Originally Posted by Porch Monkey
What I would've done, what you would've done or anybody else would've done is irrelevant now. We didn't. They did. I don't have their mindset, or their info. Neither do you. Would I have carried more fuel? I don't know. Would I have carried the same? I don't know. I wasn't there.
Oh come on. Given the info they had, what would you have carried ex BNE/SYD?
Originally Posted by Old Akro
I think an earlier post said that the pavement strength of BHI is inadequate for a B737. MIA is PCN 32, BHI is PCN 15. I don't fully understand the B737 requirements, but prima facie it looks to me that the previous poster was correct and YBHI was not a viable alternative.
They didn't need an alternate at departure; I was only suggesting that if they had carried Jabba's "might be fog" fuel, they would have had BHI as an emergency option. If I get a report of fog at a port with another wide open but low PCN, I'll take the low PCN any time. A quick check of the FMS database for approaches would also be in order.
I think there is also a potential argument that busting minima at MIA is safer than at AD
I very much doubt that a GPS NPA to 0/0 onto a shortish runway is safer than an autoland onto a Cat 1 ILS. Legal or not, I know what I'd rather do. Those Virgin guys deserve a bravery award.
A previous poster suggested that the BOM gets ground observations from a BOM person at the airport. One of my concerns / questions about the BOM is whether it has become primarily a 9-5 Mon - Fri organisation. Most of the decisions for this flight occurred before 9am. Was the BOM guy actually at work and providing observations?
We had the ridiculous situation here a few years back where the Met Office at an outport didn't open until the first flight was ready to depart. I recall making many phone calls just prior to pushback asking about the actual weather there. Pretty silly really; the only time we needed accurate weather/forecasting, early morning, nobody's in the office for obs.