Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

ERJ 145 off piste at O’ Hare

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

ERJ 145 off piste at O’ Hare

Old 12th Nov 2019, 13:02
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Crosswind, maybe too fast, big-time slippery . . . Doesn't this kinda-sorta look like, "Maybe we should go somewhere else?"

Has anyone confirmed the pax report of a go-around before this landing?
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 13:35
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SIN
Age: 48
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by OldnGrounded
Crosswind, maybe too fast, big-time slippery . . . Doesn't this kinda-sorta look like, "Maybe we should go somewhere else?"

Has anyone confirmed the pax report of a go-around before this landing?
According to the plot on FR24, they in fact went around once...
Salina Chan is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 13:35
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hotel time zone
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sailvi767
The crosswind component was well over the limit for my company on any aircraft with a reported runway condition of medium to poor.
except it was reported medium, wasn't it? (Just within my company/type limits)
Time Traveller is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 14:07
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Time Traveller
except it was reported medium, wasn't it? (Just within my company/type limits)
Just listened. They were told "medium to poor."
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 14:19
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Time Traveller
except it was reported medium, wasn't it? (Just within my company/type limits)
The tower controller reported braking medium to poor but the next part sounds like 'up to N3 and N4 paths' or was it 'up the N3 and N4 paths'?

I'll attach a .zip file with edited audio from LiveATC.net The file will open on a computer but will not open on most tablets or phones.
Attached Files
Airbubba is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 15:16
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Airbubba
The tower controller reported braking medium to poor but the next part sounds like 'up to N3 and N4 paths' or was it 'up the N3 and N4 paths'?

I'll attach a .zip file with edited audio from LiveATC.net The file will open on a computer but will not open on most tablets or phones.
The Twr also reported "5-5-5" Condition Code for 10L - does that jibe with "Medium-poor" ?

Is this situation (crap braking reports with good CCs) common?


https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...-79A_Chg_2.pdf
Zeffy is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 15:23
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hotel time zone
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sounds like the latter to me (up the taxiways). Certainly, on it's first approach, the condition was reported as medium. RPB 5/5/5 - is that a pirep? .. of good BA?

Last edited by Time Traveller; 12th Nov 2019 at 15:48.
Time Traveller is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 15:40
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,451
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Zeffy, your descriptor of the braking reports should have considered the likely accuracy of the runway report, and the role which pilots have in judging the associated conditions - the big picture.

One weather report indicted 1/8 in of contaminant. That value and less, is termed ‘good’ (for contaminants - not the same as on a dry runway). However, just a small increment deeper than 1/8 could change the runway condition to 3 or even 2.

As much as the ground services might be limited by the measurement and reporting capability, so too piloting interpretations unless the larger picture is considered; think about it.

A pre-landing assessment of runway condition should consider both the reported conditions and lower values as ‘what if’, ‘just in case’, and particularly with a crosswind, likely gusts - taken as a limit.
safetypee is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 15:43
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Zone of Alienation
Age: 79
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exacerbated by reverse thrust. Why anyone would double down on reverse as the plane slides is beyond me. Those winds and BA should have set off alarm bells.
FIRESYSOK is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 16:03
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FIRESYSOK
Exacerbated by reverse thrust. Why anyone would double down on reverse as the plane slides is beyond me. Those winds and BA should have set off alarm bells.
No disagreement here -- that's a ton of crosswind for slick runway operations.

Q: why wasn't the airport operating on 4's instead of 9's/10s?

A: Arrival rates (AAR) drop by nearly 2/3.

Pressures induced by "pushing the tin" ATC policies are a factor as well.



Zeffy is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 17:01
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: VA
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Zeffy
No disagreement here -- that's a ton of crosswind for slick runway operations.

Q: why wasn't the airport operating on 4's instead of 9's/10s?

A: Arrival rates (AAR) drop by nearly 2/3.

Pressures induced by "pushing the tin" ATC policies are a factor as well.


Rwy 4L is closed during construction of the new 9C, so the only non-east/west runway is 4R which is 8075 feet and only CAT I for approaches. Considering arrivals and departures and periodic snow removal issues, ORD would basically shut down if the east/west runways were not available.


Last edited by Tomaski; 15th Nov 2019 at 16:17.
Tomaski is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 17:46
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tomaski
Rwy 4R is closed during construction of the new 9C, so the only non-east/west runway is 4R which is 8075 feet and only CAT I for approaches. Considering arrivals and departures and periodic snow removal issues, ORD would basically shut down if the east/west runways were not available.
Bring back the 14/32s !
Zeffy is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 18:09
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Time Traveller
RPB 5/5/5 - is that a pirep? .. of good BA?
Actually RCC - Runway Condition Codes for each third of the runway. According to a table posted above these represent the runway condition description as reported by the airport operator. I believe this system was put in place in response to Southwest's fatal 737 runway overrrun at MDW in 2005.

There are pages of conditions and qualifiers for these runway numbers in bulletins and ops manuals.

For example:


Airbubba is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 19:56
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: unknown
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When I listen to the ATC communications, I hear the tower give the RVR, the 5/5/5, then braking action as medium to poor up until taxiway N3, then something else that I cannot understand(does anyone know what she said?). Isn't 5/5/5 a direct conflict with braking action of medium to poor?
tcasblue is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 21:15
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Up yer nose, again.
Age: 67
Posts: 1,232
Received 15 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by OldnGrounded
That's right. I was able to watch in slow motion and frame-by-frame on my big, hi-res desktop monitors and the outboard spoilers didn't deploy.
Shame your big high resolution monitors didn't show you all the screws holding that "outboard Spolier" firmly in place. The spoliers are ahead of the inboard flap only.


Peter Fanelli is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2019, 22:56
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Peter Fanelli
Shame your big high resolution monitors didn't show you all the screws holding that "outboard Spolier" firmly in place. The spoliers are ahead of the inboard flap only.
Well, I was watching a cellphone video, but . . . I guess I should have done a bit of research on the type, huh?

OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2019, 02:26
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: unknown
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This incident has exposed what I think could be a major disaster waiting to happen at O'Hare. If the aircraft had been landing on 10C instead of 10L. They would have had their excursion between taxiways P3 and P5. Take a look on Google Earth to see what is located at that position, a major dropoff on an exposed section of an underground roadway that crosses under the runways. It amazes ma that the FAA would approve this and every time I pass by it, I wonder if an airliner will drop into it at some point.
tcasblue is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2019, 02:58
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Zone of Alienation
Age: 79
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tcasblue
When I listen to the ATC communications, I hear the tower give the RVR, the 5/5/5, then braking action as medium to poor up until taxiway N3, then something else that I cannot understand(does anyone know what she said?). Isn't 5/5/5 a direct conflict with braking action of medium to poor?
Thats the difference between ‘measured’ RCAM and BA reports. A braking action report from a transport category aircraft should carry more weight than RCAM.

RCAM is more for planning, and when actual reports aren’t available. When an A320 reports medium-poor and you have an event like this, the investigation won’t be kind if you attempt to fall back on the RCAM report.

I have never actually heard a tower controller report the RCAM to an aircraft along with a braking action report. These were, in essence, contradictory. I’m sure this will come up during any inquiry, and is hopefully addressed.

FIRESYSOK is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2019, 15:57
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 4,076
Received 50 Likes on 32 Posts
If you’re the first arrival in hours during a weather event, the RCC codes are operational limits as well.
West Coast is online now  
Old 13th Nov 2019, 21:32
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tdot
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For those who don’t often operate in these types of conditions, I’ll offer some humble advice. Contaminated runways (even wet) don’t leave the centreline and try to turn off until at taxi speed. It’s not a good feeling to start a turn and realize you don’t have the traction to finish it. Do all the slowing down in a straight line.

I’ve done this in ORD, LGA, BOS among other busy places right down to a crawl if the conditions are bad enough. Then I’ll poke along until the exit. I’ll worry about the guy behind me on a dry runway. Clear me to land on that crud, and I’ll take my time.

Note:
I am not sure if that is part of the circumstances here.
ARealTimTuffy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.