Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AA JFK crosswind emergency...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
You can't just go off on your own in the busiest airspace in the world with over 200 people sitting on your plane. That is basically insane.

Take runway heading and get vectored to runway 31 and stay safe from other traffic. If you are fuel critical you should have mentioned this long before you were cleared to land on a runway you don't like.

Sorry but I'm posting facts here.
 
It sort of sounds like the AA crew member speaking to ATC is having a melt down. Unless it turns out this guy is on fire or this was an Avianca style 3rd missed approach and they only had a coffee cup of jet A left, then I don't know what was going through his head. I am all for the firmness with ATC, but it just seems like he went nuclear option on them.

I can imagine the other guy sitting in the cockpit thinking, "here we go. Man the Captain is wound tight....and then positive rate-gear up...uh hmm..gear up" while shaky voice gabs with ATC and he just reaches over and puts the gear up himself then the flaps. He really Schruted it.
 
OurMoney1 said:
WELL DONE...

Its about growing balls when it matters most.
Click to expand...

Emphasis on when it matters.

Anyone remember that NWA 744 Captain who decided to delay the flight so he could go get some lobster at a local restaurant? I guess he didn't like the crew meal they loaded for him. That took balls, too. Unemployed balls now, I believe.
 
agonyairfo said:
It sort of sounds like the AA crew member speaking to ATC is having a melt down. Unless it turns out this guy is on fire or this was an Avianca style 3rd missed approach and they only had a coffee cup of jet A left, then I don't know what was going through his head. I am all for the firmness with ATC, but it just seems like he went nuclear option on them.

I can imagine the other guy sitting in the cockpit thinking, "here we go. Man the Captain is wound tight....and then positive rate-gear up...uh hmm..gear up" while shaky voice gabs with ATC and he just reaches over and puts the gear up himself then the flaps. He really Schruted it.
Click to expand...


Good Post !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Best line: "This is about as compelling an example of execution of command authority as you are likely to hear."

Next best: "Right or wrong, he made a clear, unambiguous decision and acted upon it. It sometimes takes that kind of decisiveness to cut through the fence between pilot/crew/passenger priorities and air traffic control priorities. The two are sometimes at cross purposes. When they are, someone has to say as much. This Captain did and that's what defines command.

Oh, the good ol' days when captain's authority really meant something. Guess is still does. It's just a rare and dying breed. At some airlines, it's pulling teeth just to get a writeup put in the logbook. "No, we can't do that! It'll delay the flight and hurt the company."

Trumped-Up JFK Emergency?
Email this blog |
printicon.gif
Print this blog​


By Paul Bertorelli


clearpixel.gif


Last week's emergency landing at New York's JFK offers yet another example of how a group of pilots—when presented with the same scenario and risk factors—may make diametrically different decisions. The distilled summary: An American Airlines 767 enroute into JFK from Los Angeles arrived to be assigned runway 22L as the landing runway. The wind was out of 310 at 22 knots, gusting to 34 knots—a direct crosswind that might have had a slight tailwind component.

The Captain refused the landing runway and, when ATC declined to assign 31R, he declared an emergency and landed on it anyway. Here's a condensed clip on the incident.
It's illuminating for several of reasons. It's an example of what most pilots and controllers have seen before: a "sort of" or "paper" emergency. Second, regardless of who you think was right or wrong, the incident shows that the person sitting in the left seat is sometimes confronted with judgment calls for which there is no easy answer, even though the Captain is vested with the ultimate final authority on how the flight is conducted. It may be good to be King, but it's not always easy. Worth noting is that there's more going on here than most of us know and, as the Gunny likes to say, there will be consequences. Last, this incident starkly reveals how our air transport system is a tug of war between efficiency and safety.

Since March, JFK has had 31L closed for upgrades and this bollixes up the airport's acceptance rate. The airlines were asked to scale their operations accordingly. I don't know if they have done that or if this was in factor in the May 4 incident. (See above: consequences.) Either way, ATC will configure the airport to suit its concerns, which usually relate to throughput and noise restrictions. Pilot concerns about crosswind limits? Not so much. So it becomes a little bit of a blood sport in a situation like this. If crews keep gutting out landing in a crosswind to the limits of man and machine, controllers will happily let them do it until someone says—enough.

The Captain of American Flight 2 decided he wasn't going to accept a 34-knot crosswind. According to what data I could find, Boeing says 40 knots is the max recommended crosswind component for a 767 on a dry runway. If someone else can dispute that, let me hear from you. Also, American's op specs may call for something lower and those are hard limits. Either way, the Captain decided it wasn't safe and informed the tower he would declare an emergency if he wasn't given 31R. The controller seemed to note this as if he'd take it under advisement and the situation blossomed from there. Remember, the controller is thinking about separation and his flow plan, the pilot is worried about cramming that thing on the runway in a gusty crosswind.

After the emergency was declared, the controller evidently thought it was a "gentleman's" emergency in which he would be allowed to vector the airplane back around for 31R in a more less orderly fashion. The Captain, on the other hand, clearly understood that under emergency authority, he could do what he needed to and seemed to inform the surprised sounding controller of his maneuvering plan. He told ATC—he didn't ask, he told ATC—to clear the runway. American Flight 2 was landing on it. This is about as compelling an example of execution of command authority as you are likely to hear.

Listen to the tape to the end and you can clearly hear the controller's response when the flight clears the runway and asks for taxi instruction. He sounds irritated to me. So let the second guessing begin.

Over on PPRuNe opinions are divided. Some think the Captain should have slipped into the flow and let the controller work out an approach for 31R that would minimize chaos for everyone else. If the flight was so low on fuel as to require unconditional maneuvering, why didn't the crew declare this sooner? And if the crew couldn't handle a 34-knot crosswind as just a day at the office, what are they doing flying into Kennedy? Others cheered the Captain, believing he determined that an unsafe condition existed and acted to correct it. End of story.

I don't have enough experience in this realm to offer an opinion on the righteousness of the Captain's call. Even if I did, I'm not sure I would, because I wasn't in the seat. Nonetheless, I offer a tip of the hat to any skipper who pulls the plug in a situation where system-think has forced go-along-get-along behavior to a point beyond safe limits. Right or wrong, he made a clear, unambiguous decision and acted upon it. It sometimes takes that kind of decisiveness to cut through the fence between pilot/crew/passenger priorities and air traffic control priorities. The two are sometimes at cross purposes.

When they are, someone has to say as much. This Captain did and that's what defines command.

http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/AVwebInsider_EmergencyAtJFK_202513-1.html
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
rajflyboy said:
You can't just go off on your own in the busiest airspace in the world with over 200 people sitting on your plane. That is basically insane.

Take runway heading and get vectored to runway 31 and stay safe from other traffic. If you are fuel critical you should have mentioned this long before you were cleared to land on a runway you don't like.

Sorry but I'm posting facts here.
Click to expand...


You don't have all the facts and judging the crews performance based on incomplete/missing tower transmissions and unknown approach control transmissions says more about your limited capabilities than any contribution to the subject.

Perhaps you can return to more simple activities like spiked or shaping gel, Ipod inflight mix changes, and Northface or Columbia for your backpack.
 
C-150ETOPS said:
You don't have all the facts and judging the crews performance based on incomplete/missing tower transmissions and unknown approach control transmissions says more about your limited capabilities than any contribution to the subject.

Perhaps you can return to more simple activities like spiked or shaping gel, Ipod inflight mix changes, and Northface or Columbia for your backpack.
Click to expand...


If your dumb enough to fly off on your own in NY airspace with over 200 people in the back of your plane then I seriously have to ask if you can actual pass the FAA flight physical ??
 
I find it interesting we've only herad a few seconds of soundbites after they broke off the rwy 22 approach. WHY can we not get the REST of the story....c'mon, what's the deal!
 
rajflyboy said:
If your dumb enough to fly off on your own in NY airspace with over 200 people in the back of your plane then I seriously have to ask if you can actual pass the FAA flight physical ??
Click to expand...

This really makes us look bad- when a pilot can't look out the window and see and avoid anymore with the help of tcas ra and moving map- Go rent a cessna and relearn a scan
 
waveflyer said:
This really makes us look bad- when a pilot can't look out the window and see and avoid anymore with the help of tcas ra and moving map- Go rent a cessna and relearn a scan
Click to expand...

Yea. I was thinking the same thing. Probably some puppy-mill grad to a RJ that was never taught to look out the front window and would go catatonic if the moving map went blank.
 
Draginass said:
Yea. I was thinking the same thing. Probably some puppy-mill grad to a RJ that was never taught to look out the front window and would go catatonic if the moving map went blank.
Click to expand...

The reality is that the runway heading given by the tower would have sent them right into the middle of the departing traffic on 31R. Don't believe AA was advised of any traffic during his visual to 31R, probably because there was none.
 
Listening to the file, if it is a non-modified version, upon hearing the wind report provided by the tower, they say they are "breaking off the approach" (this is prior to the emergency declaration) and then state that "if you don't give us 31 Right we are gonna declare an emergency"

I think everyone in that exchange and post-incident who listened agree that the causal factor for the purported emergency is the surface wind.

Tower (in charge of keeping separation and preventing metal on metal) instructs them to fly runway heading (how dare they do their job). Instead of "OK Tower, any help you can give is is appreciated", AA responds "get everyone out of our way" etc etc

Professional? You be the judge. I know what my opinion is.

This brings back memories to an on-the-air argument by one AA crew on DFW approach against another crew, and approach control, as to "why" AA Flight XXX is sequenced behind the other one

nice nice
 
rajflyboy said:
If your dumb enough to fly off on your own in NY airspace with over 200 people in the back of your plane then I seriously have to ask if you can actual pass the FAA flight physical ??
Click to expand...

Grab an FAR/AIM and refresh yourself on the status of an aircraft after it has declared an emergency. I believe it conflicts with your definition of "on your own".
 
C-150ETOPS said:
Grab an FAR/AIM and refresh yourself on the status of an aircraft after it has declared an emergency. I believe it conflicts with your definition of "on your own".
Click to expand...

Tell me what section in the FAR/AIM addresses menstrual cycle "heavy" airline pilots who use the E-word to get it their way

You think this is Burger King?

I can't find it.....go ahead, "grab" the FAR/AIM, and "refresh us" on what section that is in.....
 
FLYLOW.... out.

SATPAK.... please get in contact when you find your sack.

Until then, please do not accept upgrade.

Yours truly...
 
It was pretty simple. They were out of gas,and had to land. JFK is the worst ATC in the entire world for listening to pilots. You need a 2X4 to get their attention. If they were to devote 1% of their time to listening, instead of issuing unreasonable clearances, none of this would have happened.

This crew did an outstanding job in difficult circumstances. My only concern is the amount of wannabee pilots Monday-morning quarterbacking their decisions.
 
ok.. clarity moment.. I listened to the recordings, approach and final. In the recordings I listened to they NEVER mentioned did they were low on gas or had to have 31R immediately until they made their "clear the airspace" comment. If you say you must have 31R because of winds they resequence you. And the "if you don't give us 31R we will declare an emergency" is not an emergency declaration.. it's a threat/statement of intentions. The standard way to get 31R is to get in line. The controller was giving them what they asked for by vectoring him for 31R. Not what he didn't ask for which is "we are declaring an emergency, we are low fuel, we need 31R immediately". The guys in the aircraft are all wound up.. and the controller has no idea it's not a normal go around due to winds. I have absolutely no problem with their declaring an emergency and getting priority, I have a big issue with their lack of clear communication.
 
FlyboyPhil said:
ok.. clarity moment.. I listened to the recordings, approach and final. In the recordings I listened to they NEVER mentioned did they were low on gas or had to have 31R immediately until they made their "clear the airspace" comment. If you say you must have 31R because of winds they resequence you. And the "if you don't give us 31R we will declare an emergency" is not an emergency declaration.. it's a threat/statement of intentions. The standard way to get 31R is to get in line. The controller was giving them what they asked for by vectoring him for 31R. Not what he didn't ask for which is "we are declaring an emergency, we are low fuel, we need 31R immediately". The guys in the aircraft are all wound up.. and the controller has no idea it's not a normal go around due to winds. I have absolutely no problem with their declaring an emergency and getting priority, I have a big issue with their lack of clear communication.
Click to expand...

Excellent post Phil, but you're gonna get thumped on By the "PIC-COMMAND-AUTHORITY" group for sure!

Some in that group don't understand that you STILL need to effectively communicate WHAT IS GOING ON, in ADDITION to what you are doing!

Not knowing anything more than the recordings, one would think that the PIC's immediate turn-back and the "we're COMING IN, CLEAR THE RUNWAY" comment would indicate a very clear and immediate threat to safety all souls on board.

1. Loss of both engines.....

2. Fire that can't be extinguished....

3. Attack in progress....


YMMV
 
Very unprofessional. THEY are the ones (for those who actually listened to the audio) who initiated the "If we don't get what we want, we are declaring emergency"

somebody's transcript here

http://nycaviation.com/2010/05/07/a...cy-landing-after-argument-with-control-tower/

Tower: “Alright I will pass it along, fly runway heading for now.”


AA 2 heavy: “Okay, we’re declaring emergency, we’re gonna land 3-1-right. We’re going to the left and then coming around.”


Tower: “American 2 heavy, just fly runway heading.”
AA 2 heavy: “Clear the area.”


Tower: “You say you’re declaring emergency?”


AA 2 heavy: “Three times I’ve told you that. Three times we’re declaring an emergency.”


Tower: “Okay, I just want to verify, I know you said if you didn’t get 31-right you have to declare an emergency. Okay, understand, fly runway heading and I gotta get you a turn!”


Tower: “Fly heading 1-8-0″


AA 2 heavy: “American 2 heavy, we are turning around to the left here and landing on 3-1. Remove everybody from our way. We’ve declared an emergency. We’re on a visual.”


Tower: “Alright, American 2 heavy, cleared to land, 3-1-right, 3-1-0 2-4 gusting to 3-4.”


AA 2 heavy: “Cleared to land, runway 3-1-right, American 2 heavy.”
​
Click to expand...
Observe this is a flight out of LA. They were not coming inbound from Barcelona, Spain against unforecast headwinds, etc.

Why not go into a hold and try to work it out with ATC?

That air-med Lear with a baby on a respirator, being vectored to the approach? we have a new vector for you, we have an aircraft with a declared emergency we must contend with. Fly heading 130 and standby for holding instructions.....

"Awesome job" at using your "PIC Authority"

I will add the observation that it appears a low fuel situation/similar was never discussed by the crew with ATC, and up until the wind report (given to the crew by the tower), absolutely no problems, issues, etc were mentioned by this flight. So when the human tower controller was "surprised" or taken off guard by the declaration (in light of the fact that such a declaration with gusty winds is not a common event....), we don't need to jump on the controller.

"Approach we are min fuel please pass it to tower" goes a long way.

CRM extends to ATC also and keeping them in the loop folks. The world we fly in extends outside the windshield.
 
Last edited:
I will put a boot on that baby's respirator tube if it saves 200 lives. Those of you who would hang this AA crew already, may you forever inhabit the right seat.
 
Min fuel doesn't mean squat to JFK ATC. The FAA management is forcing the controllers to over-maximize the traffic into and out of JFK due to the runway closure. In retrospect, maybe the best course of action considering that it's obvious that the airline and FAA managements want to put the runway closure monkey on the back of the pilots, would be to divert when the FAA insists on landing aircraft on runways with close-to, or blatantly out-of-limits winds and refuses to allow you to land into the wind.

As usual, it's the pilots that have to make up for the lack of leadership in airline management and the FAA.

If you read what the FAA controller rep said afterwards, it's obvious to me that the controllers at JFK are under tremendous pressure from FAA management to "push tin" to the max and to hell with everything else.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom