And the relevance would be what, exactly? Kind of like you...having an "issue" with "me"? And is the price of eggs, really worth the wear and tare on a chicken's ass? I wait with baited breath for your next "on topic" utterance.Hoov wrote:Well seeing as you have an issue with so many companies in this country regarding bonds or companies you don't like; Why would you have an "issue" with them? Do you work for them? Do they have any impact on how you operate from day-to-day? I don't necessarily disagree with your posts but you ruin a lot of threads based on your feelings, and you call him out for having an "issue". You have issues with every operator in this country, and post about it all the time. So if he has "issues" let him express them. They weren't there for the situation, just like you aren't a low timer stuck looking for work...Doc wrote:Why would you (or any of you) have any "issue" with this? Were any of you there? Does it impact on any way your day to day lives? Is there any lesson here, from which we can make our little world a better place? A safer place?parrot_head wrote:For the record, my issue isn't with the crew declaring an emergency and requesting another runway. My issue is what happened after the fact and the way the crew decided to get themselves to the other runway.
Give it up already.
Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
So far, there has been no mention of low fuel or any other problem other than a strong x-wind, so assuming this, here's what I would have done (with the benefit of hindsight).
I'm on final, and I decide it is not safe to land on that runway due to x-wind. I tell the controller that (and depending where I am, I might start the published missed approach and advise ATC). Then I request a runway more into wind.
If the controller tells me another runway is unavailable (for whatever reason), depending on my fuel, I may hold to see if the wind shifts.
If another runway is available, but the delay would cause me to go below my min. fuel, I go to my alternate.
After I land I write a safety report.
I'm on final, and I decide it is not safe to land on that runway due to x-wind. I tell the controller that (and depending where I am, I might start the published missed approach and advise ATC). Then I request a runway more into wind.
If the controller tells me another runway is unavailable (for whatever reason), depending on my fuel, I may hold to see if the wind shifts.
If another runway is available, but the delay would cause me to go below my min. fuel, I go to my alternate.
After I land I write a safety report.
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Good in theory, but you've just dropped 200+ passengers, at the wrong airport. Many with connections. He did the most expeditious thing he could. Got the into wind runway. No harm, no foul.airway wrote:So far, there has been no mention of low fuel or any other problem other than a strong x-wind, so assuming this, here's what I would have done (with the benefit of hindsight).
I'm on final, and I decide it is not safe to land on that runway due to x-wind. I tell the controller that (and depending where I am, I might start the published missed approach and advise ATC). Then I request a runway more into wind.
If the controller tells me another runway is unavailable (for whatever reason), depending on my fuel, I may hold to see if the wind shifts.
If another runway is available, but the delay would cause me to go below my min. fuel, I go to my alternate.
After I land I write a safety report.
I think sometimes, some folks at ATC really think we're up here, because they're down there....the opposite is true.
Airplane asks for another runway....he has his reasons....you give it to him. Unless it's actually closed.
-
- Rank 2
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:24 pm
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
On the flip side if you ask for a runway and if it isn't immediately available, we have our reasons.Doc wrote:Airplane asks for another runway....he has his reasons....you give it to him.
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Do you misplace them often?if you ask for a runway and if it isn't immediately available, we have our reasons
I look at the flipside of this. Imagine this pilot had instead been weak, and had let ATC bully him into accepting an excessive crosswind, which result in accident.
Can you imagine how the pilot would have been crucified? ATC, the FAA and the NTSB would have all "noted" that there was a better runway which the pilot did not use.
ATC and the FAA would have all blamed the pilot for accepting the excessive crosswind and crashing.
If you have a choice between the above, and pissing off ATC, well ...
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 8132
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
It better not be because you have to depart Speedbird 114 before you can give the pilot the runway...parrot_head wrote:On the flip side if you ask for a runway and if it isn't immediately available, we have our reasons.Doc wrote:Airplane asks for another runway....he has his reasons....you give it to him.
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
-
- Rank 2
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:24 pm
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
I've never said that the crew should have accepted the crosswind runway. They have every right to request/demand a suitable runway. Was there a safer runway for them available? Yes. Did they need to declare an emergency to get their preferred runway? Sounds like it. Was it necessary for them to break off their approach short final and proceed to their intended runway? I don't think so, they weren't at risk of falling out of the sky. It sounds like (I know, I wasn't there) there was an aircraft taxiing to position on that runway and another aircraft on approach at the time that needed to be moved out of the way. Because they declared the emergency they were going to get there requested runway 31, fine. Maybe not in the most expeditious way possible due to the conflicting traffic (another circuit perhaps), but what was the rush? (As for the rumored fuel issue, I'll leave that alone as that information wasn't available to ATC or anyone but the crew at the time).
Flying around a busy traffic environment like your on fire, when your not, doesn't seem like the safest thing to do. The controllers need time to co-ordinate with each other, time to move traffic out of the way, and time to call out the trucks.
Flying around a busy traffic environment like your on fire, when your not, doesn't seem like the safest thing to do. The controllers need time to co-ordinate with each other, time to move traffic out of the way, and time to call out the trucks.
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Other than a closed runway, name one or two of "your" reasons. From a flight safety point of view. Love to hear them. I'd be particularly interested in the ones involving 200 or so passengers. This isn't a pissing contest. We're all here (or we bloody should be) to ensure the safety of the FLIGHT....and for NO other reason.parrot_head wrote: we have our reasons.
Noise abatement and "convenience" (flow control) are NOT valid reasons, BTW.
- cdnpilot77
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2467
- Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:24 pm
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Seems to me the controller that handled the US Airways ditching into the Hudson didn't need any more than a minute or so to clear the way for Sully's Airbus to land, at their discretion, at no less than 3-4 New York Metro Area airports on any runway they wanted.Flying around a busy traffic environment like your on fire, when your not, doesn't seem like the safest thing to do. The controllers need time to co-ordinate with each other, time to move traffic out of the way, and time to call out the trucks
Given the circumstances, I think that is a weak argument. The Emergency was declared, don't delay, clear the way!
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
I think, the questions here are....Would he have been cleared for the into wind runway without declaring an emergency?
Was there another factor (fuel perhaps?) that necessitated immediate reaction from ATC?
I know I've been in a position to request an inactive runway on a couple of occasions. For the most part, ATC has been pretty accommodating. On one occasion, I got a nasty letter from enforcement about "insisting" on landing on a runway not approved by tower...long story...but it went my way.
Was there another factor (fuel perhaps?) that necessitated immediate reaction from ATC?
I know I've been in a position to request an inactive runway on a couple of occasions. For the most part, ATC has been pretty accommodating. On one occasion, I got a nasty letter from enforcement about "insisting" on landing on a runway not approved by tower...long story...but it went my way.
-
- Rank 2
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:24 pm
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Doc wrote:This isn't a pissing contest. We're all here (or we bloody should be) to ensure the safety of the FLIGHT....and for NO other reason.
I agree. I've never said that I agreed that the active had an excessive crosswind component, I've never said that the aircraft should have landed on a runway that they deemed as unsafe, and I've never said that the crew was wrong in declaring an emergency to get a safe runway for them. Should an aircraft have to declare an emergency to get a runway that doesn't have an excessive crosswind component? No.
Did you not hear the part about another aircraft taxiing into position on the same runway?Doc wrote:name one or two of "your" reasons
Doc wrote:you've just dropped 200+ passengers, at the wrong airport. Many with connections.
Where's the safety issue here?
Where's my crystal ball?Doc wrote:I think, the questions here are....Would he have been cleared for the into wind runway without declaring an emergency?
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Interesting reading from PPrune
No matter what, nobody should be pushed to declare an emergency to force ATC to use a proper runway...
Still don't know if min fuel was involved or not but what a joke!I think some people need to understand ZNY center does not operate like some other centers in the country. "Min Fuel" means nothing to NY, because they have 200 other a/c coming over the pond all declaring "Min Fuel."
You can ask for whatever you need, your not gonna get it. Even in this case the crew "declared" and still the controllers tried to play stupid, and act like they didn't hear the crew declare an emergency.
You can request 31R as soon as you get the local ATIS, which was maybe 150mi out. All your request is going to go in the garbage, they are not going to change the entire arrival configuration for one a/c, needless to say how this change will affect EWR or LGA. The crew did the right thing by declaring and deviating from FAR necessary to get that aircraft safely on the ground.
Spend some time here flying in and out of JFK and you'll understand how things work here.
No matter what, nobody should be pushed to declare an emergency to force ATC to use a proper runway...
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Don't you know that you're one meeeeellion times more likely to die driving (including on a bus) than flying?!? I'd say that's pretty dangerous.... I guess airlines (for which ATC provide a service, yes, that's been made clear) would only be too content to halve their flight schedules and cost them exorbitant sums of ca$h rather than land with a crosswind. A one-off like this, ok, but to have tower have to deal with every Tom, Dick, and Jane at the yoke dictating the flow of traffic would be unworkable. Airspace structure (incl. tower/terminal/enroute/airline) and corresponding inter-unit agreements are designed in such a way that guesswork (on the service provider's part) is supposedly eliminated, thus maximizing safety, and this translates to sometimes rigid procedures. I can safely assume this is much worse in congested air like NY tracon. This guy did what he had to do to get his airplane down safely, I get that. However, the controller probably had a minor embolism coordinating with other affected controllers (not heard on tapes...) and other aircraft. My feeling is that if fuel was not an issue, this pilot may get in a bit of trouble. It's not a matter of who's got the bigger 'nads, but who employs their best (and safest) judgement before the gavel falls. We'll see. Night y'all.parrot_head wrote:
Doc wrote:you've just dropped 200+ passengers, at the wrong airport. Many with connections.
Where's the safety issue here?
Turn right/left heading XXX, vectors for the hell of it.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1485
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
- Location: the stars playground
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
I've rolled with quartering tailwind T/Os that were right up to the envelope of the AC (closer then what he had), I've landed in 90degree x-winds that were beyond the envelope of my AC and compared to this guy I'm a green horn lol
Tower asked him to perform a maneuver that was WELL WITHIN the performance capabilities of the aircraft, the Capt. decided that he did not feel safe performance that maneuver (a x-wind landing) ---> By definition this guy cant fly the plane within it's STATED performance envelope, thus he should NOT be flying the aircraft
Tower asked him to perform a maneuver that was WELL WITHIN the performance capabilities of the aircraft, the Capt. decided that he did not feel safe performance that maneuver (a x-wind landing) ---> By definition this guy cant fly the plane within it's STATED performance envelope, thus he should NOT be flying the aircraft
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Betcha AA was JFK ATC's bitch for the rest of that day.
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Only an idiot would operate his aircraft to the limits of it's "envelope" if there were options. The elephant in your room Sir, is your EGO. Show it the door.SuperchargedRS wrote: Tower asked him to perform a maneuver that was WELL WITHIN the performance capabilities of the aircraft, the Capt. decided that he did not feel safe performance that maneuver (a x-wind landing) ---> By definition this guy cant fly the plane within it's STATED performance envelope, thus he should NOT be flying the aircraft
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
I think you will find that the most skilled and experienced pilots are the ones who will NOT land a plane in a significant crosswind with 200+ passengers when there is an into-wind runway available. If you read the accident reports you generally find that decision making and skill level generally go hand-in-hand.Doc wrote:Only an idiot would operate his aircraft to the limits of it's "envelope" if there were options. The elephant in your room Sir, is your EGO. Show it the door.SuperchargedRS wrote: Tower asked him to perform a maneuver that was WELL WITHIN the performance capabilities of the aircraft, the Capt. decided that he did not feel safe performance that maneuver (a x-wind landing) ---> By definition this guy cant fly the plane within it's STATED performance envelope, thus he should NOT be flying the aircraft
Being a good pilot is knowing that you could most likely safely execute a maneuver, but making the decision that it is probably not a good idea. No green-horn would dare upset ATC in the way this pilot did.
However I'm wondering if it wouldn't have been a better decision to simply divert to the nearest airport. Sure you would piss off a whole load of passengers and your airline, but you just make sure you make everyone aware of who is to blame (ATC). You could also mention this fact on the radio when talking to ATC and it might perk them up a bit (but maybe not).
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Something (anything) goes wrong on landing - a Widebody, Heavy Jet, with 200 + passengers. With a 30+ knot quartering tail-wind, the next thing you will see is;
The Tower Controller, hiding under his bed saying; "Talk to the Captain, all he had to do was request an into wind runway."
Emergency Declaration aside - we weren't there, we don't know all the details.
ATC is a service - treat it as one.
Hat's off to these Pilots, enough of the "tail wagging the dog."
The Tower Controller, hiding under his bed saying; "Talk to the Captain, all he had to do was request an into wind runway."
Emergency Declaration aside - we weren't there, we don't know all the details.
ATC is a service - treat it as one.
Hat's off to these Pilots, enough of the "tail wagging the dog."
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Indeed. This situation reminds me of a cell drifting across the localizer, and when the next pilot decides to not fly through it, he will be branded a coward because "the last guy made it through".The Tower Controller, hiding under his bed saying; "Talk to the Captain, all he had to do was request an into wind runway."
I'd rather have ATC's panties in a bunch, than a pile of twisted aluminum.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1485
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
- Location: the stars playground
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Understood but this was a good 12 percent below the Boeing max crosswind (and the max is probably a bit under a the real max). I think many people use "safety" and "decision making"as a cover for lack of ability, just like "think about the children", the runway ATC cleared them for WAS SAFE, perhaps this is my lack of experience showing but just proceed with the cleared runway and if it gets too hairy abort.CpnCrunch wrote:I think you will find that the most skilled and experienced pilots are the ones who will NOT land a plane in a significant crosswind with 200+ passengers when there is an into-wind runway available. If you read the accident reports you generally find that decision making and skill level generally go hand-in-hand.Doc wrote:Only an idiot would operate his aircraft to the limits of it's "envelope" if there were options. The elephant in your room Sir, is your EGO. Show it the door.SuperchargedRS wrote: Tower asked him to perform a maneuver that was WELL WITHIN the performance capabilities of the aircraft, the Capt. decided that he did not feel safe performance that maneuver (a x-wind landing) ---> By definition this guy cant fly the plane within it's STATED performance envelope, thus he should NOT be flying the aircraft
Being a good pilot is knowing that you could most likely safely execute a maneuver, but making the decision that it is probably not a good idea. No green-horn would dare upset ATC in the way this pilot did.
This is like going up on a check ride and refusing to stall the AC because it's not approved for spins, well it could spin... but in all reality you probably are just not confident in your stalls.
This was a abuse of a emergency declaration.
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Isn't there a 5kts tailwind limit? With winds 320 at 23 gusting 35 the tail would be 6kts.SuperchargedRS wrote: the runway ATC cleared them for WAS SAFE
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
From other sources, the max crosswind component for the 767 at American Airlines is 29 knots. This is why the pilots advised ATC that runway 22 was inadequate for landing. Remember that the max demonstrated crosswind is what the test pilots determined was the maximum they could handle on a rather new airplane that wasn't filled with paying passengers and could be fully inspected before the next flight, which could be delayed for a few days, not turned in 90 minutes for Chicago. I'm guessing you have never seen video footage of max crosswind landing tests.SuperchargedRS wrote:Understood but this was a good 12 percent below the Boeing max crosswind (and the max is probably a bit under a the real max). I think many people use "safety" and "decision making"as a cover for lack of ability, just like "think about the children", the runway ATC cleared them for WAS SAFE, perhaps this is my lack of experience showing but just proceed with the cleared runway and if it gets too hairy abort.
This is like going up on a check ride and refusing to stall the AC because it's not approved for spins, well it could spin... but in all reality you probably are just not confident in your stalls.
This was a abuse of a emergency declaration.
And yes, your lack of experience is showing.
Have Pratts - Will Travel
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
And yes, your lack of experience is showing
No point in debating, with someone that doesn't have "two clues!" Just like doing spinning a Cessna....got it.
No point in debating, with someone that doesn't have "two clues!" Just like doing spinning a Cessna....got it.
-
- Rank 1
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:22 am
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Not only have I seen them I've been in a tower working while they were doing them.I'm guessing you have never seen video footage of max crosswind landing tests.
It's sad to read this thread and see the comments like (and I'm paraphrasing) he flipped ATC the bird, good for him. I guess it goes to show how much this industry has gone down hill in the last few years. Anybody who thinks controllers are closing runways for their own amusement, or that tower controllers refuse runways to aircraft just because they feel like it has no business flying.
Before anybody declares an emergency and lands on a closed runway, I'll throw this out there for you to put in the back of your mind. When a runway is closed it's an uncontrolled surface. Tower doesn't always know what's out there, or what may have been done to the runway.
Trust me, we are more pissed off by runway closures than you are.
Re: Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.
Um, nobody landed on a "closed" runway.sh*t magnet wrote:...Before anybody declares an emergency and lands on a closed runway...
Cheers,
Brew
Brew