MDW Overrun - SWA

"Rick" wrote in message
...

Sadly there's one fatality, the first in SWA's history.


Does that one count against SWA? He wasn't on the airplane.

On 12/9/2005 15:07, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Rick" wrote in message
...

Sadly there's one fatality, the first in SWA's history.


Does that one count against SWA? He wasn't on the airplane.



SWA thinks so. Here is a snip from the article on CNN.com:

In a news conference Friday, Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly
said that it was the first fatal accident involving a Southwest
flight in the discount carrier's 35-year history.

The entire article can be found he

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/09/chicago.airplane/index.html


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Sacramento, CA

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Rick" wrote in message
...

Sadly there's one fatality, the first in SWA's history.



Does that one count against SWA? He wasn't on the airplane.



It does in my book. I think this is even worse than killing a
passenger. At least the passengers knowing accepted the risk of riding
the airplane.


Matt

We don't know that SWA was at fault. Let's wait for the investigation
to be completed before we assign blame.

roncachamp wrote:
We don't know that SWA was at fault. Let's wait for the investigation
to be completed before we assign blame.


The NTSB will find pilot error. That's a given. I'm not suggesting the pilot
made a mistake; only that the NTSB will make that a finding. It's their way:
"PIC failed to maintain clearance from ground obstacles".

Anyone want to bet? Can you feel my love for the NTSB?

All that being said, I feel sorry for everyone involved in this. The flight
crew will carry the sense of guilt forever and the family who's child died will
always associate snow with loss now.

Nobody should be too quick to assign guilt in this. None of us were there.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:

The NTSB will find pilot error. That's a given. I'm not suggesting the pilot
made a mistake; only that the NTSB will make that a finding. It's their way:
"PIC failed to maintain clearance from ground obstacles".

It might help to look at it as an observation, rather than a verdict.

Some day, I'd like to see them come right out and say, "We have no clue
why that happened, 'cause we have too little information to gain a clear
picture of the cause, but as a committee this is the best we can come up
with."

Think that could happen?

Of course, it's always possible that the decision to continue in a
moderate to heavy snowfall, at night, to a very limited length slippery
runway with a displaced threshold and an ILS touchdown point leaving
~4500' remaining after flare, with a tailwind, and published minimums
of 300' & 3/4 mile (or 4000 RVR, according to my out of date approach
book), in reported conditions of 1/4 to 1/2 mile (I have no reported RVR
info), requiring very precise airspeed management, perfect functioning
of crew and equipment, AND accurate information from Airport Operations
as to the true condition of the runway, is at least a very questionable
choice by the cockpit crew. A recent history of three other incidents
when Southwest airliners ran off the runway after landing, one almost
identical to this MDW accident except that it happened in sunny Southern
California after the airplane touched down at 182 kts, on a runway of
the same usable length as MDW. Hmmm.

Speculation is inevitable. Those who preach against it publicly are
nonetheless quietly doing exactly that in their own heads. It is
impossible not to do so if one has any interest at all in the subject.
Many of us will learn something from the process. Let's hear all sides
of the issues, re "speculation", airline operations, the FAA/NTSB,
airline bankruptcies, etc.

A final consideration: the job of an Airline crew is to avoid those
situations where every single thing has to go your way in order to make
it all come out right -- the old "superior judgment trumps superior
airmanship" thing. So far, the information available is that just about
everything was against this crew, and yet they continued into MDW. Yes,
there is much that we don't yet know, and the rest could be even worse.
Were the thrust reversers slow in deploying? Apparently, but it is also
reported that the touchdown was smooth -- the last thing I'd want when I
need spoilers and reversers NOW on a slippery, rain or snow-covered
runway. "Thirty-two seconds from touchdown to initial impact", over a
distance of a mile or less? If those numbers are correct, that's a very
high average speed. Hmmm.

I hope that no airline pilot will ever again accept a landing at MDW
under the conditions which prevailed when SWA Flight 1248 arrived on Dec
8, 2005. And if they do so, I hope that no member of my family is
aboard, or in the vicinity.


Jack

We don't know that SWA was at fault. Let's wait for the investigation
to be completed before we assign blame.

We don't know that SWA was at fault. Let's wait for the investigation
to be completed before we assign blame.

Not blame, or assigned, but there is no need to wait for a
final NTSB report if a reasoned judgment can suggest an
improvement.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"roncachamp" wrote in message
ups.com...
| We don't know that SWA was at fault. Let's wait for the
investigation
| to be completed before we assign blame.
|

Not blame, or assigned, but there is no need to wait for a
final NTSB report if a reasoned judgment can suggest an
improvement.


A reasoned judgment cannot be made before the facts are known and the
facts cannot be known until the investigation is complete.