Respect Convective Weather!
Thread Starter
Respect Convective Weather!
Accident: Frontier A321 at Orlando on Aug 8th 2019, windshear causes hard landing and tail strike
By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Aug 13th 2019 23:25Z, last updated Tuesday, Aug 13th 2019 23:27ZA Frontier Airlines Airbus A321-200, registration N717FR performing flight F9-1187 from Portland,ME to Orlando,FL (USA), was on final approach to Orlando's runway 18L when tower advised about a windshear alert 15 knots loss on 1nm final and cleared the flight to land. The crew continued, encountered windshear and touched down hard at 13:29L (17:29Z), performed a bounce recovery and went around. The aircraft positioned for another approach now for runway 35R about 25 minutes after the balked landing and landed without further incident.
The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Orlando about 126 hours after landing.
On Aug 13th 2019 The Aviation Herald received information the aircraft touched down at almost +4G and suffered a tail strike as result of windshear on short final close to ground. The damage is being assessed, it does not appears impossible the damage needs to be assessed beyond repair.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...458Z/KPWM/KMCO
Metars:
KMCO 081953Z 25009KT 10SM FEW040 FEW090 SCT250 BKN300 33/22 A2996 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT NE SLP144 T03280222=
KMCO 081853Z 28008KT 10SM FEW035CB SCT090 BKN250 32/23 A2998 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT NE AND E RAE06 TSB19E38 SLP150 CB DSNT E MOV E TCU DSNT N-NE SE VCSH E P0001 T03220233=
KMCO 081838Z 28011KT 10SM FEW035CB SCT090 BKN250 32/24 A2999 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT E RAE06 TSB19E38 CB DSNT E MOV E TCU DSNT N-NE SE VCSH E P0001 T03170239=
KMCO 081819Z 28005KT 10SM TS FEW035CB FEW090 BKN250 31/25 A2999 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT E RAE06 TSB19 OCNL LTGCG SE TS SE MOV E TCU NE-E VCSH SE P0001 T03110250=
KMCO 081753Z VRB04G31KT 6SM R35L/3500VP6000FT +RA FEW019 BKN037TCU BKN250 28/22 A3000 RMK AO2 PK WND 27031/1744 LTG DSNT E RAE00B44 SLP157 VIS NE 2 TCU ALQDS P0017 60017 T02780217 10328 20244 55005=
KMCO 081653Z 29007KT 10SM -RA SCT033TCU BKN250 31/24 A3000 RMK AO2 RAB48 SLP156 TCU ALQDS P0000 T03110239=
KMCO 081553Z 25009KT 10SM SCT029 32/24 A3001 RMK AO2 SLP159 T03170244=
KMCO 081453Z 24008KT 10SM SCT022 30/25 A3001 RMK AO2 SLP162 T03000250 50005=
By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Aug 13th 2019 23:25Z, last updated Tuesday, Aug 13th 2019 23:27ZA Frontier Airlines Airbus A321-200, registration N717FR performing flight F9-1187 from Portland,ME to Orlando,FL (USA), was on final approach to Orlando's runway 18L when tower advised about a windshear alert 15 knots loss on 1nm final and cleared the flight to land. The crew continued, encountered windshear and touched down hard at 13:29L (17:29Z), performed a bounce recovery and went around. The aircraft positioned for another approach now for runway 35R about 25 minutes after the balked landing and landed without further incident.
The occurrence aircraft is still on the ground in Orlando about 126 hours after landing.
On Aug 13th 2019 The Aviation Herald received information the aircraft touched down at almost +4G and suffered a tail strike as result of windshear on short final close to ground. The damage is being assessed, it does not appears impossible the damage needs to be assessed beyond repair.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...458Z/KPWM/KMCO
Metars:
KMCO 081953Z 25009KT 10SM FEW040 FEW090 SCT250 BKN300 33/22 A2996 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT NE SLP144 T03280222=
KMCO 081853Z 28008KT 10SM FEW035CB SCT090 BKN250 32/23 A2998 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT NE AND E RAE06 TSB19E38 SLP150 CB DSNT E MOV E TCU DSNT N-NE SE VCSH E P0001 T03220233=
KMCO 081838Z 28011KT 10SM FEW035CB SCT090 BKN250 32/24 A2999 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT E RAE06 TSB19E38 CB DSNT E MOV E TCU DSNT N-NE SE VCSH E P0001 T03170239=
KMCO 081819Z 28005KT 10SM TS FEW035CB FEW090 BKN250 31/25 A2999 RMK AO2 LTG DSNT E RAE06 TSB19 OCNL LTGCG SE TS SE MOV E TCU NE-E VCSH SE P0001 T03110250=
KMCO 081753Z VRB04G31KT 6SM R35L/3500VP6000FT +RA FEW019 BKN037TCU BKN250 28/22 A3000 RMK AO2 PK WND 27031/1744 LTG DSNT E RAE00B44 SLP157 VIS NE 2 TCU ALQDS P0017 60017 T02780217 10328 20244 55005=
KMCO 081653Z 29007KT 10SM -RA SCT033TCU BKN250 31/24 A3000 RMK AO2 RAB48 SLP156 TCU ALQDS P0000 T03110239=
KMCO 081553Z 25009KT 10SM SCT029 32/24 A3001 RMK AO2 SLP159 T03170244=
KMCO 081453Z 24008KT 10SM SCT022 30/25 A3001 RMK AO2 SLP162 T03000250 50005=
How can you be cleared to land with windshear reported and 15 kts speed loss at 1 NM?
perhaps the phraseology should be amended to:
"Cleared to land in the windshear "
Aviation industry is biased for a Captain to take a decision and decision making should be passed on to other authorities like ATC to decide when to close an airport or when NOT clear an aircraft to land. That should not be based solely on a vacant runway only but other threats like weather.
Gone are the days when a Captain could decide.It is a pseudo-decision making.
Should he have diverted , a typical management reaction would be : how did the previous aircraft make it?
So when windshear is reported , what do you do ? Rely on your instruments , weather display? And try your luck?
perhaps the phraseology should be amended to:
"Cleared to land in the windshear "
Aviation industry is biased for a Captain to take a decision and decision making should be passed on to other authorities like ATC to decide when to close an airport or when NOT clear an aircraft to land. That should not be based solely on a vacant runway only but other threats like weather.
Gone are the days when a Captain could decide.It is a pseudo-decision making.
Should he have diverted , a typical management reaction would be : how did the previous aircraft make it?
So when windshear is reported , what do you do ? Rely on your instruments , weather display? And try your luck?
The days when a captain can decide are still here, what on earth makes you be they aren't? Very few would trust to luck; skill, judgment and guidelines yes.
BTW a clearance to land is not an instruction.
I assume and hope that you are not a professional pilot.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Europe
Age: 34
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC does and cannot know the aircraft limitations, technical status of the aircraft etc., therefore such decisions have to be made by the flight crew. For example "Wind 190° 37 knots, Runway 28, cleared to land" would mandate a go around in a 737NG, but not in an A320 (different crosswind limitations). Obviously, information should be passed to the crew, so they can come to a reasonable decision. Transferring this authority to ATC would result in quite a few accidents. Rather, crew training should be improved.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to his/her profile Citation2 is an A320 driver. Of course that may only be on Flight Simulator X. If he/she is truly a commercial pilot I am seriously concerned at his/her lack of basic knowledge concerning both the profession of piloting and ATC. ATC is not the commander of the aircraft. Would you also like ATC (Tower) to instruct you to go around because in their eyes your approach is unstable (according to your company's SOPSs of course)? The decision to go-around or continue will always be that of the commander of the aircraft.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Europe you can often find airports where the wind is a few knots down the strip but the ATIS is reporting WS because it was reported hours earlier by a lighter type but actually there is no actual windshear condition or threat.
Very alike the pilots who report some light turbulence as “severe”. A colleague did recently while we were flying through some light bumps and was oblivious to the carnage it caused on the frequency. Cry wolf too many times and someone will get bitten.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we were required to go-around every time ATC reported "windshear advisory" or "windshear alert" the number of go-arounds, at least in the U.S., would sky rocket. In this example the visibility was 6-10 miles with 3700' SCT or BKN clouds. Think about how often you have that in Florida on summer afternoons. Let's see what the FDR shows as far as weather and pilot performance.
I have not mentioned ATC to instruct a go around.
I was mentioning a hypothetical scenario where a genuine authority with a real pair can instruct to close the airport due life threatening weather.
That could be meteorologist, ATC ... Any
I am sure that would close the door to a Russian roulette scenario where you have 2 possible come out: you make it or not.
Until then , Captains will continue to attempt and assume..
I was mentioning a hypothetical scenario where a genuine authority with a real pair can instruct to close the airport due life threatening weather.
That could be meteorologist, ATC ... Any
I am sure that would close the door to a Russian roulette scenario where you have 2 possible come out: you make it or not.
Until then , Captains will continue to attempt and assume..
What on earth are you talking about?
Russian roulette?
I am flabbergasted!
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As mentioned earlier when ATC clears you to land just means the runway is clear , you do not have to land.
In addition the controller cannot know your own and your airline / aircraft limitations and what you experience on finals.
Last remark : in many airports , the wind readout on the anemometer does not reflect what you will have on finals , or at touchdown point . The actual anemometer(s) are fixed somewhere, and when you have a few of them , it gives the average .
In addition the controller cannot know your own and your airline / aircraft limitations and what you experience on finals.
Last remark : in many airports , the wind readout on the anemometer does not reflect what you will have on finals , or at touchdown point . The actual anemometer(s) are fixed somewhere, and when you have a few of them , it gives the average .
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As mentioned earlier when ATC clears you to land just means the runway is clear , you do not have to land.
In addition the controller cannot know your own and your airline / aircraft limitations and what you experience on finals.
Last remark : in many airports , the wind readout on the anemometer does not reflect what you will have on finals , or at touchdown point . The actual anemometer(s) are fixed somewhere, and when you have a few of them , it gives the average .
In addition the controller cannot know your own and your airline / aircraft limitations and what you experience on finals.
Last remark : in many airports , the wind readout on the anemometer does not reflect what you will have on finals , or at touchdown point . The actual anemometer(s) are fixed somewhere, and when you have a few of them , it gives the average .
Not in America it doesn’t. You can be cleared to land when number 3 ...or crossing traffic landing or taking off....in actual fact I’m not quite sure what it means there at times !
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Europe
Age: 34
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Citation2, I don‘t know what kind of operation you work in but I was never threatened by management for making the right decision. It’s not about airport authorities, meteorologist or ATC, it’s about supervising airlines and making sure that pilots are not pushed into obviously unsafe situations. If you are not able to put your survival and the survival of your passengers above commercial concern then you should maybe not work in the airline business.
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Just off the Persian gulf
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This guy is hilarious. I hope he only spends his time flying in front of his computer. He’d never get in anywhere. He’d divert as soon as he heard the ATIS in TFS 😂😂
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Orbit
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure what outfit you fly for....if "your" captains responsibilities and freedom in decision making are that restricted the regulatory agency needs to step in because the safety protocol is broken.
We, as a crew, still, decide the amount of fuel we take , decide to accept or not a maintenance write up/deferral , to continue an approach or abort, to accept an unsafe ATC clearance( yes it happens, been vectored straight into cumulus granitos in Equador) etc etc.
We, as a crew, still, decide the amount of fuel we take , decide to accept or not a maintenance write up/deferral , to continue an approach or abort, to accept an unsafe ATC clearance( yes it happens, been vectored straight into cumulus granitos in Equador) etc etc.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Qwerty
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ATC would be made aware of the wind shear by another landing aircraft. If no more aircraft are allowed to proceed to land by ATC the airport would effectively be closed for perpetuity as no more aircraft would be allowed to make an approach and find out if the wind shear had abated or not.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Europe
Age: 34
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm totally with Havingwings4ever on this one. In most companies a reason for extra fuel has to be provided if you exceed a certain amount of extra fuel, but unless the extra fuel carried is excessive on every flight this data is mostly used for statistics etc. and not to chase up on individual captains. I have worked for four companies so far all of them had a policy like this in place but I never received any call or other consequence because of extra fuel. So either your fear regarding punishment for taking extra fuel is irrational or you should indeed send a report about this policy.
