SWA 737 in the mud @KMDW
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not could be, it is. The Daily Mail article you linked from even said so under the picture. The snow should have been a clue also.
The first post of the thread linked to a video of the incident. That should perhaps have been first port of call?
The first post of the thread linked to a video of the incident. That should perhaps have been first port of call?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see it in the simulator a hundred times a year -excess speed well beyond Vref all the way down on final and to touch down. Call it lazy flying if you like. If simulator instructors could allow practice on minimum legal length runways, I am sure pilots would strive for more accurate speeds and touch down points. In turn this would enourage good habits to be used on longer runways.
Boeing advise Vref plus five knots as minimum approach speed. The FCTM also recommends bleeding off excess headwind component additives (except for gust factor) before touch down. But rarely does this occur during recurrent training in the simulator. Too many pilots consider Vref as a dangerously low airspeed and therefore prefer to carry excess speed than dare to cross the threshold at Vref. On a slippery runway any excess airspeed coupled with unwanted float, is bound to extend the landing roll with sometimes disasterous consequences.
Boeing advise Vref plus five knots as minimum approach speed. The FCTM also recommends bleeding off excess headwind component additives (except for gust factor) before touch down. But rarely does this occur during recurrent training in the simulator. Too many pilots consider Vref as a dangerously low airspeed and therefore prefer to carry excess speed than dare to cross the threshold at Vref. On a slippery runway any excess airspeed coupled with unwanted float, is bound to extend the landing roll with sometimes disasterous consequences.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pattern is full
1500' AGL 10 miles out, right where one would want to be to intercept an ILS.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is is by chance where the google maps Icon is 
Midway Airport, Chicago, IL, United States - Google Maps
Midway Airport, Chicago, IL, United States - Google Maps
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Halfnut
Very true that, I remember when MDW was mostly a corporate/private operations airport. Very nice.
Then the airlines moved back in. More than just one.
Oh well, that's life.
There is a reason the City of Chicago decided to build an all new airport years ago out at peach orchard on the edge of town when the jets started coming on line. Now LUV makes it part of their business model to go back into airports that were abandoned years ago.
Then the airlines moved back in. More than just one.
Oh well, that's life.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So now the "non-pilot" lampaeso is ridiculing Google?
Having flown in and out of Midway, as well as Burbank in a B-727, if I want to know what and or the airport is, I don't need "giggle"...I have charts and approach plates (lampaeso--they are not really "plates" but pieces of paper we PILOTS use)...
And yes they are demanding airports, but as has been previously posted, one needs to be on their "A" game....
BTW...when is the last time you Captained a Commercial Transport Jet???
Didn't think so...
Having flown in and out of Midway, as well as Burbank in a B-727, if I want to know what and or the airport is, I don't need "giggle"...I have charts and approach plates (lampaeso--they are not really "plates" but pieces of paper we PILOTS use)...
And yes they are demanding airports, but as has been previously posted, one needs to be on their "A" game....
BTW...when is the last time you Captained a Commercial Transport Jet???
Didn't think so...
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"...and approach plates (lampaeso--they are not really "plates" but pieces of paper we PILOTS use)..."
We always called them approach plates, back in the olden days.
We always called them approach plates, back in the olden days.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably the RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 13C approach as -300s were being diverted. Only -700s are set up for RNAV, SWA's -300s can't do RNAV approaches.
the rnav rnp would have set the final at 140kts for the 37...
you could manually fly a 300 on that procedure with that straight in and manage your energy...
you mean to tell me the crew could not manage Vref+5 approach?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A3757 is quite right. Whatever happened to the ability to land within 200' of a designated spot on the runway? that was minimum commercial standard...good guys got it within six inches.
Touchdown at Vref to Vref minus 5 is acceptable...in jets anyway.
There is a reluctance to FLY THE FRIKIN PLANE...an ATP should be able to handle it...but there is so much SLOP and it is considered ok.
Touchdown at Vref to Vref minus 5 is acceptable...in jets anyway.
There is a reluctance to FLY THE FRIKIN PLANE...an ATP should be able to handle it...but there is so much SLOP and it is considered ok.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: India
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A3757 is quite right. Whatever happened to the ability to land within 200' of a designated spot on the runway? that was minimum commercial standard...good guys got it within six inches.
