SWA Pilot broke rules at MDW

[EagleRJ]

But as they approached, Stearney said, the sound of jetliners brought tears to their eyes. Lisa closed her eyes until the airport was out of sight.

Fcuk this ambulance-chasing, grandstanding, media-exploiting piece of sh!t.

What a waste of oxygen. :angryfire

 

[Falcon Jet 1]

Again youre an idiot, what does the autobrake have to do with productivity in the eyes of a insurance man? We dont have the disarm feature on the autobrake like the 767.

 

[furloughed dude]

Lowecur,

You are partially right. When situations dictate (long runway), you can decellerate the aircraft with thrust reversers until you are almost at taxi speed. This of course uses less braking energy and keeps the brakes cooler. And in normal circumstances, delaying braking would keep brakes cooler and allow for quicker turns. Bottom line is if any brake is hot, you shouldn't push back for the next leg until they have cooled adequately..

When using even lower autobrake settings, after touchdown and a brief delay, braking begins. Pilots can always take over manual braking at any time.

In this situation, I don't think brake energy was an issue. With the short runway and slippery conditions, max braking should be used either by autobraking or manual.

It does sound like the 59 YEAR OLD CAPTAIN had trouble with the thrust reversers. But his landing data would be calculated WITHOUT thrust reversers anyway so he should still be able to stop. He also wasn't following company policy with regards to using autobrakes. If they aren't authorized (for any reason) you shouldn't use them. Sounds like BAD judgement by him. I am sure lawsuits will fly and it will be a big payoff by SWA.

 

[lowecur]

Lowecur,

You are partially right. When situations dictate (long runway), you can decellerate the aircraft with thrust reversers until you are almost at taxi speed. This of course uses less braking energy and keeps the brakes cooler. And in normal circumstances, delaying braking would keep brakes cooler and allow for quicker turns. Bottom line is if any brake is hot, you shouldn't push back for the next leg until they have cooled adequately..

When using even lower autobrake settings, after touchdown and a brief delay, braking begins. Pilots can always take over manual braking at any time.

In this situation, I don't think brake energy was an issue. With the short runway and slippery conditions, max braking should be used either by autobraking or manual.

It does sound like the 59 YEAR OLD CAPTAIN had trouble with the thrust reversers. But his landing data would be calculated WITHOUT thrust reversers anyway so he should still be able to stop. He also wasn't following company policy with regards to using autobrakes. If they aren't authorized (for any reason) you shouldn't use them. Sounds like BAD judgement by him. I am sure lawsuits will fly and it will be a big payoff by SWA.

Thanks for at least giving me some due.

As far as the CA is concerned, I have no opinion. He did what he thought was best at the time.

 

[njcapt]

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif] In addition to the autobrakes, transportation expert Aaron Gellman, head of Northwestern University's Transportation Center, says part of the crash probe should center on whether the pilot was using the plane's "head-up display" which provides flight path guidance in low visibility landings.

"It's used in such a way that touchdown is at a very low speed and also puts you down right near the end of the runway," Gellman said. "If he was not using it, he was not using one of the major tools available to him."

Somebody needs to straighten out Professor Gellman about the use of a HUD, and he should have his ability to be referred to as a 'transportation expert' taken away.

Before LowerIQ seizes on this as another element of the accident, the HUD provides the same glidepath as the Primary Flight Display and would cause the exact same touchdown point. Airspeed info would be exactly the same as well. F'ing expert should keep his mouth shut and leave the analysis to real professionals.
[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Lowecur,

You are partially right. When situations dictate (long runway), you can decellerate the aircraft with thrust reversers until you are almost at taxi speed. This of course uses less braking energy and keeps the brakes cooler. And in normal circumstances, delaying braking would keep brakes cooler and allow for quicker turns. Bottom line is if any brake is hot, you shouldn't push back for the next leg until they have cooled adequately..

When using even lower autobrake settings, after touchdown and a brief delay, braking begins. Pilots can always take over manual braking at any time.

In this situation, I don't think brake energy was an issue. With the short runway and slippery conditions, max braking should be used either by autobraking or manual.

It does sound like the 59 YEAR OLD CAPTAIN had trouble with the thrust reversers. But his landing data would be calculated WITHOUT thrust reversers anyway so he should still be able to stop. He also wasn't following company policy with regards to using autobrakes. If they aren't authorized (for any reason) you shouldn't use them. Sounds like BAD judgement by him. I am sure lawsuits will fly and it will be a big payoff by SWA.

You are exercising bad judgement and a lack of professionalism by passing judgement on this Captain/Crew. You were not there and do not know what they knew. If you believe that you can make a judgement based upon what you see/read in the press, you must not have been around aviation for very long. BTW, reverse thrust is considered on the 737-700 landing performance.

As for the person you were replying to, my seven year-old can carry on a more intelligent discussion on this subject. At least she knows to keep her mouth shut and simply ask questions when she gets into an area that she knows little or nothing about.

 

[Slug]

on the -700 the TRs are used in landing distance calculations. This has been stated many times on flightinfo, since the accident.

 

[lowecur]

As for the person you were replying to, my seven year-old can carry on a more intelligent discussion on this subject. At least she knows to keep her mouth shut and simply ask questions when she gets into an area that she knows little or nothing about.

Chest, are you the mother, father, or just androgyneous? It's hard to tell with the avatar.

:beer:

 

[lowecur]

Fcuk this ambulance-chasing, grandstanding, media-exploiting piece of sh!t.

What a waste of oxygen. :angryfire

I guess I shouldn't have my people call yours about doing lunch. Oh, well!:nuts:

 

[regionaltard]

Somebody needs to straighten out Professor Gellman about the use of a HUD, and he should have his ability to be referred to as a 'transportation expert' taken away.

Before LowerIQ seizes on this as another element of the accident, the HUD provides the same glidepath as the Primary Flight Display and would cause the exact same touchdown point. Airspeed info would be exactly the same as well. F'ing expert should keep his mouth shut and leave the analysis to real professionals.

I'd go so far as to say that a landing made solely by reference to the HGS cue in AIII mode (more likely the Flight Director or Primary mode was being used here) will typically be a bit on the long side.

 

[Capi_Cafre']

Thanks for at least giving me some due.

As far as the CA is concerned, I have no opinion. He did what he thought was best at the time.

Shhhhh!

 

[apdsm]

Just a quick question for the SW guys. The article that keeps getting posted states that the NTSB found the autobrake switch in the Max position. Then goes on to state that the pilot started to brake manually. On the 767, if you brake manually, the autobrake system disarms and the switch moves to the disarm position, does the 737 operate the same? If so, there would seem to be a disconnect in the facts.

On the 737 the system disarms, but the switch does NOT snap to the off position.

 

[TCAS]

A point that has not been made in this "discussion" is that the hotter a carbon brake gets during braking the more efficient it is for said braking.

Secondly, carbon brakes disipate the heat faster then steel brakes, thus allowing for quicker turn times.

Finally, Lowecur, the brake temp tables you refer to are for cool down time before the next takeoff when the brake temp sensors are inoperative and the actually brake temperature cannot be determined. It has nothing to do with the temp of the brakes before pushback. You could take off anytime after a landing as long as the brake temps are in the green no matter which braking option was used for the prior landing. And all landings never cause the same temperature increase. Factors such as ambient outside air temp, moisture content of the ambient air, thickness of the brake pads and friction disks all come into play in determining how hot a set of brakes will get during a landing.

 

[commode Air]

Hey lowecure or whatever your name is. The OPC calculates landing data in the 700 with the thrust reversers working the, 300-500 doesn't.... basically what my point is......... you need to GET LAID!!!!

 

[Diesel-9]

Don't We All!!!

 

[lowecur]

Finally, Lowecur, the brake temp tables you refer to are for cool down time before the next takeoff when the brake temp sensors are inoperative and the actually brake temperature cannot be determined. It has nothing to do with the temp of the brakes before pushback. Sooo, are you saying that the tables are important or not? You could take off anytime after a landing as long as the brake temps are in the green no matter which braking option was used for the prior landing. Well if the sensors are inoperative, just how is the green determined? And all landings never cause the same temperature increase. Factors such as ambient outside air temp, moisture content of the ambient air, thickness of the brake pads and friction disks all come into play in determining how hot a set of brakes will get during a landing.

.....imp:

 

[lowecur]

Hey lowecure or whatever your name is. The OPC calculates landing data in the 700 with the thrust reversers working the, 300-500 doesn't.... basically what my point is......... you need to GET LAID!!!!

OK!

 

[apdsm]

For the record: SWA a/c do not have brake temp sensors or indications in the cockpit.

 

[737tanker]

I'd go so far as to say that a landing made solely by reference to the HGS cue in AIII mode (more likely the Flight Director or Primary mode was being used here) will typically be a bit on the long side.

It would be 1000 ft long. When AIII is selected in the OPC it adds 1000 ft to the landing length. If you are using IMC, VMC, or Primary it doesn't add anything to the landing distance.

 

[regionaltard]

It would be 1000 ft long. When AIII is selected in the OPC it adds 1000 ft to the landing length. If you are using IMC, VMC, or Primary it doesn't add anything to the landing distance.

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. It's been my experience that landings made solely by reference to the flare and idle cues in AIII mode tend to result in touchdowns more than the nominal 1000 feet from the threshold.

I believe that 1000 feet is actually subtracted from the entered runway length for the RO calculation.