FAA Control tower Abandoned

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
ink.net:


"beavis" wrote in message
...

There's your answer. If the tower is closed, there's no-one to issue
RVR reports; the ASOS won't do it. Further, the charts specifically
say that Cat II (and III) minimums are NA when the tower is closed.

With no operating tower, they require Cat I minimums, which are 1/2
mile for both 05 and 23.

So what they said was true: They couldn't land because there was no-one
in the tower.


No, what they said was false: They couldn't land because the weather was
below minimums for all available approaches.

What the pilots are reported to have said to their passengers is
irrelevant.

Based on the available information it would seem that the pilots made a
sensible decision, How the cranky passengers interpreted and relayed the
on-air announcement to NBC reporters doesn't change that fact. And how the
sensationalist reporter spins it is even moreso irrelevant.

If you read the story carefully, it is even possible to interpret that the
pilot announced to the passengers that the combination of the tower being
closed and the weather being below minimums left them with no safe, legal
options to land at PVD, but that the reporter left out that important
detail. After all, there is no direct quote of what the Pilot said, only a
statement that, "NBC 10's Audrey Laganas reported that the planes turned
around in flight just before midnight. The passengers said the pilots told
them they were turning back because there was no one in the control tower
at T.F. Green Airport."

But the angry mother of an infant who refused to buy formula or Daipers in
Baltimore at 1am didn't seem to complain about the diversion, just about
how she and others were left in a challenging situation as a result. And
the woman travelling with her mother didn't complain about being diverted,
only about being treated like "cattle".


A more accurate news headline would have been, "Diverted Passengers
Complain". But how much more engaging is "Southwest Planes Turn Around
Minutes From Green"...

Robert Chambers wrote:


Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Robert Chambers" wrote in message
. com...

You fly to an airport, the tower is open, you don't think the tower
is open and you land anyway?

You've entered class D without establishing communications 91.129(c)1
then you've just landed without a clearance 91.129(i)

So yes you've been naughty and will most likely be asked to call the
tower.



You can't enter Class D airspace if it's outside the hours the Class D
airspace is in effect.


So by that logic, for example if PVD's tower controllers said "ok SWA
1234 we will stick around for another 30 minutes" - SWA 1234 still
wouldn't be allowed to shoot the CAT II approach because the tower was
not in operation because it was outside the normal operating hours?

No, you're confusing different topics. The Class II, III approach
requires the tower to be open, it doesn't require a certain type of
airspace to be in effect.

For example, our local tower would sometimes stay open late (past 11pm
in this case) to facilitate certain users. During this time the tower
was open and talking, but they were providing advisory services only.
The airspace above this airport reverted to Class G up to 700' after
11pm, and that still occurred even if the tower stayed OPEN late. (No
idea why it didn't become Class E to the surface since it had a
certified ASOS, but probably because nobody felt like changing the rules
for that airport.)

Judah wrote:

What the pilots are reported to have said to their passengers is
irrelevant.

Based on the available information it would seem that the pilots made a
sensible decision, How the cranky passengers interpreted and relayed the
on-air announcement to NBC reporters doesn't change that fact. And how the
sensationalist reporter spins it is even moreso irrelevant.


Perhaps, but what Southwest is reported to have said through their
spokeswoman is quite relevant:

"We made the request for both flights for the tower to stay open, and
the
local tower refused. Once they refused, we had no choice but to return
back
to Baltimore because we need the guidance of air traffic controllers to
land
in the weather conditions that were present," spokeswoman Whitney
Eichinger
said.



If you read the story carefully, it is even possible to interpret that the
pilot announced to the passengers that the combination of the tower being
closed and the weather being below minimums left them with no safe, legal
options to land at PVD, but that the reporter left out that important
detail. After all, there is no direct quote of what the Pilot said, only a
statement that, "NBC 10's Audrey Laganas reported that the planes turned
around in flight just before midnight. The passengers said the pilots told
them they were turning back because there was no one in the control tower
at T.F. Green Airport."


If that's what the pilot said it's still wrong. With the weather below
minimums they couldn't land at PVD whether the tower was open or
closed. Since the tower did stay late to accommodate the approach that
was missed it appears it was strictly the weather that prevented a
landing.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in oups.com:


Judah wrote:

What the pilots are reported to have said to their passengers is
irrelevant.

Based on the available information it would seem that the pilots made a
sensible decision, How the cranky passengers interpreted and relayed the
on-air announcement to NBC reporters doesn't change that fact. And how the
sensationalist reporter spins it is even moreso irrelevant.


Perhaps, but what Southwest is reported to have said through their
spokeswoman is quite relevant:

"We made the request for both flights for the tower to stay open, and
the
local tower refused. Once they refused, we had no choice but to return
back
to Baltimore because we need the guidance of air traffic controllers to
land
in the weather conditions that were present," spokeswoman Whitney
Eichinger
said.

I completely agree. It is consistent with the rest of the evidence...

If you read the story carefully, it is even possible to interpret that the
pilot announced to the passengers that the combination of the tower being
closed and the weather being below minimums left them with no safe, legal
options to land at PVD, but that the reporter left out that important
detail. After all, there is no direct quote of what the Pilot said, only a
statement that, "NBC 10's Audrey Laganas reported that the planes turned
around in flight just before midnight. The passengers said the pilots told
them they were turning back because there was no one in the control tower
at T.F. Green Airport."


If that's what the pilot said it's still wrong. With the weather below
minimums they couldn't land at PVD whether the tower was open or
closed. Since the tower did stay late to accommodate the approach that
was missed it appears it was strictly the weather that prevented a
landing.

I thought the weather was below minimums BECAUSE the tower had closed? To my understanding, if the tower was open, there would have been approach options available with lower minimums.

In any event, I think we're in agreement.

"Judah" wrote in message
. ..

I thought the weather was below minimums BECAUSE the tower had closed? To
my understanding, if the tower was open, there would have been approach
options available with lower minimums.


The tower stayed open beyond the published closing time to accommodate an
approach which was missed. The tower must be open for Cat II and Cat III
approaches, but it is not known that the crew was capable of those anyway.