The views in #27 increase concerns about the issues raised in #20. Do problems of seeking alternative views stem from individuals or management (SOPs, Ops Man), where the latter can influence the individual.
TA #22, makes an important point about ‘legal’
and safe. I prefer not to associate ‘legal’ with operating requirements; these may not have the same status as national law. Furthermore, there can be rare situations where operating manuals do not provide guidance or have a procedure for the required level of safety, thus it is necessary to deviate from the norm, i.e. not ‘legal’, but appropriate safety action is taken - judgement - a decision.
Re PIREPS; are the recent recommendations for TALPA widely known (only use to downgrade BA).
We should avoid using PIREPS because of their subjectivity, but in the absence of adequate technical alternatives are they being used to replace the need to evaluate the situation.
Has the TALPA information been published / adopted by regulators; are operators aware of these changes.
Is management safety action increasingly dependent on mandates opposed to recommendations, i.e. if not published then no action; thus shifting the responsibility for assessment of subjective or variable information to the flight crew.
For professional reading / info, re winds and braking action.
https://reports.nlr.nl/xmlui/ Search separately for ‘crosswind’ and ‘overrun’.