Sabenaboy: I empathise with you and agree with your concerns. I doubt ATC can do anything because they do to know the limitations of the a/c. A sly sneaky F/O is another matter. Now imagine if you'd screwed up the NPA and had an incident. The AAIB/NTSB etc might investigate and ask, "why did they G.A. and not land ILS RW25?" You just can not win.
So let's go further: the cloud base is between ILS & NPA minima, perhaps and/or the visibility too. You decided to GA due to the ILS tailwind being 3kts >10. There is then an effective approach ban onto the NPA. You hold for 30 mins and the wind increases and the approach ban remains. You divert to another Greek island in the middle of the night. Imagine the chaos and cost caused. Eventually you return to mission control and are summoned to CP's office after he has read your report of GA + Diversion. Would you expect a pat on the back? If you had landed on ILS, and somehow a rumour reached the ears of said CP, would you expect to hear anything further?
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. 1000' on finals, as ATC give landing clearance with wind, is not the time to go into a long winded CRM committee meeting. It's also not a time to continue with lingering doubts swimming around your brain when you should be concentrating on what's in front of you. It is a moment for clear reasoned judgement and decision making. And there-in lies the rub; hence this discussion. Being a commander and knowing what is the best and safest thing to do, but having a written limitation with a new shiny know it all 'advocating their opionion' RHS jockey.
I always thought that the job of a commander was to do what was best & safest for their pax and the operation. There were the days when 'rules were for the obedience of......... and the guidance of wise men.' Shame that was abused and the book of limitations became thicker.
Sometimes the Mediterranean ATC's were not too bad and could be useful; if you knew the rules. I once was arriving at MXP. CAT 3 was out and the RVR was 550m. Passing FL100 we checked again and they asked what we needed. "600m". Passing IAF for the ILS we were given the wind, landing clearance and 600m. After that everyone kept quiet. It had been a long night over the N.Atlantic and we were very grateful. Perhaps it was true, perhaps not. I didn't ask.The difference is, could I have landed if they had reported 500m? No. Would I have landed with 13kts tailwind & 600m..................
Trouble with these topics is in the bar, for a social chat, there will be many diverse opinions from the old and new pilots, the thinkers and the rule abiders. Ask the XAA's for an official answer and there be only the rule book with no discretion. Sometimes it's a cruel world we have to tolerate, but I understand the reasoning. There will be too many guys who 'give them a yard and they'll take a mile.' Sad but true, and so the discretion has to be removed. However, the wroth of the CP & the pax might be for real.
Anyway it's been a fun chat and I'm glad I am no longer in the discretion-less no thinking allowed LHS. It is a shame that aspects of our job as commanders has fallen into that of a 'jobs worth'. Sadly, in the case of a 13t tailwind, and if the CP did want to see the back of you, if might become just that....'jobs worth'.
Last edited by RAT 5; 20th Oct 2015 at 17:06.