ERJ 145 off piste at O’ Hare

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by ARealTimTuffy

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.

Good advice.

[jmmoric]

Originally Posted by ARealTimTuffy

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.

I'll give you a thumbs up on that.

Always safety first, then expeditiousness.

[DOVES]

PRUDENCE

What the public and management comments would have been if they had done it without any damage - Even after a gound loop -?
"Heroes! Only one in a thousand makes it!"
Those pilots will surely become I.P, C.P, Fleet Managers.
That's the reason why all of us, prudent pilots, injured in our professionalism, should shout at the scandal.
Airmanship is not the toss of a coin, nor a russian roulette.
Fly Safely

[Professional Amateur]

"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."

So by that logic if the aircraft in front reports conditions below what is required AND you prioritise the BA over an RCAM you can't land until a greater fool lands after the a320 and provides a better braking report.

Learning lots in this thread. Just trying to work out how to handle all this..... As I head into my first NE US winter season.

[Sobelena]

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.

And maybe a good reason for ATC to increase spacing by a mile or two to allow for that option and avoid G/As. But maybe they do already?

[cossack]

Originally Posted by Sobelena

And maybe a good reason for ATC to increase spacing by a mile or two to allow for that option and avoid G/As. But maybe they do already?

We do but its a balancing act. Spacing is increased but not by so much that it wastes space and causes huge delays. If the preceding is in the exit just before you cross the threshold is ideal.
If your runway occupancy time is longer than the previously observed average you will cause a go around. If you go off the side, the result is much worse both for you and those following. Do your best but stay safe.

[havick]

Originally Posted by DOVES

What the public and management comments would have been if they had done it without any damage - Even after a gound loop -?
"Heroes! Only one in a thousand makes it!"
Those pilots will surely become I.P, C.P, Fleet Managers.
That's the reason why all of us, prudent pilots, injured in our professionalism, should shout at the scandal.
Airmanship is not the toss of a coin, nor a russian roulette.
Fly Safely

you obviously don’t know how Envoy management operates. They will most likely be fired by Envoy (directive rolling downhill from American Airlines), and the Captain will get his job back via arbitration about 9-10 months later. Same thing for the FO unless they are still on probation.

[Pilot DAR]

If your runway occupancy time is longer than the previously observed average you will cause a go around.

Obviously, no pilot would tie up a runway longer than they needed to. However, unless cleared to land with an acknowledged "land to hold short" or "clear by...", the runway is yours, until you clear, even if you decide to use the whole length. If your use of the runway during a normal, or unexpectedly long rollout causes a go around so be it. Focus on landing, stopping and clearing safely, not rushing off the runway for the pilot behind you, their spacing is not your concern.

When I have been in doubt about runway conditions/friction, I'm content to land and allow the plane to roll out the length of the runway, if doing so is the better way to assure control is maintained. If I anticipate this, I will tell ATC that I plan to land long. A few too many times I have been training a pilot who tried to rush to clear a runway to meet the hopes of ATC. Ruining tires, brakes, or the plane is not worth stretching your skills, in what may be unusually difficult conditions. I have reminded pilots under training that if they have a problem resulting from clearing in a rush, ATC is not going to come to their defense about it.

[Nomad2]

Back when I was a145 Capt, we used to joke that there wasn't a European runway that a Barbie hadn't been off the end of.

Now, it wasn't true, but you get the idea.

Our examples had no reversers, so you were on wheel brakes alone. If you landed on a real slick runway, the wheels didn't spin up, the jet didn't know it had landed and so it didn't change its 'WoW' condition to 'on the ground'.

This meant no spoilers and no wheel brakes, and of course we already had no reversers...

Once I landed at BRS to find absolutely no way to slow the thing down at all.