Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Passengers "terrorized", aircraft "nose ripped off". LATAM A320 landing at ASU.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by flashcrash View Post

    Forgive me, but isn't the METAR TS, or TSRA?
    Remember that he is an old geezer, that is from the old format. Just after Lindbergh and Earhart retired

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Evan View Post
      I will get no love on this forum for saying this, but again (as these things and worse keep happening), ATC should be given the authority and the responsibility to divert traffic and call off approaches when the weather along the flight path appears unsafe to continue. And the pilots would always to have the ability to call off the approach themselves, but not the ability to continue if ATC doesn't approve. Bring on the flames.
      Somethings to think about are:

      1. ATC Radar systems use wavelengths and tunings that are good at detecting aluminum and composites.

      2. Weather radar systems and tunings that are good at detecting water droplets big enough to fall.

      3. I’m sure a computer could integrate the two (sort of like FlightAware DOES) but all those rainbow colors might make the planes harder to see.

      4. Water droplets ‘big enough to fall’ doesn’t always correlate to whether it’s severe to fly through AND storms are 3 dimensional…maybe on-board radar gives a better picture of weather at the planes attitude.

      5. Maybe it’s better for ATC to do Air Traffic Control and let pilots analyze the weather.

      6. The flow of weather data to ATC, sometimes sucks: “A little shower on final” and my favorites at flyover:





      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Evan View Post
        I will get no love on this forum for saying this, but again (as these things and worse keep happening), ATC should be given the authority and the responsibility to divert traffic and call off approaches when the weather along the flight path appears unsafe to continue. And the pilots would always to have the ability to call off the approach themselves, but not the ability to continue if ATC doesn't approve. Bring on the flames.
        They do have that authority.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by ATLcrew View Post

          They do have that authority.
          When we were discussing a South American runway breakup after continuing through CB's and windshear, I was told by every pilot on this forum that the Captain has the final call on whether to continue an approach in bad weather (provided the aerodrome is open). I had argued that ATC should have that authority. Do they?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Evan View Post

            When we were discussing a South American runway breakup after continuing through CB's and windshear, I was told by every pilot on this forum that the Captain has the final call on whether to continue an approach in bad weather (provided the aerodrome is open). I had argued that ATC should have that authority. Do they?
            Context, buddy, context. ATC can't physically shoot me down (although they can call guys who can), but if I go somewhere they specifically told me not to, it's on me.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Evan View Post
              the Captain has the final call on whether to continue an approach in bad weather (provided the aerodrome is open). I had argued that ATC should have that authority. Do they?
              They can close the aerodrome.

              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

                They can close the aerodrome.
                and unless the runway is not visible, ATL can still land his plane there...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by TeeVee View Post

                  and unless the runway is not visible, ATL can still land his plane there...
                  "Can" with the meaning of "allowed to" or "not impossible"?

                  "Chinga Air 234, landing clearance cancelled, the field is closed, climb and maintain 3000"

                  Yes, you can still go ahead and land. Nobody is going to go out and stop you. But unless you can justify that you deemed it was necessary for safety, it would be illegal and the last thing you are allowed to do at the controls of an airplane.

                  --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                  --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    "Chinga Air" JAJAJAJAJAJA

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

                      But unless you can justify that you deemed it was necessary for safety, it would be illegal and the last thing you are allowed to do at the controls of an airplane.
                      which is likely why ATL said "it's on me..."

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X