![]() |
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 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This is all speculation, that is all true. Something that bugs me is
that the ILS for 31C requires RVR of 4000 or 3/4 of mile visibility. The METAR from just before the accident pegged visibility at 1/2 mile. Seems to me that the approach shouldn't have even started. Well, for starters, prevailing visibility and a specific runway's RVR can often differ by quite a bit. That's why RVR is controlling for an airliner. It also changes minute by minute, and the hourly ATIS isn't at all a good indicator of what the RVR was when that airplane landed. Yep, thanks for that. The hourly METAR was: KMDW 090053Z 10011KT 1/2SM SN FZFG BKN004 OVC014 M03/M05 A3006 RMK AO2 SLP196 R31C/4500FT SNINCR 1/10 P0000 T10331050 $ Showing the field visibilty as 1/2-mile and 31C's RVR as 4,500 feet - greater than minimum. The FAA accident report has the following for the weather: 0115 11007KT 1/2SM SN FZFG VV003 M04/M05 A3006 R31C/4500V500 This doesn't appear properly formatted, as with a V separator, it's supposed to be minimum and maximum. It's possible that it's supposed to be a minimum of 4,500 and a maximum of 5,000 feet, and the extra zero was dropped off. Or it could be that visibility ranged from 500 feet to 4,500 feet. That I find less likely. It'll be interesting to get the CVR and ATC transcripts and find out what the pilots were told. Second, Southwest's 737-700 airplanes have a heads-up display that lets them use 3000 RVR on that runway at MDW. Interesting! Do you any additional info on that? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|