She seemed like a micro-manager who was trying to fly the plane for him the whole way in. I could see this type of stuff for "helping out" a newer pilot to the type, but he had been there 18 months. My guess, and yes i emphasize guess since we can't hear voice inflections, or know how previous segments had gone with this crew, his somewhat agreeable/apathetic responses may have been a compensatory mechanism to contrast her method of captaining. Seems like he was pretty with it during the approach briefing before sinking into the repeat followed by "yeah".

Her focus seemed to be with energy management. Captain's I've flown with on Le Bus with similar tendencies tend to fall into two categories; they've either been burned before by not intervening soon enough and are paranoid about it, or they are weak themselves and micro-manage because of their own short comings. In most cases verbalizing a little more, "hey I'm going to go V/S and dirty up about here" usually takes care of this.

Agree with previous posts about LGA too; yes there's water and urban areas right up to the boundaries, but the runways are more than adequate!

See what you're saying, but........in the realm of transport/swept wing/relatively short/slightly adverse wx conditions, a "salvaged landing" is NOT what one wants. A stable approach/landing is the desired outcome.

In the use of modern nomenclature, the treats were piling up, and the management of those threats diminished or were never trapped/stopped. Noting wrong with going around......

Along the lines of above, in a swept wing, the margin between speed at touchdown and the stall is much more than in a straight wing. IOW, if you're that close to the 2, crap usually isn't going the way it's supposed to.

Joey,

If you don't have the spine to tell this nit noid capt to shut her yap or to call a go around or to take over and go around yourself. Maybe this isn't the right line if work for you?

What ever happened to being assertive?

if I've got some whistling wombat screeching at me to get it down when everything looks good. My reaction would be to go around. We can workout the how and why after we have a couple of thousand feet of air under our butts.

I don't know about at your airline, but at mine if there is an unstable approach we call for a go around (and that call has to be honored). The Capt. should have just called for a go around if she felt so endangered and let the FO fly the go around. Perhaps then she could have taken the controls and flown it around herself to landing. Wrestling with the controls at 30 feet isnt usually a good idea.

sorry didnt mean to sound snippy..i'm fatigued!

Especially since she was taking it away from the F/O to LAND, vs. to Go Around!

She was trying to salvage a **** approach, by taking it away from the F/O and slammed it down!

How many times has THAT ever happened?

Then why was the Colgan flight entirely transcribed? Many non-pertinent things well before the descent/approach into BUF still made their way into it. In fact, it was pretty much the full two hours. So far from the CVRs I've browsed it seems fully fatal flights get the entire recorder transcribed and incident/accidents where most walk away (SWA, Asiana), they only transcribe the absolute essentials. I could be wrong but it's just an observation.

From the FO's interview, this peaked my interest:

Is it common to put in crosswind crossed controls that early at WN? It's pretty standard practice in airliners to kick out the crosswind in the flare.

Question - what is the HUD policy at SWA and other 737 operators?

At AA the HUD is required for all takeoffs and landings, regardless whether it's VMC or not.

Was the HUD deployed in this case?

Let me guess, it's also only installed on the CA side.

USAF-Yes
WN-No