A Public Service/Safety Plea

[QOL_is_great:)]

Food for thought: While I agree that no one should have landed in these conditions....why put it all on the pilots? Why the hell is ATC allowing arrivals to continue? Shut the airport down, spin guys over pie or wherever...and then get everyone in 15 minutes later. My theories as to why are closely aligned to why some controllers try to sucker you into accepting a visual 20 friggen miles out on a hazy day....so they can get rid of you and get back to thier paper. Don't believe this happens....go visit a center.

I am with ya brother....... Why didn't they just shut down the airport if a thunderstorm was that close? It's a two-way street most of the time.
As for the visual approach in haze or follow another aircraft while parallel approaches are in use and the background isn't conducive to see the traffic. I love those times and I just report "looking for aircraft" and let them keep me in their sight on the scope and vector me in behind or to intercept the final approach course. It's a safety thing!! Now if I see everything 100% then I'll follow traffic ahead. We have the same issue going into a satellite airport that's uncontrolled and the approach radar wants to dump ya (cxl IFR) as quick as possible so they aren't responsible for me.
All in a day's work.

 

[DrewBlows]

Food for thought: While I agree that no one should have landed in these conditions....why put it all on the pilots? Why the hell is ATC allowing arrivals to continue? Shut the airport down, spin guys over pie or wherever...and then get everyone in 15 minutes later. My theories as to why are closely aligned to why some controllers try to sucker you into accepting a visual 20 friggen miles out on a hazy day....so they can get rid of you and get back to thier paper. Don't believe this happens....go visit a center.

Your point is noted, but it's not the controllers job to make command decisions about your flight. I've seen many "professional" pilots follow ATC instruction blindly, when a simple evaluation of all available information would suggest a different course of action.

 

[airbus_jas]

There is NO EXCUSE for these guys landing with a tower issued "microburst alert."
Not to be confused with low level windshear advisories, microburst alerts are very accurate and reliable information and a violation of company policy and therefore F.A.R. for landing.

As a guy sitting on a taxiway and listening to all of this, I would have considered asking tower, "comfirm you have a runway specific microburst alert issued for the landing runway" as a HINT to these ignorant company idiots on approach.

If they had landed, I would have no qualms "narcing" these losers to the chief pilot and/or professional standards committees.

This type of dangerous behavior has already claimed too many lives.

Great Post!

The "Microburst Alert" is generated by live doppler radar. The old "Windshear Alert" is generated by comparing the wind speeds at various points on the airfield. These cowboys (and we have more than the standard 10% where I work) probably don't know the difference between the two terms.

 

[BILL LUMBERG]

Now Peaknuckle-

If you really work at DAL, you SHOULD know: A windcheck will make all windshear go away!

-DUH!

I dont get it CRJ.....please enilighten us Del-DUH boys what that exactly means....