![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
One lesson I think we can all learn from this accident is to strongly
consider NOT landing with a tailwind. I know that the prevailing runway is used, winds shift and Tower doesn't want to turn everyone around untill they are sure that the wind is stabilized. But....landing with the wind means higher landing speeds and all the hazards associated with that (not just length of runout, there are other issues). It takes guts to decline the prevailing runway, and there is a LOT of pressure to land like everyone else is.....it's your lives of passengers/equipment/career depending on your decision. It is decisions like these why airline captains get paid the salaried they get paid. Not an easy choice, but look what happens when one makes the wrong choice. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I heard, but only once, that the reason the runway in use wasn't changed was
the possibility of conflicts with O'Hare traffic... "Doug" wrote in message oups.com... One lesson I think we can all learn from this accident is to strongly consider NOT landing with a tailwind. I know that the prevailing runway is used, winds shift and Tower doesn't want to turn everyone around untill they are sure that the wind is stabilized. But....landing with the wind means higher landing speeds and all the hazards associated with that (not just length of runout, there are other issues). It takes guts to decline the prevailing runway, and there is a LOT of pressure to land like everyone else is.....it's your lives of passengers/equipment/career depending on your decision. It is decisions like these why airline captains get paid the salaried they get paid. Not an easy choice, but look what happens when one makes the wrong choice. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Lakeview
Bill wrote: I heard, but only once, that the reason the runway in use wasn't changed was the possibility of conflicts with O'Hare traffic... The opposite ILS also has a higher RVR minimum (5000), making it unusable anyway, headwind or not. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
News this morning said the plane landed too far down the runway, would have needed another 800' if it didn't go off the
end... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
11 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | November 11th 03 11:58 PM |
08 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | November 9th 03 01:51 AM |
Washington Post Article | Tex Houston | Military Aviation | 4 | September 26th 03 03:35 PM |
18 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 19th 03 03:47 AM |
PFC Lynch gets a Bronze Star? | Brian | Military Aviation | 77 | August 2nd 03 11:15 AM |