More fallout from SWA crash - pax and rw length

[P-Dawg_QX]

You seem like the kind of guy that would sit down on an airliner, look in the magazine pouch and upon seeing the bomb or simulated bomb, calmly disable the device and politely carry it out of the plane to the authorities. Then as you walk off the airliner, balloons and confetti will come from the ceiling, the flight crew, passengers, airport staff, TSA, airport police and the media will be there in a gauntlet of praise and applause. Music will be playing in the background.

BANG, BANG, BANG! You're dead...dream's over.

If you see a bomb on a plane and jump out of your seat, running off the plane screaming a warning of impending doom, you'll be lucky if the scheduling gods didn't put any armed men on your plane that day...because if they did, you'll be dead.

Think about it.

Wow, I hadn't heard that there was a bomb on the airplane. How could I have missed this? Please provide the documentation that verifies this so we can all be enlightened.

*chirp chirp chirp*

That's what I thought.

 

[SuperFLUF]

Anyone care to comment on how much the autobrake system actually affects stopping distance on a contaminated runway?

The 737-700 manual actually shows a 10 ft longer stop with max autobrakes over max manual brakes in poor braking conditions.

Fair braking conditions allows max manual braking to stop 50 ft shorter than max AB.

The variable of course is when and how the pilot applies max manual braking.

 

[FN FAL]

Wow, I hadn't heard that there was a bomb on the airplane. How could I have missed this? Please provide the documentation that verifies this so we can all be enlightened.

*chirp chirp chirp*

That's what I thought.

When there isn't a bomb on the plane, the government is required to find a retard and murder them, it's the law.

 

[FedEx1]

There is a lot more to this than you will hear on CNN. The Midway airport has to takeoff and land the same direction as OHare. They wont switch around the runways at Midway until it gets to be a real 10 knot tailwind, which is the max. Then they have to switch around both airports. As a result, the wind reading you get from controllers are always kinda suspect. Not to mention where the reading is taken (probably with the airport wall reducing the speed.)

They haven't mentioned where the plane touched down. But they did say what speed it touched down at, and that seems like a correct speed for a -700. (Indicated airspeed.) The approach requires 3000 RVR, unless SWA got something less from the Feds. (this is a special figure for ATA anyways. I assume they have it too.) They had the reported vis as required. And you CANNOT have clutter on the runway to land. The airport is actually pretty good about keeping it clean in general, but I have no idea about this night.

However, I know for a fact that more than one ATA flight diverted that night because they wanted 13C and ATC wouldn't give it to them.

As for Wolf and his less than max power rant... I say we all send him the data that shows more engines FAIL on takeoff at max power settings, and the wear and tear it does on them.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

FN FAL
Name one other incident where this has happened? Armed air marshal shooting ANYBODY! This is the first Ever unless you are going to pull some bull$hit story out of your black hellicopter government conspiracy websites. There are many times every year where people find notes or evidence to show there might be a bomb on the airplane and nobody has been shot. I hope you are just trying to stir the pot, because yours have been some of the most illogical statments on this web board. And that is saying something.

SS

 

[LegacyDriver]

So autobrake is clearly a non-issue in this case as I heard braking action at rollout was fir/poor.

Now the pilot (I presume Captain -- the media just said pilot as if there is only one) is being sued by the family. What a crock of horsesh*t...


This is why pilots should make as much as we think we should. One thing like this and you are ruined.

The NTSB said the Captain had problems getting the reverser levers into the up position. A light quartering tailwind...a bounce...a lighter than usual load on the wheels...WOW logic stops bucket deployment... ????

 

[Falcon Jet 1]

actually less than 10 feet on both radio altimeters or ground on the air/ ground switch, then the reversers can be deployed. they can be deployed in the air if less than 10 feet.

 

[LegacyDriver]

I stand corrected. Legacy is WOW. Spoilers are WOW on 737 right?

Transport cat cert for landing distance is done without reversers IIRC, so length is really noy the issue. Contamination is and perhaps certification (test pilots with perfect airplanes and perfect procedure execution vs the average pilot in varying conditions).

They said the Captain had trouble getting the levers up for deployment. Not sure what that says.

 

[FedEx1]

Legacy's right. Landing data does not include reversers. (Anyway, even if the plane had had autobrakes, and reversers were deployed, the autobrake system lets up on the brakes as more and more reverse thrust is attained. Take out the reversers, you get more brakes.)

My understanding of the 737, though, is that the reversers can unlock at weight on the main wheels, but the engine will not go into reverse until nose wheel touchdown. The RA 10 thing is another safety thing built in for reverser unlock, kind of a back up. But the WOW is still required to get them unlocked.

How do they know the captain had trouble getting the reverse levers up? Wasn't his NTSB interview confidential? Or maybe not....

 

[LegacyDriver]

I am not sure. Some NTSB spokesperson on CNN (I was channel flipping and stopped) said the Captain had problems getting the reverser levers up after touchdown. Presumably this affected stopping distance. Once the crew realized they were going to go off the end they applied max braking.


Legacy requires WOW (mains) to deploy buckets. You can get reverse without weight on the nosegear but mainwheels must be spinning above 25 knots (I think).

With a quartering TW and a few extra knots you can wheelie down the runway a long way in reverse until you apply brakes. I have found a tendency among ERJ drivers to refrain from tapping the brakes in this condition because it can slam the nose down pretty hard. Maybe the SWA crew was in a similar frame of mind subconsciously.

 

[FatesPawn]

LegacyDriver:

>>>Transport cat cert for landing distance is done without reversers IIRC, so length is really noy the issue.<<<

FedEx1:

>>>Legacy's right. Landing data does not include reversers. (Anyway, even if the plane had had autobrakes, and reversers were deployed, the autobrake system lets up on the brakes as more and more reverse thrust is attained. Take out the reversers, you get more brakes.)<<<

Attention Attention Attention Armchair Quarterbacks of Aviation:

The 737-700 flown by Southwest Airlines absolutely positively DOES include thrust reverse in the stopping distance computations in the scenario that happened that night.

This is a perfect example of people who don't fly our equipement and people who don't use our procedures making assumptions over what information the Captain had at his fingertips.

Please, Please, Please stop your speculating.

Fate
-SWA pilot

 

[Mugs]

LegacyDriver:

>>>Transport cat cert for landing distance is done without reversers IIRC, so length is really noy the issue.<<<

FedEx1:

>>>Legacy's right. Landing data does not include reversers. (Anyway, even if the plane had had autobrakes, and reversers were deployed, the autobrake system lets up on the brakes as more and more reverse thrust is attained. Take out the reversers, you get more brakes.)<<<

Attention Attention Attention Armchair Quarterbacks of Aviation:

The 737-700 flown by Southwest Airlines absolutely positively DOES include thrust reverse in the stopping distance computations in the scenario that happened that night.

This is a perfect example of people who don't fly our equipement and people who don't use our procedures making assumptions over what information the Captain had at his fingertips.

Please, Please, Please stop your speculating.

Fate
-SWA pilot

Are you telling us that SWA is allowed to use reverse thrust as part of data for determining stopping distance? I think you would be a solo act in that regard. I have never heard of such a thing.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

Are you telling us that SWA is allowed to use reverse thrust as part of data for determining stopping distance? I think you would be a solo act in that regard. I have never heard of such a thing.

1. Airlines dispatch based on FACTORED landing distance. Your max landing weight for a particular runway is based on DRY condition, with NO THRUST REVERSE. Wet data is usually published, but mostly for jet approach minima regulation.

2. When a runway is CONTAMINTATED, you must use ACTUAL landing distance numbers for an equivalent contaiminate. That data DOES consider the use of THRUST REVERSE.

 

[LegacyDriver]

I will stick with my assertion (based on memory--always suspect) that stopping distances for transport category airplanes are calculated without reversers. The ERJ has reversers as an option not standard equipment so I do know all its #s are based on brakes only.


Can someone look in the FARs for us?

Edit in: does Aircraft Performance Group Data encorporate reversers?

 

[Oakum_Boy]

I will stick with my assertion (based on memory--always suspect) that stopping distances for transport category airplanes are calculated without reversers. The ERJ has reversers as an option not standard equipment so I do know all its #s are based on brakes only.


Can someone look in the FARs for us?

Depends on the equipment. If you don't have it, you can't use it.

 

[LegacyDriver]

Well the only manufacturer numbers I have for my plane are brakes-only. Can't find reverser #s in the aom and don't recall if APG data was with TRs (my guess is it was also without). That with certification criteria led me to believe that KMDW's ALD was sufficient for a 737 w/o TRs.

Sorry.

 

[FNG320]

I am pretty certain that aircraft certification as well as normal operations must be calculated without thrust reversers. That is why no one can find tables for landing with thrust reversers. Landing calculations must take into account all parameters and actual weather, including runway conditions. Thrust reversers are just "extra" for safety, they help decrease wear/heat to the braking system. It should not have mattered that the thrust reversers didn't work or that the Capt had trouble with the levers. The only thing this could have affected is the Capt may have spent so much time dicking with the reversers instead of pushing on the brakes.

Has anone who is familiar with this version of the 737 done the calculations for this type of aircraft, with the posted load and with published weather. Were they legal to land? I don't want to badmouth the crew, I just want to now the facts.

Just my opinion......

FNG

 

[sf260pilot]

So I was reading in the paper that there was a 13 MPH tail wind... I don't know what that converts to in knots. Am I to understand that some of the most experienced pilots in the world not some rookies out of riddle but pilots with thousands of hours... Landed with a ten knot tailwind, in a blizzard, on a short runway, with braking fair in the touchdown zone and poor in the rollout area?

You do not know this simple conversion? Do you really need to be posting questions then?

 

[Oakum_Boy]

I am pretty certain that aircraft certification as well as normal operations must be calculated without thrust reversers. That is why no one can find tables for landing with thrust reversers. Landing calculations must take into account all parameters and actual weather, including runway conditions. Thrust reversers are just "extra" for safety, they help decrease wear/heat to the braking system. It should not have mattered that the thrust reversers didn't work or that the Capt had trouble with the levers. The only thing this could have affected is the Capt may have spent so much time dicking with the reversers instead of pushing on the brakes.

Has anone who is familiar with this version of the 737 done the calculations for this type of aircraft, with the posted load and with published weather. Were they legal to land? I don't want to badmouth the crew, I just want to now the facts.

Just my opinion......

FNG

What makes you think that Part 25 aircraft have to be certifed to land on a snow-covered runway? The AFM will contain actual landing distance numbers for contaminated runways. These numbers are engineered numbers. Numbers that have been derived from testing on dry runways. They don't go out and land on ice-covered runways to see how far they slide off. Plus, you must know that thrust reversers are THE key to stopping on a contaminated runway. Decreasing wear/heat? Puhlease! Methinks you are not as experinced as your profile would purport.

Dry factored, actual landing distance= no thrust reverse

Wet factored, actual / Contaminated actual= thrust reverser(s) servicable

It is amazing the lack of understanding. No better than CNN I must say!

 

[LJDRVR]

Let's see here:

FN FAL-You fancy yourself an expert on all matters small arms and law enforcement, even though there are those on this board with far more real-world experience than you in both areas. Anybody that profers up an opinion on either matter is a target for your worldly-wise scorn, derision and sufferage as you sarcastically tutor us hayseeds on the reality of the situation, with the added bonus of us basking in the glorious warmth of your contrived (And entirely unjustified) air of superiority. YAWN.... You're just another one of us morons posting on the stupid internet. Get over yourself Deputy Fife.

Crash Pad (And other brain-addled armchair quarterback pilots) If you think you're not capable of finding yourself in the same situation as our two brothers at SWA, you are so totally full of excrement it's not even funny.

"Am I to understand that some of the most experienced pilots in the world..."
-you write.

No, you do not understand. Most likely you never will. Hundreds of pilots who are far better aviators than you or I could ever hope to be, have gotten to meet Elvis for one reason ore another. Our job is keep it from happening to us, not point fingers when we (read that YOU goober) don't even understand what happened.

Rant off, back to more constructive activities.

My heartfelt thoughts and prayers to my brothers at WN and the family of the 6 year old. I couldn't even begin to imagine...