Re: A/C off the runway in CPH
Empty Cruise “…are we legal or not?”
Just because the book states that something can be done, or that the Authority has approved the book, does not imply that operations on contaminated runways are lawyer proof or indeed sensible at ant time.
The Captain has the responsibility, a duty of care for the passengers, which is exercised through judgment and decisions. If there is an accident, most lawyers will walk all over the crew to get to the money – to the operator and the insurance. There is little that the crew can do to protect themselves except do what is right in the situation presented to them – but first make sure that the situation is understood. ‘What is right’ means avoiding accident prone circumstances and unnecessary risk, and by taking precautions to safeguard the aircraft and passengers.
When considering operations on contaminated runways, this means having knowledge of all advisory information, i.e. UK CAA AICs, FODCOMs, and JAR-OPS ACJs, etc, then with due judgment of this and all other information ‘in the book’, SNOWTAM, ATIS, the crew has to decide on the best (safest) course of action. There should be good guidance in the Ops Manual, if not then the best place to consider the decision is on the ground before any pressures of in-flight situations are encountered, as these are often associated with time/fuel and commercial issues that might bias judgment.
The crew need to understand the limitations of book data and runway condition reports, and the reduced safety margins these items provided; this should enable crews to determine a baseline standard for a safe operation. Then in-flight, the crew can apply judgment as to any detrimental effect of the actual circumstances such as cross wind, runway surface, concrete/tarmac, grooved/smooth, length available, landing weight as a % of max allowed (how close to the limit is this landing), and most important consider how each individual might have been biased in their judgment. Individuals need self discipline in their thinking, a need to cross check both information and understanding, and to question everything; these are central areas of airmanship. Then and only then have you the basis of a defense, legally or morally whichever applies.
The question to ask is not if the operation is legal, or if the crew will come out clean (which I doubt), it is whether each individual is satisfied with his or her performance. For advice of how to achieve that I refer to the following from Tony Hayes, CFI Brisbane Valley Leisure Aviation Centre.
”Airmanship is a personal attitude to flying, why we do it, how we do it. Airmanship must grow with training, experience, and personal exposure. It is not just about staying alive or not bending the airplane or yourself, it is about walking off the airfield knowing that you have both performed and crafted an activity. You have been totally aware of what you have done and why you enjoyed it, and at that point you owe nothing to anyone”.