Skip to comments.
NTSB Update on Southwest Airlines Runway Incident at Midway Airport
NTSB
| 12/16/05
Posted on 12/16/2005 7:20:18 AM PST by pabianice
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 last
To: Pukin Dog
If it is a series -200 thru -500 of the 737, then you are right. The throttles must be brought back to the idle detent to engage the TR's, then of course you bring the throttles back up.
For the later series 737 I don't know.
I don't fly the planes, but know enough about these aircraft to confirm that for you.
Wolf
21
posted on
12/16/2005 10:23:35 AM PST
by
RunningWolf
(Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
To: RunningWolf
If it is a series -200 thru -500 of the 737, then you are right. The throttles must be brought back to the idle detent to engage the TR's, then of course you bring the throttles back up. Okay, then let me expand on my supposition:
Say the pilot comes out of autoland at minimums, cuts autothrottle, and takes control of the landing. At the same time, due to conditions, he is getting his first view of the runway. He makes the determination that he is sinking and spools up the engines to lower the sink rate.(they landed hard anyway)So, he is on the deck now, but his engines just got spooled up.
He tries to engage reverse thrusters, but they wont go, because the engines have not spooled down yet from the pilots attempt to lower the landing sink rate.
Pilot tells CP that he cant get reversers, but by the time CP reacts, the engines have spooled down and reversers go active.
However, because of the pilot's spool up at the threshold, his touchdown was delayed until he was too far down the runway, and the rest is history.
That is my supposition, based solely on my opinion. It is not too unlike what would happen on a carrier landing where glideslope is almost completly dependent on engines, and a small adjustment can take you from a near ramp strike to an overshot of wire#4.
Just my opinion, though I probably dont have enough information for a more accurate opinion.
22
posted on
12/16/2005 10:35:49 AM PST
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: Pukin Dog
That sounds pretty reasonable.
I don't know about all the decision making dynamics you just described there. But now that you described it I could picture that scenario going down. If its not exactly that, then it could turn out to be something close along those lines.
As I think you said earlier, it looks like somehow they got behind the airplane a little bit.
On another note there have been missed opportunities there to install the crushable concrete at the runways end. So what if they cant get 1000 ft of it in there.
Wolf
23
posted on
12/16/2005 10:53:03 AM PST
by
RunningWolf
(Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
To: RunningWolf
I'm not in favor of concrete barriers. Airplanes and concrete don't mix well. I am in favor of better pilots. If you cant put down a little thing like a 737 in a mile and a half under any conditions, maybe you should not be driving.
24
posted on
12/16/2005 10:56:52 AM PST
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: Pukin Dog
That is a good point. That is plenty of runway under any circumstance. He probably wont drive anymore.
25
posted on
12/16/2005 11:01:52 AM PST
by
RunningWolf
(Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
To: pabianice
An ILS does not have an MDA, it has a DH. I stand corrected. God, I hate getting old. First thing that goes is the memory. Don't feel bad. I've been flying from the same airport since 1977. Last month I couldn't remember its name when I started to announce my takeoff on CTAF.
26
posted on
12/16/2005 11:22:42 AM PST
by
pabianice
(I guess)
To: pabianice
"The investigation has revealed that runway 31C was used as the landing runway because it contained lower landing minimums for aircraft using the ILS approach. If runway 13C was used, the runway most aligned with the wind, pilots would have been unable to land because of insufficient landing minimums."
31C and 13C are opposite ends of the the same strip, some 6,572 feet in length, there must be elevation restrictions in the flight path from ESE approach.
27
posted on
12/16/2005 11:46:14 AM PST
by
Old Professer
(Fix the problem, not the blame!)
To: ClearCase_guy
Turns out it pretty much took a week. Seems odd to me.
---
This isn't the investigation. This is a preliminary progress report. Look at all the items they said they still have to review.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson