Reverse Thrust vs. Contaminated Runways

[SWA/FO]

The investigation is on going...

 

[Chest Rockwell]

It appears that these guys decided to use autobrakes and they weren't allowed to use them at that time and they also took their time deploying the thrust reversers. I think it might get my attention if I was landing on a slick, short runway, especially if I had a whole 30 foot pad. What is it with these Southwest guys and not being able to ke
ep their aircraft on the airport property?

Dude,

"It appears" that you should not pass judgement on theses guys until you have all of the facts.

 

[73-Driver]

What is it with these Southwest guys and not being able to keep their aircraft on the airport property?

737 type rating........$5000

SWA interview prep.......$200

Not getting the job after interviewing with SWA and resorting to weak, coward-like attacks on F.I. to make one's self feel better.........PRICELESS!

 

[psysicx]

Are the pilots involved flying again? And this is an honest question not a crack at SWA.

 

[DX Rick]

In my dispatch class, we were told that all landing calculations were made without the use of the TR's to begin with. Is this true?

 

[Lampshade]

"FAA allows the reverse thrust credit to be used in calculating en route operational landing distances for some transport-category airplanes, such as the accident airplane, a 737-700. Accordingly, when using the reverse thrust credit for contaminated runways, the required runway length for 737-700 model airplanes is about 1,000 feet less than the required runway length without the reverse thrust credit. The OPCs of Southwest Airlines'™ 737-300 and -500 model airplanes do not use the reverse thrust credit; therefore, these model airplanes have a greater landing safety margin. In this accident, when the thrust reversers were not (or could not be) used in a timely manner, the airplane could not be stopped on the runway because of the absence of this extra safety margin."

 

[stonewall]

Are the pilots involved flying again? And this is an honest question not a crack at SWA.

1,553 questions.....

 

[michael707767]

Maybe the 737 is different but both "transport" category airplanes I have flown already calculate landing distance with out the use of reverse.

It is normally ground spoilers and max breaking.

at my airline, its funny. Landing distance on a dry runway is calculated using just brakes and spoilers, but if you go in the charts for a contaminated runway, they use brakes, spoilers and reversers.

The NTSB is right, reverse thrust should never be used as a part of the calculations for any landing distance. If they are available and you can use them thats just icing on the cake.

 

[lowecur]

Does this mean that everytime MDW has snow on the runway they will be sending the 737NG to another airport? Talk about a tough break. I'm sure that will go over big with the flying public.

imp:

 

[SkiFishFly]

Does this mean that everytime MDW has snow on the runway they will be sending the 737NG to another airport? Talk about a tough break. I'm sure that will go over big with the flying public.

imp:

I don't think that is necessarily the case.

I thought landing distance calculations already excluded reverse thrust. I'm going to have to check.

Can't believe the quote about automatic reverser operation. Where do they find such idiots to quote in the media?