Skids off runway in FSD
 

Heavy snow and x-winds are a b!tch. Nothing worse than that helpless feeling of losing control. I experienced it once, and luckily with a better outcome.

Thankfully sounds like all crew and pax are safe.

Somebody should forward the memo to South Dakota that Spring officially started a few weeks ago!

The whole Northeast too...

Figured it must have happened when FlightAware was telling me it had landed 5 minutes ago, but there was no plane in sight from the terminal.

Perfect opportunity to use the back stairs though!

SPECI KFSD 081633Z 12017G27KT 1/4SM +SN FZFG VV006 M02/M04
A2981 RMK AO2 PK WND 14028/1607 TWR VIS 1/4 P0002
T10221039 RVRNO=

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...432Z/KLAS/KFSD


I don't know of any commercial aircraft with a crosswind limit of greater than 15 knots on a contaminated runway.... Yet, they were clearly landing runway 21, with a 17 G 27 direct crosswind... Even if the MD-80 has a x-wind limit higher than that... who would attempt landing on that garbage with heavy snow, 1/4 mi vis and no RVR??? No smart pilot would.....

Good job, guys. Lucky you didn't kill anyone.

Even more interesting.... the ILS to runway 21 cannot be shot without at least 1/2 mile vis....

Doesn’t the MD-80 ‘suffer’ from rudder blanking if thrust reverse is used in excess of 1.3 EPR?
If I recall correctly that’s what made Delta loose it at LakWadiaaa couple of years back.
Contaminated runway too.

Cleveland was always a popular spot for this as well.

Allegedly tower reported 5/5/5 and 1800rvr.

According to that, I would have also shot the approach.

https://www.abc15.com/news/national/...-to-icy-runway

Hey DENpilot was this you? :rolleyes:

I mean really. Who shoots an approach in the heaviest freezing rain storm anyone can remember?

Good job guys. Lucky you didn't kill anyone.

Maybe before you throw stones, you do 5 seconds of research.

All I did is listen to the LiveATC archive -- and guess what I found:

Minutes before approach they were given a runway condition code of 5/5/5. Which means - WET - not contaminated - good braking action.

A few minutes before landing they were given the latest weather - Crosswind GUST didn't even exceed 20 knots. Runway 21 RVR TDZ (only controlling one for CAT1) of 1800.

And wouldn't you know, the approach chart for the ILS to 21 requires 1800 RVR.

So let me ask you, what would a "smart pilot" do? Not land on a runway that they are legal to per the most up to date information they were given?

Again, please do a few seconds of research before publicly calling out a fellow professional.

I heard that Maury Gallagher was on the airplane. This could get interesting.

Glad to see you know what's a Frontier airplane and what's not. :rolleyes:

Horrible attempt at humor.

No he wasn’t, but even had he been, how would this get interesting as a result?

21 is 1800 RVR for any aircraft. With snow, visibility is a roller coaster and when that last meter came out to when the plane began the approach for all we know rvr must have gone up enough to permit the approach.

There but for the grace of God go I.
Landing in DTW a few winters ago with a strong cross wind. We were the first one in after the runway cleared was cleared and were assured MU's better than 40. After touching down on 4R my feet went to the floor on the brakes and... we didn't slow down. Tower asked if we could make 9L. Nope. Y5? Nope. Finally slowed enough to make Y7. I told the tower braking action was poor at best, but I guess they didn't believe me. Big Blue Airbus landed after me and didn't get slowed until the end. He told them it was NIL. They believed him and shut it down.

I'm seeing 1800 RVR required for the straight in ILS to 21 (assuming nothing was NOTAM'd inoperative).

Like most news articles that show a picture of a Boeing but call it an Airbus, they got it wrong.

The article shows a picture of a 170 but states, "None of the 139 passengers on the flight from Denver was injured and the airplane never left the pavement..."

Reading is hard.

RVR has been NOTAM'd inop for a while now at KFSD.

Not sure that's accurate but I'm sure it will all get sorted out in an investigation. The real question is why are you here being a douche? This would be like me going on the F9 forum and running my mouth about how you all have a ****ty contract and will be stuck in mediation for another 5 years. If it is none of your business and you don't know what you're talking about then just ****.

Yeah well having a ****ty contract does not equate to endangering the lives of a planeful of people. I have no tolerance for people who do stupid sh*t that is unsafe. Landing in heavy snow, RVR inop, 1/4 mi vis, direct gusting 27 kt xwind? Have some common sense! What happened to using good judgment as pilots? A/C limitations be damned. No way in hell I would attempt a landing in any commercial aircraft with the lives of the people behind me at stake.

If you were in your interview for the airline you are at now, and someone asked you if you'd land under those conditions, would you say yes?

My point is you are talking out your a$$ cause you weren't there so you don't know the conditions or the information the crew had. That's why they do an investigation. But from looking back at your post history you seem like a dbag so I doubt anything I say here will change that. Carry on

RCC of 5/5/5 and 1800rvr (with FD or AP) seems like the approach would be legal to me. I don’t know about the mad dog side of the house but on the bus we have a chart from the company that says our x-wind limitation with a rcc of 5/5/5 is between 38kts and 25kts depending on the depth of dry snow. Sounds like they were legal to shoot the app. and had landing data that said they had enough distance for the conditions, but the RCC was not as advertised, it sucks, but it sounds like they used all of the info at their disposal and made a decision within opspecs and FARs. just sucks that the RCC wasn’t accurate. Thankfully no one was hurt.

I didn’t realize you flew the 80 at F9. I’d love to hear more about what our procedures and limitations are. Post that METAR all you want. Tower reported RVR or vis is controlling. I’ve yet to see you post anything about any RCC values either (I’m assuming it doesn’t fit your narrative so why would you include it?!?).

Way to take cheap shots at your fellow pilots without knowing all of the facts. I’m sure you’re an absolute pleasure to fly with. You’ll make a fantastic management pilot one day (that’s not a compliment btw).

Wow you should get a job at the NTSB or FAA since your able to solve the whole thing by reading a news article and an a METAR. Or maybe you should tell your airline you should be head of flight standards since you are a much better pilot than anyone else. Then again maybe you should just pull your head out of your ass and admit you where a little premature about your conclusion here

You think the company's gonna keep badgering us to keep the operation going with the "is it safe? is it legal?" mantra?? Seems like there might be more to the equation.

Come on, use your head - just because something is legal doesnt make it safe. These guys shouldn't have even attempted an appch

Some really pitiful Monday quaterbacking from other pilots... Perhaps it must be aggravating for a crusty F9 pilot at the top of their sad payscale to be making less than a 2nd year G4 pilot, but being based in Denver doesn't make you the master of winter flying.

The ATC tapes are easily available online now to anyone who can grasp a google search. Have a quick listen before you throw your colleagues under the bus. Most of the info propagated on this thread is not accurate.

There is a common thread in many of these runway excursions due to poor braking action, bad information from tower. When there is heavy snow you must assume that reports are not as reliable as when there is light snow. Literally the minute after they brushed and sanded the runway and came up with 555 the contaminant is starting to impact braking action. While I am not aware of the facts of this event I urge everyone to take tower reports with a grain of salt. They aren’t the ones flying the plane.

Do you know what an RCC is ? There is nothing bad about shooting an approach to mins and landing with an RCC of 555

Great in theory. But now imagine you’ve diverted and landed at another field... you get a call asking why you diverted when everything was legal and within limits.

I’d like to hear how that conversation goes for you.

Blaming pilots in this scenario seems like a bad idea. I’m much more inclined to blame whoever rated the runway conditions as 5/5/5.

It never fails that any time an aircraft incident occurs, we hear negative commentary from a select few of the Monday morning QBs that tell us about their superior aviating skills and decision making while they have no facts to back up their commentary. Its a shame there isn't a psychology test to weed them out.

RCC is only valid at the time it was done. In heavy snow conditions change rapidly. I have seen runways called bare and wet covered in snow.

Facts from the LiveATC archive sound clip -

Sioux Falls Tower told Allegiant 456 the wind was 130/16G21, RVR1800, Braking action had been reported good by a CRJ 20 minutes prior. After landing, tower tells the crew to allegiant to report exiting the runway, the crew responds, and then adds "braking action pretty much nil." Moments later, the Allegiant crew reported that they had gone straight off the departure end of the runway.

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kf...2018-1630Z.mp3

Landing clearance / RVR report is around the 7:00 mark
After touchdown comments around the 9:00 mark

So what we are to read from that comment is that despite planes landing ahead of you reporting good braking, and planes approaching to land behind you and not diverting, YOU would have the foresight to know that the runway conditions may have changed enough that you would divert to the alternate. Riiiiiggghhhht

I can tell from this comment that you are new to the industry, welcome. This isn't about foresight, its about judgement. I was only pointing out that observations made during rapidly changing conditions should be taken with a grain of salt. What the aircraft behind you will do should not be part of your decision making process. Be safe and do the best to get as much information before making the decision. Things don't feel right don't do it. RCAM is not absolute. There are countless examples of reported conditions being different than encountered.

To what airline is the beneficiary of your greatness? And you’re not a condescending little internet prick, I don’t care what anybody says.

Been in the industry plenty long. That comment alone proves my point about people like you. You think you know everything.

You seem to have some extra skill to avoid anything ever happening to you and thank you so much for sharing your incredible knowledge about changing runway conditions during snowfall. Clearly you are better than anyone else at aviating and we are lucky to have you out there and here on the forum, to keep us in check.

I just have to know what it is that should have made this crew feel that "things don't feel right" and divert? They have a legal RVR, runway 555, just like I'm sure they've seen where we fly at least dozens of times. Aircraft departing and arriving ALL day. What is this 6th sense you have that we can utilize to make sure this never happens again in the industry? Should we all divert if its 555 but snowing?

Every year a couple crews get bit by this at various airlines. I'm sure you can so please help out.