![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jim Macklin wrote: I would like to know why the PIC did not divert to O'Hare or some other airport. Seems pretty simple , the plane stopped right where a calculation indicates it would stop. The seasoned flier will spare the extra $$ for assigned seats at the BIG airport during the winter. Longer runways and top shelf Daley relatives driving the plows. The under-acheivers get dumped plowing at MDW ![]() JG -- James H. Macklin ATP,CFI,A&P "Paul kgyy" wrote in message ups.com... | yep | |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Someday, the Daley gang will all be in jail, but still, the
diversion decision should be based on the weather, not local crooked politicians. When I was faced with a diversion choice, I always went to SPI because I could drop in on my mother. -- James H. Macklin ATP,CFI,A&P -- The people think the Constitution protects their rights; But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome. some support http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm wrote in message oups.com... | | Jim Macklin wrote: | I would like to know why the PIC did not divert to O'Hare or | some other airport. Seems pretty simple , the plane stopped | right where a calculation indicates it would stop. | | The seasoned flier will spare the extra $$ for assigned seats at the | BIG | airport during the winter. Longer runways and top shelf Daley relatives | driving | the plows. The under-acheivers get dumped plowing at MDW ![]() | | JG | | | | -- | James H. Macklin | ATP,CFI,A&P | | "Paul kgyy" wrote in message | ups.com... | | yep | | | |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Macklin wrote:
Someday, the Daley gang will all be in jail, but still, the Not likely. Chicago has a long history of celebrating crooked politicians, not prosecuting them. I see no indication this will change any time soon. Matt |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We don't know that SWA was at fault. Let's wait for the investigation
to be completed before we assign blame. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We don't know that SWA was at fault. Let's wait for the investigation
to be completed before we assign blame. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|