MDW Overrun - SWA

If I had a spare $10, to bet, you can send my winnings to me
when the NTSB is finished. I correctly described the final
report of the JFK,Jr. NTSB report the day of the crash. I
may be very smart or psychic (or is that psycho) but in any
case, I have no official standing or any reason to withhold
my opinion.
I do KNOW the length of the runway and the configuration of
an ILS. The last time I personally landed at MDW it was in
a blizzard with snow deep enough that the tips of the props
on the King Air 300 were cutting into the snow on the
unplowed taxiways.
I will tell you that 90% of the nose wheel tires on most
airplanes below 40,000 pounds are worn out on the right side
[left side when viewed from the front] and I can teach you
why this is so and improve all your flying technique, but
you'll need to send me more than $10 for that.


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


"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
. com...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:vVpmf.17957$QW2.13192@dukeread08...
| Agreed, but it was a stupid thing to do, MDW is marginal
on
| good VFR days. IFR caused by low ceilings and
visibilities
| are not really a problem either, you either see and land
on
| a dry or wet runway or make a missed approach. But snow
and
| icy runways have poor braking, runway light obscured,
| white-out conditions with attendant landing problems.
| Airline pilots are well trained and regimented. This
can be
| good or bad. When "company pressure" makes
non-operational
| needs, such as the companies bottom line or on-time
record,
| more important issues can take a backseat.
|
| PIC means that you take the heat, if necessary, from
| passengers, chief pilot and upper management when you
spend
| a few hundred or thousands of dollars diverting. A good
| chief pilot will support a well reasoned decision to
divert.
| There should be a pat on the back for a good safe
diversion,
| but often it is "chicken, we got in OK, why did
everybody
| else except you land." [The fact is that is rarely
true,
| lots of pilots divert or delay, but since they didn't
crash,
| who knows.]
|
| You need to call the NTSB. They say it could take them a
year to determine
| the cause of the accident. You seem to have figured it
out without having
| been there. I am sure they will appreciate the help.
|
| --
| James H. Macklin
| ATP,CFI,A&P
|
| "beavis" wrote in message
| ...
| | The fact that this is the airline's first fatal crash
in
| nearly 35
| | years of operation speaks volumes about its safety
| culture. I'd put
| | its record up against any airline's.
|
|
|
|

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.
|

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

I will tell you that 90% of the nose wheel tires on most
airplanes below 40,000 pounds are worn out on the right side
[left side when viewed from the front] and I can teach you
why this is so and improve all your flying technique, but
you'll need to send me more than $10 for that.

Okay, 'fess up. Why is this so?

(You'll earn ten bucks off your next stay at the Inn... :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

News reports say that the jet was landing with a tail wind. Anyone know how
much of a tailwind it was? Why were they landing with a tailwind?

Mike Schumann

"Rick" wrote in message
...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...33660.story?co
ll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

Sadly there's one fatality, the first in SWA's history. I've driven past
that intersection many times, and it's partly exhilarating and partly
terrifying to have the jets take off so close above you. And it's almost
always a little disconcerting landing there with the usual lake effect
turbulence on final, especially when you seem to float over the runway
forever before actually touching down. I've never piloted anything beyond
my
simulator, but isn't it really pushing the envelope to land (on 31C) in
fairly heavy snow with winds from the east at 13 mph?

- Rick

In article et, Mike
Schumann wrote:

News reports say that the jet was landing with a tail wind. Anyone know how
much of a tailwind it was?

I think the report was that it was around 7-8 knots of tailwind.

Why were they landing with a tailwind?

Because the tower assigned it, and they accepted it. The longer answer
is that the other arrival interfered with O'Hare, and requesting it
guarantees you'll hold for at least 45 minutes, and probably end up
diverting because you don't have the fuel for that.

I know, hindsight, but this happens at airports all the time. It
happens to me in BOS pretty regularly, because they can pack more
traffic in one way than the other. My airline can land with up to 15
knots of tailwind, if our landing data show we're within weight limits
for it.

Pilots tend to sit on the left side and not look truly
straight ahead, but look a few degrees toward the center of
the airplane. Thus they think the airplane's longitudinal
axis is not aligned with the direction of travel, since
their reference point is incorrect. I've even seen pilots,
in calm wind conditions, setup a slip to align their
incorrect aim point. Then since they also fail to properly
flare and follow through with the landing, allowing the nose
to slam down when the torque from main wheel spin-up occurs,
the nose wheel tire makes hard contact with the ground while
swinging to the right as the CG corrects their direction of
travel.
The cure is to first get an accurate reference point
directly in front of the pilot, parallel and off-set from
the centerline; Then always get that point pointed straight
down the runway;And follow through with the flare so that
the pilot controls the nose wheel touchdown.

That will also make your airwork better, since that same
reference point is used for in-flight maneuvers and the
attention to detail makes you a better pilot.


BTW, I've actually had a professional pilot, CFI taking a
flight review want to come to blows when I told him what he
was doing. It took a few trips around the pattern before he
saw his error. This is not just a problem with SE trainers,
look at the tires on a Lear or King Air next time you have
the chance, it isn't uncommon to see all the tire wear on
the co-pilot's side because the Captain does all the
landings.


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

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:HxCmf.394396$084.134791@attbi_s22...
| I will tell you that 90% of the nose wheel tires on most
| airplanes below 40,000 pounds are worn out on the right
side
| [left side when viewed from the front] and I can teach
you
| why this is so and improve all your flying technique,
but
| you'll need to send me more than $10 for that.
|
| Okay, 'fess up. Why is this so?
|
| (You'll earn ten bucks off your next stay at the Inn...
:-)
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|
|

Low IFR weather, 31C is the ILS runway. The wind was NE at
13 knots, I think that is what I heard.

Airports that they could have gone to within a 30 minute
diversion, Springfield, IL has ILS 04 on a long runway,
Peoria, IL, Indianapolis, IN, Milwaukee. WI and of course
O'Hare.
It was a stupid error on the part of flight crew, IMO, and
they are lucky this is not Europe, in the EU they could be
facing criminal charges for the death of the kid.

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


"Mike Schumann" wrote in
message
news | News reports say that the jet was landing with a tail
wind. Anyone know how
| much of a tailwind it was? Why were they landing with a
tailwind?
|
| Mike Schumann
|
| "Rick" wrote in message
| ...
|
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...33660.story?co
| ll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true
|
| Sadly there's one fatality, the first in SWA's history.
I've driven past
| that intersection many times, and it's partly
exhilarating and partly
| terrifying to have the jets take off so close above you.
And it's almost
| always a little disconcerting landing there with the
usual lake effect
| turbulence on final, especially when you seem to float
over the runway
| forever before actually touching down. I've never
piloted anything beyond
| my
| simulator, but isn't it really pushing the envelope to
land (on 31C) in
| fairly heavy snow with winds from the east at 13 mph?
|
| - Rick
|
|
|
|

Landing in BOS in crummy conditions with a tailwind may be OK due to longer
runways. Landing with a 9 knot tailwind in a blizard with fair to poor
braking on a 6,500' runway was obviously not a good idea.

Mike Schumann

"beavis" wrote in message
...
In article et, Mike
Schumann wrote:

News reports say that the jet was landing with a tail wind. Anyone know
how
much of a tailwind it was?

I think the report was that it was around 7-8 knots of tailwind.

Why were they landing with a tailwind?

Because the tower assigned it, and they accepted it. The longer answer
is that the other arrival interfered with O'Hare, and requesting it
guarantees you'll hold for at least 45 minutes, and probably end up
diverting because you don't have the fuel for that.

I know, hindsight, but this happens at airports all the time. It
happens to me in BOS pretty regularly, because they can pack more
traffic in one way than the other. My airline can land with up to 15
knots of tailwind, if our landing data show we're within weight limits
for it.

The landing threshold is displaced, only 5800 feet available
and the ILS/GS will bring you down with only about 4600-4800
feet remaining. That will be reduced by the tailwind
extending the flare-touchdown. Then the stopping distance
will be increased by 50-200% because of the ice/snow.


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

"Mike Schumann" wrote in
message
k.net...
| Landing in BOS in crummy conditions with a tailwind may be
OK due to longer
| runways. Landing with a 9 knot tailwind in a blizard with
fair to poor
| braking on a 6,500' runway was obviously not a good idea.
|
| Mike Schumann
|
| "beavis" wrote in message
| ...
| In article
et, Mike
| Schumann wrote:
|
| News reports say that the jet was landing with a tail
wind. Anyone know
| how
| much of a tailwind it was?
|
| I think the report was that it was around 7-8 knots of
tailwind.
|
| Why were they landing with a tailwind?
|
| Because the tower assigned it, and they accepted it.
The longer answer
| is that the other arrival interfered with O'Hare, and
requesting it
| guarantees you'll hold for at least 45 minutes, and
probably end up
| diverting because you don't have the fuel for that.
|
| I know, hindsight, but this happens at airports all the
time. It
| happens to me in BOS pretty regularly, because they can
pack more
| traffic in one way than the other. My airline can land
with up to 15
| knots of tailwind, if our landing data show we're within
weight limits
| for it.
|
|