Southwest 737 off the runway in Chicago

DA900 · Post by **DA900** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:22 pm

complexintentions wrote:From the AFM:

-Max takeoff / landing tailwind component 10kts (May be 15kts as customer option)
-No tailwind component allowed on contaminated runways.

That is interesting, on the -200s it is 15 kts. I don't have any info the -700s. I'm surprised they reduced it to 10 kts. With contaminated runways it depends on the level of contamination, length and approach to decide if what, or any tailwind component is used.

tripleseven · Post by **tripleseven** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:04 am

teacher wrote:Initial reports are that the reversors did not operate as they should. Could be just speculation (although it said that this was stated by "investigators").

Reverse thrusters weren't working properly when plane slid off Chicago runway

23:16:46 EST Dec 10, 2005

CHICAGO (AP) - Reverse thrusters that should have slowed a Southwest Airlines jetliner before it slid off a runway at Midway Airport and into the street didn't immediately kick in when the pilots tried to deploy them, U.S. investigators said Saturday after interviewing the crew.

How much of a role that braking equipment played in Thursday's deadly accident wasn't immediately clear, though, and the investigation is continuing.

Call me nuts, but I thought that in landing performance, you couldn't take credit for reverse thrust. In other words, brakes, and spoilers need to work properly, and any reverse thrust is seen as "bonus" deceleration.

Canus Chinookus · Post by **Canus Chinookus** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 10:10 am

agreed, it's the spoilers and brakes that do the lion's share of the work, the reversers are there to impress the passengers with noise.

I know that even on a dry runway, I wouldn't be taking a 10 kt(or 13kt) tailwind to land a 737-700 on a 6500 ft runway. Not much room for error

WJflyer · Post by **WJflyer** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:22 pm

Well, they moved the plane to a hangar at the airport that Southwest Airlines owns. The insurance adjusters are there with Southwest to look at the plane and see if it is worth fixing or scrapping.

GreatSlave · Post by **GreatSlave** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:40 pm

Hi Canus Chinookus,

I'm curious to know what is the max landing weight for the 700?

Thanks,

Kevin Elke

Dust Devil · Post by **Dust Devil** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:58 pm

Funniest thing I've seen in a long time was last weekend. I was westjetting back from Calgary to Regina. when we landed and the reversers deployed the person next to me saw this and looked at me with the look of death in his eye. It took all I had too keep from laughing. It was pretty funny. I swear he thought the engine was coming apart.

W5 · Post by W5 » Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:55 pm

NTSB update:

http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2005/051215.htm

Needed another 800':

http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCo ... 014_newsml

W5 · Post by W5 » Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:58 pm

GreatSlave wrote:Hi Canus Chinookus,

I'm curious to know what is the max landing weight for the 700?

Thanks,

Kevin Elke

The WJ -700 without Live TV was 129.2 , with Live TV 127.9
Not sure if they can vary as a customer option.

the original tony · Post by **the original tony** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 8:24 pm

sensitivity police????
i'm impressed.
usually i'm the insensitive old bastard.
anyways, beavis,you loose a family member in a plane crash or any accident, and tell me what your chips look like when they fall.
i'll just make a few smart comments, not knowing them personally, shouldn't matter.

cheers
the "original" tony

15 kt tailwind, that ain't gonna be good for the crew to explain.
best of luck to them