Jim Carter wrote:
If the aircrew "needed to get on the ground right away", why did they
overfly other suitable airports? That action alone could have suggested to
ATC that this wasn't that big an issue. Love Field has equipment to deal
with air carrier class aircraft and they flew right past it even after being
asked about landing there.

I'm not advocating the actions of ATC here, but I am suggesting that the
crew acted in a manner contrary to what they were saying.


That is difficult to say. Perhaps he was sufficently higher passing
Love that it would have taken more time to land there.

An example I am familar with is passing Ontario Airport on the way into
Los Angeles. You are usually at 14,000 feet passing Ontario and on a
fuel efficent profile to land at LAX. That is a judgment call that can
go either way.

I wouldn't second guess his decision to stick with a company airport
that may have been on the best fuel-efficient descent profile.

It is part of the review that I am sure was conducted about his
decisions. Nonetheless, at the time, that decision was not for anyone
in ATC to question. Only after the fact was it reasonable to determine
what, in fact, were the nearest suitable airports.