Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




Pages : [1] 2

View Full Version : SWA 737 Burbank incident


navigatro
12-06-2018, 08:28 AM
Just heard on local SOCAL news a SWA 737 ran off the end of the runway at Burbank. Raining here all day. Hope everyone OK


NotMrNiceGuy
12-06-2018, 09:58 AM
4037

Ran into the EMAS...

Ducttape
12-06-2018, 10:08 AM
Deja Vu.....


Remind me again why the EMAS was installed there? 🙄


jetprop420
12-06-2018, 10:12 AM
https://i.ibb.co/J3VqKZH/47487742-1807882912668286-5380197440257261568-n.jpg (https://ibb.co/QDLkf0M)

deus ex machina
12-06-2018, 10:52 AM
Hey Jon Weeks... quit posting Vintage photos and retirement announcements on your Flying Club social media pages and get block or better pay for your pilots...

It seems you have a pattern of behavior and it ain't good.

WhaleSurfing
12-06-2018, 10:56 AM
Hey Jon Weeks... quit posting Vintage photos and retirement announcements on your Flying Club social media pages and get block or better pay for your pilots...

It seems you have a pattern of behavior and it ain't good.

What?????????

sailingfun
12-06-2018, 10:58 AM
Hey Jon Weeks... quit posting Vintage photos and retirement announcements on your Flying Club social media pages and get block or better pay for your pilots...

It seems you have a pattern of behavior and it ain't good.

What on earth does your post have to do with the thread?

Chimpy
12-06-2018, 10:59 AM
I love the SWA Corporate Spin.......

Via Twitter

ďSouthwest Flight 278 from OAK to BUR landed safely and rolled to a stop at the end of a runway. Customers deplaned the aircraft via air stairs, with no reported injuries among the 112 Customers and five Crewmembers. Customers can check flight status....Ē


On a more serious note, **** happens, glad everyone is OK.

WhaleSurfing
12-06-2018, 11:06 AM
I love the SWA Corporate Spin.......

Via Twitter

ďSouthwest Flight 278 from OAK to BUR landed safely and rolled to a stop at the end of a runway. Customers deplaned the aircraft via air stairs, with no reported injuries among the 112 Customers and five Crewmembers. Customers can check flight status....Ē


On a more serious note, **** happens, glad everyone is OK.

Well how would you spin it if you were in charge of corporate communications? Youíre a poster child as to why pilots are lousy airline managers. Really dumb post!

CA1900
12-06-2018, 11:15 AM
Hey Jon Weeks... quit posting Vintage photos and retirement announcements on your Flying Club social media pages and get block or better pay for your pilots...

What are you talking about? Aside from a 4 minute buffer, we do get block or better.

Chimpy
12-06-2018, 11:20 AM
Well how would you spin it if you were in charge of corporate communications? Youíre a poster child as to why pilots are lousy airline managers. Really dumb post!

Touched a nerve ehhhhh? I was just making an observation......

450knotOffice
12-06-2018, 11:21 AM
Well how would you spin it if you were in charge of corporate communications? Youíre a poster child as to why pilots are lousy airline managers. Really dumb post!

Dude.

The personal attack is totally out of line.

Ducttape
12-06-2018, 11:27 AM
Well how would you spin it if you were in charge of corporate communications? Youíre a poster child as to why pilots are lousy airline managers. Really dumb post!

Feel better now?

captjns
12-06-2018, 11:30 AM
:(Deja Vu.....


Remind me again why the EMAS was installed there? ��

For those who have the need to land in the other touchdown zone... of course;).

WhaleSurfing
12-06-2018, 11:47 AM
Touched a nerve ehhhhh? I was just making an observation......

Yes, the nerve of common sense! Have any?

WHACKMASTER
12-06-2018, 11:48 AM
Hey Jon Weeks... quit posting Vintage photos and retirement announcements on your Flying Club social media pages and get block or better pay for your pilots...

It seems you have a pattern of behavior and it ain't good.

We do get block or better (except for the first four minutes which seriously needs to be changed in the next contract), but many still continue to rush.

biigD
12-06-2018, 12:11 PM
KBUR 061715Z 29008KT 1SM +RA BR FEW005 BKN013 OVC031 08/08 A2993 RMK AO2 AIRCRAFT MISHAP P0026 T00830078

KBUR 061653Z 28011KT 1 1/2SM +RA BR FEW004 OVC013 08/08 A2991 RMK AO2 SLP122 P0033 T00830083

Landing on 8 with that? They have bigger balls than I do, thatís for sure.

drywhitetoast
12-06-2018, 01:16 PM
KBUR 061715Z 29008KT 1SM +RA BR FEW005 BKN013 OVC031 08/08 A2993 RMK AO2 AIRCRAFT MISHAP P0026 T00830078

KBUR 061653Z 28011KT 1 1/2SM +RA BR FEW004 OVC013 08/08 A2991 RMK AO2 SLP122 P0033 T00830083

Landing on 8 with that? They have bigger balls than I do, thatís for sure.

"Autobrakes 2. We'll plan on rolling it to the end"

rickair7777
12-06-2018, 01:18 PM
They need to build you guys a new terminal at the end there, with rubber bumper stops.

Sorry couldn't resist the second time around.

Glad nobody got hurt.

sailingfun
12-06-2018, 02:19 PM
KBUR 061715Z 29008KT 1SM +RA BR FEW005 BKN013 OVC031 08/08 A2993 RMK AO2 AIRCRAFT MISHAP P0026 T00830078

KBUR 061653Z 28011KT 1 1/2SM +RA BR FEW004 OVC013 08/08 A2991 RMK AO2 SLP122 P0033 T00830083

Landing on 8 with that? They have bigger balls than I do, thatís for sure.

Do you know for a fact they landed on 8? I canít imagine a crew accepting that with those winds and rain.

AllOva736
12-06-2018, 02:21 PM
SWA pilots are a solid bunch, if it can happen to them it can happen to anyone. Talking crap is always fun until you're the butt of the joke.

tunes
12-06-2018, 02:23 PM
Do you know for a fact they landed on 8? I canít imagine a crew accepting that with those winds and rain.

Yes, because they did. From the LiveATC tape:
ďHeavy precipitation now over the airfield, winds 270/10, cleared to land 8Ē

Galaxy5
12-06-2018, 02:29 PM
Yes, because they did. From the LiveATC tape:
ďHeavy precipitation now over the airfield, winds 270/10, cleared to land 8Ē

Also announced via FAAís Twitter feed.

sailingfun
12-06-2018, 02:36 PM
Also announced via FAAís Twitter feed.

Wow! Filler

captjns
12-06-2018, 02:36 PM
Yes, because they did. From the LiveATC tape:
“Heavy precipitation now over the airfield, winds 270/10, cleared to land 8”

Let’s wait and see what the FOQA, DFDR, DCVR Tower Controllers, and witnesses statements reveal.

Monkeyfly
12-06-2018, 02:42 PM
Do you know for a fact they landed on 8? I canít imagine a crew accepting that with those winds and rain.

8 is the only viable instrument approach.
See Jepps. 4575í usable beyond GS.

tunes
12-06-2018, 02:43 PM
Letís wait and see what the FOQA, DFDR, DCVR Tower Controllers, and witnesses statements reveal.

Iím not judging, just stating a fact.

Emmerson Bigs
12-06-2018, 02:45 PM
Yes, because they did. From the LiveATC tape:
ďHeavy precipitation now over the airfield, winds 270/10, cleared to land 8Ē Do these guys compute landing data? Maybe with everyone flying the same a/c into the same old fields day after day they get to the point where it's assumed. But, WTH? :confused: 10 kts of tailwind on a wet 5800' runway?????? :eek:

Galaxy5
12-06-2018, 02:48 PM
Letís wait and see what the FOQA, DFDR, DCVR Tower Controllers, and witnesses statements reveal.

Well, we have the ATC feed and a statement from the FAA, you really need the rest of that to believe they went off the end of 8?

UALfoLIFE
12-06-2018, 03:25 PM
Do these guys compute landing data? Maybe with everyone flying the same a/c into the same old fields day after day they get to the point where it's assumed. But, WTH? :confused: 10 kts of tailwind on a wet 5800' runway?????? :eek:

In heavy rain no less, SMH.

captjns
12-06-2018, 03:54 PM
I’m not judging, just stating a fact

I get that.

And clearly, by no means am I a “There by the grace of God”, or “It can happen to anybody” kind of sky jockey. Let’s wait for FOQA, DFDR, DCVR Tower Controllers, and witnesses statements to be revealed before the crew is slagged or congratulated.

I think all can agree that fortunately nobody went to the hospital in a body bag.

Emmerson Bigs
12-06-2018, 03:54 PM
8 is the only viable instrument approach.
See Jepps. 4575í usable beyond GS. Too bad it wasn't about 4625' usable......:rolleyes: Are you actually suggesting that's a valid reason for trying to land? I'll bet all the LAX or LGB ILS approaches were "viable".

dash8driver
12-06-2018, 05:35 PM
Do these guys compute landing data? Maybe with everyone flying the same a/c into the same old fields day after day they get to the point where it's assumed. But, WTH? :confused: 10 kts of tailwind on a wet 5800' runway?????? :eek:

Nah, we just wing it and hope for the best.

Emmerson Bigs
12-06-2018, 05:55 PM
Nah, we just wing it and hope for the best.
Matches the BUR x2 and MDW results. Thanks for the clarification.

dash8driver
12-06-2018, 06:07 PM
Well, it was kind of an ignorant statement to make, sorry. Yes, even private pilotís are required by FARís to calculate landing data for every flight. Please, resume your Monday morning QBíing.

GPullR
12-06-2018, 06:10 PM
I get that.

And clearly, by no means am I a ďThere by the grace of GodĒ, or ďIt can happen to anybodyĒ kind of sky jockey. Letís wait for FOQA, DFDR, DCVR Tower Controllers, and witnesses statements to be revealed before the crew is slagged or congratulated.

I think all can agree that fortunately nobody went to the hospital in a body bag.

The facts show it was a poor judgement to even attempt that approach in those conditions. Yes we need more for a clearer picture but that much can be seen easily.

at6d
12-06-2018, 06:24 PM
The facts show it was a poor judgement to even attempt that approach in those conditions. Yes we need more for a clearer picture but that much can be seen easily.

I disagree. You donít know all the facts.

Were they outside of any limitations to ďattemptĒ an approach?

Was the landing data acceptable?

Did the tower issue verbal weather that differed from the ATIS?

Thereís a difference between shooting an approach and actually landing, but you know that.

How many other aircraft landed in that same environment?

Was there a mechanical issue?

My concern is the touchdown point and actual speed.

No worriesówe will all know the real information soon enough.

Happy nobody was hurt.

GPullR
12-06-2018, 06:35 PM
I disagree. You donít know all the facts.

Were they outside of any limitations to ďattemptĒ an approach?

Was the landing data acceptable?

Did the tower issue verbal weather that differed from the ATIS?

Thereís a difference between shooting an approach and actually landing, but you know that.

How many other aircraft landed in that same environment?

Was there a mechanical issue?

My concern is the touchdown point and actual speed.

No worriesówe will all know the real information soon enough.

Happy nobody was hurt.

Sorry, u are wrong. Flew the plane for many years. Would never attempt a landing with the wind reported to them and the rain and visibility on that runway. Poor judgement.

80ktsClamp
12-06-2018, 06:36 PM
I disagree. You don’t know all the facts.

Were they outside of any limitations to “attempt” an approach?

Was the landing data acceptable?

Did the tower issue verbal weather that differed from the ATIS?

There’s a difference between shooting an approach and actually landing, but you know that.

How many other aircraft landed in that same environment?

Was there a mechanical issue?

My concern is the touchdown point and actual speed.

No worries—we will all know the real information soon enough.

Happy nobody was hurt.

Tower comms and ATIS info is readily available and matched. Weather report actually showed 11 knot tailwind vs. tower reported 10 (hmmmm...).

Previous landing was 9 minutes prior- rain showed intensifying during that time period.

What we don't know are the mechanical state and their energy state.

I will say that the thought of landing in those conditions in that length of runway even with a well functioning airplane perfectly in the slot gives me the heebie-jeebies.

at6d
12-06-2018, 06:44 PM
Sorry, u are wrong. Flew the plane for many years. Would never attempt a landing with the wind reported to them and the rain and visibility on that runway. Poor judgement.

Iím not wrong. You donít have all the facts! Itís day of my friend!

You first said they were wrong to even attempt an approach. Thatís where we disagree.

wrxpilot
12-06-2018, 07:04 PM
Tower comms and ATIS info is readily available and matched. Weather report actually showed 11 knot tailwind vs. tower reported 10 (hmmmm...).

Previous landing was 9 minutes prior- rain showed intensifying during that time period.

What we don't know are the mechanical state and their energy state.

I will say that the thought of landing in those conditions in that length of runway even with a well functioning airplane perfectly in the slot gives me the heebie-jeebies.

Itís pretty common to have a different tower report vs the METAR/ATIS. When I flew ASE at SkyWest, the tower reported wind was the only way we could ever legally operate into their most days.

ShyGuy
12-06-2018, 07:17 PM
Monday morning quaterbacking, so easy even a caveman could do it :rolleyes: Sad what fellow professional pilots are writing against the crew without all the facts being known.

WHACKMASTER
12-06-2018, 07:22 PM
Sorry, u are wrong. Flew the plane for many years. Would never attempt a landing with the wind reported to them and the rain and visibility on that runway. Poor judgement.

Agreed. Seemingly poor judgment.

Sliceback
12-06-2018, 07:22 PM
Tower comms and ATIS info is readily available and matched. Weather report actually showed 11 knot tailwind vs. tower reported 10 (hmmmm...).


I will say that the thought of landing in those conditions in that length of runway, with a headwind, even with a well functioning airplane perfectly in the slot gives me the heebie-jeebies.

Slight editing.

ShyGuy
12-06-2018, 07:36 PM
If you have valid landing data that shows legal numbers given the length, wet, and tailwind, there are guys who would say they are legal and comfortable for the approach. Without being in their seat that day, at that instant, with their duty day length (fatigue?), I would not presume to make a statement this soon about a bad judgement call.

Of course post-incident sitting in the comfort of your computer chair, "I would have never done that!"
Hindsight always meets 1st class FAA medical eye standards ;)

WhaleSurfing
12-06-2018, 08:01 PM
Sorry, u are wrong. Flew the plane for many years. Would never attempt a landing with the wind reported to them and the rain and visibility on that runway. Poor judgement.

So you’re saying that even if the landing data supported it, and we know the ILS Approach criteria was met, that you’d still not attempt the approach? Based on what exactly?

And I’ve flown the plane for many years and into KBUR and with tailwinds and rain....So what?

BarrySeal
12-06-2018, 08:01 PM
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kbur/KBUR3-Gnd-Twr-App-Dec-06-2018-1630Z.mp3

King Air goes missed at 04:30ish

Windshear alerts reported by unknown aircraft at 10:40ish mark and 12:03ish, 12:25ish

SWA 278 on at approx 32:15 it appears. First wind report given to that aircraft (garbled, believed to be 278) is

"wind 260 at 9, and (garbled) reported good (garbled) minutes ago by a 737". Cleared to land, Runway 8 also stated by tower.

tower discusses areas of heavy precip "directly on top of Burbank" at 34:09

"winds 270 at 10" by Tower to unknown aircraft at 34:28

note: (Speculation) based on audio comms it appears significant weather may have existed on the departure end and this may have impacted any "go around/missed" decision making.

** for some reason when I listened to the above link it did not capture the incident itself beyond that

I did not see any "numerous windshear reports in the last hour" or "we had a few aircraft go missed within the hour" passed to SWA278. Maybe "not required" per FAA policy but it would be good from an S.A. standpoint.

Not so sure I would be dropping the crew in the grease over this one.

Remember all accidents require numerous holes in the swiss cheese to line up.

CBreezy
12-06-2018, 08:03 PM
If you have valid landing data that shows legal numbers given the length, wet, and tailwind, there are guys who would say they are legal and comfortable for the approach. Without being in their seat that day, at that instant, with their duty day length (fatigue?), I would not presume to make a statement this soon about a bad judgement call.

Of course post-incident sitting in the comfort of your computer chair, "I would have never done that!"
Hindsight always meets 1st class FAA medical eye standards ;)

Honestly, aircraft at limits for tailwind into moderate to heavy rain at a minimum with no reliable breaking action reports and a mostly full airplane to a runway that's less than 5000ft? I know it's easy to Monday morning QB it, but if I'm going into Keywest with those circumstances, I'm strongly encouraging a different course of action. Get there itis can haunt your dreams and careers. I hope it is a fluke and they just had a bout of bad luck, but it seems like they may have missed a few steps in the ADM process.

trip
12-06-2018, 08:53 PM
And Iíve flown the plane for many years and into KBUR and with tailwinds and rain....So what?

Tailwinds and wet runway? And you ďdataĒ supported it, I doubt it.

cactipilot
12-06-2018, 08:54 PM
Does anybody else think it would be cool if both of these pilots got to keep their jobs on the stipulation that they had to be the stars of one of those really funny "****DING- Wanna get away?" commercials, filmed in front of the airplane on the EMAS?

pangolin
12-06-2018, 09:01 PM
Does anybody else think it would be cool if both of these pilots got to keep their jobs on the stipulation that they had to be the stars of one of those really funny "****DING- Wanna get away?" commercials, filmed in front of the airplane on the EMAS?

I like that the EMAS worked. It worked well. It did it's Job.

pangolin
12-06-2018, 09:11 PM
Here's the rest of it:

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kbur/KBUR3-Gnd-Twr-App-Dec-06-2018-1700Z.mp3


http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kbur/KBUR3-Gnd-Twr-App-Dec-06-2018-1630Z.mp3

King Air goes missed at 04:30ish

Windshear alerts reported by unknown aircraft at 10:40ish mark and 12:03ish, 12:25ish

SWA 278 on at approx 32:15 it appears. First wind report given to that aircraft (garbled, believed to be 278) is

"wind 260 at 9, and (garbled) reported good (garbled) minutes ago by a 737". Cleared to land, Runway 8 also stated by tower.

tower discusses areas of heavy precip "directly on top of Burbank" at 34:09

"winds 270 at 10" by Tower to unknown aircraft at 34:28

note: (Speculation) based on audio comms it appears significant weather may have existed on the departure end and this may have impacted any "go around/missed" decision making.

** for some reason when I listened to the above link it did not capture the incident itself beyond that

I did not see any "numerous windshear reports in the last hour" or "we had a few aircraft go missed within the hour" passed to SWA278. Maybe "not required" per FAA policy but it would be good from an S.A. standpoint.

Not so sure I would be dropping the crew in the grease over this one.

Remember all accidents require numerous holes in the swiss cheese to line up.

cactipilot
12-06-2018, 10:15 PM
I like that the EMAS worked. It worked well. It did it's Job.
I agree! I'm so glad it didn't become a deja vu moment of SWA1455, 18 years ago. This was a great engineering investment!

Sluggo_63
12-07-2018, 12:08 AM
8 is the only viable instrument approach.
See Jepps. 4575’ usable beyond GS.I can't believe in this day and age that there is only one approach to that airport. With the advent of RNAV-RNP approaches, there's no reason that they can't get some sort of VNAV mins to the other runways.

LumberJack
12-07-2018, 01:11 AM
I can't believe in this day and age that there is only one approach to that airport. With the advent of RNAV-RNP approaches, there's no reason that they can't get some sort of VNAV mins to the other runways.

I wonder if it's more a political problem than a practical one.

Sluggo_63
12-07-2018, 01:48 AM
I wonder if it's more a political problem than a practical one.I was thinking it must be something like that. I know there's terrain issues there, but looking at some of the places Alaska flies into using RNP approaches, I can't believe that Burbank would be any more difficult.

Skyward
12-07-2018, 03:53 AM
I was thinking it must be something like that. I know there's terrain issues there, but looking at some of the places Alaska flies into using RNP approaches, I can't believe that Burbank would be any more difficult.

Hey, people didnít build multi-million dollar houses next to the airport to hear airplane noise, lol. Itíll never make any sense out there... itís CA

ockham
12-07-2018, 03:58 AM
Another EMAS success, nobody injured. Best engineering solution I can think of in my 40 years in the game.

deus ex machina
12-07-2018, 04:04 AM
We do get block or better (except for the first four minutes which seriously needs to be changed in the next contract), but many still continue to rush.

Good to know....


Why continue to rush.... aren't you tired of the bad reputation and the accident record?

ZapBrannigan
12-07-2018, 04:15 AM
Good to know....





Why continue to rush.... aren't you tired of the bad reputation and the accident record?


Not to disagree with my friend Whack (who I have a better than 90% record of agreeing with), but other than the occasional fast taxi, I do NOT see any culture of ďrushingĒ that is any different than any of the other airlines Iíve worked for. Over a third of the airline has been hired over the last 5 years, plus the 2000+ AirTran folks, so we are talking at least half the airline that was not raised in that kind of culture (if one ever existed)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

deus ex machina
12-07-2018, 04:26 AM
Not to disagree with my friend Whack (who I have a better than 90% record of agreeing with), but other than the occasional fast taxi, I do NOT see any culture of ďrushingĒ that is any different than any of the other airlines Iíve worked for. Over a third of the airline has been hired over the last 5 years, plus the 2000+ AirTran folks, so we are talking at least half the airline that was not raised in that kind of culture (if one ever existed)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That is the problem... you don't see. The rest of us see a pattern of behavior with the same type of accident happening.

Sliceback
12-07-2018, 04:28 AM
Another EMAS success, nobody injured. Best engineering solution I can think of in my 40 years in the game.

EGPWS? That's probably saved a lot of people.

full of luv
12-07-2018, 04:29 AM
EGPWS? That's probably saved a lot of people.

TCAS isn't bad either.....Come to think of it, GPS and FMS's aren't too shabby either.

EMAS is better than crashing through the fence and across the street though..

e6bpilot
12-07-2018, 04:32 AM
Have to agree with above. I also donít see the rushing culture. You only have to sit holding out for a gate so many times before that gets beaten out of you. Most pilots here just want to operate the airplane in SOP, go home, and get paid.
Look, none of us have the facts (yet) so the tough guy ďI would neverĒ stuff is ridiculous. You would. You probably have. You probably will again. Most of us have gotten to this point in our lives through a collective set of scary experiences that make outcomes like this much less likely, but every now and then we are all reminded of just how easy it is to get complacent.
I would say the average SWA pilotsí comfort level with operating heavy 737s into short fields is pretty danged comfortable. We do it with full 800s and tanker gas into MDW with much worse conditions.
BUR is generally easy. The weather is 99.5 percent great there. I am betting that there are a variety of factors that led to the overrun, but I am not going to hang anyone in absentia until I know for sure what happened.
Some of the ďfunnyĒ jokes and comments above are just uncalled for. Put yourself in a similar situation. If you donít think this very situation could happen to any one of us, you are wrong.

Frip
12-07-2018, 04:50 AM
"So youíre saying that even if the landing data supported it, and we know the ILS Approach criteria was met, that youíd still not attempt the approach? Based on what exactly?"

Judgement. Decades of experience teaches us that pilots who begin the approach are all focused on and all but conditioned to attempt to complete that approach with a landing.

They can literally teach a monkey to fly a spaceship.

They pay us for our experience and to exercise good judgement.

"And Iíve flown the plane for many years and into KBUR and with tailwinds and rain....So what?"

Having gotten away with it is not proof that it is a good idea.

GPullR
12-07-2018, 04:57 AM
So youíre saying that even if the landing data supported it, and we know the ILS Approach criteria was met, that youíd still not attempt the approach? Based on what exactly?

And Iíve flown the plane for many years and into KBUR and with tailwinds and rain....So what?

What a dumb quote.

Fact, wind at tailwind limit, fact heavy precip in middle of field, fact 4625 useable(about, :) )).
You have to assume braking action is going to be med to poor at the time. I guarantee you you do not have landing data to support it.
So if the wind increases 1 knot, which it never does in a thunderstorm, you are illegal. Why do you want to be a test pilot?. We get paid by the minute. If something goes wrong you are going to be doing a carpet dance, it's not worth it. And it did...

So all this , to answer your question, JUDGEMENT.

deus ex machina
12-07-2018, 04:58 AM
Have to agree with above. I also donít see the rushing culture. You only have to sit holding out for a gate so many times before that gets beaten out of you. Most pilots here just want to operate the airplane in SOP, go home, and get paid.
Look, none of us have the facts (yet) so the tough guy ďI would neverĒ stuff is ridiculous. You would. You probably have. You probably will again. Most of us have gotten to this point in our lives through a collective set of scary experiences that make outcomes like this much less likely, but every now and then we are all reminded of just how easy it is to get complacent.
I would say the average SWA pilotsí comfort level with operating heavy 737s into short fields is pretty danged comfortable. We do it with full 800s and tanker gas into MDW with much worse conditions.
BUR is generally easy. The weather is 99.5 percent great there. I am betting that there are a variety of factors that led to the overrun, but I am not going to hang anyone in absentia until I know for sure what happened.
Some of the ďfunnyĒ jokes and comments above are just uncalled for. Put yourself in a similar situation. If you donít think this very situation could happen to any one of us, you are wrong.

The confirmation bias is strong ....

You guys desperately a stronger safety structure and committee. There are other carriers that operate the 737 better than you and for longer...

WHACKMASTER
12-07-2018, 05:02 AM
Good to know....


Why continue to rush.... aren't you tired of the bad reputation and the accident record?

Well, first of all I was reluctantly ďadoptedĒ so donít group me in with the cowboy mentality. Second, ďI hate to rush so letís not as it leads to mistakesĒ is part of my briefing.

Fortunately, even in the 5+ years Iíve been on the SWA side of the partition things have slowed down (the dragged out contract negotiations had something to do with that as well). However, some still rush and the mentality is definitely not just limited to the left seat.

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 05:06 AM
The confirmation bias is strong ....

You guys desperately a stronger safety structure and committee. There are other carriers that operate the 737 better than you and for longer...

Care to back that statement with evidence? I don’t see any fatal hull losses at SWA. There have been fatal hull loses at other airlines though!

I don’t see why anyone wants to castigate/blame/damn the crew at this point.

deus ex machina
12-07-2018, 05:17 AM
Care to back that statement with evidence? I donít see any fatal hull losses at SWA. There have been fatal hull loses at other airlines though!

I donít see why anyone wants to castigate/blame/damn the crew at this point.

Rhetoric...

SWA has a taxiway/runway overrun problem... hurried culture ingrained...

Tired of you guys asking for direct
Tired of you guys asking for visual approach clearances when your not number one for the runway.
Tired of you guys ignoring ground control instructions to 'get ahead' then playing stupid when called out.

What other US 737 airline regularly leaves the taxiway or runway (or lands at the wrong airport) more than SWA? Hull losses or fatalities? When was the last one?

Oh yeah, SWA.

And now, it's .. hmm let's wait and see on this one... wonder what it could be?

e6bpilot
12-07-2018, 05:17 AM
The confirmation bias is strong ....



You guys desperately a stronger safety structure and committee. There are other carriers that operate the 737 better than you and for longer...



Thanks, tough guy. When you have something constructive to add to the conversation, let me know.
I am comfortable with our safety programs and processes.

deus ex machina
12-07-2018, 05:18 AM
Thanks, tough guy. When you have something constructive to add to the conversation, let me know.
I am comfortable with our safety programs and processes.

Obviously.... guess there is no room for improvement.

pangolin
12-07-2018, 05:22 AM
You are correct about the facts. Shortly after the incident wind is reported at above 20kts from the west. Could have been legal and doable at even 15kts but 20 too much. I suspect however that the heavy rain resulted in poor braking action. Time will tell.


Have to agree with above. I also donít see the rushing culture. You only have to sit holding out for a gate so many times before that gets beaten out of you. Most pilots here just want to operate the airplane in SOP, go home, and get paid.
Look, none of us have the facts (yet) so the tough guy ďI would neverĒ stuff is ridiculous. You would. You probably have. You probably will again. Most of us have gotten to this point in our lives through a collective set of scary experiences that make outcomes like this much less likely, but every now and then we are all reminded of just how easy it is to get complacent.
I would say the average SWA pilotsí comfort level with operating heavy 737s into short fields is pretty danged comfortable. We do it with full 800s and tanker gas into MDW with much worse conditions.
BUR is generally easy. The weather is 99.5 percent great there. I am betting that there are a variety of factors that led to the overrun, but I am not going to hang anyone in absentia until I know for sure what happened.
Some of the ďfunnyĒ jokes and comments above are just uncalled for. Put yourself in a similar situation. If you donít think this very situation could happen to any one of us, you are wrong.

BLAHBLAHBLAH
12-07-2018, 05:49 AM
Rhetoric...

SWA has a taxiway/runway overrun problem... hurried culture ingrained...

Tired of you guys asking for direct
Tired of you guys asking for visual approach clearances when your not number one for the runway.
Tired of you guys ignoring ground control instructions to 'get ahead' then playing stupid when called out.

What other US 737 airline regularly leaves the taxiway or runway (or lands at the wrong airport) more than SWA? Hull losses or fatalities? When was the last one?

Oh yeah, SWA.

And now, it's .. hmm let's wait and see on this one... wonder what it could be?

Delta and United have had a few off the runway recently. I bet we are not worse than average. And we fly into shorter runways more frequently.

And since when do you have to be number one to the airport to get a visual? You just sound angry.

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 06:03 AM
Tower comms and ATIS info is readily available and matched. Weather report actually showed 11 knot tailwind vs. tower reported 10 (hmmmm...).

Previous landing was 9 minutes prior- rain showed intensifying during that time period.

What we don't know are the mechanical state and their energy state.

I will say that the thought of landing in those conditions in that length of runway even with a well functioning airplane perfectly in the slot gives me the heebie-jeebies.


True. Looking at the picture the plane is well into the EMAS. NTSB will be able to calculate the energy remaining when it left the runway area and into the EMAS.

deus ex machina
12-07-2018, 06:23 AM
Delta and United have had a few off the TAXIWAY recently. I bet we are not worse than average. And we fly into shorter runways more frequently.



Fixed it for you.

Not like SWA... and not off the end of the runway.... and you don't fly into shorter runways more freq... you are just making excuses for going off the end of the runway. If you can do it some of the time, you can do it all of the time. If you can't, then don't.

Again... you guys have a systemic problem and you convince yourselves there is no problem...



And since when do you have to be number one to the airport to get a visual? You just sound angry.


You wait your turn like everyone else and accept the sequence ATC provides. You just sound entitled. You guys aren't as amazing as your management tells you that you are...

rickair7777
12-07-2018, 06:26 AM
If you have valid landing data that shows legal numbers given the length, wet, and tailwind, there are guys who would say they are legal and comfortable for the approach. Without being in their seat that day, at that instant, with their duty day length (fatigue?), I would not presume to make a statement this soon about a bad judgement call.

Of course post-incident sitting in the comfort of your computer chair, "I would have never done that!"
Hindsight always meets 1st class FAA medical eye standards ;)

So you’re saying that even if the landing data supported it, and we know the ILS Approach criteria was met, that you’d still not attempt the approach? Based on what exactly?

And I’ve flown the plane for many years and into KBUR and with tailwinds and rain....So what?

Local perspective...

Have to say, it wouldn't have happened to me because I wouldn't have gone in there. I've done BUR plenty, and I've gotten a real good look at the far end a couple times even with favorable conditions. Even if they had good numbers, they would have VERY little left at the end, and you just don't know for sure that winds and braking/reverse are going to be book value, nor if YOUR performance is going to be book value. Floating 300' on a good day at BUR is exciting.

And I also wouldn't have accepted a lesser wind call from the tower to make me legal in those conditions. I'm a native and the SOCAL winds are mostly not very gusty, they tend to be steady state (driven by big systems vice local convective crap), so I would take a METAR at face value. An 8-10 kt wind isn't going to just drop off conveniently at the moment of your arrival because the tower told you what you needed to hear (maybe right at sunset for a westerly).

Same for SAN, although more margin there if you're stable on GP (BA regularly operates triples and 74's).

My guess is that the forensics will show they didn't even have good numbers unless they were really light. Feel free to flame me if I'm wrong.

sherpster
12-07-2018, 06:51 AM
Its not the pilots fault.. It has to be something else. It was the weather, ATC, the runway length, or some unknown mechanical reason. I am not sure which but SWA pilots never suffer from poor Aeronautical Decision Making. That just cant be the reason.

at6d
12-07-2018, 06:52 AM
Rhetoric...

SWA has a taxiway/runway overrun problem... hurried culture ingrained...

Tired of you guys asking for direct
Tired of you guys asking for visual approach clearances when your not number one for the runway.
Tired of you guys ignoring ground control instructions to 'get ahead' then playing stupid when called out.

What other US 737 airline regularly leaves the taxiway or runway (or lands at the wrong airport) more than SWA? Hull losses or fatalities? When was the last one?

Oh yeah, SWA.

And now, it's .. hmm let's wait and see on this one... wonder what it could be?

Ok, now that the company and our 9000+ pilots are being openly attacked on preliminary information, we lose the ability to be constructive.

Is this one a hull loss? We donít know yet.

AA381 was.

Iím not defending poor decision making. I just want to wait for the data.

Asking for a shortcut is wrong?

We ďregularlyĒ depart the taxiway/runway?

Ok boss.

I appreciate debate on judgement, weather, decision making.

Youíve already assembled a posse and built the gallows.

e6bpilot
12-07-2018, 06:59 AM
Fixed it for you.



Not like SWA... and not off the end of the runway.... and you don't fly into shorter runways more freq... you are just making excuses for going off the end of the runway. If you can do it some of the time, you can do it all of the time. If you can't, then don't.



Again... you guys have a systemic problem and you convince yourselves there is no problem...











You wait your turn like everyone else and accept the sequence ATC provides. You just sound entitled. You guys aren't as amazing as your management tells you that you are...



You having a bad week, brah?
Need to talk to someone?

RJSAviator76
12-07-2018, 07:27 AM
Rhetoric...

SWA has a taxiway/runway overrun problem... hurried culture ingrained...

Tired of you guys asking for direct
Tired of you guys asking for visual approach clearances when your not number one for the runway.
Tired of you guys ignoring ground control instructions to 'get ahead' then playing stupid when called out.

What other US 737 airline regularly leaves the taxiway or runway (or lands at the wrong airport) more than SWA? Hull losses or fatalities? When was the last one?

Oh yeah, SWA.

And now, it's .. hmm let's wait and see on this one... wonder what it could be?

Wow... so much vitriol. Did your flame leave you for a Southwest pilot? I mean, at least THAT would help explain your post. If that's not the case, then you clearly have other issues.

Here are a few other tidbits you may not know... Southwest operates well over 4,000 flights each and every day and it's steadily increasing... all in 737's. Our largest base is MDW which ironically boasts some of the shortest runways in the country.

I've flown into BUR many times as a Southwest pilot and in the previous life. Runway 8 is short, but it's not the shortest runway in our system either. SNA is shorter, and guess what... unless it's a brand new FO with less than 100 hours, it's almost always the FO landing there! Oh, the horrors!!! :eek:

Back to BUR... though this runway has been resurfaced, it still has a hump, kinda like 4R in MDW does as well. It's grooved, but in my experience, it's much slicker than any other runway in our system with a similar amount of precip - lots of rubber deposits there. Factor? An investigation will tell.

And yes, we do use calculated performance numbers for each landing. Sorry to disappoint, but we don't just wing it and hope for the best.

It's also sad to see fellow pilots rushing to hang a crew without even letting an investigation take its course where everything will get dissected and disseminated to us and the public. I don't know about you folks, but I want to learn from this. This could easily happen to any one of us.

deus ex machina
12-07-2018, 07:48 AM
It's also sad to see fellow pilots rushing to hang a crew without even letting an investigation take its course where everything will get dissected and disseminated to us and the public. I don't know about you folks, but I want to learn from this. This could easily happen to any one of us.

The problem is... it looks like you guys didn't learn from the last ones. Yes that is plural. that is the whole point... you guys act like this is a one off... it is a systemic recurring problem.... wake up!

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 08:43 AM
Tailwinds and wet runway? And you ďdataĒ supported it, I doubt it.

If you doubt then you donít know what youíre talking about. The data is either valid or it comes back with no data, meaning you canít continue.

As I said, you donít know what youíre talking about.

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 08:47 AM
That is the problem... you don't see. The rest of us see a pattern of behavior with the same type of accident happening.

You certainly sound like a bitter TBNT Southwest candidate. You might want to start comparing safety records.

As I said previously, you really donít know what youíre talking about.

Peacock
12-07-2018, 08:50 AM
I never understood the motivation for dbags to rush to the internet, judge people without the facts, and pound their chest over a perceived ďcultureĒ they didnít create. Very strange.

BLAHBLAHBLAH
12-07-2018, 08:51 AM
Fixed it for you.

Not like SWA... and not off the end of the runway.... and you don't fly into shorter runways more freq... you are just making excuses for going off the end of the runway. If you can do it some of the time, you can do it all of the time. If you can't, then don't.

Again... you guys have a systemic problem and you convince yourselves there is no problem...


Delta 2016
https://weather.com/news/news/detroit-delta-plane-slides-off-runway

Delta 2015
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/05/plane-laguardia-skidded-off-runway-landing/24433915/

United 2018
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/twice-diverted-united-airlines-plane-skids-off-runway-in-green-bay/

United 2015
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-united-airlines-flight-veers-off-runway-at-o-hare-20151230-story.html

united 2015
https://abc13.com/news/plane-skids-off-the-runway-at-iah/655063/

American has just as many , and those don't even include the regionals. This is my unscientific 1 minute google search.

You are an angry troll.

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 08:54 AM
That is the problem... you don't see. The rest of us see a pattern of behavior with the same type of accident happening.

Rhetoric...

Tired of you guys asking for visual approach clearances when your not number one for the runway

So you have to be ďnumber oneĒ to request a visual approach clearance? Really??

Now Iím certain you have no idea what youíre talking about.

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 09:00 AM
Rick 7777

So you’re saying they dilibertley ignored the landing data that would have been dashed out (giving them no ref speeds or stopping distances) and continued the approach?

Man you 20K message keyboard warriors are full of yourselves. GMAFB!

Emmerson Bigs
12-07-2018, 09:03 AM
This could easily happen to any one of us. Disagree. When someone uses that phrase, they make this out to be a game of chance. Stuff like this doesn't just happen because it was their turn. It's not a one-off corrosion issue or a manufacturing defect that turns into a catastrophic failure they had no control over. Those events "could easily happen to any one of us". This was a conscious decision to land on a 5800' wet runway with a max tailwind.
So, no.... it couldn't happen to any one of us unless we let it happen.

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 09:18 AM
So, no.... it couldn't happen to any one of us unless we let it happen.

So, youíve already reviewed the FDR and know what happened, and how it could never happen to you?

Impressive!!

GPullR
12-07-2018, 09:19 AM
Rick 7777

So youíre saying they dilibertley ignored the landing data that would have been dashed out (giving them no ref speeds or stopping distances) and continued the approach?

Man you 20K message keyboard warriors are full of yourselves. GMAFB!

Please tell me how braking action would of been reported at the time of the down pour???

2StgTurbine
12-07-2018, 09:42 AM
If you doubt then you donít know what youíre talking about. The data is either valid or it comes back with no data, meaning you canít continue.

So youíre saying they dilibertley ignored the landing data that would have been dashed out (giving them no ref speeds or stopping distances) and continued the approach

Does the landing data require the crew to input variables? Many pilots at my current employer rarely update landing performance variables from the default values. Some gotchas include not selecting the correct braking action, failing to update the wind, and not updating approach speed for a wind additive.

rickair7777
12-07-2018, 09:43 AM
Rick 7777

So you’re saying they dilibertley ignored the landing data that would have been dashed out (giving them no ref speeds or stopping distances) and continued the approach?

Man you 20K message keyboard warriors are full of yourselves. GMAFB!

Tough guy here.

My guess is the numbers they had did not precisely account for the available braking action. But i don't think it was prudent under the conditions to just call it good because nobody threw an official braking action flag.

They had two strikes to start with. Whether +RA constituted strike three for braking action was a judgement call. We'll know soon enough.

Emmerson Bigs
12-07-2018, 09:46 AM
So, youíve already reviewed the FDR and know what happened, and how it could never happen to you?

Impressive!! You're right. It's far more likely that a brake/hydraulic failure, spoiler issue or some other stopping related malfunction just happened to occur at the same time a decision to land under those conditions was made. :rolleyes: It couldn't possibly be exactly what it looks like. I'm a proponent of Occam's Razor, but time will tell.

Emmerson Bigs
12-07-2018, 10:01 AM
Here are a few other tidbits you may not know... Southwest operates well over 4,000 flights each and every day and it's steadily increasing... all in 737's. Our largest base is MDW which ironically boasts some of the shortest runways in the country.

I've flown into BUR many times as a Southwest pilot and in the previous life. Runway 8 is short, but it's not the shortest runway in our system either. SNA is shorter,

Back to BUR... though this runway has been resurfaced, it still has a hump, kinda like 4R in MDW does as well. It's grooved, but in my experience, it's much slicker than any other runway in our system with a similar amount of precip - lots of rubber deposits there. Factor? An investigation will tell.

And yes, we do use calculated performance numbers for each landing. What is your point? Lots of flights - so you get "x" amount of "mulligans"?

So, short and shorter runways in your system, possibly slick - sounds like a reason to be extra conservative, not an excuse for occasionally running one off the end. If anything, you're supporting an argument for more frequent diverts. Would you rather have the "Why does SWA divert from BUR, SNA or MDW so often?" discussion 1000 times or this one once?
The fact that this airline chooses to service airports with tiny runways really isn't a valid excuse if this event is exactly what it appears to be.

Fixnem2Flyinem
12-07-2018, 10:02 AM
This thread is why I hate pilots...

RJSAviator76
12-07-2018, 10:06 AM
Disagree. When someone uses that phrase, they make this out to be a game of chance. Stuff like this doesn't just happen because it was their turn. It's not a one-off corrosion issue or a manufacturing defect that turns into a catastrophic failure they had no control over. Those events "could easily happen to any one of us". This was a conscious decision to land on a 5800' wet runway with a max tailwind.
So, no.... it couldn't happen to any one of us unless we let it happen.

There are always contributing factors, like the proverbial Swiss cheese model. Was rain a factor? Absolutely. Was tailwind a factor? Absolutely. Now, what about the performance calculations? Y'know... that TALPA thingamajig. Are there any inconsistencies there? Was runway called 5-5-5 when in reality it was 4-4-4 or worse? Who makes the determination? When?

But hey, forget all that. Let's just hang a crew because who needs that scientific hogwash telling us what's what. We should just "eyeball" it and call it good or bad, right? But wait... isn't that what you and your ilk accuse us of doing?

RJSAviator76
12-07-2018, 10:15 AM
What is your point? Lots of flights - so you get "x" amount of "mulligans"?

So, short and shorter runways in your system, possibly slick - sounds like a reason to be extra conservative, not an excuse for occasionally running one off the end. If anything, you're supporting an argument for more frequent diverts. Would you rather have the "Why does SWA divert from BUR, SNA or MDW so often?" discussion 1000 times or this one once?
The fact that this airline chooses to service airports with tiny runways really isn't a valid excuse if this event is exactly what it appears to be.

OK, I'll bite. How does your airline conduct TALPA?

"Extra conservative" - what does that mean specifically? How much margin do we add to be "extra conservative"? If the FAA calls the runway contamination as 5-5-5, should we just "eyeball" it and call it 4-4-4 for our calculations and call it "extra conservative"? Or do we just say 'naaaaaaaaaw' despite that the company pays A LOT of money to provide us with the best and most accurate information possible to help us make the best possible decision?

Your argument is emotional and bears no semblance of a rational thought. I realize that's all the rage these days in politics, but thankfully, that's not how we approach events like this. After the investigation is complete, then we can cast stones and hang the crew if they need hanging... until then, I'm a very interested party with an open mind.

ROFF
12-07-2018, 10:18 AM
i think I've read 2 posts that were sensible in this thread.

What's with all the haters? Hat too tight?

Most of you sound like complete D bags

saab2000
12-07-2018, 10:19 AM
This thread is why I hate pilots...

Totally get that and I am one and for the company in question here.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Most pilots have one thing in common: a desire to complete the flight to the destination airport. Sometimes this can lead us to do things we later think wasn't the best idea. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Very, very happy nobody got hurt.

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 10:22 AM
I don't agree with hanging a crew either, unless there was a wilful act of negligence with a "hey watch this" (which almost never happens). Most likely this crew had every intention of flying safely from OAK to BUR that day.


Every airline - including the one every criticizer here works for - has had an incident/accident in the past including excursions like these. The "this would never happen to me" crowd this early in the game is bravado at best.

PDRit
12-07-2018, 10:22 AM
This thread is why I hate pilots...

You know how WN could stop being the butt jokes about runway overruns?...stop doing it.

Seriously the constant fast taxiing, always ďlooking for a short cutĒ with ATC and other eyebrow raising acts would help keep WN out of the line of jokes.

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 10:23 AM
You know how WN could stop being the butt jokes about runway overruns?...stop doing it.

Seriously the constant fast taxiing, always ďlooking for a short cutĒ with ATC and other eyebrow raising acts would help keep WN out of the line of jokes.

I recall several departures from paved surfaces at Delta, United, and American in the past several years.

RJSAviator76
12-07-2018, 10:32 AM
You know how WN could stop being the butt jokes about runway overruns?...stop doing it.

Seriously the constant fast taxiing, always ďlooking for a short cutĒ with ATC and other eyebrow raising acts would help keep WN out of the line of jokes.

Someone posted a few links to other airlines' recent runway excursions, so your "jokes" about Southwest overruns are factually incorrect.

As for fast taxiing, looking for shortcuts, by all means, please keep joking about it. I'll happily be the subject of your jokes, especially as I watch my profit sharing check hit my bank account.

Bluesideup1
12-07-2018, 10:49 AM
Some seriously butt hurt people on here. Whack if you still think that is the way SW operates you just have your head up your ass and a chip on your shoulder. For the rest of the haters that seem to come out of the woodwork for no apparent reason. Get a life!

There were so many variables at the time of the event that it will take months to figure out what a crew had minutes to do. Anyone that says judgement or that would never happen to me better take a closer look as just about every accident that has happened was with crews that were outstanding right up until the accident.

The vitriol and hate coming from a pilot group towards another is just astounding. The fact that every other major airline has had runway excursions on nearly an annual basis yet no one has this kind of reaction when it is done by them. I also find it funny that all these pilots from carriers that have numerous fatal accidents from flying perfectly good airplanes into mountains to runway overruns killing dozens are casting stones.

Could there be improvement yes but that could be said about every airline. So stop living in the past as I hear other airlines asking for direct a lot more than SW as the rush mentality went out a long time ago.

I guess they say misery loves company and a select few that are on this board seem very miserable.

2StgTurbine
12-07-2018, 10:56 AM
it will take months to figure out what a crew had minutes to do.

Well said.

Emmerson Bigs
12-07-2018, 11:01 AM
There were so many variables at the time of the event that it will take months to figure out what a crew had minutes to do. "Minutes"??? Why? Were they on fire? Out of gas?

2StgTurbine
12-07-2018, 11:05 AM
"Minutes"??? Why? Were they on fire? Out of gas?

Who knows what else they were dealing with at the time. There may have been a red herring threat that got their attention and made them miss the latest update from Tower. Maybe they had an old ATIS and didn't notice the time stamp.

ZapBrannigan
12-07-2018, 11:26 AM
Lots of schadenfreude here. Which is pretty sad.

Iím just going to wait and see what the investigation reveals.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Sluggo_63
12-07-2018, 11:26 AM
Who knows what else they were dealing with at the time. There may have been a red herring threat that got their attention and made them miss the latest update from Tower. Maybe they had an old ATIS and didn't notice the time stamp.

I don't know if you're helping your cause... the naysayers are going to say "they probably wouldn't have missed it if they hadn't been rushing," or "that would be the time to slow down."

Fixnem2Flyinem
12-07-2018, 11:32 AM
Totally get that and I am one and for the company in question here.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Most pilots have one thing in common: a desire to complete the flight to the destination airport. Sometimes this can lead us to do things we later think wasn't the best idea. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Very, very happy nobody got hurt.

I too am a pilot, and it really annoys me when people throw rocks at those that have incidents without knowing all the details. In this case people that are saying itís a WN culture thing, how would they know? Do they work there? Have they gone through the WN training and standardization process? Nope, just loud keyboard warriors who think they are above an incident happening to them. I guarantee at one point in time the same folks making these comments have made errors, whether in flying skill or judgement. That is what fills that bucket of experience, but not being humble about it and hanging a crew based on just a weather report and runway length to me is dumb.

RJSAviator76
12-07-2018, 11:38 AM
I too am a pilot, and it really annoys me when people throw rocks at those that have incidents without knowing all the details. In this case people that are saying itís a WN culture thing, how would they know? Do they work there? Have they gone through the WN training and standardization process? Nope, just loud keyboard warriors who think they are above an incident happening to them. I guarantee at one point in time the same folks making these comments have made errors, whether in flying skill or judgement. That is what fills that bucket of experience, but not being humble about it and hanging a crew based on just a weather report and runway length to me is dumb.

^^^^^^^^^^^ This

biigD
12-07-2018, 11:43 AM
Yeah, I donít see much sense in piling on the crew - every one of us lives in a glass house.

But I donít think thereís harm in coming up with a few objective facts. Anyone here fly the -700 that can pull out their EFB and run the numbers for the conditions and various braking actions?

PowerShift
12-07-2018, 11:59 AM
Iíve been at SWA for just under 2 yrs and have never seen a ďcowboyĒ mentality or culture. Quite the opposite in fact. Maybe itís just my encounters but thatís my experience.

Microburst? 1/2Ē standing water on the runway? Who knows. But we will find out in due time.

sailingfun
12-07-2018, 12:23 PM
The confirmation bias is strong ....

You guys desperately a stronger safety structure and committee. There are other carriers that operate the 737 better than you and for longer...

What type of system does SWA use to compute landing distance? I plugged some numbers into a paper graph and with a 115K landing weight and a 10 knot tailwind canít really make it work.

PDRit
12-07-2018, 12:33 PM
Someone posted a few links to other airlines' recent runway excursions, so your "jokes" about Southwest overruns are factually incorrect.

As for fast taxiing, looking for shortcuts, by all means, please keep joking about it. I'll happily be the subject of your jokes, especially as I watch my profit sharing check hit my bank account.


Except a direct isnít always the fastest or least cost. So maybe you are costing yourself some of that profit sharing? On the short legs you MIGHT be shaving seconds off a flight plan. Also, the constant cowboy drawl on the radio doesnít help your demand to be taken seriously. The ATC recording yesterday even had a bit of that stuff.

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 12:37 PM
Except a direct isnít always the fastest or least cost. So maybe you are costing yourself some of that profit sharing? On the short legs you MIGHT be shaving seconds off a flight plan. Also, the constant cowboy drawl on the radio doesnít help your demand to be taken seriously. The ATC recording yesterday even had a bit of that stuff.

So youíre saying all 10,000 pilots are from Texas and speak in a southern drawl ?

Emmerson Bigs
12-07-2018, 12:47 PM
What type of system does SWA use to compute landing distance? Abacus? Maybe dice? :D

SlipKid
12-07-2018, 12:58 PM
You know how WN could stop being the butt jokes about runway overruns?...stop doing it.



Pretty ironic, coming from a UAL guy..........:D

mulcher
12-07-2018, 01:01 PM
Rhetoric...

SWA has a taxiway/runway overrun problem... hurried culture ingrained...I can list several of the same for every major flying

Tired of you guys asking for direct. Hear this from every airline everday at work.
Tired of you guys asking for visual approach clearances when your not number one for the runway. Sometimes we do it to help the controller not to get ahead that would never work.
Tired of you guys ignoring ground control instructions to 'get ahead' then playing stupid Been here 13 years never seen this. Not one time. I was even DAL based.

Funny stuff you posted.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 01:16 PM
I recall several departures from paved surfaces at Delta, United, and American in the past several years.

So I just spent some time on the NTSB website and this is what I see:
SWA overrun:
4/26/11 MDW
12/8/05 MDW
3/4/01 PHX
3//5/00 BUR

AA overrun:
12/29/10 JAC (and both reversers and speedbrakes initially didn't deploy while landing in snow).

I could not find any other overruns in the lower 48 by US mayor carriers.

By all means, correct me if I missed something, but if this is correct SWA does have a lot more overruns.

Rolf
12-07-2018, 01:23 PM
Departures from the paved surface v overruns.

HuronIP
12-07-2018, 01:24 PM
Where do you guys get the 10 kt tailwind limit? Itís not allowed anywhere else, but a 15 kt tailwind is allowed going into San Jose Costa Rica. So my guess is that the Boeing 737 tailwind limit is at least 15 kts.

Ducttape
12-07-2018, 01:32 PM
Anyone who has been flying for some time knows that all airlines have their reputation for doing things a certain way. Airlines have cultures.

AA likes to taxi slow and SWA likes to move.

Every one of us has seen SWA take the high speed that we dont, take the last minute side step to the parallel runway that is closer to the gate, and taxi with a "purpose".

I have never had a bad encounter with a SWA crew, and have no doubt that this crew did not intentionally do anything dangerous.

But lets not act like sheep and ignore what we all see and have seen in our careers. SWA like to keep it moving...this should not be a secret to anyone. Airlines have cultures.

KevinH65
12-07-2018, 01:38 PM
So I just spent some time on the NTSB website and this is what I see:
SWA overrun:
4/26/11 MDW
12/8/05 MDW
3/4/01 PHX
3//5/00 BUR

AA overrun:
12/29/10 JAC (and both reversers and speedbrakes initially didn't deploy while landing in snow).

I could not find any other overruns in the lower 48 by US mayor carriers.

By all means, correct me if I missed something, but if this is correct SWA does have a lot more overruns.

AA had an overrun in 1999 with 11 fatalities.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AAR0102.aspx

Peacock
12-07-2018, 01:39 PM
Except a direct isnít always the fastest or least cost. So maybe you are costing yourself some of that profit sharing? On the short legs you MIGHT be shaving seconds off a flight plan. Also, the constant cowboy drawl on the radio doesnít help your demand to be taken seriously. The ATC recording yesterday even had a bit of that stuff.

Having an accent means someone wonít be taken seriously? Which accents are ok, and which are bad? Are people who sound like theyíre from New York or Boston smarter than people from the south or Texas? Or the mid west? What about foreign accents.

Please let me know, Iíd hate to not be taken seriously by some judgemental ass clown who hears me on the radio.

captjns
12-07-2018, 01:42 PM
Totally get that and I am one and for the company in question here.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Most pilots have one thing in common: a desire to complete the flight to the destination airport. Sometimes this can lead us to do things we later think wasn't the best idea. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Very, very happy nobody got hurt.

Itís rather obtuse of you, Saab2000, to think all pilots, entrusted with the lives of the sponsors who make our paychecks possible, act in any reckless manner to complete the mission rather than diverting to a suitable airport, or elect for a straight in approach realizing the flight is 7,000íí above the profile with 30 miles to run.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 01:46 PM
AA had an overrun in 1999 with 11 fatalities.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AAR0102.aspx

I looked from 2000 onwards, but yeah, you are right.

saab2000
12-07-2018, 01:48 PM
Itís rather obtuse of you, Saab2000, to think all pilots, entrusted with the lives of the sponsors who make our paychecks possible, act in any reckless manner to complete the mission rather than diverting to a suitable airport, or elect for a straight in approach realizing the flight is 7,000íí above the profile with 30 miles to run.

Youíre ascribing things to me I didnít say. Iím neither condemning the crew nor defending them. Iím just making a general statement based on 22 years in the industry and Iím thankful nobody got hurt.

GuardPolice
12-07-2018, 01:49 PM
Where do you guys get the 10 kt tailwind limit? Itís not allowed anywhere else, but a 15 kt tailwind is allowed going into San Jose Costa Rica. So my guess is that the Boeing 737 tailwind limit is at least 15 kts.


Deltaís TW limit is 10 knots for all 737 models except when different on our company pages. No idea if the 10 knots is company-imposed or Boeing.

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 01:52 PM
I looked from 2000 onwards, but yeah, you are right.

Not sure why lower 48 matters only. AA had a 737 at Kingston go off, similar thing with heavy rain and tailwind.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 01:55 PM
Not sure why lower 48 matters only. AA had a 737 at Kingston go off, similar thing with heavy rain and tailwind.

The only reason is I was looking for US carriers, the only way (that I saw) was to limit the search to "United States".

Edit: and yes, that one should be included in the list

HuronIP
12-07-2018, 02:21 PM
Deltaís TW limit is 10 knots for all 737 models except when different on our company pages. No idea if the 10 knots is company-imposed or Boeing.

Gotta be a company imposed limitation.

Grease5667
12-07-2018, 02:28 PM
Obviously.... guess there is no room for improvement.

Hey douche, err deus.., what outfit do you fly for so we can study itís sterling safety record and learn from the best? Yeah, didnít think so. We are just like any other airline now. That ďcowboyĒ culture has been gone for the last 5-10 years for the most part. As for judgement, Iíll wait to hang the crew with vitriol until all the facts are in.

Peacock
12-07-2018, 02:28 PM
Gotta be a company imposed limitation.

But itís waived at certain airports. That doesnít sound like a company thing but Iím no expert.

Edit: oops I read that as company meaning Boeing. I realize now you probably meant airline imposed, and I agree.

WHACKMASTER
12-07-2018, 02:30 PM
SWA max tailwind is 10 kts. with the exception of San Jose, Costa Rica.

mulcher
12-07-2018, 02:37 PM
March 2015 Delta at LGA.
Republic for Delta March 17í LGA.
Delta Dec 16í DTW

United Feb 18í Greenbay
United Jan 16í Spokane
United Dec 15í ORD

American Dec 10í Jackson Hole
09í Jamaica
99í LIT

Every airline has them. On longer runways even. Glass houses people. Most of what is mentioned about the culture had been around for a long time. Yet many butt hurt pilots bring it up over and over. Including a Tran that is lucky to have a job.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 02:54 PM
March 2015 Delta at LGA.

Was not an overrun, captain used too much reverse thrust leading to loss of directional control.

HuronIP
12-07-2018, 02:54 PM
SWA max tailwind is 10 kts. with the exception of San Jose, Costa Rica.

Exactly what I said.

mulcher
12-07-2018, 02:57 PM
Was not an overrun, captain used too much reverse thrust leading to loss of directional control.
That makes it better. WOW!!!

GPullR
12-07-2018, 03:08 PM
March 2015 Delta at LGA.
Republic for Delta March 17í LGA.
Delta Dec 16í DTW

United Feb 18í Greenbay
United Jan 16í Spokane
United Dec 15í ORD

American Dec 10í Jackson Hole
09í Jamaica
99í LIT

Every airline has them. On longer runways even. Glass houses people. Most of what is mentioned about the culture had been around for a long time. Yet many butt hurt pilots bring it up over and over. Including a Tran that is lucky to have a job.

Those United were not over runs. One of them the aircraft was going 3 mph and hit black ice approaching the runway taxiing. Dropped the nose wheel off taxi way.

Pulling up to the pumps in Burbank, ending up in the street in Chicago, and ending up in the blocks in Burbank again, now those are over runs.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 03:26 PM
That makes it better. WOW!!!

No, but it makes it DIFFERENT. The list is aircraft using more runway than available, not aircraft going over the side due to incorrect pilot input.

flyguy81
12-07-2018, 03:31 PM
Those United were not over runs. One of them the aircraft was going 3 mph and hit black ice approaching the runway taxiing. Dropped the nose wheel off taxi way.

Pulling up to the pumps in Burbank, ending up in the street in Chicago, and ending up in the blocks in Burbank again, now those are over runs.

Continental 1404 crashed taking off out of DEN resulting in a 737 hull loss. American 331 overran the runway in Jamaica in a 737 resulting in a hull loss.

No airline is exempt from mistakes. I wasnít there so canít comment on what they saw, etc. Iíll leave the analysis up to the experts. Figure out what went wrong, learn from it, and do your best to not repeat.

RJSAviator76
12-07-2018, 03:33 PM
All the more reasons to wait and see the results of the investigation and refrain from being a presumptuous d-bag in the process.

mulcher
12-07-2018, 03:41 PM
One of them yes not all three. Fact is every airline has had them on more pavement to boot. But keep validating.

mulcher
12-07-2018, 03:44 PM
No, but it makes it DIFFERENT. The list is aircraft using more runway than available, not aircraft going over the side due to incorrect pilot input.We donít know what happened in BUR yet. MDW was bad data. First BUR was pilot input not using more runway then available, whatever the hell that means.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 03:45 PM
March 2015 Delta at LGA.
Directional control, not overrun
Republic for Delta March 17í LGA.
Not mainline
Delta Dec 16í DTW
Slipped while taxiing, not overrun
United Feb 18í Greenbay
Only looked for completed reports, but yes, good candidate.
United Jan 16í Spokane
Slid off while taxiing, not overrun
United Dec 15í ORD
Not in the NTSB database(?), but yes, good candidate
American Dec 10í Jackson Hole
On my list already, some extenuating circumstances.
09í Jamaica
Yes, added to list in other reply
99í LIT
Mostly due to not arming ground spoilers and using too much reverse thrust as opposed to wrong landing performance

Every airline has them. On longer runways even. Glass houses people. Most of what is mentioned about the culture had been around for a long time. Yet many butt hurt pilots bring it up over and over. Including a Tran that is lucky to have a job.

Sofar I count 4 overruns for SWA, and 3 for all other mainline carriers combined, for the last 20 years.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 03:54 PM
We donít know what happened in BUR yet. MDW was bad data. First BUR was pilot input not using more runway then available, whatever the hell that means.

Was trying to keep it simple for you. What I meant was, it seams SWA has more than its fair share of incidents where they go of the far end, sometimes without the pilot doing something wrong.

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 04:09 PM
Was not an overrun, captain used too much reverse thrust leading to loss of directional control.

So what. Technicality. They landed and for [reasons] were not able to stop on the runway.

This thread has turned into SWA bashing while ignoring that other airlines have had planes go off runways too. So far, SWA has only lost one passenger and one boy in a car. Compare that to Delta/United/American and theyíve killed a whole lot more.

LandGreen2
12-07-2018, 04:13 PM
Very grateful of no injuries. EMAS system engineers will never buy another beer if I'm around and they make themselves known.

Those of us who really are professional pilots, and not some neighbor kid impersonating a pilot on this thread, will learn from this incident like all of the other industry mishaps. A great pilot is one who learns from each other's experience and applies those lessons to their portfolio of flying knowledge/judgement. A dangerous pilot is one who thinks they know everything and freely convicts his colleagues in an attempt to boost his/her self image.

Let's be grateful of no injuries and look forward to the facts so that we can learn and make changes to the system, the training and our own comfort levels.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 04:22 PM
So what. Technicality. They landed and for [reasons] were not able to stop on the runway.

This thread has turned into SWA bashing while ignoring that other airlines have had planes go off runways too. So far, SWA has only lost one passenger and one boy in a car. Compare that to Delta/United/American and theyíve killed a whole lot more.

Yes, SWA has only lost one pax in 35+ years, and that is an amazing record. But the LGA accident was not an overrun, it was a pilot being more conservative by using more reverse than required (and allowed by airplane limitation) and because of that slid of the side. That is not the same as running of the end because your software is wrong (the first MDW overrun) or because you are still going 180kts on touchdown with the GPWS screaming for the last 1000' (the first BUR).

Peacock
12-07-2018, 04:25 PM
Yes, SWA has only lost one pax in 35+ years, and that is an amazing record. But the LGA accident was not an overrun, it was a pilot being more conservative by using more reverse than required (and allowed by airplane limitation) and because of that slid of the side. That is not the same as running of the end because your software is wrong (the first MDW overrun) or because you are still going 180kts on touchdown with the GPWS screaming for the last 1000' (the first BUR).


More conservative or poorly trained?

PDRit
12-07-2018, 04:35 PM
So youíre saying all 10,000 pilots are from Texas and speak in a southern drawl ?

No but they all affect one when they hit transmit. Jersey guys sound like they fell off an Apple truck in Conroe

PDRit
12-07-2018, 04:41 PM
More conservative or poorly trained?

Donít forget the ďlooks like BransonĒ landing. Was that being conservative or training? Itís hard to keep track with the Southwest issues.

PDRit
12-07-2018, 04:43 PM
Yes, SWA has only lost one pax in 35+ years, and that is an amazing record. But the LGA accident was not an overrun, it was a pilot being more conservative by using more reverse than required (and allowed by airplane limitation) and because of that slid of the side. That is not the same as running of the end because your software is wrong (the first MDW overrun) or because you are still going 180kts on touchdown with the GPWS screaming for the last 1000' (the first BUR).

Thatís the best spin on a crash since trumps tweets today. Very funny. Thanks for the laugh.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 04:47 PM
More conservative or poorly trained?

No, the training is quite clear in how much the maximum EPR for reverse is. It is apparently not very easy to set in the real airplane, (I hear some operators have the PNF setting reverse for that reason...)

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 04:49 PM
Thatís the best spin on a crash since trumps tweets today. Very funny. Thanks for the laugh.

Always happy to entertain

Peacock
12-07-2018, 04:51 PM
Donít forget the ďlooks like BransonĒ landing. Was that being conservative or training? Itís hard to keep track with the Southwest issues.

Oh sorry I thought second guessing was allowed. Continue Monday morning quarterbacking.

This was posted in whatever accent you think sounds ok

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 05:03 PM
What is this ďcultureĒ thing Delta and United pilots keep bringing up about Southwest? Unless you worked there, how would you know what itís really like? Or is this just general bashing because they pay for flight trip value that itís assumed they go fast? Is it sort of like the double breasted culture I keep hearing about at Delta? Is that the same thing, just outsiders bashing in?

SWA operates the largest mainline flights into MDW and BUR. One would expect that on numbers alone SW would appear more for short runway excursions at those airports.

PNWFlyer
12-07-2018, 05:05 PM
I too am a pilot, and it really annoys me when people throw rocks at those that have incidents without knowing all the details. In this case people that are saying itís a WN culture thing, how would they know? Do they work there? Have they gone through the WN training and standardization process? Nope, just loud keyboard warriors who think they are above an incident happening to them. I guarantee at one point in time the same folks making these comments have made errors, whether in flying skill or judgement. That is what fills that bucket of experience, but not being humble about it and hanging a crew based on just a weather report and runway length to me is dumb.

Oh, so like when your union threw rocks at Boeing without knowing all the details?



Can't wait to hear how this is somehow Boeing fault because they didn't explain to the pilots how the hydraulic fluid is manufactured.

Fixnem2Flyinem
12-07-2018, 05:08 PM
Very grateful of no injuries. EMAS system engineers will never buy another beer if I'm around and they make themselves known.

Those of us who really are professional pilots, and not some neighbor kid impersonating a pilot on this thread, will learn from this incident like all of the other industry mishaps. A great pilot is one who learns from each other's experience and applies those lessons to their portfolio of flying knowledge/judgement. A dangerous pilot is one who thinks they know everything and freely convicts his colleagues in an attempt to boost his/her self image.

Let's be grateful of no injuries and look forward to the facts so that we can learn and make changes to the system, the training and our own comfort levels.

This post is probably the best post Iíve ever read on APC. Thatís not saying much for the relative posts, but solid post and the way I wish more pilots thought of these incidents.

at6d
12-07-2018, 05:21 PM
Sofar I count 4 overruns for SWA, and 3 for all other mainline carriers combined, for the last 20 years.

Ok. How many overruns ended up with a hull loss?

Add up fatalities since 1967.

This thread is turning stupid.

pangolin
12-07-2018, 05:28 PM
Gotta be a company imposed limitation.

My research shows that Boeing allows (company dependent) up to 15kts tail wind. You have to look at what that does to your landing distance though. My CONJECTURE though is that it was reported at 10 but perhaps went higher just prior to touchdown and that there was probably unreported standing water on the runway from the recent heavy rain and that impacted braking action. But we don't know.

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 05:29 PM
Donít forget the ďlooks like BransonĒ landing. Was that being conservative or training? Itís hard to keep track with the Southwest issues.

So? Delta landed at the same wrong North Dakota airport. Twice.

pangolin
12-07-2018, 05:40 PM
Does the landing data require the crew to input variables? Many pilots at my current employer rarely update landing performance variables from the default values. Some gotchas include not selecting the correct braking action, failing to update the wind, and not updating approach speed for a wind additive.

I go conservative. If it's dry and a headwind I don't generally input the wind. If there's any chance of a tailwind/strong crosswind I put in the wind. If gusting I add half the gust factor. If it's raining I put in WET even though a WET runway requires standing water and there may not be any. If it all comes out legal and good - we do it. I maintain that SW could have done all that and STILL ran off the end because of EXCESS rain and winds in excess of reports.

So if YOU are flying it and all the numbers say you are legal to go and you have sufficient runway - what would you do? I'd attempt it and if not down in the first part of the touchdown zone, call for a go around - but I would attempt it. Maybe I go off the end too.

Planes R Great
12-07-2018, 05:40 PM
Deja Vu.....


Remind me again why the EMAS was installed there? 🙄
cuz its short fool

mulcher
12-07-2018, 05:40 PM
Ok. How many overruns ended up with a hull loss?

Add up fatalities since 1967.

This thread is turning stupid.
Yup!!!!!!!!

Planes R Great
12-07-2018, 05:42 PM
Oh, so like when your union threw rocks at Boeing without knowing all the details?



Can't wait to hear how this is somehow Boeing fault because they didn't explain to the pilots how the hydraulic fluid is manufactured.
dude go back to hating on virgin or whatever your bad life says you should bum out at.

Planes R Great
12-07-2018, 05:46 PM
Abacus? Maybe dice? :D
Who is this malcontent? sorry the carreer didn't pan out dude. or whatever didn't work.

mulcher
12-07-2018, 05:48 PM
So? Delta landed at the same wrong North Dakota airport. Twice.
Not to mention taxiways. Iím sure it was Southwest fault somehow.
Keep chucking those stones. No wonder I havenít been on this forum in awhile. A bud mentioned idiots from other airlines slamming SWA so I checked it out. Typical douches to stupid to learn but think their airline is invincible. Wake up supper pilots or we could be reading about you in the news. We could compare hull losses and deaths but why. Our business is dynamic and we are the safety switch. Sometimes we get it wrong. Keep safe this winter.

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 05:48 PM
Yes, SWA has only lost one pax in 35+ years, and that is an amazing record. But the LGA accident was not an overrun, it was a pilot being more conservative by using more reverse than required (and allowed by airplane limitation) and because of that slid of the side. That is not the same as running of the end because your software is wrong (the first MDW overrun) or because you are still going 180kts on touchdown with the GPWS screaming for the last 1000' (the first BUR).

WHAT?!?!?!

Being more conservative? You mean not knowing that the MD-80 series has a limitation on using higher reverse thrust and a stated EPR limit on a contaminated runway. This same issue was brought up in the AA accident in LIT over a decade earlier. So this outcome was preferable because the pilot was being more conservative yet going against the manufacturer advice using reverse thrust on a contaminated runway.

Talk about spinning a story. Do you work for Hannity on Fox?

Planes R Great
12-07-2018, 05:58 PM
The problem is... it looks like you guys didn't learn from the last ones. Yes that is plural. that is the whole point... you guys act like this is a one off... it is a systemic recurring problem.... wake up!
here's another glass house dude. if the pilots didn't do right by the man then bad dog, no treat. but this moronic " i know what this pilot, or this crew or even THIS WHOLE AIRLINE did, or thought, or trained is pretty arrogant. Don't want my people on your jet.

Skyward
12-07-2018, 06:08 PM
Was not an overrun, captain used too much reverse thrust leading to loss of directional control.

So in NTSB terms... ďpilot errorĒ

Call it what you want... overrun, underrun (didnít DAL have one of those in LGA? #554), Loss of directional control... theyíre all errors.

Iíve been at SWA just over a year. My 3rd airline and over 20yrs in the biz. SWA does not have a hurry-at-all-costs, cowboy culture. I would not be here if I felt it was unsafe and hurried. We are efficient and good at our jobs. I commute and ride up front on DAL and AA quite a bit (thanks!). I have been comuting for nearly 18yrs of my career, so Iíve watched a lot of crews from a lot of carriers. I can honestly say that I am proud of the way we do our job at SW. Anyone bashing the culture and poking fun of our guys/gals look pretty rediculous to those of us that know the truth.

Maybe SW has a higer rate of some incidents simply due to the numbers (4000+ 737 flights every day). If we start comparing # of fatalities by carrier I have a feeling this SW bashing party will shut down right quick (I typed those last two words in my best Texas draw for some of you guys:D - and Iím not even from TX)

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 06:15 PM
WHAT?!?!?!

Being more conservative? You mean not knowing that the MD-80 series has a limitation on using higher reverse thrust and a stated EPR limit on a contaminated runway. This same issue was brought up in the AA accident in LIT over a decade earlier. So this outcome was preferable because the pilot was being more conservative yet going against the manufacturer advice using reverse thrust on a contaminated runway.

Talk about spinning a story. Do you work for Hannity on Fox?

Yup more conservative = hannity&fox....
I said he exceeded limitations and maybe more conservative was a poor choice of words. What I meant was the airplane exited the runway on the side, because the pilot exceeded the EPR limitation for reverse thrust, but he didnít go of the end because he came in too fast or because the landing distance wasnít calculated correctly. Because of this I donít think it is a runway overrun. No if you disagree with that we can have an adult conversation. I went through the NTSB database and found 4 instances of SWA going over the end, and 3 of all the others combined since 1999. Spin that for me...

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 06:22 PM
So in NTSB terms... ďpilot errorĒ

Call it what you want... overrun, underrun (didnít DAL have one of those in LGA? #554), Loss of directional control... theyíre all errors.

Iíve been at SWA just over a year. My 3rd airline and over 20yrs in the biz. SWA does not have a hurry-at-all-costs, cowboy culture. I would not be here if I felt it was unsafe and hurried. We are efficient and good at our jobs. I commute and ride up front on DAL and AA quite a bit (thanks!). I have been comuting for nearly 18yrs of my career, so Iíve watched a lot of crews from a lot of carriers. I can honestly say that I am proud of the way we do our job at SW. Anyone bashing the culture and poking fun of our guys/gals look pretty rediculous to those of us that know the truth.

Maybe SW has a higer rate of some incidents simply due to the numbers (4000+ 737 flights every day). If we start comparing # of fatalities by carrier I have a feeling this SW bashing party will shut down right quick (I typed those last two words in my best Texas draw for some of you guys:D - and Iím not even from TX)


Speaking of LGA. What happened to the captain that at the last minute took the plane over from the fo and pranged it on the runway? I heard she was fired. I've always wondered if that was true. I remember hearing about that in the news that day, thinking hey no worries not flying to LGA this evening. Next thing I know I'm rerouted to pick up diverted passengers and take them to LGA.

Skyward
12-07-2018, 06:25 PM
Yup more conservative = hannity&fox....
I said he exceeded limitations and maybe more conservative was a poor choice of words. What I meant was the airplane exited the runway on the side, because the pilot exceeded the EPR limitation for reverse thrust, but he didnít go of the end because he came in too fast or because the landing distance wasnít calculated correctly. Because of this I donít think it is a runway overrun. No if you disagree with that we can have an adult conversation. I went through the NTSB database and found 4 instances of SWA going over the end, and 3 of all the others combined since 1999. Spin that for me...

And you KNOW that SW came in too fast or the distance wasnít calculated correctly? Sounds to me like youíre comparing fact (NTSB report) to fiction (you donít know because it happened yesterday). I guess DAL would have done it better by getting more ďwind checkĒ data?? Whatís your point?

Skyward
12-07-2018, 06:27 PM
Speaking of LGA. What happened to the captain that at the last minute took the plane over from the fo and pranged it on the runway? I heard she was fired. I've always wondered if that was true. I remember hearing about that in the news that day, thinking hey no worries not flying to LGA this evening. Next thing I know I'm rerouted to pick up diverted passengers and take them to LGA.

Iím not sure what happened to the CA career wise, but the report is an interesting read.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR9703.pdf

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 06:27 PM
So in NTSB terms... ďpilot errorĒ

Call it what you want... overrun, underrun (didnít DAL have one of those in LGA? #554), Loss of directional control... theyíre all errors.

Iíve been at SWA just over a year. My 3rd airline and over 20yrs in the biz. SWA does not have a hurry-at-all-costs, cowboy culture. I would not be here if I felt it was unsafe and hurried. We are efficient and good at our jobs. I commute and ride up front on DAL and AA quite a bit (thanks!). I have been comuting for nearly 18yrs of my career, so Iíve watched a lot of crews from a lot of carriers. I can honestly say that I am proud of the way we do our job at SW. Anyone bashing the culture and poking fun of our guys/gals look pretty rediculous to those of us that know the truth.

Maybe SW has a higer rate of some incidents simply due to the numbers (4000+ 737 flights every day). If we start comparing # of fatalities by carrier I have a feeling this SW bashing party will shut down right quick (I typed those last two words in my best Texas draw for some of you guys:D - and Iím not even from TX)

Absolutely, and 4000 flight a day over decades with 2 fatalities compared to the other carriers with numerous hull losses with all on board lost is a very good safety record, and rightfully something to be proud of. That doesnít mean you can sit back and say no problem if you have more overrun problems than the rest combined, because one of those could end up bad too. Probably over 40 million departures, 4 overrun problems is still excellent, it just more than the others.

WhaleSurfing
12-07-2018, 06:32 PM
Yup more conservative = hannity&fox....
I said he exceeded limitations and maybe more conservative was a poor choice of words. What I meant was the airplane exited the runway on the side, because the pilot exceeded the EPR limitation for reverse thrust, but he didn’t go of the end because he came in too fast or because the landing distance wasn’t calculated correctly. Because of this I don’t think it is a runway overrun. No if you disagree with that we can have an adult conversation. I went through the NTSB database and found 4 instances of SWA going over the end, and 3 of all the others combined since 1999. Spin that for me...

So a crew exceeding the EPR limits and exiting the hard surface is preferable to an overrun where we don’t know the facts? SMH!

A couple of you on this thread have basically
stated that the crew deliberately exceeded limits and landed illegally. Total BS from a habitual 20K posts keyboard warrior who seems to be an expert on all things aviation.
If the performance was out of limits the crew wouldn’t have received the data in the first place.

As I said in a previous post, NO ONE on this forum knows what happened in the last few seconds of the landing, yet you’re all experts based on some culture that you feel exists at SW.

Let’s not compare overruns, rather let’s compare safety records in general. Obviously there’s some hard feelings by a few of you against SW for whatever reason. Sad a few of you take out your dislike of the airline out on a couple of pilots in a mishap wherein you have no idea as to what actually happened.

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 06:34 PM
I’m not sure what happened to the CA career wise, but the report is an interesting read.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR9703.pdf


I’m not sure what happened to the CA career wise, but the report is an interesting read.

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 06:34 PM
Selective word choice. Delta isn't an overrun. Nah, his nose his half way over Flushing Bay but he didn't run off the end of the runway. Um, okay. If this SWA had swerved off the side of the runway instead of running at the end into EMAS, the SWA attacks would have been just the same.

Read your own airline's ASAP and irregularity reports. Some of that is just downright scary.

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 06:41 PM
Iím not sure what happened to the CA career wise, but the report is an interesting read.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR9703.pdf


Not that one, this one.



https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/07/27/ntsb-southwest-nose-landing-laguardia/30736777/

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 06:41 PM
And you KNOW that SW came in too fast or the distance wasnít calculated correctly? Sounds to me like youíre comparing fact (NTSB report) to fiction (you donít know because it happened yesterday). I guess DAL would have done it better by getting more ďwind checkĒ data?? Whatís your point?

The too fast was a reference to the first BUR overrun where the GPWS was active during the last 1000í, They selected flaps above the flap speed, the OF acknowledged the flaps would not come down because they were too fast, and they crossed the threshold at 180 kts (from memory), the distance calculation was a reference to the MDW accident where the crew thought they had adequate performance for landing but the numbers were incorrect (and led the FAA to implement TALPA for more accurate runway assessment). In no way was I guessing what happened yesterday, and none of my post included what happened yesterday.

fly2ski
12-07-2018, 07:06 PM
One of the wildest approaches I've seen was SWA in KLAS. 40 kts above ref at 1000' AGL. Full side slip yanking and banking. I was up front as a JS, wife in the back on a ticket. She said people were freaking out. I said great guns D... It's a cultural thing, we had it at FDX for a long time, glad we're finally getting rid of it.

Jess1
12-07-2018, 07:08 PM
https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/74396-delta-737-overshoots-kcmh-columbus.html

Excargodog
12-07-2018, 07:08 PM
Considering we don't have critical information. Like:

1. Aircraft gross weight
2. Aircraft touchdown airspeed
3. Aircraft touchdown point/distance remaining
4. Duration and power setting of reverse thrust
5. Duration and extent of wheelbrake application

And doubtless a few factors I've overlooked. Before we go all Hatfield vs McCoy here it would be nice to have some of these numbers...

HuronIP
12-07-2018, 07:13 PM
Speaking of LGA. What happened to the captain that at the last minute took the plane over from the fo and pranged it on the runway? I heard she was fired. I've always wondered if that was true. I remember hearing about that in the news that day, thinking hey no worries not flying to LGA this evening. Next thing I know I'm rerouted to pick up diverted passengers and take them to LGA.
She was fired.

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 07:16 PM
[QUOTE=Jess1;2721143]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/07/27/ntsb-southwest-nose-landing-laguardia/30736777/


Yes that's the one.

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 07:25 PM
She was fired.


That's what I heard. Kinda wondered if it really happened, never knew. Pretty sure every airline has someone getting fired for off the wall stuff every month. Things that make you go :eek:

Thanks for confirming!

Jeff Lebowski
12-07-2018, 07:30 PM
Big picture, all those passengers bought tickets to Burbank.

We got them to Burbank.

Next.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 07:41 PM
Selective word choice. Delta isn't an overrun. Nah, his nose his half way over Flushing Bay but he didn't run off the end of the runway. Um, okay. If this SWA had swerved off the side of the runway instead of running at the end into EMAS, the SWA attacks would have been just the same.

Read your own airline's ASAP and irregularity reports. Some of that is just downright scary.

I do, and yes, there is much to improve. We had a crew almost go over the end a few months ago. BAD! It was caught by safety department and we all got the memo and a reminder that a GA is not just an option, but sometimes required. I specifically only included overruns, and not events like the nose gear collapse by SWA because of an unstable approach, because the overrun is the only thing that seems to happen more to SWA. FWIW if they had gone of the side I would not have gotten in this discussion.

Cortezpilot
12-07-2018, 07:41 PM
Big picture, all those passengers bought tickets to Burbank.

We got them to Burbank.

Next.



Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PNWFlyer
12-07-2018, 08:19 PM
So a crew exceeding the EPR limits and exiting the hard surface is preferable to an overrun where we donít know the facts? SMH!

A couple of you on this thread have basically
stated that the crew deliberately exceeded limits and landed illegally. Total BS from a habitual 20K posts keyboard warrior who seems to be an expert on all things aviation.
If the performance was out of limits the crew wouldnít have received the data in the first place.

As I said in a previous post, NO ONE on this forum knows what happened in the last few seconds of the landing, yet youíre all experts based on some culture that you feel exists at SW.

Letís not compare overruns, rather letís compare safety records in general. Obviously thereís some hard feelings by a few of you against SW for whatever reason. Sad a few of you take out your dislike of the airline out on a couple of pilots in a mishap wherein you have no idea as to what actually happened.


So, as long as our profit sharing checks come in who cares if we kill one or two people every so often.

We have no idea what happened in the Lion Air crash but lets blame Boeing.

Boeing didn't tell us what MCAS was but we are somehow experts on it. Weird we keep calling it an anti stall system and it isn't.

Check yourself before you wreck yourself.... oh ****, to late...

Jess1
12-07-2018, 08:26 PM
I do, and yes, there is much to improve. We had a crew almost go over the end a few months ago. BAD! It was caught by safety department and we all got the memo and a reminder that a GA is not just an option, but sometimes required. I specifically only included overruns, and not events like the nose gear collapse by SWA because of an unstable approach, because the overrun is the only thing that seems to happen more to SWA. FWIW if they had gone of the side I would not have gotten in this discussion.

Did you count the CMH overruns? Delta over run 04/09/2013. Continental went off the same runway 3/9/2008

Edited bad hyperlink

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 08:32 PM
Did you count the CMH overruns? Delta over run 04/09/2013. Continental went off the same runway 3/9/2008

Edited bad hyperlink


It's ok. Hey, you're a newbie. Only 3 post.. Welcome to the board!

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 08:34 PM
Did you count the CMH overruns? Delta over run 04/09/2013. Continental went off the same runway 3/9/2008

Edited bad hyperlink

I only looked in the NTSB database, the delta flight isnít in there, maybe because there was no damage, still too close for comfort. I couldnít find anything on the COA overrun?

Jess1
12-07-2018, 08:35 PM
I only looked in the NTSB database, the delta flight isnít in there, maybe because there was no damage, still too close for comfort. I couldnít find anything on the COA overrun?

https://www.dispatch.com/photogallery/OH/20120307/PHOTOGALLERY/303079799/PH/1

Short Bus Drive
12-07-2018, 08:37 PM
[QUOTE=pangolin;2721083]... If it's raining I put in WET even though a WET runway requires standing water and there may not be any./QUOTE]

It's good you do that, because the FAA has changed the definition of wet runway back in 2015. And grooved runway doesn't matter either.

Jess1
12-07-2018, 08:37 PM
https://www.dispatch.com/photogallery/OH/20120307/PHOTOGALLERY/303079799/PH/1


https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/74396-delta-737-overshoots-kcmh-columbus.html The post here about Delta. Some funny predictions in there.

snowdawg
12-07-2018, 08:41 PM
https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/74396-delta-737-overshoots-kcmh-columbus.html The post here about Delta. Some funny predictions in there.


Post Number 5. How about #6?

Jess1
12-07-2018, 08:45 PM
Post Number 5. How about #6?

#13 is what happened here.

symbian simian
12-07-2018, 08:53 PM
https://www.dispatch.com/photogallery/OH/20120307/PHOTOGALLERY/303079799/PH/1

I see the photo, and canít find any other reference?!?!? I guess with no injuries it wasnít big news but still surprising. Yes, both of are overruns. I included the ones were the final ntsb report was out so it would be easier to exclude events that werenít (to me at least) relevant (like unexpected total brake failure). I am not trying to hide all the non SWA incidents/accidents.

Skyward
12-07-2018, 08:57 PM
#13 is what happened here.

And #14, LOL

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 09:20 PM
Heard that a jet just went off the runway at IAH during heavy rain/winds. Nothing in the news yet.

Skyward
12-07-2018, 09:32 PM
Heard that a jet just went off the runway at IAH during heavy rain/winds. Nothing in the news yet.

Bad news. If so, I hope everyone is ok

ShyGuy
12-07-2018, 10:18 PM
Seems I heard wrong. Apologies, doesn't look like anything happened.

mulcher
12-07-2018, 10:27 PM
I do, and yes, there is much to improve. We had a crew almost go over the end a few months ago. BAD! It was caught by safety department and we all got the memo and a reminder that a GA is not just an option, but sometimes required. I specifically only included overruns, and not events like the nose gear collapse by SWA because of an unstable approach, because the overrun is the only thing that seems to happen more to SWA. FWIW if they had gone of the side I would not have gotten in this discussion. They actually went off to the side. Just that EMAS was placed well off the runway centerline.

Cysco4120
12-08-2018, 05:16 AM
What a great thread. It is amazing how happy fellow pilots seem to get when something bad happens at WN. Canít wait to jump on the keyboard and talk tough about what a disaster we are. I have good friends at just about every airline and anytime I see that airline on the news I feel bad that something has happened and drug them into the news.

But letís talk about just how bad we are. We seem to be the only ones with runway overruns according to some. We have had 3 in 18 years on runways less than 6000 feet. I wonder if anyone else has had any issues.

DL MD88 LGA. We were told that one doesnít count because he went off the side of the runway and was trying to be extra careful using to much reverse thrust.
UA 737 DEN. Lost control on takeoff ran off the runway and destroyed the aircraft. Oh wait...that one doesnít count either. Went off the side of the runway.
AA 737 in Kingston. Ran off end of runway in rainstorm. Sure that one doesnít count for some reason.
AA 1420 LIT. Ran off end of runway during thunderstorm killing 11. Oh wait that one doesnít count it wasnít WN.
UA 737 GRB. After diverting to GRB ran off the end of ice covered runway. Oh that one doesnít count. Final report not out.

Thatís just a sampling.

Someone mentioned us landing at the wrong airport near Branson. Didnít DL land an A320 at Ellsworth AFB instead of Rapid City a year or two ago. Sure did and not the first time. (The other was NW)

Didnít Delta also land a 767 on an ATL taxiway around 530am some years back? Well that doesnít count because it was early in the morning.

Iím so glad that when WN has a bad day it only takes about 5 minutes for the keyboard warriors to show up and let us know what an awful unsafe airline we are. Maybe we should learn from our friends and realize if we gave away a large chunk of our flying to the regionals we wouldnít be developing this nasty trend over the past 18 years.

Oh well. Hopefully we can fix this mess soon or there will soon be 9600 pilots looking for a job.

PDRit
12-08-2018, 05:41 AM
What a great thread. It is amazing how happy fellow pilots seem to get when something bad happens at WN. Canít wait to jump on the keyboard and talk tough about what a disaster we are. I have good friends at just about every airline and anytime I see that airline on the news I feel bad that something has happened and drug them into the news.

.

Good thing you hate to see people talk bad about other airlines. Nice to see you stay above the fray...

Cysco4120
12-08-2018, 05:52 AM
Good thing you hate to see people talk bad about other airlines. Nice to see you stay above the fray...

Thatís the entire point. Every airline out there has had a bad day yet WN seems to be the only one mentioned as if no one else has ever had any of these issues.

SlipKid
12-08-2018, 05:57 AM
What a great thread. It is amazing how happy fellow pilots seem to get when something bad happens at WN. Canít wait to jump on the keyboard and talk tough about what a disaster we are. I have good friends at just about every airline and anytime I see that airline on the news I feel bad that something has happened and drug them into the news.

But letís talk about just how bad we are. We seem to be the only ones with runway overruns according to some. We have had 3 in 18 years on runways less than 6000 feet. I wonder if anyone else has had any issues.

DL MD88 LGA. We were told that one doesnít count because he went off the side of the runway and was trying to be extra careful using to much reverse thrust.
UA 737 DEN. Lost control on takeoff ran off the runway and destroyed the aircraft. Oh wait...that one doesnít count either. Went off the side of the runway.
AA 737 in Kingston. Ran off end of runway in rainstorm. Sure that one doesnít count for some reason.
AA 1420 LIT. Ran off end of runway during thunderstorm killing 11. Oh wait that one doesnít count it wasnít WN.
UA 737 GRB. After diverting to GRB ran off the end of ice covered runway. Oh that one doesnít count. Final report not out.

Thatís just a sampling.

Someone mentioned us landing at the wrong airport near Branson. Didnít DL land an A320 at Ellsworth AFB instead of Rapid City a year or two ago. Sure did and not the first time. (The other was NW)

Didnít Delta also land a 767 on an ATL taxiway around 530am some years back? Well that doesnít count because it was early in the morning.

Iím so glad that when WN has a bad day it only takes about 5 minutes for the keyboard warriors to show up and let us know what an awful unsafe airline we are. Maybe we should learn from our friends and realize if we gave away a large chunk of our flying to the regionals we wouldnít be developing this nasty trend over the past 18 years.

Oh well. Hopefully we can fix this mess soon or there will soon be 9600 pilots looking for a job.

Golf Clap.......

PDRit
12-08-2018, 06:13 AM
Thatís the entire point. Every airline out there has had a bad day yet WN seems to be the only one mentioned as if no one else has ever had any of these issues.

Sounds like the tweets from our orange quaffed leader. Maybe you should have mentioned Hillaryís emails to get the point across?

symbiansimian
12-08-2018, 06:45 AM
What a great thread. It is amazing how happy fellow pilots seem to get when something bad happens at WN. Canít wait to jump on the keyboard and talk tough about what a disaster we are. I have good friends at just about every airline and anytime I see that airline on the news I feel bad that something has happened and drug them into the news.



But letís talk about just how bad we are. We seem to be the only ones with runway overruns according to some. We have had 3 in 18 years on runways less than 6000 feet. I wonder if anyone else has had any issues.



DL MD88 LGA. We were told that one doesnít count because he went off the side of the runway and was trying to be extra careful using to much reverse thrust.

UA 737 DEN. Lost control on takeoff ran off the runway and destroyed the aircraft. Oh wait...that one doesnít count either. Went off the side of the runway.

AA 737 in Kingston. Ran off end of runway in rainstorm. Sure that one doesnít count for some reason.

AA 1420 LIT. Ran off end of runway during thunderstorm killing 11. Oh wait that one doesnít count it wasnít WN.

UA 737 GRB. After diverting to GRB ran off the end of ice covered runway. Oh that one doesnít count. Final report not out.



Thatís just a sampling.



Someone mentioned us landing at the wrong airport near Branson. Didnít DL land an A320 at Ellsworth AFB instead of Rapid City a year or two ago. Sure did and not the first time. (The other was NW)



Didnít Delta also land a 767 on an ATL taxiway around 530am some years back? Well that doesnít count because it was early in the morning.



Iím so glad that when WN has a bad day it only takes about 5 minutes for the keyboard warriors to show up and let us know what an awful unsafe airline we are. Maybe we should learn from our friends and realize if we gave away a large chunk of our flying to the regionals we wouldnít be developing this nasty trend over the past 18 years.



Oh well. Hopefully we can fix this mess soon or there will soon be 9600 pilots looking for a job.



SWA is the only one with 4 overruns excluding the one this week. Yes, everyone else has done stupid things too, including landing and taking of from taxiways/wrong airports. Yes, SWA has probably the lowest accident rate out there. No, you donít have to worry about your job.
As far as your sampling goes, I (and I think you are talking to me) used the NTSB database, thinking that would be relatively unbiased. I read the reports, so I could exclude events where a mechanical issue affected the outcome, so excluding events without reports (like BUR this week) seems fair to me. I searched for USA, because I didnít see a way to exclude foreign carriers, and when someone pointed out AA inn Kinston I fully agreed it should be included. DL in LGA isnít the same because the had the landing performance, but exceeded limitations for reverse. The SWA MDW overrun is different because the pilots thought they had adequate landing distance. I fully agree it is unfair perception of the whole airline is shaped by events that happen once every million flights, but read the reports for the first BUR overrun. SWA fired both pilots, but that is not the same as fixing the problem.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rolf
12-08-2018, 06:46 AM
Go back to the UAL board and work on scope or something. Maybe read up on how the rudder pedals work on a TO roll. Tool.

blockplus
12-08-2018, 07:26 AM
UA 737 DEN. Lost control on takeoff ran off the runway and destroyed the aircraft. Oh wait...that one doesnít count either. Went off the side of the runway.

UA 737 GRB. After diverting to GRB ran off the end of ice covered runway. Oh that one doesnít count. Final report not out.
.

First one was continental -500. It was discovered when tower gives wind report it is tower wind not runway wind. Runway wind was over crosswind limit ,tower wind wasnít. There by the grace of God we go is right.

The continental in CMH , was a systemic problem of not using full reverse thrust due to fuel initiatives. Muscle memory Played into that one. Due to that,current policy is to always use full reverse initially.

GRB seems to be a taxi mishap that just happened to occur after a landing. Final report will tell, but trying to turn on ice will be the culprit. Airport authority will also be to blame partly.

Bur is a no sh!- airport with little room for error. And placing blame before all the facts are in isnít helpful.

rickair7777
12-08-2018, 08:07 AM
... If it's raining I put in WET even though a WET runway requires standing water and there may not be any.

It's good you do that, because the FAA has changed the definition of wet runway back in 2015. And grooved runway doesn't matter either.

Yup. Wet = "Not Dry"

WhaleSurfing
12-08-2018, 08:43 AM
So, as long as our profit sharing checks come in who cares if we kill one or two people every so often.

We have no idea what happened in the Lion Air crash but lets blame Boeing.

Boeing didn't tell us what MCAS was but we are somehow experts on it. Weird we keep calling it an anti stall system and it isn't.

Check yourself before you wreck yourself.... oh ****, to late...

I have no idea what you’re talking about probation boy! Obviously your boyfriend works for Boeing as so many of your posts defend the plane maker. And yes, we pretty much do know what happened in the Lion Air crash.

It’s clear you have a love for Boeing and hate for WN. I understand the former but the latter must be because to see what’s on the horizon for AK. Yes pun intended.

trip
12-08-2018, 09:03 AM
Yup. Wet = "Not Dry"

Looks like lots of people need to re-read TALPA.
Damp surface now equals wet.
Contaminated is over 25% of usable area with over 1/8" or more standing water, that's only 3mm.
Contaminated with water equals RCC 2.
If RCC is not being reported then use actual contaminate and associated BA.
Plug that into your landing calcs.

e6bpilot
12-08-2018, 09:21 AM
Re - landing data.
SWA uses PWB through acars. It is a FAA approved solution. It takes the current conditions from the metar, but pilots can override them manually (rarely done).
The pilot also puts the runway condition in straight off the acars report or ATIS.
The PWB server runs the numbers and sends it to ACARS. You get speeds and stopping margins. If you donít have stopping margin with auto brakes max, you canít go there. Auto brakes are required when the runway surface is anything but dry.
This electronic record will be part of the NTSB investigation.
So no, there is no slide rule, no dice, and no tab data. It is actually all modern and sh!t and is very conservative in its calculations.

Andy
12-08-2018, 09:36 AM
Does anybody else think it would be cool if both of these pilots got to keep their jobs on the stipulation that they had to be the stars of one of those really funny "****DING- Wanna get away?" commercials, filmed in front of the airplane on the EMAS?

OK, that was damned funny.
Can someone make a youtube video based on this? Just use the plane's picture and pictures of two pilots. With the audio of one of their commercials. And for good effect, add Southwest's statement about the incident at the end.

RadarColor
12-08-2018, 10:46 AM
OK, that was damned funny.
Can someone make a youtube video based on this? Just use the plane's picture and pictures of two pilots. With the audio of one of their commercials. And for good effect, add Southwest's statement about the incident at the end.

Or, we could have a pic of a UAL 737 in DEN in the weeds and have two pilots looking at rudder peddles and the captain saying, “ What are these things used for?”

And I’m not talking about the UAL 737 that just went off the hard surface in DEN just two short weeks ago.

symbian simian
12-08-2018, 11:37 AM
Or, we could have a pic of a UAL 737 in DEN in the weeds and have two pilots looking at rudder peddles and the captain saying, ď What are these things used for?Ē

And Iím not talking about the UAL 737 that just went off the hard surface in DEN just two short weeks ago.


..............

Andy
12-08-2018, 12:00 PM
Or, we could have a pic of a UAL 737 in DEN in the weeds and have two pilots looking at rudder peddles and the captain saying, ď What are these things used for?Ē

And Iím not talking about the UAL 737 that just went off the hard surface in DEN just two short weeks ago.

:D Too soon?
Cactipilot's post was damned funny. I'm sorry to read that you're humor impaired. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBbOSUcr9CQ

Galaxy5
12-08-2018, 01:48 PM
Or, we could have a pic of a UAL 737 in DEN in the weeds and have two pilots looking at rudder peddles and the captain saying, ď What are these things used for?Ē

And Iím not talking about the UAL 737 that just went off the hard surface in DEN just two short weeks ago.

ď*Ding* wanna get away?Ē Is a Southwest advertising campaign.

at6d
12-08-2018, 04:05 PM
Can we get back to bashing our ETOPS dreams now please?

WhaleSurfing
12-08-2018, 04:31 PM
ď*Ding* wanna get away?Ē Is a Southwest advertising campaign.

Really?

Tell me more Mr. Wizard!

ShyGuy
12-08-2018, 07:06 PM
Correction again, I did hear correctly about that IAH incident yesterday.

Looks like it was an E145 at IAH:

Incident: Expressjet E145 at Houston on Dec 7th 2018, runway excursion on landing (http://avherald.com/h?article=4c14fb99)

Skyward
12-08-2018, 07:27 PM
Sounds like the tweets from our orange quaffed leader. Maybe you should have mentioned Hillaryís emails to get the point across?

Snowflakes just arenít happy unless theyíre bashing someone or something. Weíre running out of criticism for WN so why not make it about Trump, lol. Or is it still Bushís fault?

BTW, Hillary should be in jail. I voted for Trump, and Iíll do it again.

full of luv
12-08-2018, 07:31 PM
So? Delta landed at the same wrong North Dakota airport. Twice.

Aren't you referring to South Dakota..... as in Ellsworth AFB vs Rapid City?

exitrow
12-08-2018, 07:37 PM
Correction again, I did hear correctly about that IAH incident yesterday.

Looks like it was an E145 at IAH:

Incident: Expressjet E145 at Houston on Dec 7th 2018, runway excursion on landing (http://avherald.com/h?article=4c14fb99)
Can we just agree while we don't know all the facts in either incident we as professional pilots will stop and think twice before landing in heavy rain on a very short runway or long runway with decent crosswind? Just stop a second and think have I read this NTSB report before or how is this decision going to look in my NTSB report? Sure we can bash each other or as professionals we can simply try to learn

Galaxy5
12-08-2018, 07:55 PM
Really?

Tell me more Mr. Wizard!

Just pointing that out for RadarColor. He didnít know.

ShyGuy
12-08-2018, 08:05 PM
Aren't you referring to South Dakota..... as in Ellsworth AFB vs Rapid City?

Whoops, yes sir.

Can we just agree while we don't know all the facts in either incident we as professional pilots will stop and think twice before landing in heavy rain on a very short runway or long runway with decent crosswind? Just stop a second and think have I read this NTSB report before or how is this decision going to look in my NTSB report? Sure we can bash each other or as professionals we can simply try to learn

Except this thread is full of pilots bashing SWA and its pilots.

Rama
12-08-2018, 08:32 PM
Short runway.
Wet/contaminated runway.
Tailwind.
Any one of these calls for vigilance, but not a big deal.
Any two requires a great deal of vigilance in most cases.
All three is a bad mix, not necessarily undoable, but my preference is to go around and maybe hold, or divert.
I'll have a talk with the CP any day rather than get myself, crew and pax into an untenable position.

PNWFlyer
12-08-2018, 08:52 PM
I have no idea what youíre talking about probation boy! Obviously your boyfriend works for Boeing as so many of your posts defend the plane maker. And yes, we pretty much do know what happened in the Lion Air crash.

Itís clear you have a love for Boeing and hate for WN. I understand the former but the latter must be because to see whatís on the horizon for AK. Yes pun intended.

Probation? Please show your math.

No, you don't know what happened in the Lion Air crash.

symbian simian
12-09-2018, 08:35 AM
Aren't you referring to South Dakota..... as in Ellsworth AFB vs Rapid City?

Yeah, at least DL landed in the right state.

ShyGuy
12-09-2018, 10:36 AM
Yeah, at least DL landed in the right state.

No they don’t. Delta has a hub in Cincinnati and every time you guys land there, you land in the wrong state! :D

flyguy81
12-09-2018, 10:54 AM
Went to BUR after the incident and jotted down some real world numbers. Obv our data will be different because Iíve no idea what their ldg weight was.

We were in a -700 with a ldg weight of 123.0 with 138 pax. ATIS reporting clm winds (went to a 6 kt tailwind at 500í that went away in the flare), landing rwy 8.

Flaps 40 data had a 132 kt approach speed. Didnít need auto brakes but Max gave a 1200í stopping margin.

Reran numbers while in cruise. No data returned with a 10 kt tailwind and 5/5/5 or 4/4/4 at our weight. Reran with 115k ldg weight: No tailwind and 5/5/5 gave around 600í with auto brake Max. 10 kt tailwind and dry gave 880í stopping margin with Max auto brakes.

Was a little sobering seeing the ruts in the EMAS as we taxied by. We were wondering if they skidded off centerline or swerved trying to avoid the red/white painted blast fence. The final report will be a interesting read.

BMEP100
12-09-2018, 11:45 AM
Has anyone here ever executed a balked landing?
In my 40 year career, I can look back at two times I should have, but by the grace of God it worked out.

Once in MD-80 in JAX, landing downwind in rain. I was FO, and we litterally had to reverse and do a 3 point turn to get off the runway. I hung out the window and saw less than 2 feet of pavement in front of nose tire.

Second time in EWR, same scenario, with FO flying. Touch down and auto brakes selected. Realized we were not decelerating and applied max everything. Had just enough room at end to do a hard right, and exit.

Point here is we are usually dialed in to landing and sometimes become a passive participant sometime after touchdown.

I have since adopted the conventional landing gear philosophy, that I was taught decades ago.

Runway conditions, winds, aircraft systems and their integration is not an exact science, yet. It still requires some art.

We will likely be thanking those SWA pilots for reminding us we are human artists, and watch each other while we donít put total faith in the technology.

Skyone
12-09-2018, 02:15 PM
Short runway.
Wet/contaminated runway.
Tailwind.
Any one of these calls for vigilance, but not a big deal.
Any two requires a great deal of vigilance in most cases.
All three is a bad mix, not necessarily undoable, but my preference is to go around and maybe hold, or divert.
I'll have a talk with the CP any day rather than get myself, crew and pax into an untenable position.

Very good advice. As a captain, I never landed or departed with a report of "heavy rain" anywhere in the world. Either report from ATIS (+RA or verbal report). And heavy rain with any tailwind.....forget it. I have made numerous mistakes and survived as most of us have, but landing in heavy rain and a tailwind, nope. Think about this, about 99% of the time, we don't learn the names of pilots that go-around. Takes a bigger "set" sometimes to GA than land.

ShyGuy
12-09-2018, 03:59 PM
Has anyone here ever executed a balked landing?
In my 40 year career, I can look back at two times I should have, but by the grace of God it worked out.

Once in MD-80 in JAX, landing downwind in rain. I was FO, and we litterally had to reverse and do a 3 point turn to get off the runway. I hung out the window and saw less than 2 feet of pavement in front of nose tire.

Second time in EWR, same scenario, with FO flying. Touch down and auto brakes selected. Realized we were not decelerating and applied max everything. Had just enough room at end to do a hard right, and exit.

Point here is we are usually dialed in to landing and sometimes become a passive participant sometime after touchdown.

I have since adopted the conventional landing gear philosophy, that I was taught decades ago.

Runway conditions, winds, aircraft systems and their integration is not an exact science, yet. It still requires some art.

We will likely be thanking those SWA pilots for reminding us we are human artists, and watch each other while we don’t put total faith in the technology.

Accident history shows that once a crew touches down, continuing the attempt to stop on the runway would have been much better than trying to power up and go around. Far too many fatal examples with this. Despite how late they touched down on the table-top runway at Mangalore, even the Air India Express 737-800 would have stopped on the runway overrun area (paved) had the crew continued max braking and max reverse to full stop, instead of what they actually did. Accident history also shows that most of the crews who do elect to go around once already on the ground very typically forget to bring flaps to an appropriate Takeoff/GoAround setting. Once you're on the ground and slowing, the odds are stacked against you for taking it up in the air.

oldcarpilot
12-09-2018, 04:43 PM
Accident history shows that once a crew touches down, continuing the attempt to stop on the runway would have been much better than trying to power up and go around. Far too many fatal examples with this. Despite how late they touched down on the table-top runway at Mangalore, even the Air India Express 737-800 would have stopped on the runway overrun area (paved) had the crew continued max braking and max reverse to full stop, instead of what they actually did. Accident history also shows that most of the crews who do elect to go around once already on the ground very typically forget to bring flaps to an appropriate Takeoff/GoAround setting. Once you're on the ground and slowing, the odds are stacked against you for taking it up in the air.


That is completely against everything that is being trained these days. Where do you get your "history"? Because the ones that went around after touchdown don't get reported as accidents.

ShyGuy
12-09-2018, 04:48 PM
That is completely against everything that is being trained these days. Where do you get your "history"? Because the ones that went around after touchdown don't get reported as accidents.

What's being trained these days? Balked landing? Bounced a landing? Just touched down? Yes, you can still go around. I should have clarified to represent this scenario where you land, get on the brakes and reverse and realize you aren't stopping on the runway so you try to go around. Lots of bad accident history here.

Most operators out there have a do-not-go-around after the TRs are out during landing. You're committed at that point to try and stop, not power up and go around.

Frip
12-10-2018, 06:51 AM
I'll have a talk with the CP any day rather than get myself, crew and pax into an untenable position.


In what world does a go-around or even a divert generate a "talk with a CP?"

rickair7777
12-10-2018, 08:04 AM
What's being trained these days? Balked landing? Bounced a landing? Just touched down? Yes, you can still go around. I should have clarified to represent this scenario where you land, get on the brakes and reverse and realize you aren't stopping on the runway so you try to go around. Lots of bad accident history here.

Most operators out there have a do-not-go-around after the TRs are out during landing. You're committed at that point to try and stop, not power up and go around.

Yes a balked LDG (aka go-around) is fine. Trying to take off after deceleration occurs is not fine. Ground spoilers (on all transport planes that I know anything about) will stow themselves if you go to toga thrust, so you can "undo" those but not the TR's.

I did such a go-around once. We floated more than expected (short runway) I told the FO to go-around but he said "I got it". By the time I said my "controls, go-around" we had actually touched down but off we went again.

Adlerdriver
12-10-2018, 08:10 AM
I told the FO to go-around but he said "I got it". :eek: Wow. Would have liked to be a fly on the wall after that flight. Where do we get such pilots?

8ballfreight
12-10-2018, 08:15 AM
https://youtu.be/LMUK3OYn_9c

Itís a short video and a corporate jet but still applicable to your discussion.

Rama
12-10-2018, 08:40 AM
I'll have a talk with the CP any day rather than get myself, crew and pax into an untenable position.


In what world does a go-around or even a divert generate a "talk with a CP?"

The untenable position is landing on a wet, short runway with a tailwind.

rickair7777
12-10-2018, 10:03 AM
:eek: Wow. Would have liked to be a fly on the wall after that flight. Where do we get such pilots?

He was one of the "new breed" for sure. Thought he was god's gift to the CRJ because he had 400 hours in a challenger, came to the regionals because he was angry the corporate gig wouldn't upgrade him. You can't make this stuff up.

FastDEW
12-10-2018, 10:37 AM
I have never flown the 737. Used to drive the 320 for a number of years. Looking at what is known about conditions (aside from wt, speed, etc), I cannot imagine doing this landing in a 320 at any weight. Still, having said that, I feel sad that many are blaming the crew or even the company culture. Not a single one of us were on that flight deck when this occurred. We do not know what was happening, what the real data of the moment was, why they chose to land vs miss, etc. When the report comes out, we will all learn a lot. For now, thank God that the runway safety systems worked, nobody was injured or killed, the crew and passengers walked away and hope this is a learning event for the crew and not a career ending event.

trip
12-10-2018, 12:38 PM
Went to BUR after the incident and jotted down some real world numbers. Obv our data will be different because Iíve no idea what their ldg weight was.

We were in a -700 with a ldg weight of 123.0 with 138 pax. ATIS reporting clm winds (went to a 6 kt tailwind at 500í that went away in the flare), landing rwy 8.

Flaps 40 data had a 132 kt approach speed. Didnít need auto brakes but Max gave a 1200í stopping margin.

Reran numbers while in cruise. No data returned with a 10 kt tailwind and 5/5/5 or 4/4/4 at our weight. Reran with 115k ldg weight: No tailwind and 5/5/5 gave around 600í with auto brake Max. 10 kt tailwind and dry gave 880í stopping margin with Max auto brakes.

Was a little sobering seeing the ruts in the EMAS as we taxied by. We were wondering if they skidded off centerline or swerved trying to avoid the red/white painted blast fence. The final report will be a interesting read.

Whalsurfer in 3,2,1... to say your data is no good.



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1