Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

"We're all counting on you..."

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

densoo

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
2,054
WASHINGTON, June 20 (Reuters) - The crew of a Southwest Airlines (LUV.N: Quote, Profile, Research) jet that ran off a snowy runway in Chicago last December spent much of the flight trying to decide if they could land safely and considered trying other cities, cockpit recordings showed on Tuesday.

Flight 1248 from Baltimore to Midway airport skidded off the tarmac, crashed through two fences and struck a car before coming to rest on a city street. A 6-year-old Indiana boy riding in the car was killed. No one on the plane was hurt.

Veteran Capt.***** and first officer ********* decided to bring the Boeing 737 down on Dec. 8 despite snow, conflicting reports on runway conditions, and their initial indecision about using the aircraft's automatic braking system, which could mean a more abrupt stop.

"No procedure if that sucker fails and we just go through the fence," ****** said in cockpit transcripts released by the National Transportation Safety Board. "We never talk about any of that stuff, ya know."

********** felt he was not familiar enough with the enhanced braking system to use it in bad weather and the two spent a long time reviewing calculations to see if they could land safely in Chicago.

While holding over Chicago, an order they did not welcome, ******* and ****** considered diverting to St. Louis or Indianapolis. When they were cleared for Midway, ****** joked to *********: "We're all counting on you."

The plane touched down normally and the automatic brakes were activated, the safety board said. But the crew quickly realized the plane was in trouble and added manual pressure to the brakes.

"Jumping on the brakes are ya?" said ******.

"Hang on," ********* said as the plane skidded.

"Hang on," ******** said just before impact with the fence.

Accident investigators said the automatic brakes worked but the skidding diminished their effectiveness.

The safety board has been looking at when the pilots activated the engine thrust reversers, which help slow a plane once it's down. They were turned on 18 seconds after touchdown; Four or five seconds is common.

Privately, one investigator said on Tuesday the safety board was skeptical of the crew's decision to land in Chicago. Investigators have been critical of industry approved landing calculations like the ones used by the Southwest crew.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you're gonna post an article to disparage these guy's names and careers, could we at least get a link to reference this article?
 
The fact that those poor guy's names and snippets from a cvr are made public in an article makes me sick to my stomach. Its not new news that this can happen, but it infuriates me every time it does. Some stuff just doesn't belong in a newspaper.
 
Welcome to the spin zone....

Privately, one investigator said on Tuesday the safety board was skeptical of the crew's decision to land in Chicago.

Should read:

While viewing the TV from his recliner that night, this investigator who holds a private pilot ticket privately stated.....
 
Privately, one investigator said on Tuesday

Any NTSB guy that speaks off the record should be terminated.

If it was a party member from the company, they ought to be barbequed.
 
This really makes you realize that EVERYTHING you say for the flight will be made public so be careful what you say......



What a wake up call-reminder......:angryfire
 
vetrider said:
The fact that those poor guy's names and snippets from a cvr are made public in an article makes me sick to my stomach. Its not new news that this can happen, but it infuriates me every time it does. Some stuff just doesn't belong in a newspaper.

All,

Agreed ...

Hopefully, most everyone here is mature enough to know that this could happen to anyone of us on any given day. The problem is that the public doesn't know that.

I agree, their names should have never been included. "Who" did it is not as important as "How and Why" did it happen, and how can it be prevented in the future.

I'm sure these two pilots are professionals, but they just got led down a dark path that day. Something that can happen to any of us. Unless you were sitting in either of their seats, you really don't know the sequence of events.

Also the public doesn't understand how an accident like this is the result of a series of things that went wrong. Included is the training at Southwest, the weather, the pilots, ATC, Midway, weather information available to the pilots, the dispatcher, everyone that touched the flight in any way. Several people had a chance to end it, but chose not to.

As we say in our JB training, the holes in the swiss cheese lined up that day.

Let's all learn from this. If you do this long enough, you WILL be confronted with the same decision to continue or divert. What will you do?

Sincerely,

DW
 
I'll divert, and flight control will rake me over the coals. I'll be subject to a Critical Incident Review by some not-so-qualified desk jockeys, and then after an hour of interrogation in the presence of my ALPA representation, They'll recess, and come back to tell me I "probably" did the right thing.

I love working for a regional airline. Yes!
 
ReportCanoa said:
I'll divert, and flight control will rake me over the coals. I'll be subject to a Critical Incident Review by some not-so-qualified desk jockeys, and then after an hour of interrogation in the presence of my ALPA representation, They'll recess, and come back to tell me I "probably" did the right thing.

I love working for a regional airline. Yes!

Wow, you must not work for XJT!
 
Pprune has the entire last 45 minutes or so of the CVR transcript if you want to read it. Sounds like they did a lot of research and review of legalities and policies before deciding it was legal to do what they did. The last report I saw was yesterday.

It sounded like a normal flight to me. They were in agreement on their decision and the normal humor does not take away from their performance. It would have been a non event if the reversers had functioned properly.
 
Has there been a fault found with the reversers?

On a lighter note, that cant possible be a transcript out there as the government has told us that kind of info would never be released to the public. Just like they would never release the video if they ever get them in the cockpit.
 
Reversers didn't indicate any power up until late in the landing, too late to stop on the fair braking part of the runway. The last 1,000 feet was reported poor braking.
 
vetrider said:
The fact that those poor guy's names and snippets from a cvr are made public in an article makes me sick to my stomach. Its not new news that this can happen, but it infuriates me every time it does. Some stuff just doesn't belong in a newspaper.

Vet,
i am not in the same job as you but i agree with your assesment, any pilot reading the transcript has to have the same feeling...like someone watching
you during.....
i would have been so excited it would have taken me 31 minutes to settle down
and turn off the recorder thingy.
 
FR8mastr said:
Has there been a fault found with the reversers?

On a lighter note, that cant possible be a transcript out there as the government has told us that kind of info would never be released to the public. Just like they would never release the video if they ever get them in the cockpit.

Transcripts can be released, recordings cannot (unless they are recovered in a foreign country -- in which case they will wind up on the internet.)
 
FR8mastr said:
Has there been a fault found with the reversers?

On a lighter note, that cant possible be a transcript out there as the government has told us that kind of info would never be released to the public. Just like they would never release the video if they ever get them in the cockpit.

Transcripts can be released, recordings can't.
 
Geez,

How many of us HAVEN'T said "We're all counting on you..." or made reference to the "Looks like I picked the wrong week to ______" comment? Sucks that it made to the Chicago Tribune though. Should have at least been cleaned of names and identities.

F-in media strikes again.

MM
 
Let's all learn from this. If you do this long enough, you WILL be confronted with the same decision to continue or divert. What will you do?
I have been confronted with this scenario before more than once and I diverted, no questions asked. I've only flown the B737-800 not the smaller models and MDW can be a hand full with no tailwind in these conditions. If another pilot calls fair braking I usually believe it is fair to poor and if they say poor it's probably poor to nil.

I'm not here to judge anyone I can only speak for myself flying my equipment. If MDW is calling fair to poor braking with ANY tailwind and I'm mid weight or greater it's diversion time. PERIOD. When I flew the B727 into MDW, forget about it.......

Why? In my experience pilots normally call braking action liberally so as to help their brethren get in and MDW's 5kt tailwind is closer to 10. Can I fly an airplane as good as the test pilots that help make up the performance charts? At times I'm sure but throw in a variety of variables, fatigue and just being off some days and no one can fly as close as the test pilot all of the time.
 
Last edited:
It was 23 seconds from touchdown to first indication of reverse power application. I have had reversers fail on short runways like TGU in Honduras on a dry runway and am very happy it wasn't wet that day. At Reno one morning we were the first flight in and after coming out of reverse on ice realized the only way to stop short of the end was using reverse to a full stop in a 737.
 
The NTSB web page has several documents related to SWA1248. I haven't read them all but I did read the CVR transcript. I found it gave me quite a bit of insight.

Here's the link if you're interested:

http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/major.asp then click on the "related information" link for the flight in question.

There's the CVR transcript and a bunch of other factual reports like FDR data.
 
Last edited:
ReportCanoa said:
I'll divert, and flight control will rake me over the coals. I'll be subject to a Critical Incident Review by some not-so-qualified desk jockeys, and then after an hour of interrogation in the presence of my ALPA representation, They'll recess, and come back to tell me I "probably" did the right thing.

I love working for a regional airline. Yes!

I have to disagree with your post especially about the not so qualified desk jockey remark and say instead "What the heck was the Dispatcher doing?"
There may be factors not yet revealed after the investigation, so based off the information at hand I have to say something is not quite right.
When a flight is planned, it is based off a balanced field. So the flight should land safely in 60 percent of the field length add another 15 percent to the dry landing distance when wet and add contamination penalties. At my company thrust reverse is a bonus and not factored into the performance, Southwest may be different. But penalties such as the tail wind component should be used. So unless the field was actually BRAN, I have to say again what was the Dispatcher doing for this flight? The additional 40 percent of field length should have been plenty to come to a complete stop without going through the grass-fence-road-and finally vehicle. Where the only loss of life was to the 6-year-old boy who was reported to be singing "Santa Claus is coming to town" right before he lost his life.
There was pre-flight planning, enroute time and holding time, and if I am not mistaken the crew was even in contact with their Dispatcher during the flight to discuss weather. Everyone can Monday morning quarterback and say the flight should not have landed at MDW, but the FAA balanced field length is there to prevent disaster which is what happened to the 6 year old boy and his family. Now, why did the additional 40 percent not work? Was the field BRAN? Were they too heavy for the field length when you consider the conditions? Was the landing not perfect? These are the questions the NTSB is asking.
ReportCanoa, you may not fully understand the Flight Control function of an airline or you may have had a bad experience within yours. If more Pilots would utilize their Flight Control office, which IMHO is the greatest source of information you have at your disposal, I believe your opinions of us would change greatly. We are there for you to ask questions, calculate performance, and get departure, enroute, and arrival information dealing with the safety and legality of each flight. We are NOT there to call for your catering, hotel shuttle vans and lav service. You know who you need to call for those functions. And if you are in Germany and you call me in the U.S. to call for your shuttle van do not be surprised if you never get your ride. As Dispatchers we are required by the FAA to spend observation time in the cockpit or the full 5 hours in the sim. Maybe you could take a few minutes to stop by your Flight Control office and spend some time to see what we actually do. If you need to divert for conditions you feel to be unsafe, I have a hard time believing your Dispatcher would question your actions because he/she should be bug eyed looking at the computer version of what you are actually seeing.
 
Maybe you could take a few minutes to stop by your Flight Control office and spend some time to see what we actually do.

I have visited our Dispatch / SOC centers quite a few times through the years and I can tell you everytime I learn something new. ATA has been blessed with an outstanding Dispatch department and I use the service like having another crewmember upfront, they watch out for me also. Many times I have responded to their selcal advising of an upcoming t-storm front and the best hole available.

I appreciate it when Dispatchers jumpseat with me we both leave the cockpit smarter.


 
You might want to do a better job of striking out their names.
They are mentioned by name in both paragraph 4 and 6 of the first post.
 
manny..thanks man. Take care of.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom