Jump to content

Good article on plan continuation primacy


bradp

Recommended Posts

On 20/04/2018 at 11:11 AM, bradp said:

Thanks for the link Brad.  A worthwhile read.

In the MD-82 accident, the pilots ignored two of these automatic go around cues: they lost sight of the runway and the crosswind (which was 50 degrees off the runway at 30 knots, gusting to 45) 

Well illustrated in the above details.  After a long, busy and at the end tiring duty the crew were confronted with the above and probably just wanted to get down and finish for the day, a normal human trait.  I believe the max demo crosswind of the MD80 is 30 kts dry runway and 25 kts wet runway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mooney in Oz said:

 . . . the crosswind (which was 50 degrees off the runway at 30 knots, gusting to 45) 

I believe the max demo crosswind of the MD80 is 30 kts dry runway and 25 kts wet runway. 

Is this a hard limit in 121 ops? It is not for us in Part 91, it's just the most the plane saw in certification and must be a certain minimum fraction of stall speed (20%?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hank said:

Is this a hard limit in 121 ops? It is not for us in Part 91, it's just the most the plane saw in certification and must be a certain minimum fraction of stall speed (20%?).

At a guess, probably Hank.  However, company SOP comes into play.  I had a quick look at the NTSB link and the three causes it cites is - Contributing to the accident were the flight crew’s (1) impaired performance resulting from fatigue and the situational stress associated with the intent to land under the circumstances, (2) continuation of the approach to a landing when the company’s maximum crosswind component was exceeded, and (3) use of reverse thrust greater than 1.3 engine pressure ratio after landing.

Note No. 2.

Company SOP's with regard to crosswind (or other limitations) do not exceed the manufacturer's numbers, even if only demonstrated and I can't see any country's regulator permitting this.  Gust factor has to be taken into consideration too.  For example, the company I work for considers wind gusts to 45 kts (or any wind speed in excess of the SOP limit) as a solid figure, even though its a momentary occurrence.  The wet runway in this accident made it worse.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.