wrote:

There are oil and gasoline terminals in the area of Central Ave. &
I-55, so it could have been one large fire-ball.

I-55 is a LONG way from the departure end of 31C -- a little over a
mile. Remember, this was a landing accident, and they didn't even make
it across S. Central Ave.


...pilot debriefing mentioned issues with the Captain have problems
engaging the thrust reversers, the co-pilot had to "force" them.

That happens when the struts aren't compressed and/or you have no wheel
spin-up.

That night at MDW was the place for a crew who had cut their aviation
teeth on Great Lakes winter ops. The name "SOUTH WEST" doesn't paint
that kind of a picture for me.

WRT: Charles Oppermann's Blog:

http://spaces.msn.com/members/chuckop/

"Chicago Tribune: Midway radios crackled warnings"

The Chicago Tribune is reporting today that controllers and pilots
were concerned about the choice of runway 31C and the unavailability
of runway 13C, which would have been preferable given the wind.

[....]

I'm amazed that the Chicago Tribune authors would suggest that 13C
would be more preferable because it slopes upward by 5 feet from one
end to the other. I think it's a very minor benefit. That kind of
detail, while ignoring the actual length of the runway is curious to
me.


The five foot difference in elevation would not bother me much. The
tailwind incurred by operating on 31C rather than turning it into a
headwind on 13C, given all the other circumstances, would bother me a lot.

There comes a time when somebody in the airplane has to make a decision
unencumbered by concerns for schedule, cost, or convenience. When you
do, you can never know whether doing so made a difference, but you will
always know it was the right thing to do. Every Thanksgiving (and the
other 364 &1/4 days of the year) I give thanks that almost all of our
decisions are correct. But when we have to wait to know that until after
the fact, it's the same as rolling the dice.


Jack