sw plane goes off the rnway in mdw

[KCFlyer]

finally people will know what there paying for

So...let's raise the price of a BWI-ORD/MDW ticket to $1000 one way, and insert the guarantee that your plane won't be involved in an incident/accident.

Sorry...your comment is totally classless...I can't recall any Southwest or any other airline employee responding with glee at news of an accident of any airline. You're the first. Dubious congratulations to you.

 

[Art at ISP]

Whatever the reason for the incident, folks, there is a grieving family out there right now.

Our thoughts, prayers, and words of comfort should somehow reach the family of a 6 year old boy who lost his life in this accident.

Thoughts and prayers as well to all those involved.

 

[Busdrvr]

Don't know about autoland, but Gary Kelly was quoted earlier on the local CBS affiliate as saying that as a policy, WN does not allow its pilots to use autobrakes.

It also appear this will be recorded as a fatal accident.

If they can't use Autobrakes, then I'd say they can't use autothrottles, especially when flying an uncoupled approach. you say cost saving measures didn't matter? This is the connection. While the accident will be blamed in part on "pilot error" (mark my word, they will cite a slightly fast touchdown speed or slightly long landing with a very short delay in applying full brakes), the person to blame is the one who decided $X's could be saved from the MX budget by not having to maintain an autoland funtion as well as autothrottles and autobrakes. Personally, I think the pilot did the very best he could with the tools he was given. Tragically, the person who paid the ultimate price is not the one who got a cheap ticket to CHI or who cashed in on higher stock values due to lower costs. Hopefully this will result in a rationalization and standardization of procedures, and what is considered safe, throughout the industry, as well as a practical look at the cost vs benefit of keeping airports like Midway and Burbank open. Let's learn from our mistakes so this doesn't happen again.

 

[DC6cleaner]

You're right. I am not from Chicago, it is not proper English, and I did not realize it was common practice there. Sorry ??

No it is NOT proper English. It is also NOT common practice there. I am from Chicago and I don't know anyone who speaks that way!

 

[phasersonstun2]

[quote name='EyeInTheSky' date='Dec 9 2005, 05:33 AM' approach" pattern. The pilot applied full power as they attempted to pull the jet from the landing descent, the crew forgot to deactivate the wing spoilers. The plane stalled. And then it crashed.
[/quote]

To this day, all of UAL 737's (and possibly other fleet types) have a flashing SPEED BRAKE light at flaps 25 or greater.

 

[x15]

just to clear up some misconceptions on your part...

The HUD may allow lower mins than other GUPPIES, but it doesn't result in lower mins than an A320, 777 or other jet with a 3 axis AP. The guppy has been limited by the fact that the rudder does not have an autopilot channel, therefore, it can and does land in a crab when doing an autoland. Having approx 1500 hours of HUD time, I can say they are WONDERFULL, however, they have their deficiencies. First, they can facilitate channelized attention, AKA HUD Head. The second big problem with a HUD, specifically with hand flying a CAT III approach off one, is that a HUMAN then must control airspeed, as well as the three axis' that an autoland function would usually control, while fighting some really wicked weather, with the added bonus of fighting the "invisible hand" of Spatial D. carrying 5 knots of extra speed on a 6500 ft snow covered runway can result in a HUGE increase in landing distance. Other factors such as a slightly long aimpoint or any delay in applying MAXIMUM braking would also have dramatic affects. Personally, despite being "God's gift to aviation" (aren't we all? ), This is not an approach I'd have a lot of "fun" doing. Legal? Probably. An accident waiting to happen? I'd say so. I'd take autoland, autothrottles and autobrakes over Chuck Yeager every day of the week with those conditions.

Just to clear up a misconception on your part:

Where the 777 can land CAT IIIA, the 737 with HGS can land CAT III but there ARE places in which the SWA HGS airplanes can get lower CAT I and II mins where the A320 777 can not due to certain parameters of runway lighting not meeting normal CAT I and II requirements. SWA HGS has runway symbology displayed which allows SWA to sometimes have lower landing minimums at certain runways without certain lighting, such as touchdown zone lighting due to the symbology displayed and other features with the HGS. So, bottom line - the SWA 737s CAN go CAT I and II where 777s and Airbuses can't. You didn't know about the runway lighting factor.

If the HGS is flown as it is SUPPOSED to be flown, on speed, etc it is as safe, and maybe safer than a coupled airplane. Once trained and comfortable with it, it's no problem.

Oh, another thing, pilot max braking gives more braking than the MAX setting on the autobrake on the 737.

 

[nycbusdriver]

It's been years since I've flown one, but I thought the 737's speedbrakes will auto-stow when the thust levers are pushed up to go around thrust.

Of course, if the levers are not forward enough to make the stow switch, the spoiler will remain out if deployed by hand.

 

[luvthe9]

Did I read the Captain was a 10 yr VETERAN and the F/O had 3 yrs. What a joke our junior pilot on the bottom has 19 to 20 yrs. That's an F/O

 

[Busdrvr]

"Just to clear up a misconception on your part:

Where the 777 can land CAT IIIA, the 737 with HGS can land CAT III but there ARE places in which the SWA HGS airplanes can get lower CAT I and II mins where the A320 777 can not due to certain parameters of runway lighting not meeting normal CAT I and II requirements."

It appeared that mattered in this case.....
IOW, you are saying at these places (many of which I'm sure a 777 frequently goes....) an A320 or 777 would divert to a more suitable field (ie a SAFE solution).

"So, bottom line - the SWA 737s CAN go CAT I and II where 777s and Airbuses can't. You didn't know about the runway lighting factor."

Let's CLARIFY, SWA can LEGALLY land with lower CAT I and CAT II mins than other airlines at certain fields. In these cases, the other airlines DIVERT. They don't depend on a HUMAN to make a perfect approach and landing for the flight to end SAFELY.

"If the HGS is flown as it is SUPPOSED to be flown, on speed, etc it is as safe, and maybe safer than a coupled airplane. Once trained and comfortable with it, it's no problem."

Yes, it appears that was the case in this situation. The Capt had 10 F'n years at SWA, and knowing the quality of candidates at SWA 10 years ago, I'm willing to bet he was an OUTSTANDING pilot. But guess what, even outstanding pilots can land 5-10 knots hot after a long day of delays and holding. The autopilot does NOT get fatigued.

"Oh, another thing, pilot max braking gives more braking than the MAX setting on the autobrake on the 737."

Given PERFECT technique. But how's your technique? With a cornering tailwind, can you put in equal brake pressure on both brakes while applying significant rudder with one leg? Can you apply brakes at PRECISELY the right moment while ensureing good reversers and spoiler deployment? Can you do it right 9999 times out of 10,000? Again, I'll take Autothrottles, autobrakes and a coupled approach over Chuck Yeager OR your Brother, ANY day.

 

[ualdriver]

My family's prayers as well go out to the boy and his family as well as the flight crew and the family of the flight crew involved in the accident. But for the grace of God go I.

I had the profound DISPLEASURE of flying a 737 at ORD at the same time this accident yesterday happened at MDW. We departed ORD just before the accident happened. If the runway conditions at ORD were indicative of the conditions at MDW, they absolutely SUCKED. The plow crews couldn't keep up with the snow coming down, drifting snow on the runways, with braking actions on takeoff "fair" on the more heavily used departure end of the runway. It was one of those days where you advance the throttles for takeoff and pray nothing "weird" happens at high speed or it could get very ugly, very fast. But it's was also nice to have 13,000' of runway in front of you in case you can't stop as quickly as you would like.

I'll have to agree with Busdrvr on his points. Anybody landing on a relatively short runway at MDW in the above mentioned conditions, in my opinion, would be at a distinct disadvantage without the availability of an autocoupled approach with autothrottles and autobrakes, HUD or not. Maybe the flight crew was right on their flaps 40 airspeed bug, landed on the first 1000' of runway, got reversers/spoilers deployed in a timely manner and got on the brakes right away and still slid off the runway despite doing everything right. And personally, I'll give them that benefit of the doubt until the details come out. But unfortunately, using accident history as my guide, it seems that most of these types of accidents are caused by guys landing hot, and/or long and simply not being able to stop the aircraft in the remaining portion of the runway. I hope for their sake that this did not happen.

 

[Borescope]

pilot max braking gives more braking than the MAX setting on the autobrake on the 737.

The pilot can only press so hard on the pedals. He gets 3000 psi to the brakes. The autobrakes in "Max" apply 3000 psi at wheel spin up. In the split second the pilot takes to get his/her feet pressing on the brakes the autobrakes have already started applying them. That 1/2 a second could be the 300 to 400 feet off the end of the runway. How does the pilot get more than 3000 psi out of the system??

 

[x15]

"The HUD may allow lower mins than other GUPPIES, but it doesn't result in lower mins than an A320, 777 or other jet with a 3 axis AP."

I corrected something you said that was incorrect (above) and then you spin it into a different issue to make it appear you are still correct. The fact is, SWA HGS 737s can land in lower CAT I and II mins than non HGS airplanes due to having runway symbology and RA displayed on the HGS as they approach DH thus negating the need for all the touchdown lighting required for AP coupled aircraft. It was studied endlessly and found safe.

As for the rest of your post, a matter of opinion. Many experts think the HGS is actually safer than coupled approaches because the pilot is flying the airplane and 100% in the loop as to what is going on and already focused outside for the landing. A matter of philosophy and personal opinion.

 

[Atlantic]

It should be noted that Midway Airport is a very small airport. It was layed out to handle, at least to start with,DC3's,etc. This is a very small airport to fly jets into. No overruns on any of the runways. It can be done, with no margin for error. Seeing the pictures on tv, it looks like the aircraft left the airport proper at a very low speed. If this was a 10,000ft. runway, I think everything would have been ok.

 

[Flying Titan]

Atlantic,
You're absolutely right. It's always amazed me to see the size and amount of aircraft that fly in and out of MDW w/ its configuration. With its size & location it's just not meant for the type and volume of traffic it handles today. Its runways leave no margin for error - especially in the weather conditions that existed last night. ORD certainly can't handle the overflow of a MDW shutdown - and it's not politically viable - but, ideally, MDW would be closed and another airport opened in its place with a lot more space.

 

[operaations]

no class is when a company does demand its employees to rush rush go go go to make money and have no respect for the pax to get that plane on the ground so it can keep going

PSA,

You are way off base here. WN has one of if not the best safety records of all Major carriers and LCC. Accidents happen and this is a horrible event. Quit trying to bash people to make your self happy.

My prayers go out to all of the people involved in this tragedy.