A pilot declares an "emergency" and wants something done.
The pilot only knows what he can see on his panel, what he
has been told on the radio and therefore, his request may
not be THE solution to the problem.

My point is that ATC did get him on the ground safely. If
ATC had granted the pilot's request for 17 and it had taken
longer to clear the airspace and get him on the ground, ATC
would still be blamed.

BTW, has anybody heard what the problem actually was? [fuel
leak, bad gauges, PMS?]


"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| IF there was no traffic, 17 would be faster, but there
is
| always traffic at DFW.
|
| Even though the emergency status gives priority, it does
not
| create a magic wand that eliminates the traffic.
|
| It is not a magic wand. It is respecting the PIC's needs
expressed
| with, or subsequent to, a declaration of emergency.
|
| Had the collective ATC folks involved worked on getting
the requested
| runway available as they should have, then traffic would
have had to be
| handled as necessary.
|
| Perhaps, in turn, that could have created other fuel
emergencies
| (although I doubt it). If that had been the case,then
perhaps in turn
| that would show that AAL and others have conned a weak FAA
into letting
| them cut back their dispatched reserve fuel requirements
far too much.