Mistakes because of Fuel Savings?

[wheelsup]

I used to see SWA land 35 in PHL quite often, less now after their latest overrun accident but I see it every now and then. 5,400 runway, B737...? I've never 'flown' a 737 so I have no idea what you can do safely but in the CR200 it's doable but can get a bit sketchy if you don't pound it in.

I never saw any other operators doing it...maybe someone with some 737 experience can pipe in here but to me it just looks odd, and from a bystanders view it certainly looks like they are forgoing safety to save a few bucks on gas.

 

[CallmeJB]

wheelsup,

I've thought that too, and really don't have anything to add. But I guess it's just like landing at MDW, and we know they do that a lot. Plus it gets them out of the ILS conga line. And I'll bet their final speed is probably a good 10-20 knots slower than us, too (no facts to back that up).

Just my meandering $.02

 

[ArcticFlier]

Does the warm up requirement apply to engines with residual heat?



AF

 

[canyonblue737]

I used to see SWA land 35 in PHL quite often, less now after their latest overrun accident but I see it every now and then. 5,400 runway, B737...? I've never 'flown' a 737 so I have no idea what you can do safely but in the CR200 it's doable but can get a bit sketchy if you don't pound it in.

I never saw any other operators doing it...maybe someone with some 737 experience can pipe in here but to me it just looks odd, and from a bystanders view it certainly looks like they are forgoing safety to save a few bucks on gas.

if SWA lands on 35 at PHL, it is because weight, weather, and the aircraft allow it to do so in a safe manner. SWA lands hundreds of flights daily into runways with total or useable lengths at 5400 ft or LESS all around the country.

 

[pilot772]

I used to see SWA land 35 in PHL quite often, less now after their latest overrun accident but I see it every now and then. 5,400 runway, B737...? I've never 'flown' a 737 so I have no idea what you can do safely but in the CR200 it's doable but can get a bit sketchy if you don't pound it in.

I never saw any other operators doing it...maybe someone with some 737 experience can pipe in here but to me it just looks odd, and from a bystanders view it certainly looks like they are forgoing safety to save a few bucks on gas.

I have seen swa land on 35 in philly and make taxiway H (thats the HIghspeed) never could do that in the CRJ.

 

[Count Dracula]

With all due respect, the FAA doesn't really care that SWA lands safely on useable lenghts of 5400' or less on a day to day operation even if you are within legal book/fudge parameters. The only time they care is on the day a tire blows on your 737 upon landing on 35 @ PHL and you end up in the grass on the other end and have to evacuate pax. This possible risk to save SWA a few bucks on fuel? The paycheck may say SWA, but not the ATP.

FAR 91.3 Resonsibility and Authority of the Pilot in Command
December 10, 1964 FAA Administrator's definition was "the inherent responsibility for pilots to be alert at all times for, and in anticipation of all circumstances, situations and conditions which affect the safe operation of their aircraft." What the adminstrator was saying is that every situation or circumstance simply cannot be covered by publication or regulation.

Of course, FAR 91.3's hot sister FAR 91.13 Careless or Reckless Operation is the FAA's main course to fry your a$$ on.

 

[PunchTheClown]

We have a cool down limit but not a warm up. And the cool down is 2 min.

There is actually a 2 minute limitation on start up too. As longhorn said its not an airline thing, its a GE thing.

I agree with the fuel savings though. I couldnt care less, I work for a company that in the past has actually punished us for saving fuel and brakes (we were told on several occasions that we had the highest use of fuel and brakes of any CRJ operator. This is impossible).

If we save money by saving fuel our execs get a nice bonus. But if I bust my ass to save money I get nothing out of it. So why bother?

 

[BoilerUP]

I've heard AirTran offered & accept 35 in PHL (with a strong northerly wind), only to have them decline it 30 seconds later after realizing it wasn't in their OpSpecs. I have, however, noticed more RJ operators other than US Express carriers (Comair, Mesa, Pinnacle) using 35 these days...

I saw SWA make Hotel/Spot 12 after landing on 35 last week but I'd guess they were empty, I seem to recall it was an 8000 or 9000 flight number.

5400ft is plenty of runway to land the CRJ even at MLW, provided there isn't a tailwind and you don't float it 1/3 down the runway. The only thing that bothers me about landing 35 (other than ATC trying to force you into it with a tailwind) is that female controller that will have you keep you 200kts "as long as possible" and when she hands you off to tower on a 3 mile final they need hard 90 degree S turns to maintain spacing with 27R arrivals.

 

[PoorJetDriver]

Gotta love PHL... They are still accustomed to the days when we mostly flew turboprops in PHL. They got spoiled.

 

[John Pennekamp]

I once saw SWA take off on the short runway in Islip. It's about 5000' and they used every inch. Yikes.