Sluggo63
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1,929
- Display Name
Display name:
Sluggo63
tl;dr: You don’t know what you’re talking about.
First, you don’t know if they considered it or not. That’ll be on the CVR, or it won’t be. The Captain may have considered it and thrown it away immediately when she saw how close PHL was.
Our FOM gives a list of items a crew should consider when deciding what the “nearest suitable” airport is. It contains things like runway, ARFF, crew familiarity, navigation facilities, etc. Surprisingly, having someone call into question your decision on an internet message board due to the fact that your plane may “come from together” over downtown Philadelphia while they’re eating a Wawa hoagie in Rittenhouse Square in not on the list.
I bet what it came down to mostly was the crew familiarity. I’m sure they both knew Philly well. It’s a big hub for SWA and they’ve probably been in there dozens and dozens of times. They probably have never been to Harrisburg. But, not knowing anything about Harrisburg, you just know that Philadelphia is a bigger city, with a bigger, better equipped airport and better medical facilities.
But, having said that, if I was on that plane, I would have opted NOT to go to MDT, and I’m really familiar with that airport. I’ve spent plenty of hours there doing touch and goes in heavy jets. First, it’s not a 10,000 foot runway, like you keep saying. It’s a hair longer than 8,000 feet for landing purposes. Approaches to both ends, especially to 31 can be challenging in a large airplane, with terrain on final, and squirrelly winds. She opted to land with Flaps 5, which if I had to make an educated guess, I’d say it probably added 40 knots to her approach speed.
Also, in a large jet, the last thing you want to do in any emergency (save for an on-board fire) is to rush anything. I’m sure we’ve all heard it at some point in our training, but the first thing you should in any emergency is “wind the clock.” The crew was dealing with an engine with severe damage, a rapid decompression, and later on a medical emergency. There are checklists to run, people to coordinate with, data to be gotten, decisions to be made. Even if they went to MDT, I bet they would have had to enter holding or get extended vectors to get everything done that needed to be done. Even with the little bit of extra time to get to Philly, they still took a long, almost 25 mile downwind, before they came back in for the approach.
You’ve had plenty of people on here with experience is this type of flying tell you that all your assumptions were incorrect and PHL was as least as good as an option as MDT. I’m telling you that PHL was actually the better option of the two (in my opinion, not having been there). You seem to be the only one tilting at this windmill, but have at it, Don Quixote...
First, you don’t know if they considered it or not. That’ll be on the CVR, or it won’t be. The Captain may have considered it and thrown it away immediately when she saw how close PHL was.
Our FOM gives a list of items a crew should consider when deciding what the “nearest suitable” airport is. It contains things like runway, ARFF, crew familiarity, navigation facilities, etc. Surprisingly, having someone call into question your decision on an internet message board due to the fact that your plane may “come from together” over downtown Philadelphia while they’re eating a Wawa hoagie in Rittenhouse Square in not on the list.
I bet what it came down to mostly was the crew familiarity. I’m sure they both knew Philly well. It’s a big hub for SWA and they’ve probably been in there dozens and dozens of times. They probably have never been to Harrisburg. But, not knowing anything about Harrisburg, you just know that Philadelphia is a bigger city, with a bigger, better equipped airport and better medical facilities.
But, having said that, if I was on that plane, I would have opted NOT to go to MDT, and I’m really familiar with that airport. I’ve spent plenty of hours there doing touch and goes in heavy jets. First, it’s not a 10,000 foot runway, like you keep saying. It’s a hair longer than 8,000 feet for landing purposes. Approaches to both ends, especially to 31 can be challenging in a large airplane, with terrain on final, and squirrelly winds. She opted to land with Flaps 5, which if I had to make an educated guess, I’d say it probably added 40 knots to her approach speed.
Also, in a large jet, the last thing you want to do in any emergency (save for an on-board fire) is to rush anything. I’m sure we’ve all heard it at some point in our training, but the first thing you should in any emergency is “wind the clock.” The crew was dealing with an engine with severe damage, a rapid decompression, and later on a medical emergency. There are checklists to run, people to coordinate with, data to be gotten, decisions to be made. Even if they went to MDT, I bet they would have had to enter holding or get extended vectors to get everything done that needed to be done. Even with the little bit of extra time to get to Philly, they still took a long, almost 25 mile downwind, before they came back in for the approach.
You’ve had plenty of people on here with experience is this type of flying tell you that all your assumptions were incorrect and PHL was as least as good as an option as MDT. I’m telling you that PHL was actually the better option of the two (in my opinion, not having been there). You seem to be the only one tilting at this windmill, but have at it, Don Quixote...
