as a skid preventor. ABS on an airplane stands for Auto Brake System. ABS on a car stands for Anti-lock Brake System. See the difference?
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:26 am

I'm not going to comment on the accident, but be careful when discussing autobrakes as there seems to be confusion between autobrakes and the anti-skid system.

The original poster used "ABS" as an abbreviation for autobrakes (we just call them autobrakes), and "ABS" is also another abbreviation for "anti-lock braking system" (for cars), which is pretty much what an anti-skid system does on an aircraft.

In a nutshell, the anti-skid is something that is used all the time, and if it's inop, there are big weight penalties to the max takeoff and max landing weights to maintain safe margins.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
bucky707
Posts: 954
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 2:01 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:43 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 5):
In a nutshell, the anti-skid is something that is used all the time, and if it's inop, there are big weight penalties to the max takeoff and max landing weights to maintain safe margins.

absolutely correct. Unless the anti-skid failed during landing, I would highly doubt the anti-skid was inop. The penalty for anti-skid inop would have been so severe that there is no way a crew would consider a landing at MDW on a snowy day.
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1574
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:50 am

Quoting N79969 (Reply 2):
I would read a press release written by plaintiff's attorneys with the highest degree of skepticism possible. If interested in facts, wait until the NTSB speaks

Good advice. Especially the NTSB part.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:03 am

Quoting Bucky707 (Reply 6):
The penalty for anti-skid inop would have been so severe that there is no way a crew would consider a landing at MDW on a snowy day.

Nor would a dispatcher have released it....

My point was that the media and others are confusing autobraking systems with anti-skid systems, and that they're two separate things, the latter of which is always used.

I wish I could say more, but can't, and won't....  Sad
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 3435
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:20 am

Mr. Moller, I'm sure, has a law degree from an esteemed University. He probably drives a real nice car and has a real nice house. But he'll be at the bottom of the ocean with all the other lawyers after saying that weather doesn't cause accidents. Of course it doesn't, Mr. Moller. It's not possible to SUE weather, Mr. Moller, and THAT is why you're going after people. Mother Nature doesn't have a pile of cash sitting around, Mister.

Thanks for playing, Mr. Moller. Someone, somewhere, will have some nice parting gifts for you.
 
socalfive
Posts: 474
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 5:37 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:51 am

Quoting N79969 (Reply 2):
I would read a press release written by plaintiff's attorneys with the highest degree of skepticism possible. If interested in facts, wait until the NTSB speaks.

EXACTLY

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 9):
Mr. Moller, I'm sure, has a law degree from an esteemed University. He probably drives a real nice car and has a real nice house. But he'll be at the bottom of the ocean with all the other lawyers after saying that weather doesn't cause accidents. Of course it doesn't, Mr. Moller. It's not possible to SUE weather, Mr. Moller, and THAT is why you're going after people. Mother Nature doesn't have a pile of cash sitting around, Mister.

Thanks for playing, Mr. Moller. Someone, somewhere, will have some nice parting gifts for you

You can count on the fact he has all those things, having gained them walking across the backs of others. Attorneys by and large have done nothing and continue to do nothing BUT ruin this country and cost us all a lot more money for everything we do and buy. They truly are the bottom feeders and what's worse, they're in control of almost everything, including the parasites of the world waiting for any opportunity of financial gain by suing anybody for anything possible. Watch how many totally unaffected neighbors come out of the woodwork on this one, you can bet there's attorneys canvassing the neighborhood as we speak.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 3435
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:56 am

We call them 'ambulance-chasers.' In South Chicago they're '737-chasers.'
 
saab2000
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 6:19 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 3:39 am

Standing on thin ice here........

We don't know the facts.

But weather doesn't cause accidents. Part of the job of a pilot (in fact one of the biggest parts) is to make decisions. The crew made the decision to land on a shortish, snow-covered runway. That much we know. Don't read anything into that. We don't know if the anti-skid failed (I am sure it was working, or, as the others mentioned, the airplane would never have left for Midway. Anti-skid is probably not deferrable on a revenue flight anyway). We don't know if they were on speed over the threshold. We don't know if they "floated". I have heard that they landed with a slight tailwind, but "heard" is not a fact.

All that in mind, I am sure that they had the required performance data or they would not have attempted to land. That includes landing distance required for their weight, wind conditions and reported braking-action.

I do know that it was a tragedy. Someone died. Let's not forget that.

As far as the crew goes, part of their job is the make decisions based on the current conditions. I was not in their seat and so for me to second-guess their judgement would be bad.

But the fact is that while weather is a factor in many accidents, the decision to proceed in that weather belongs to the crew.

By saying that I am not blaming them at all. Like I say, I don't know the facts.

But to imply that it is just "weather" that can cause accidents is to not see the whole picture of flying.
smrtrthnu
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 3:48 am

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 12):
Anti-skid is probably not deferrable on a revenue flight anyway

As an aside, an anti-skid can be deferred, and there are landing weight and takeoff weight penalties involved. If the resultant lower weights don't permit operation to a certain airport (due to weather/conditions) you fix it (if MX and parts available) or send the aircraft someplace where conditions are not a problem. If you can't do that, you send MX/parts and fix it where it is.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
flightopsguy
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:51 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:24 am

My info is that SWA does not use the autobrakes system at all.

Amazing what 8 kts of tailwind on BRAF-BRAP will do. The boeing narrowbodies I have dispatched over 25 years all have a 5 kt tailwind limit for these braking conditions.
A300-330 BAC111/146/J31/41 B99/1900 CV580 B707-777 DC8/9/10 L188/1011 FH227/28/100 SB340 DO228 EMB2/170 CR2-900 SH330-60
 
skymileman
Posts: 577
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 2:32 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:42 am

I wouldn't listen to anything the NTSB says, either. Their main goal is to blame the pilots. I would bet good money they will say this one is the pilot's fault, just like every other. They're pilot haters.
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:47 am

I find it incredibly arrogant that Mr. Moeller is absolutely certain this accident was the result of SWA not utilizing auto brakes. There's no information out there about this incident other than what was released in the media, and yet's he confident he knows why it happened.

Freaking lawyers. Sigh.
PHX based
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:57 am




Quoting Skymileman (Reply 15):
I would bet good money they will say this one is the pilot's fault



I suspect the only way it won't be ruled pilot error is if the accident is found to be the direct result of a de facto mechanical failure. I could be wrong, but the pilots are effectively guilty until proven innocent.




2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
aa757first
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:40 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:10 pm

Quoting Skymileman (Reply 15):
I wouldn't listen to anything the NTSB says, either. Their main goal is to blame the pilots. I would bet good money they will say this one is the pilot's fault, just like every other. They're pilot haters.

Who will you trust then?

AAndrew
 
CosmicCruiser
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:01 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:22 pm

Quoting Tercer (Thread starter):
Quote:
Mr. Rose indicated that, as a cost-savings method, SWA had also decided to disconnect an automatic braking system, which would have stopped the aircraft on the runway in Burbank. As at Midway, the Burbank aircraft ran off the runway, broke through the airport barriers, 20 feet tall steel blast fences, and ran onto Hollywood Way, a busy multi-lane road, crashing into a car and injuring its occupants. Kreindler was the lead attorney in the case on behalf of the 20 families involved in the Burbank crash.

I don't know about that. All I read said, they were high and fast all the way down due to a gooned up app. and auto brakes wouldn't have changed a thing. I've flown into Burbank in a 727-200 and stopping on a good day was work.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6719
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:44 pm

Also remember that autobrakes do nothing but maintain a preset deceleration rate. More reverse, less brakes. Less reverse, more brakes. The flight crew can produce a higher deceleration rate by standing on the brakes and applying full reverse. Autobrakes are designed as a workload reducing system. Disabling the system should not compromise safety, in fact, it may improve the the flight crews skill level by not having the autobrake crutch to lean on.

Skymileman, the NTSB finds fault with whoever or whatever is at fault. I'm not judging this one by any means, but from what I've seen, read and heard, this one sure does look like a flight crew problem, with the weather as a contributing factor. But who knows what the NTSB will turn up. That's why they call these things 'investigations'.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5603
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:44 pm

Hi, lawyer SCCutler here.

The "article" that started this whole thread is a pathetic and shameful display.

"Cost saving measure."

Ignorance is so ugly to watch in action.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
SFOMB67
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:20 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:06 pm

I would be surprised if this was not ruled pilot error. Nothing against pilots, but, if he came in and put it down, too far down the runway to make a safe stop in the existing conditions, I think that's pilot error. It's also the pilot's discretion whether to land or not, in the existing conditions. However, if everyone else was landing at Midway, with no accidents, I'm sure he'll have some explaining to do if he diverts. A no win situation. Would autobrakes stop the plane 50' faster? I don't know, that's for the lawyers, Boeing and other experts to decide. I'm sure it will have an impact on a jury though, and I'm also sure SW knows that, and will try to avoid a court scene. So, if the weather was to blame, is this then called an Act of God? Only other scenario that I see is to blame the controllers for allowing the plane to land, but nobody else had problems, at least we haven't heard of any yet.
Not as easy as originally perceived
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:40 pm

Quoting Sfomb67 (Reply 22):
I'm sure he'll have some explaining to do if he diverts.

Maybe at your place, but I've never seen that in 20+ years here.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
D L X
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:49 pm

Quoting Sfomb67 (Reply 22):
I'm sure it will have an impact on a jury though

JURY?! No way this thing sees a courtroom.


BTW, Hi SCCutler. Guess who decided to go to law school.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5603
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:56 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 24):
BTW, Hi SCCutler. Guess who decided to go to law school.

God, no!

It's too late for me, but youcan save yourself!
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
LUVRSW
Posts: 481
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:15 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:56 pm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...05-12-10-midway-crash_x.htm?csp=24
NTSB: Reverse thrusters not working properly when plane slid off runway
CHICAGO (AP) — The reverse thrusters that should have slowed a Southwest Airlines jetliner before it slid off a runway at Midway Airport and into the street didn't immediately kick in when the pilots tried to deploy them, federal investigators said Saturday after interviewing the crew.
 
dc10s4ever
Posts: 700
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:46 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:57 pm

Quoting Skymileman (Reply 15):
I would bet good money they will say this one is the pilot's fault, just like every other. They're pilot haters.

It seems this is always the case. But generally it is the easy way out and it referres to the old saying "A pilot in command is ultimately responsible for the safe operation of his aircraft"....

As to the article, good thing I am wearing my boots, its getting deep in here...
 
User avatar
n229nw
Posts: 2028
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:09 pm

Well, someone will be blamed. But before all the WN-bashing hits full stride, remind yourselves that they have the best safety record in the history of civil aviation.

33 years and I think >12 milion flights without a single passenger fatality on board one of their planes (OK, actually I think a guy died on one of their flights after going crazy and then being restrained physically by other passengers, but that doesn't count). It is a fairly amazing safety record.

I'm not even a big WN fan, but you have to give them the fact that they don't appear to have ever been an airline that cut corners in the safety department.
All Glory to the Hypnotoad!
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:22 pm

Quoting N229NW (Reply 28):
33 years and I think >12 milion flights without a single passenger fatality on board one of their planes (OK, actually I think a guy died on one of their flights after going crazy and then being restrained physically by other passengers, but that doesn't count). It is a fairly amazing safety record.

Technically they still haven't had a pax die onboard one of their planes due to an aircraft related incident.
PHX based
 
aviatortj
Posts: 1694
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 9:15 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:48 pm

Quoting Luvrsw (Reply 26):
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...05-12-10-midway-crash_x.htm?csp=24

That could have a bit of an effect on things. I'm sure it was a result of the impact, but in the pictures of the plane the number two reverser was hanging open. IIRC, the number two took a little bit of a beating too.
 
ckfred
Posts: 4763
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 3:01 pm

This is from the Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,0,1788050.story?coll=chi-news-hed

The article mentions that the switch for the thrust reversers initially stuck. It also mentions that the auto-brake system was working and was used for the landing at MDW.

Also, for those of you who have been bashing lawyers as a group, remember that for every lawyer who sues large corporations, such as Southwest, there is at least 1, and probably more than 1, who defends large corporations.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Sun Dec 11, 2005 6:41 pm

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 25):
God, no!

It's too late for me, but youcan save yourself!

Oh no become a Doctor, Engineer, Nurse, Pilot, Teacher anything, anything anything but.....

Here is a quiz for you.

You fall in a deep pit and find yourself alone with a Rattlesnake a Lawyer and a Wolf and you have a pistol with two bullets what do you do?

Shoot the lawyer twice!
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
DCrawley
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 3:18 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 7:00 pm

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 12):
Standing on thin ice here........

We don't know the facts.

Very much so agreed. Until all facts are published, we can only speculate while some assume.. but you what happens when we assume? It can make an ass out of u and me.

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 12):
But weather doesn't cause accidents.

Ehh, that is standing on thin ice. I see your point, but weather is a contributing cause because without it the accident (which in this case would be weather related) would not have occurred. I'm not trying to take anything away from your point of bad judgement on the pilots behalf in his or her decision making process, but you can't just count weather out..

Quoting Saab2000 (Reply 12):
But the fact is that while weather is a factor in many accidents, the decision to proceed in that weather belongs to the crew.

Agreed. Weather issues are very much so aviodable now, especially with the advancements in technology.

Quoting N229NW (Reply 28):
Well, someone will be blamed.

Well, I understand human error and its factors, but before blaming one of my comrades I will try and find anything else that was/went wrong with the aircraft. I'm sure the pilots feel horrible about this situation and how it ended, but until all is known I'm not blaming anyone or anything as I could be very, very wrong..

Just my thoughts for the night and I feel for the family whom lost a loved one.. I've lost 2 friends in the last 2 days in separate incidences. My prayers are with them.

-d
"Weather at our destination is 50 degrees with some broken clouds, but they'll try to have them fixed before we arrive."
 
DC8FriendShip
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:35 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 9:47 pm

I don't understand what all the trouble is with the autobrakes. The fact is whether the pilot applies brakes or the auto system does, the Anti- Skid is what ultimately prevents a loss of control- as long as the wheels aren't skidding, the plane will go straight. So, IMO, the real questions are did the Anti- skid, thrust-reversers, and spoilers work propely? or did the pilot come in hot, float the plane (as 737s are known to do) and just not have enough time to stop on a runway covered with snow? Just a thought, Chris.
Come fly the Friendly Skies of United
 
c680
Posts: 428
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:03 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:10 pm

The article in question was released via the "PR Newswire" - a source of publicity for anyone who wishes to pay a small fee.

According to this "news" story it was written by:

Daniel O. Rose: Kreindler law partner specializing in litigating airline, general aviation and military crash cases, as well as other complex products liability and negligence cases

Source: Kreindler & Kreindler LLP

______________

This is a perfect example of why the American Legal system has an awful reputation. Shame on you, Mr. Daniel O. Rose, for attempting to profit from the death of a young boy.
My happy place is FL470 - what's yours?
 
gorbskow
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:02 pm

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Sun Dec 11, 2005 11:17 pm

Quoting Sfomb67 (Reply 22):
Only other scenario that I see is to blame the controllers for allowing the plane to land

Personally I disagree. I think it is great to get the updates from the controllers of the most current wx, runway conditions, PIREPS, LLWS alerts, etc......but to give them the control to decide if I can land there or not, I personally dont want to give up the power to make that decision
 
birdbrainz
Posts: 424
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:57 am

RE: SWA Fatal Landing May Be Indicative Of Carrier

Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:48 am

My father flew 737s and 727s with UA for 30 years, and he's dumbfounded that the pilot would accept an approach to a short, snowy/icy runway with a 13 mph tailwind. Simply put, he doesn't have to accept the approach, period.

He said that he's rejected approches to very long runways in good weather on account of tailwinds.

It doesn't sound like good judgement on the part of the pilots. The required distances are calculated without reversers factored in, so whether or not the reversers are working is irrelavent. Also, of course braking is better on the end of the runway where pilots touch down. That's common knowledge to anyone who flys in bad weather.

He's watching this investigation very carefully. If the pilot blew it, it is a bad reflection on the carrier. If the maintenance was a factor, it's a bad reflection on the carrier. Either way, WN doesn't look good.

All that said, i agree that autobrakes are the problem here.
A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos