"Danny Deger" wrote in
:

Have you listened to the tape. It is pretty obvious that the controller
was willing to give the pilot the straight-in and the supervisor said no
without any rationalization. In my opinion the airspace could have been
cleared, but the supervisor choose not to. Listen to the tape and tell
me what you think.

Actually, when I listened to the edited tape on the WFAA report, my initial
reaction to the inter-controller phone call was that the word "emergency" was
not mentioned. Basically, controller #1 said that "American 489 is requesting
17C" and controller #2 said "Unable."

It's possible that the fact that he had a fuel emergency was discussed
elsewhere in the phone call. But my guess is, that if the request was made that
way, controller #2 was probably justified in his refusal to stop all area
traffix for a pompous pilot wanting to land opposite the rest of the airport.

However, the report indicates (without ever playing tapes of it) that the pilot
reiterated his fuel leak situation and his request for 17C at least one other
time before landing. Presumably, the situation eventually got to the controller
responsible for runway 17C and/or 35R. But from where I sit, it may have been a
classic case of "the Telephone Game"...