moderators
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 6:33 am

WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:44 am

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.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12390
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:59 am

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 avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8536
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:41 am

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
 
jayspilot
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 12:32 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:04 am

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 avatar
Moose135
Posts: 2566
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:18 am

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!
 
seven3seven
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:55 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:27 am

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
 
T prop
Posts: 910
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:33 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 5:17 am

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 avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8536
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:46 am

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
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:45 am

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.
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:53 pm

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.
 
jayspilot
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 12:32 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:01 pm

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 avatar
alberchico
Posts: 2947
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:41 pm

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 !
 
brucek
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:43 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:51 pm

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?
 
hivue
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:53 pm

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?
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5563
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:35 pm

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?
 
Okie
Posts: 3551
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:50 pm

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
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:53 pm

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.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5634
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:07 pm

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.
 
Okie
Posts: 3551
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:34 pm

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]
 
silentbob
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:19 pm

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.
 
n92r03
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:46 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:23 pm

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 avatar
usxguy
Posts: 940
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:35 pm

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
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 810
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:47 pm

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.
Pilots are idots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 940
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:58 pm

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
 
Okie
Posts: 3551
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:04 pm

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
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:13 pm

Don't forget American off the end of the runway in Jamaica.
 
usflyguy
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:29 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:20 pm

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 maintenance program
My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 1732
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:23 pm

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 25):
Don't forget American off the end of the runway in Jamaica

Dont forget the Caribbean Airlines 738 off the runway at GEO
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 810
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:41 pm

Quoting usxguy (Reply 23):
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....

AAL1420 - pilot landed in winds that exceeded the maximum crosswind component for the MD-80
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...euznuqsert1fl1/U07262013120000.pdf
AAL587 - PF overloaded the rudder system after encountering wake turbulence.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...kpe45nyrrid451/R07262013120000.pdf
DAL191 - Flew into a severe thunderstorm.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...velj0magcbreq1/U07262013120000.pdf
DAL1141 - Failure of the pilots to set the flaps/slats properly for takeoff.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...4ze2esyc0ei451/N07262013120000.pdf

Now, this is just a small example of the list of fatal crashes associated with pilot error. There are literally hundreds of non-fatal crashes and incidents that have been attributed to pilot error. Incidents and non-fatals like -

AAL2253 - where the pilots became distracted by a malfunctioning reverser and overran the runway.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...lt3i0p2rfekuh1/L07262013120000.pdf
AAL1586 - The pilot followed the aircraft generated V1 call rather than that of the FO and over-rotated the plane.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...gji45q32ojvzg1/I07262013120000.pdf
AAL20 - flight crew flew too close to a thunderstorm causing injury to a flight attendant.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...jbzmkeuttc5451/G07262013120000.pdf
AAL1402 - Failure to go-around and deviation from a CATIII approach proceedure, scraped its wing on the runway.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...hk445ouavup551/L07262013120000.pdf

This isn't even the first half of just American Airlines incidents on the NTSB database. A conclusion to draw from this list...American Airlines has horrible pilots that are going to kill everyone they fly if they aren't grounded right now!!!!!
/sarcasm
Pilots are idots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 940
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:17 pm

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 25):
Don't forget American off the end of the runway in Jamaica.

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 by all members of a group.

so.. please show other American 737-800s that went off a runway and broke up into pieces while landing.

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 28):
AAL1420 - pilot landed in winds that exceeded the maximum crosswind component for the MD-80
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...euznuqsert1fl1/U07262013120000.pdf
AAL587 - PF overloaded the rudder system after encountering wake turbulence.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...kpe45nyrrid451/R07262013120000.pdf
AA A300 - rudder issue, not a common denominator with the MD-80

Quote:

DAL191 - Flew into a severe thunderstorm.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...velj0magcbreq1/U07262013120000.pdf

Ok, different airline, different aircraft type from above.

Quote:

DAL1141 - Failure of the pilots to set the flaps/slats properly for takeoff.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...4ze2esyc0ei451/N07262013120000.pdf

same airline, different aircraft type.

Quote:

AAL2253 - where the pilots became distracted by a malfunctioning reverser and overran the runway.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...lt3i0p2rfekuh1/L07262013120000.pdf

American Airlines - 757 - automation issue, pilot issue.

Quote:

AAL1586 - The pilot followed the aircraft generated V1 call rather than that of the FO and over-rotated the plane.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...gji45q32ojvzg1/I07262013120000.pdf

American Airlines - 737-800, not the same as the 757, so that isn't a COMMON DENOMINATOR, automation issue however is a common item - due to pilot error entering the wrong data,

Quote:

AAL20 - flight crew flew too close to a thunderstorm causing injury to a flight attendant.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...jbzmkeuttc5451/G07262013120000.pdf

American Airlines, 767-300, not the same as a 757 or 737, so not a common denominator, not an automation issue so there's no common denominator, issue with unanticipated turbulence around a storm.

Quote:

AAL1402 - Failure to go-around and deviation from a CATIII approach proceedure, scraped its wing on the runway.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...hk445ouavup551/L07262013120000.pdf

American Airlines, MD-80, not a 767, not a 757, not a 737 so not a common denominator here. Not necessarily an automation issue.

Quote:
This isn't even the first half of just American Airlines incidents on the NTSB database. A conclusion to draw from this list...American Airlines has horrible pilots that are going to kill everyone they fly if they aren't grounded right now!!!!!
/sarcasm

wow, you are right. Those all have something in common. um. nothing? pilot error on a few?

so I still swing back to my other post. Show me some COMMON DENOMINATORS HERE.

most of Southwest's incidents do. 737 - common denominator occurred at landing - common denominator all involved speed/overspeed - common denominator

so that's where people get the OPINION, based on multiple COMMON DENOMINATORS that Southwest pilots are hot shots, add in the high speed taxis performed by WN. That's all I'm getting at. People have the opinion of that, this incident supports it. Do I care? no. You have yours, others have theirs and that's ok, but I won't sit here and call someone stupid because they feel the A320 is the perfect airplane, or that automation could have saved them. who knows. we weren't in the cockpit.

I've unfortunately worked for 3 airlines that have killed people, and I was on the safety committee at one and we looked THROUGH every nook & cranny of our operation during one particular crash so we can fix any errors to PREVENT a common denominator from occurring. So all I'm point out here is, the underdogs have a valid reason because of the COMMON DENOMINATORS of the incidents at WN.

[Edited 2013-07-26 16:30:26]
xx
 
Okie
Posts: 3551
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:27 pm

Quoting usxguy (Reply 29):
common denominator all involved speed/overspeed - common denominator

Sorry a 133kts at LGA in this incident seems to be right on the money.

Okie
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 810
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:41 pm

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 incidents occurred because of being too fast, too high, too slow, etc. Exclude the high profile incidents at MDW and BUR as we are well aware of these incidents, I want NTSB reports and links.
Pilots are idots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 940
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:22 am

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 coming in HOT (or girl, I should say). They were late, so the pilots were already under pressure to get this plane on the ground, get to the gate, offload, onload, and go. So the idea of doing a go-around at one of the busiest, if not busiest airport in the country, will just make things worse. (although that landing kinda DID make it worse..) Now I'm jumping the gun... I know this was a hard-ass landing compared to other 737s - and living in Alaska, the Alaska Air pilots are KING of firm/hard landings on the 737 - and if I was on that plane I'd be saying "holy shii%%" as well. But my deductive reasoning isn't going to equate the LGA incident directly to the 737, because when I fly on Alaska, the pilots at least flare before landing. well, try to.

I'm just standing up for the underdogs here. I was on the safety committee while working at an airline where we DID kill people.. and guess what? Our first objective was to look for COMMON DENOMINATORS.. (sound familiar). Lets make sure this doesn't happen again. We looked at all of our incidents and maintenance reports/dispatch logs of the plane, the flight crew, then started looking for anything that was similar/common occurrence. Just as Boeing did with the 787, well FAA... battery issue on 787 in Boston, and minor reports elsewhere - so the battery was the common issue. Now, many people, in their minds, feel the 787 batteries are flawed. Doesn't make the 787 a bad plane, sloppy design, etc.

But people have the right to say "pilots at Southwest are hot-shots" because of the track record of incidents on landing and their exceptionally fast taxiing. You may not agree with that generalization, but that's ok - that's your choice. But I won't do what some do on a.net and get a GOD complex.
xx
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 810
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:51 am

Quoting usxguy (Reply 32):

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 to explain that all airlines have these issues, and the soul common denominator between all of them is the human at the controls. Humans make mistakes, that is why there is an entire field dedicated to human factors, and how to understand and mitigate them in the future.

We don't know all of the factors, was there something going on in the cockpit that distracted the crew? Did something malfunction? Maybe the pilots were fatigued, the end of a long duty day/week? We don't know. To blame the "safety culture" or lack there-of of a single carrier is ignorant at best. It is great that you work to promote safety at your carrier, but to insult someone else's work at another carrier simply because you have a different opinion of their operation is just wrong.
Pilots are idots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2637
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 1:18 am

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 to prevent more loss of life......

When the reality is that any metric that accounts for the true safety record will show WN as being safer than pretty much any other airline. The only ones that could be less have 0 fatalities. So do it by fatalites per million passenger miles, or some other real metric and find out that 0 passenger fatalities and 1 total over the last 46 years... Is impressive.
 
User avatar
usxguy
Posts: 940
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 1:18 am

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 problem there. I'm backing up those who feel Southwest has some hot shot pilots.

I'd be sitting here shooting them down like the rest of you if WN has had a lot of other incidents. Fact is, they haven't. Outside of a fluke panel falling off a 737-300 and the normal AOG's from ground equipment, you can't sit there and notice the correlation / common denominator / that when Southwest trashes an airplane, its typically on landing.

Back in the 1980s, you'd probably argue the same thing when the Delta L1011 smashed into the highway in DFW. It wasn't until the NTSB and FAA found a common denominator with the L1011 crash and those of a few others - (Eastern @ JFK, Pan Am @ MSY - takeoff I think?, and a few others) microbursts. And on the flip side, it was common denominators after the ValuJet crash that put pressure on the FAA to take harder looks at Kiwi, Air South, Vanguard, etc. (despite there not being any major issues at those airlines outside of some paperwork errors). Who knows, maybe in a few years someone will find that flaw in WN. Or this is just a weird fluke and that its just mere coincidence that when Southwest has major hull damage its from landing.
xx
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 1:49 am

Quoting okie (Reply 30):
Sorry a 133kts at LGA in this incident seems to be right on the money.

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 particular flight. Otherwise you don't know whether this was on speed or not.

Also I would suspect the power was idle as they went to 40 flaps close to the ground and the nose down pitch at time of the crash. The speed was probably bleeding off at a very good clip at impact.
 
Okie
Posts: 3551
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:26 am

Quoting mcdu (Reply 36):
Approach speed is based on weight not runway length/location

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 exact weight but we are going to guess that 133 knots is going to be in the ballpark we are talking a 700 here way less than MLW.

Okie
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:35 am

Quoting usxguy (Reply 29):
Quoting SSTeve (Reply 25):
Don't forget American off the end of the runway in Jamaica.

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 by all members of a group.

Here's some more English for you, bucko:

Quoting usxguy:
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


You always get rude and pedantic when you are very specifically too far out on a limb? You could be right that Southwest has a higher num·er·a·tor of occurrences, but you actually claimed American's is zero. The fact that they flew the same type of plane off the end of a runway fairly recently does indeed make you incorrect. Doesn't matter how much pedantry you pile on later, you were being hyperbolical, and too much so. I'd have more respect for your claims if you didn't get so defensive based on my mentioning one specifically relevant counterexample.

Honestly, it reminds me of the whole taxi speed kerfluffle, but speaking of denominators and other such statistical concepts, I don't know that there's any hard data there, as plausible as it sounds.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5634
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:47 am

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 have never seen any other Airline consistently brake and decelerate as rapidly as possible to make an early turn off then taxi like a bat out of hell to the gate. Like wise on the way out to the runway for departure they are always in a hurry.


I have watched them operate in this manner for years, if there is one thing you get the clear impression of with their operation it's that time is critical and saving minutes here and there is a very high priority.


After all this is part of the well known history of Southwest, in their early days they had to return one of their Aircraft as they couldn't afford the payments, so they kept the same network by stretching the remaining planes further. And of course their rapid turnarounds are famous.


It really is a cultural issue and their accidents all have a common denominator, trying to force a landing that should have been thrown away and why ? I would say that a reasonable explanation is that saving time is so ingrained at that company it overrides good judgement.


Remember this also, these accidents are likely just the tip of the iceberg, I have seen a close call by one of their Aircraft myself due to rushing and other's take place more often than you would think.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8536
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:36 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 39):
I have watched them operate in this manner for years, if there is one thing you get the clear impression of with their operation it's that time is critical and saving minutes here and there is a very high priority.

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 the back for all the years of high-stress 737 flying they accomplish day in and out under those operational/management demands.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 4:19 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 39):
Remember this also, these accidents are likely just the tip of the iceberg, I have seen a close call by one of their Aircraft myself due to rushing and other's take place more often than you would think.

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 record. Expediency does not always mean overriding good judgement. Every airline has its fair share of lose encounters, statistics add up, not anecdotal opinion.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
barney captain
Posts: 1405
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 10:01 am

Quoting usxguy (Reply 35):
Back in the 1980s, you'd probably argue the same thing when the Delta L1011 smashed into the highway in DFW. It wasn't until the NTSB and FAA found a common denominator with the L1011 crash and those of a few others - (Eastern @ JFK, Pan Am @ MSY - takeoff I think?

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 crew took a look at the TRW that was off the departure end of runway 10 and refused the takeoff clearance - opting to wait for better conditions. The Pan Am crew who was number 2 behind WN was then asked if they could accept the takeoff. They did, and tragically flew right in to a microburst that was unrecoverable costing the lives of all 145 aboard the 727 as well as 8 on the ground.

After the BUR incident, WN hired NASA AMES research to conduct a top to bottom evaluation of all the procedures. It led to industry leading changes to the way the aircraft is operated. There are no more "Taxi Checklists" - everything including Flap selection is completed prior to moving the aircraft - a much safer procedure. All of the NG's and most of the Classics have data monitoring that will trigger flags if parameters are exceeded - including an unstabilized approach. The crew can expect a phone call to explain why they were outside of the norm.

The only place I'm aware that the "get 'er done" attitude at WN is alive and well - is right here on Anet.

[Edited 2013-07-27 03:15:13]
Southeast Of Disorder
 
christopherwoo
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 4:14 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 11:06 am

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_1374891817

Sounds like the throttles went to idle at about 75-100ft and it just fell on to the runway... looks like a pretty painful impact.
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:52 pm

That video confirms idle thrust way early in the approach.
 
barney captain
Posts: 1405
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 6:19 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 44):
That video confirms idle thrust way early in the approach.

It does?

I hear a reduction in thrust as they cross the fence - which can be completely normal.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4636
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 6:22 pm

Quoting christopherwoo (Reply 43):
looks like a pretty painful impact.

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.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
usflyguy
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:29 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 6:45 pm

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 46):
People choking on smoke in the cabin, and they still refuse to evacuate?

Guess we haven't learned a damn thing from KT 28M.

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 have rather choked on smoke than evacuated and then get run over by a firetruck. For someone that wasn't there, you sure do have quite a bit to say about this incident.
     
My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 7:22 pm

Quoting Barney Captain (Reply 45):
I hear a reduction in thrust as they cross the fence - which can be completely normal.

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 out to be something other than idle thrust I will be the first to apologize. Read the stabalaized approach at WN is 1,000'AGL. With flaps moving from 30 to 40 at 53 seconds sounds like they were unstable. NTSB said they were at 133kts, that should = 650fpm ROD. That would put them under 1,000' at the 53second mark. Also looks high in the video over the freeway.
 
eastern747
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:34 am

RE: WN Nose Gear Collapse At LGA Part 2

Sat Jul 27, 2013 7:37 pm

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 crew after they shut everything off. Or where was the evacuation announcement? The front crew had to know they were in trouble as they were staring at grass out the front window.......

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 321neo, Bald1983, beachba, Bing [Bot], carljanderson, Chillax2511, DC1979, FLIHGH, Google Adsense [Bot], jetblastdubai, jetmatt777, klwright69, Majestic-12 [Bot], MattSYD, mikegigs, Mumrik, qf789, rbrunner, SamoNYC, Scorpio, SuperSix2, ttm, ulker32, User001, vuelti24 and 253 guests