Chicago runway too slick at Crash

[Andy]

With normal reverse thrust a pilot does not know what the braking action is until coming out of reverse. I have thought braking was normal until reversers were stowed then had to go back into reverse to stop the 737. After that episode in Reno on the first arrival one morning after a big snow storm I always hesitated on coming out of reverse until I knew I didn't need brakes any more. If one or both reversers hadn't deployed that morning there is no doubt where we would have ended up.

Since Southwest's FOM called for manual braking, the pilot should have felt the antiskid cycle in the pedals. Even in full reverse, I've heard the clicking of the antiskid cycling on slick runways.

 

[Andy]

Sometimes its better to keep your mouth closed than open it and let something stupid come out. This would have been a good opportunity to exercise that option.

LOL! You Southwest boys used to be proud to be called cowboys. Even after BUR, there were plenty of Southwest posters who didn't mind being called cowboys when they were taxiing at 40 knots.

 

[Andy]

You tell us: Short runway....low vis....9 knot tailwind....7 inches of fresh snow....very late deployment of thrust reversers.

There...I'm asking. Enlighten me about the decision process involved here.

Perfectly safe ops; there's no cowboy ops at Southwest. :nuts: :laugh:

 

[Andy]

OPC baby...OPC. ONBOARD PERFORMANCE COMPUTER.

Ah yes, GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). Change a number here or there and you can always get the 'ol computer to spit out the 'correct' answer.

You forgot to mention that the crew called a dispatcher who confirmed that it was 'safe' to land. If you've got to call a dispatcher to ask if it's safe to land, it's not safe to land. Doable, yes. Dicey, yes. Safe, no.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0512160279dec16,1,2183092.story

 

[Andy]

Who takes information from a McPaper special report as meaning anything? If people are looking for straws to grasp at, I've got some, otherwise we should just wait for the official hearing/report.

http://www.ntsb.gov/pressrel/2005/051215.htm

Are you trying to say that you are unable to see any problems in the above preliminary report? Whatever you say, John Wayne. Giddyup.

 

[Andy]

The runway at Chicago's Midway International Airport was much slicker than pilots were led to believe on the snowy December night that a Southwest Airlines jet skidded through a fence and killed a 6-year-old boy, according to a USA TODAY analysis.

The last 6 words in this paragraph just crack me up.

 

[ivauir]

I stated what I have heard to be the facts. Nothing more, nothing less. If they are not the facts, please correct them. What facts did you state? It seems you just asked a leadig question

Would you have landed under those conditions? As they were reported to the crew? Maybe. I still don't know what the information the crew had or when they had it. Would I? Of course you wouldn't, you are a 12 year old on mommy's computer, you are not allowed to fly yet.I would hope not... but like you said it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. And yet you peck away.

What I was asking for was SWAs criteria for determining whether or not a landing should have been attempted in the first place. Is there SOP? Landing performance criteria? (Boeing does publish landing weight performance data). Which we use - though the form of an on board performance computer. The NTSB has already come out with a memo questioning how some of this data is derived for the -700 and many "next generation" aicraft.

Contrary to what you believe, I can look at things objectively if I am in a position to render a decision with all the facts before me (which I don't have). And won't have until the NTSB is done. Which I am sure that you know - unless you are a complete idiot. Therefore your only motive by posting as you have is to slander my company, my pilot group and me. But unlike the medical profession, I can also critisize those that endanger others by perhaps doing things that they shouldn't have. Based on what criteria? What you read in USA today? Since I don't have the responsibility of being on the NTSB I have that luxury.

And I have the luxury of caling you out. You are a hater. You aren't gathering information, you aren't seeing if there is something you can learn here. You are taking a fatal accident and using it as an excuse to slam your least favorite airline. Screw you. Our safty record is OUTSTANDING. We are proud of it and we work to maintain and improve it every day. It is absolutly our top priority. To say otherwise is a slam on every pilot here. And that is really your intent here isn't it? You have some grudge against us and this is your chance to settle up. Well not today; to draw conculsions and assign blame before the NTSB does is the currency of fools and cowards.

Thank you for identifying yourselves:
- Hvy
- Andy
- RP04 (carried over from previous thread)

 

[SWA/FO]

Andy,

Lets face it, this would never happen to you. You are better then any of us, in your opinion.

I believe any Southwest Pilot (even the ones on my avoidence bid) could fly circles around you. Since we all fly 8 legs a day and 1000 hours a year - we are good at what we do. Why not wait until you hear all the facts.. do I think errors might have been made? sure. Do I think the Pilots plugged numbers in the OPC to "make things work", do I think they said "hey it (the opc) says we can't land safety, but lets do it anyway?" NO. NOT JUST NO BUT F#^k NO.

 

[CatfishVT9]

I've been wondering a few things about this after reading the preliminary report. I've got questions, not face shots.

My first trip to MDW about a year ago, the Captain flew the leg and had trouble deploying the thrust reversers because he was too aggressive trying to get them out. I saw that he coudn't get the levers to come back because the power levers weren't all the way at idle. By trying to get into reverse quickly, it made our rollout longer. After I pulled the throttles back, they popped right into reverse. Could this have happened to these guys?

The preliminary report says the FO moved his seat forward to apply brakes. Was this because he was out of position, or just trying to get more leverage?

They touched down with 4500 feet remaining. Was that on glideslope? Seems like a long landing given the conditions.

Jus' wonderin'

 

[F16TJ]

All the more reason to shut Midway down.

Mayor Daley, it that you?

 

[1BigRodeo]

First, someone did call conditions what they were that night...heard it with my own two ears. At least twice. Nil on a couple of occasions. Tower did a nice job of getting new "acceptable" reports out there to get traffic flowing. Nil reports made their way miraculously to "good" when the news crews got to the tower management. Tapes dont lie.

Second, repositioning ones seat might have been the only way to get true "maximum" braking. If youve never tried it, the only two things touching the airplane from your body should be the balls of your feet, and the middle of your back.

Anyone with the holier than though critic attitude on this thread needs to remember two things. First, one life was lost, a family without a son, two careers scarred and possibly ruined, not to mention the nightmares being suffered by the two pilots for the could have- should haves we all face as professionals. Second, it could have happened to any of you on any given day. Go back and review some of the tapes that we all get to see in training. Any of those guys appear incopetent when they showed up for work? Any of them say "Im going to have an accident today?" Didnt think so. How about you, you going flying today?

SWA haters can spew all they want about a culture issue, but the facts stand, the computer said it worked, tower kept the "fair" conditions rolling, and the HUD and ILS Z made it all come together. Were they led down a path? We will find out soon enough. The only difference between us and others is the HUD and the ILS Z to 31c.

By the way, when was the last time any of you reran numbers inside the marker for winds when your supposed to be monitoring an approach???

Monday morning quarterbacking this kind of event is a disgusting byproduct of too many self important, arrogant pinheads standing on the third floor of a glass condo chucking cinderblocks at one another. Coming to this board is like listening to Stern, morbid curiosity in what stupidity will present itself next.

We all want to know exactly what happened, so we dont press on and learn nothing from the lesson Joshua Woods taught us. Use some discretion and class in how you learn it. It would be a much needed boost to our profession if there wasnt such a low class discussion such as this on a public access board.

 

[RP 04]

What did I do?

 

[GuppyWN]

Andy, with your arrogance I can only assume you fly for United. No matter how much you dislike us, it won't make us go away. If that were the case UAL would have been out of business years ago.

Gup

 

[El-Rushbo]

Chicago runway too slick at Crash

By Alan Levin, USA TODAY

The runway at Chicago's Midway International Airport was much slicker than pilots were led to believe on the snowy December night that a Southwest Airlines jet skidded through a fence and killed a 6-year-old boy, according to a USA TODAY analysis.

But the USA TODAY analysis, based on a physics formula using information released by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), shows the conditions were "poor" at best.

How about we all wait for the REAL analysis before we start pointing fingers at SWA, ATC, pilots, etc?

One question that I do have regarding the preliminary NTSB report linked above is

Interviews were conducted with a number of other Southwest Airlines flight crews, including the crew of the last Southwest flight to land at Midway and a subsequent crew that diverted to St. Louis.

Why did the mishap crew choose to land immediately after a company aircraft made a divert decision? No face shot, this is new information to me and it does raise a valid question.

 

[LarryinTN]

They touched down with 4500 feet remaining. Was that on glide slope? Seems like a long landing given the conditions.

They touched down with a ground speed of 133kts. To maintain a G/S at 133kts would require a 665fpm descent which is above certification limits for landing (600fpm) so a flare was required.

The glide slope intersects the runway with 4,922' remaining. That's only 422' of flare distance--less than two seconds.