8000+ hours in 767 and 787 . Landed on 29 in both many many times. You are as usual so wrong. Give me tons of wheel brakes and a big plane over 737 on 29 all day.

And im assuming you have no answer to my question.
Did you just get out of ER?

When you get to the pearly gates, you will be judged on how many times you landed on 29 successfully. It counts people.

But before you arrive, just a few questions..
Was accident aircraft approved for approach to landing runway as reported for conditions? Yes

Was accident aircraft operated within required performance data? Yes

Was accident aircraft below standard glide path? Yes

Were required deviation instruments/indicators above/below standard glide path for charted displaced threshold runway operational? Yes

Was/were glide path deviation callout(s) made at anytime by any assigned crewmember?

Yes, the 737 might come in “a little” fast, but at least the brakes suck.🤪

I generally don’t answer stupid questions… but I’ll answer this one because the younger pilots need to see how wrong you are. Your bravado and apparently continued bad threat forward thinking will eventually catch up to you… bad decisions generally ends in threads just like this one. I’m guessing the crew on this flight thought the same as you… but probably won’t do 29 again…

So all UAL operations on runway 29 should be prohibited as a result of this incident in your view. Is that what you are saying? Landing on 29 is a “bad decision.”

read the entire thread and you’ll be able to answer this question yourself.

I usually dont respond to people who have zero defense or any intelligent insight into a topic , but in this case we are all waiting for you to say something that contributes and defends your statement. All we have is word salad. Not a single statement defending your missguided position. If you are scared to fly anyhthibg but straight in 12000 ft runways, just say that. Still waiting for your explanation of why a heavy aircraft into 29 with 30kts of headwind is so much harder then a NB. And go... .

Let me throw this hypothetical out there for you.

You are in the left seat and have just upgraded to the 75/76 from the 320...cause now you can finally hold good stuff. You consolidated but still kind of new.....so you are not yet "Blue", but otherwise very experienced as far as the company goes.. You are operating domestic unaugmented 764 to EWR. Your FO has more time on the airframe than you but she has less than 2 years on property, (she used the vacancy during her indoc and never flew the narrow body for UAL). It's her leg and she asks if you could request 22L....as she hasnt yet done 29 in the 764, only once as PM on the 757. You say "Oh come on it's nothing I've done it hundreds of times on the a320, it's so easy to do, I don't know why we make such a big deal about it. There is a first time for everything you are gonna have to do it eventually."......she succumbs to your occupational peer pressure and accepts it reluctantly. Then you hit a light pole. Imagine how you sound on that CVR........

uh oh. We’re low, go around, flaps 20.

See you also bastardize the go-around maneuver profile (you know our SOP)… it’s not “uh oh”… and you don’t tell them what flaps to set during the actual GA maneuver… that’s their job as PF. You learn these F’d up profiles from L-CAL and have used them during your accumulation of 8000 hours in type? 😂

How about we stop departures at LGA anytime “bird activity in the vicinity of the airport” is reported on the ATIS? Considering what happened once in the history of the place.

Spoken like someone who's never flown a pitch-sensitive jet with a 160kt+ target speed.

Give me the docile, easy-to-fly, retirement-cruiser WB with the much lower approach speed, better brakes, better automation etc over the guppy all-day, every-day.

And if EWR is landing 29 when the wind is between 260 and 320 at more than 20kts, I'm not going to make an effort to land on the 22s with a strong crosswind, even if I'm in the guppyER. Imagine trying to justify scraping a cowl or a wing tip after refusing to land on the runway that pointed into the wind just because "RNAV scary."

The 22s have displaced thresholds too, you still need to cross the threshold at an appropriate altitude, no matter the runway.

Three points,

If I’m the Captain, and she doesn’t want to fly the 29 approach, I’d take it from her, and demo it, talk her through it since she’s obviously hesitant to fly it for whatever reason. Perhaps if She/He has seen it before, the anxiety about it will diminish. But a red flag in my book concerning the F/O’s reluctance.

The F/O isn’t a rookie…United didn’t hire her with 250 hrs, I’d assume she was a captain somewhere else before United hired her. If she wasn’t, that could be where the problem lies.

I flew the C-17 in the Air Fiorce . That big Fu#@er could land on a 3500 ft runway at over 500,000 Lbs, with 1000 ft to spare, ALL day long,! Part of the reason we could do that was we had a 500 ft box to land in and if you didn’t it was an automatic go-around. The other reason was massive and effective brakes, which we manually operated as soon as the mains touched down, I’m talking pressing on those brake pedals as hard as your legs can stand. Reason I bring this up, is both the 767/757 can give you impresssivly short landing distances, using manual braking, and you won’t get hot brakes if done smoothly. The auto brakes are great, but if you really want to slow the jet down max manual, or max auto brakes will do the trick.

Yes. PF call. Baseline Boeing unless recently revised. All one phrase. Easy peasy. Easier still if pilot monitoring gets your SA eyes moving with enough space to reject the procedure as defined under FM stabilized approach criteria/limits. Saving landings, transferring control at the fence, off a bounce, past the touchdown zone, rarely worth the adrenal rush.

What did you eat for your crew meal?

I had the fish:)

Did anybody notice all the anti-DEI folks squawking 7600 after this was posted? Radio check JoeBlo and tommy2times, radio check….

In this hiring environment, it is a bit of an assumption to believe that FO had PIC/were a CA elsewhere.

Some of the CA's I fly with are on their FIRST upgrade.

But did you do it 300 yards from 4000 Cubans that are trained to kill you?

“But did you do it 300 yards from 4000 Cubans that are trained to kill you?”

If you’re talking about Gitmo, been there, done that, got the T-shirt x 20
Flew 141’s and -17’s for 28 years.

brah, we're landing in New York with people on vacation that just need a normal landing from Italy....bring it in soldier.

May not be over Macho Grande yet........

Ummmm are you sure you work at United?

I assume these guys are also saying unable if given ILS 22R with its steeper glidepath angle. Why risk it when you can get a standard glidepath on 22L.

Yeah that approach can be a little sporty, but I was in a highly capable C-130 so it was likely a little easier than a C-17.

JHC, so now flying the airplane well within its capabilities is “bravado?” That’s what you’re going with? “I can’t do it and everyone else that can is cocky and dangerous.”

Wow.

You still haven’t articulated one factual data driven reason “wide bodies” are so much more incapable of an almost 7k’ runway with 30kts of headwind than a NB.

Well, I guess Maui is out. Should be "unable" to land on that <7000ft runway in a wide body as well???

Don’t put words in my mouth. I said your posts were full of bravado. I also never said the plane and crews here at United were incapable of flying 29… just said nothing wrong with saying unable after a long flight (you know just because you can). You can do whatever you want brother… you think the risk is worth it then have at it… I’ll continue to say “unable 29” and just continue to read these accident reports from those who aren’t making smart decisions.

The two approaches into Kahului aren’t anything like EWR 29… but you know that… so stop being an idiot.

Well, yes. ATC works for you. If they can’t or won’t offer a preferred RW option, it becomes another matter entirely. But to infer crews accepting the non precision visual to a more demanding approach on a shorter RW as ‘not smart’ no.

Since you are making "smart decisions" and read all the reports, I'm sure you've considered this also happened barely more than a month ago:

https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/a...-alaska-fedex/

My posts about the C-17 was an example about using the brakes aggressively and how short a 767 can land. Not trying to be a “soldier” just pointing out that you can get on the brakes and stop a lot shorter than most pilots are used to.

relevance?

Agree, C17 was designed for what you describe… not our airline fleets. However, IMO Smoking the brakes to land on a shorter runway should be way down on the decision tree… many on here think it’s like some combat assault landing on 29 that might earn them a DFC… laughable.

On dry pavement, truly breathtaking. You can almost sense it testing itself then boom, stopped.

It’s time to equip airliners with arresting hooks

I cannot agree. Landing on 29 does not presuppose bravado or undue confidence…as the last couple decades of heavies landing there safely have demonstrated. I've seen and done it numerous times. Certainly it doesn’t involve unnecessary risks, unless one considers some malfunction or personal pilot limitation we are not yet aware of.

The company, FAA and even Alpa, has spent enormous resources on human factors and CREMTEM, for all pilots. There were three on that deck. If this were a case of “ bravado or unnecessary risk” they would have all had to be “all in”. Unlikely.

As professional airline pilots we are trained and certified to be able to accept the risks the airline and faa have already certified to demonstrate. That is why we have sims. If a pilot cannot perform those tasks when conditions are within limits, and the equipment is not malfunctioning, that pilot should request additional training ( which United will happily supply), to bring his ability and confidence level up to standards.

The passengers that pay and depend on us will appreciate not landing at another airport, at the same time all other flights are safely landing at the intended destination.

I think the most telling thing will be the last minute of the CVR. I expect (unfortunately) to hear nothing out of the ordinary.

Remember, there’s no points for second best getting the 2 wire.

But we don’t get paid/hired to be piloty……

Regarding the bold, read the thread, pronouns matter (eyeroll)

by far one of the dumbest posts I’ve ever read on the forum…

Ugleeual,
Nobody is talking about” smoking the brakes” 40+ years of flying and never had hot brakes….i keep explaining that You can get on the brakes aggressively and stop the jet a lot shorter than most think possible, I do regularly fly a 767 into 6000-7000 ft runways, (RIC, BDL, PVD, SDF) land close to the 1000 ft markers, smooth application of brakes,full reverse.so far it’s worked well…