Narrative:

During the morning hours, the runways at dtw were snow covered with a thin layer of ice underneath. This was the result of above freezing WX the previous day, followed by a 1-2 inch snow fall and a hard freeze overnight. We were on a flight from grb to dtw and learned from ATIS that dtw was landing on runway 21R, wind was 290 degrees at 18 KTS, and the braking action was reported poor by a dc-9. Although this crosswind was well within flight manual limits for a dry runway, there is no guidance for icy runways. We know that the ability to rollout in crosswind conditions is degraded on icy runways. I am frustrated that ATC and airport management at dtw do not make use of the parallel runways 27R/left. In the 18 months since runway 27L was completed, I've landed on it only twice. But during this time, crosswind near the crosswind limits of the airplane have been numerous and operations continued on runway 21R/left/C with runway 27L/right clear and dry. While any pilot should be able to control the airplane at and below crosswind limits, I draw the line on icy runways, where no limits or corrections are published. With hundreds of operations per day at dtw with numerous types of aircraft, potential exists for a crosswind/icy or wet runway mishap. In this case, ATC and/or airport management decided to clear and treat runways 21R/C/left rather than runway 27L/right, even with an existing strong crosswind. There is no excuse, not cost, not noise, not taxi time to the gate, or pilot acceptance of this hazard, for a mishap of this type. Procedures should be developed now (a priority approach to safety) for optimum utilization of runways 27L/right at dtw. We have a tough enough time at airports without additional runways, and do not need a regular test of skills to airplane limits at dtw. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that he did not go any further with his complaint as he did not want to be put in the position of 'representing' his company in case company did not agree. He did discuss the situation with other pilots who indicated the issue has been addressed but the airport management stonewalls. They claim that because of noise complaints they have an agreement not to use the runways 27 more than a certain number of days per week. Reporter quite upset as this has no consideration regarding safety at all. He did talk to his union before sending the report to ASRS. They indicated they will use his report an ammunition to discuss the situation. Reporter feels the company may not be supportive in using the runways 27 because of a longer taxi out and taxi in from that runway. Reporter suggests the development of a traffic flow plan to have takeoffs from one runway set and lndgs on the other as they do not intersect. Flight crew was reluctant to request runway 27 as they felt they would be vectored way out and about and have late arrival chalked up against them. He seems very reluctant to attract attention to himself with any follow-up. Analyst received a callback from reporter regarding a newspaper article on a noise demonstration house set up for local residents. Article enclosed.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: COMPLAINT REGARDING RWY USE WITH STRONG XWIND AND ICY RWY.

Narrative: DURING THE MORNING HRS, THE RWYS AT DTW WERE SNOW COVERED WITH A THIN LAYER OF ICE UNDERNEATH. THIS WAS THE RESULT OF ABOVE FREEZING WX THE PREVIOUS DAY, FOLLOWED BY A 1-2 INCH SNOW FALL AND A HARD FREEZE OVERNIGHT. WE WERE ON A FLT FROM GRB TO DTW AND LEARNED FROM ATIS THAT DTW WAS LNDG ON RWY 21R, WIND WAS 290 DEGS AT 18 KTS, AND THE BRAKING ACTION WAS RPTED POOR BY A DC-9. ALTHOUGH THIS XWIND WAS WELL WITHIN FLT MANUAL LIMITS FOR A DRY RWY, THERE IS NO GUIDANCE FOR ICY RWYS. WE KNOW THAT THE ABILITY TO ROLLOUT IN XWIND CONDITIONS IS DEGRADED ON ICY RWYS. I AM FRUSTRATED THAT ATC AND ARPT MGMNT AT DTW DO NOT MAKE USE OF THE PARALLEL RWYS 27R/L. IN THE 18 MONTHS SINCE RWY 27L WAS COMPLETED, I'VE LANDED ON IT ONLY TWICE. BUT DURING THIS TIME, XWIND NEAR THE XWIND LIMITS OF THE AIRPLANE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS AND OPS CONTINUED ON RWY 21R/L/C WITH RWY 27L/R CLR AND DRY. WHILE ANY PLT SHOULD BE ABLE TO CTL THE AIRPLANE AT AND BELOW XWIND LIMITS, I DRAW THE LINE ON ICY RWYS, WHERE NO LIMITS OR CORRECTIONS ARE PUBLISHED. WITH HUNDREDS OF OPS PER DAY AT DTW WITH NUMEROUS TYPES OF ACFT, POTENTIAL EXISTS FOR A XWIND/ICY OR WET RWY MISHAP. IN THIS CASE, ATC AND/OR ARPT MGMNT DECIDED TO CLR AND TREAT RWYS 21R/C/L RATHER THAN RWY 27L/R, EVEN WITH AN EXISTING STRONG XWIND. THERE IS NO EXCUSE, NOT COST, NOT NOISE, NOT TAXI TIME TO THE GATE, OR PLT ACCEPTANCE OF THIS HAZARD, FOR A MISHAP OF THIS TYPE. PROCS SHOULD BE DEVELOPED NOW (A PRIORITY APCH TO SAFETY) FOR OPTIMUM UTILIZATION OF RWYS 27L/R AT DTW. WE HAVE A TOUGH ENOUGH TIME AT ARPTS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL RWYS, AND DO NOT NEED A REGULAR TEST OF SKILLS TO AIRPLANE LIMITS AT DTW. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE DID NOT GO ANY FURTHER WITH HIS COMPLAINT AS HE DID NOT WANT TO BE PUT IN THE POS OF 'REPRESENTING' HIS COMPANY IN CASE COMPANY DID NOT AGREE. HE DID DISCUSS THE SIT WITH OTHER PLTS WHO INDICATED THE ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED BUT THE ARPT MGMNT STONEWALLS. THEY CLAIM THAT BECAUSE OF NOISE COMPLAINTS THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT NOT TO USE THE RWYS 27 MORE THAN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF DAYS PER WK. RPTR QUITE UPSET AS THIS HAS NO CONSIDERATION REGARDING SAFETY AT ALL. HE DID TALK TO HIS UNION BEFORE SENDING THE RPT TO ASRS. THEY INDICATED THEY WILL USE HIS RPT AN AMMUNITION TO DISCUSS THE SIT. RPTR FEELS THE COMPANY MAY NOT BE SUPPORTIVE IN USING THE RWYS 27 BECAUSE OF A LONGER TAXI OUT AND TAXI IN FROM THAT RWY. RPTR SUGGESTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TFC FLOW PLAN TO HAVE TKOFS FROM ONE RWY SET AND LNDGS ON THE OTHER AS THEY DO NOT INTERSECT. FLC WAS RELUCTANT TO REQUEST RWY 27 AS THEY FELT THEY WOULD BE VECTORED WAY OUT AND ABOUT AND HAVE LATE ARR CHALKED UP AGAINST THEM. HE SEEMS VERY RELUCTANT TO ATTRACT ATTN TO HIMSELF WITH ANY FOLLOW-UP. ANALYST RECEIVED A CALLBACK FROM RPTR REGARDING A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ON A NOISE DEMONSTRATION HOUSE SET UP FOR LCL RESIDENTS. ARTICLE ENCLOSED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.