Pax and bags
 

Here in La Guardia, as in Kathmandu with the Turkish Air incident, all pax evacuate with hand baggage.

I know this is an unpopular topic with aircrew who post here, but that is what people do, and telling them in the safety brief that they cannot do that is a total waste of time. Do the cabin crew police that at emergency exits? "No" must be the answer.

A complete industry risk review of evacuation with hand baggage is overdue, because prohibition simply does not work and never has. If it is not preventable because of human factors, then a mitigation strategy is required, such as slide and door design. Low cost carriers are forcing pax into hand baggage only, and that means such a review is overdue.

VERY close call:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_WiWLfWAAA_UHi.jpg:large

An aircraft requested a wind check at 16:00:25Z, where the wind was 020 @ 10kts.

Previous aircraft (A 319) reported braking action as "good"

Port Authority News Conference now reporting aircraft landed on RWY 13 length 7000' and exited the runway aprox. 4500' from the threshold. Aircraft did not exit end of runway or go through EMAS (Excursion Mitigating and arresting system)

Braking action reported as good by preceding aircraft. Did not mention aircraft type that reported braking action.

LGA still closed planning to open a runway by 2 pm local.

They were probably using Rwy 13 because of low visibility.

Winds aloft from National Weather Service Radiosonde at 1200Z at Upton Long Island(about 40 nautical miles east of LGA) were reported from 020 degrees at 10 knots true at the surface, from 350 degrees at 16 knots true at 414 feet msl and from 350 degrees at 22 knots true at 1000 feet msl .


According to FlightAware Delta 1086, a MD-88, from ATL arrived LGA at 1556Z


METARs


KLGA 051751Z COR 30015G21KT 1/4SM R04/2200V2800FT +SN FZFG VV007 M05/M07 A3017 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 1/4 SLP217 931040 4/007 933015 SNINCR 1/7 P0004 60028 T10501067 10006 21050 53010 $
KLGA 051716Z 33013KT 1/4SM R04/2000V2400FT +SN FZFG VV009 M04/M06 A3016 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 1/4 P0002 $
KLGA 051651Z 32016KT 1/4SM R04/2800V4000FT SN FZFG FEW006 OVC012 M03/M05 A3015 RMK AO2 SLP210 P0005 T10331050 $
KLGA 051640Z 32014KT 1/4SM R04/2400V4000FT SN FZFG SCT007 OVC012 M03/M05 A3015 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 1/2 PRESRR P0005
KLGA 051631Z 36009KT 1/4SM R04/3500VP6000FT SN FZFG VV012 M03/M05 A3012 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 1/2 P0004
KLGA 051622Z 01008KT 1/4SM R04/3000VP6000FT SN FZFG VV011 M03/M05 A3012 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 1/2 P0003
KLGA 051551Z 01008KT 1/4SM R04/2800V3500FT SN FZFG VV009 M03/M05 A3012 RMK AO2 SLP199 P0006 T10331050
KLGA 051524Z 04007KT 1/4SM R04/2600V2800FT SN FZFG VV009 M03/M04 A3013 RMK AO2 P0004
KLGA 051451Z 03010KT 1/4SM R04/3000V4500FT SN FZFG VV012 M03/M04 A3014 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 SLP207 P0003 60013 T10281044 53040
KLGA 051417Z 03012KT 1/4SM R04/2800V4000FT SN FZFG SCT006 OVC012 M02/M03 A3011 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 P0002
KLGA 051351Z 01014G18KT 1/2SM R04/5000VP6000FT SN FZFG FEW006 OVC014 M02/M03 A3011 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 SLP195 SNINCR 1/5 P0005 T10171033
KLGA 051338Z 01013KT 1/2SM R04/3000V5000FT SN FZFG SCT006 OVC010 M02/M03 A3010 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 P0005
KLGA 051333Z 36011KT 1/4SM R04/3000V5000FT SN FZFG VV007 M01/M03 A3010 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 PRESRR P0004
KLGA 051251Z COR 34006KT 1/4SM R04/3000V4000FT SN FG OVC009 00/M01 A3006 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 SLP178 SNINCR 1/4 P0005 T00001011
KLGA 051218Z 33007KT 1/4SM R04/3500V4500FT SN FG BKN009 OVC014 00/M01 A3004 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 P0002
KLGA 051208Z 33007KT 1/2SM R04/4000V5500FT SN FG FEW006 OVC011 00/M02 A3004 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 P0001
KLGA 051157Z 33007KT 1/2SM R04/5000VP6000FT SN FG BKN010 OVC015 01/M02 A3003 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 3/4 P0000
KLGA 051151Z 33007KT 1SM R04/5500VP6000FT -SN BR BKN011 OVC016 01/M02 A3003 RMK AO2 SLP167 931004 4/003 P0002 60016 70046 T00061017 10044 20006 53014

Wonder if its local crew or expats?:}

Tailwind > Lt. Surface HW ?
 

That is surface wind.
Was there any wind shearing reported on short final by previous ACs.
Profile of DL1086 shows incr of Descent Rate on short final.
Data recorder will have all the answers.

EMAS is Engineered Materials Arresting System, not Excursion Mitigating. Generally, a runway excursion is away from the centerline, where an overrun is in line with runway heading, but past the threshold (which EMAS is designed to arrest)

The aircraft arrived closer to 1603Z.

So, not a massive wind shift in speed or direction, as the preceding aircraft reported 020@10, and the closest METAR indicates 010@8.

Closed my local
 

Nasty WX here, but what strikes me about an outwardly survivable mishap is the number of exits rendered unusable. Reports locally that the left side exits unusable due fuel leak (did they hit an antenna or hut?) and R1 hanging over Jamaica bay (shades of an undelivered A340 at Tolouse..) leaving only 2 over wing exits and pax carring baggage out. Any fire or smoke and things would have gone downhill rapidment. A closer call than perhaps a casual observer might consider

Approximately 15 minutes earlier United 462 called braking "medium, worse at the end .. later said poor". Three others that followed called it good braking (a Regional Jet and a 319) and this was communicated to 1086. Touchdown RVRs at the time were good (6000'). Wind 030 at 9 for runway 13.

if you look , the tail cone is gone, I think they may have used the tail slide to evacuate, plus the over wing exits

Per Neilki - "and pax carrying baggage out. Any fire or smoke and things would have gone downhill rapidment." Unfortunately no amount of cajoling the pax is going to change this. I hate to say it, but nothing will until it causes fatalities and compels the airlines to come up with a solution (locking system on the overheads that can be engaged by crew on takeoff and landing, perhaps?)

So, one crew report poor braking action, and with further snowfall, a few idiots report goo BA and ATC run with that? This reeks of commercial pressure and contempt for safety. As for a 10kt downwind landing on a contaminated runway in continuing snow? Really? This seems to be a major US cultural issue.

There was no 10kt downwind landing. It was 4kts.

Commercial pressure and contempt for safety? With several others (more recent) reporting good braking action, why should ATC report anything else?

Enlighten me on this "major US cultural issue" this is "reeking" of.

As reported by Aviation Herald, sounds somewhat weird – tower apparently unable to see what had happened and having to be persuaded by fire service that there had been a crash ...

Accident: Delta MD88 at New York on Mar 5th 2015, runway excursion on landing

it is really all about assessing the criticality of the approach, being on speed, on centerline and directional control INCLUDING post landing aerodynamic controls (eg pushing forward to keep nosewheel in contact with runway, being sure the spoilers deployed, compensating for crosswind and symmetric application of reverse thrust).

wondering when the last time rubber removed from runway?

For those of you looking for a link to the ATC transmissions, see: Delta plane slides off runway at snowy New York airport

Pablo26 Listening to CNN earlier today - they conducted a telephone interview with a passenger who attempted to use the restroom as the plane was being evacuated. He told the newscaster that the pilot told him the bathroom was locked and that he had to exit the plane. I'll try to find the interview.

:ugh:

Here it is: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/...ing/vp-BBih7CI

Starts at around the 5:00 mark on the video. Forget grabbing your carryon bags - this guy was going to take a bathroom break prior to evac.

Pudo, this incident took place at LGA, not JFK. And there was a braking action PIREP (good) provided a few minutes before by an Airbus. Regardless, there was plenty of snow and ice on the field due to the lousy weather today. As long as aircraft continue to attempt operating in these conditions, I fear situations like this will occur.

I wonder how bad the previously landed Airbus crew feels about reporting good braking action.
I was just listening to ewr tower and all U.S. carriers said good braking action. British airways comes in and lands.
They then told the tower that there was considerable contamination towards the end of the runway.
So a lot more info than from the local carriers who just keep their mouth.. Why?