View Single Post
Old 02-05-2013, 12:07 AM   #14
Leftseat86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: L.A.
Posts: 6,769
Send a message via AIM to Leftseat86 Send a message via MSN to Leftseat86 Send a message via Yahoo to Leftseat86
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
I think there's agreement that this was not particularly dangerous- and even if it was an "oh crap" the pilots were situationally aware after the speculated gear warning and plenty of time to determine if continuing or going around was more appropriate.

As to the disagreement- while we can't say with absolute certainty- it would appear that they violated the commonly accepted 'rules' for a stabilized approach.

I would question the wisdom of deliberately violating stabilized-approach 'rules'- you could get reprimanded for bad judgement.

Now, if things unfolded fast and there were some valid distractions in the cockpit, and it was an honest mistake, I feel a lot better.

Because a premeditated and deliberate violation of stabilized approach 'rules' seems unlikely to me, I side with those who suggest that this was an honest, "oh crap" mistake.
Yes, I'm also interested in the fact that they are not using full flaps for landing. Seems like they were planning on landing long in the first place, and forgot to drop wheels?

DC-10 Landing Gear Operating / Extended Limits
Extension: 260 Kts/ 0.7 M Retraction: 230 Kts/ 0.7 M Alternate Gear Extension: 230 Kts / 0.7M Gear Extended: 300 Kts / 0.7 M Gear Extended following Alternate Extension: 260 Kts / 0.7M

Since speed clearly wasn't an issue I think I agree with you guys now that it was probably just a mistake.
Leftseat86 is offline   Reply With Quote