-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
737 runs off runway at Midway Chicago
- Thread starter ZoomByU
- Start date
I'll start by saying there isn't a whole lot of information available as of yet. But from what I heard the runway wasn't even plowed and visibility was almost nonexistent. My question is, if your the capatin of that 737 why are you trying to land at that airport and not divert to an airport with better weather?
Unconfirmed rumor:
Said on the news here that the gear may have collapsed prior to running off the runway.
Article says braking condition described as fair to good? Sure looks it ...
Said on the news here that the gear may have collapsed prior to running off the runway.
Article says braking condition described as fair to good? Sure looks it ...
Short runway at Midway --- I always hated it, even in daylight, CAVU conditions .... but bring on near zero conditions, add the pressure of "shutting down" your company's hub with a divert, add poor/limited braking, make just a small mistake or two in airspeed control or landing spot on the runway .... and the question becomes ..... "do you feel lucky"???
How about going to O'Hare ??? Ooooops, That's right --- it's not the company hub. This thing will take a year to come to the bottom line .... but still, it's always pilot judgement. Make sure you use .... yours.
How about going to O'Hare ??? Ooooops, That's right --- it's not the company hub. This thing will take a year to come to the bottom line .... but still, it's always pilot judgement. Make sure you use .... yours.
Media is saying that the FDR indicated a 7-10 knot tailwind during landing - certainly not ideal for short runway/braking issues situation like snow. I wouldn't have landed my Prowler there under those conditions, even if they had gear.A4sForever said:
Brett
I think it's going to come down to the plane was landed slighly long (maybe a dot high on ILS? that would surely be enough) along with horrible breaking conditions on the remaining runway. I bet the Captain had a splitr second to make the decion to either commit to stopping the aircraft or immediatly going around. Tough call either way. No one was really at fault and everyone was at fault. SWA, FAA, Midway airport operations, etc. They'll be splitting hairs here.
The comment "I would never land my Prowler in those conditions" triggered another thought - and that's as militrary aviators (and especially Navy/USMC) we are shielded from the realities of consistent flying in crappy-marginal weather conditions. A fact I didn't fully realize until I was flying 135. It's a different world.
The comment "I would never land my Prowler in those conditions" triggered another thought - and that's as militrary aviators (and especially Navy/USMC) we are shielded from the realities of consistent flying in crappy-marginal weather conditions. A fact I didn't fully realize until I was flying 135. It's a different world.
Another problem that has not been mentioned: Operating jets from old, downtown airports.
Ever since the "birth" of SWA and the plethora of similar low-cost carriers (LCC) operating from downtown, close-in, encroached, short runway airfields designed in the propeller era .... landing in anything other that CAVU WX on fields such as Midway has been problematical. These accidents are bound to happen. It's amazing that more haven't ....
Ever since the "birth" of SWA and the plethora of similar low-cost carriers (LCC) operating from downtown, close-in, encroached, short runway airfields designed in the propeller era .... landing in anything other that CAVU WX on fields such as Midway has been problematical. These accidents are bound to happen. It's amazing that more haven't ....
Here is a overview pic of Chicago Midway
http://local.live.com/default.aspx?cp=41.785972|-87.752417&style=h&lvl=14&v=1
there not much room for expansion.....
http://local.live.com/default.aspx?cp=41.785972|-87.752417&style=h&lvl=14&v=1
there not much room for expansion.....
ChuckMK23 said:
Is this statement based on the fact we have absolute weather mins, so the decision is taken out of our hands? If so, that sounds like a valid arugument on paper, but not in practice. I'm sure there are similar instances on the carrier, but I know for a fact (as do you, I'm sure) that there are times when you're coming to the back of the boat and it's less than mins, but there's no where else to go. Even getting back to a field (whatever you fly) because you don't want to divert or don't have the gas. Mins certainly get pushed. However, in that case, there's no way around the fact that as the guy who signed for it, you screwed up (didn't fuel plan, weather plan, or just blew off the rules). I'm assuming that's what you were referring to.
Wouldn't it be nice if this unfortunate event reshaped the debate on the Wright Amendment? This Midway occurance is precisely one of the events that the Dallas city fathers were trying to avoid when they tried to close Love Field entirely on the construcion of DFW. The arguement was almost exactly as A4s outlines. No SWA bashing here. They are a great buch of aviators. But the margins they have to deal with at many of their airports are minimal. It is just as much so at Love as Midway. The last thing Love needs is more operations, regardless of what state they are flying into.A4sForever said:
No reverse thrust, plus a snowy, short runway ... bad day for all.
FOX NEWS - Investigators: Reverse Thrusters Didn't Kick In Before Midway Accident
FOX NEWS - Investigators: Reverse Thrusters Didn't Kick In Before Midway Accident