14kts tail, near max landing weight, close to limiting runway length - is that not enough to decide how to do it in the first place??
BOAC, I work for Europes most hated airline on the same type.
We have a 10 knot limit as standard and to quite a few specific runways a 15 knot tailwind limit. Usually this is to avoid a NPA in less then favourable conditions, or because we can't perform night time visuals and there is no instrument approach to the reciprocal. I can think of a few alpine airfields with some
very close in terrain where there is a definite safety advantage to going straight in on the other end even with a tailwind. I point this out that despite the image it's not all about saving time and money there are sometimes sound operational reasons.
That's not to say that we also don't do it to save time and make life easier for ourselves. I would say that it is an accepted part of our culture to ask for the non duty runway if it suits us.
I've learned a lot from the last two pages of this thread and from the FAA safety recommendation. I would also admit that I had not read the FSF ALAR or is it a pertinent publication that is referenced at any time in our house.
While it is beyond question a point of good airmanship to check LDR before every landing (It's SOP), and touchdown in the TDZ should be a given, I do feel some sympathy here because while it is an accepted part of our operation the specific risk factors of tail wind landings are not emphasized perhaps as much as they should have been. I've landed on lots of wet runways at night with 15 knots of tailwind. A float on landing might not have been punished as much at other airports the crew were (over?)familiar with.
Reading the charts and basic airmanship should have prevented this but I wonder if the risks of tailwind landings had been discussed in training combined with a better understanding or use of TEM during the approach brief the crew would have been more primed to perform a go around when the float developed?