MD80. Because of WX, had already had lightning strike, crew refused a lahso to runway 14R at ord.

Attributes
ACN	419017
Time
Date	199810
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : ord airport : ord
State Reference	IL
Altitude	msl bound lower : 100 msl bound upper : 2300
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : ord
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-80 Super 80
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around
Route In Use	arrival other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
ASRS Report	419017
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Events
Anomaly	inflight encounter : weather other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	other
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : unspecified

Narrative:

While on final approach to ord, the aircraft was struck by lightning. Subsequent maintenance inspection found no damage. On the same approach, I refused a lahso clearance on runway 14R due to a wet runway and thunderstorms in the area. Initially, the tower controller's attitude was very antagonistic, as if a blasphemy had been uttered. He then asked us to s-turn at about 500 ft and told us to expect landing clearance over the numbers. At about 100 ft, we were told to go around. In general, I am seeing more and more incidents where controllers are attempting to push capts into decisions that would shrink the margin of safety in a given situation. I understand the controller's desire to 'move airplanes' and the pilot's desire to exhibit a 'can do' attitude, but I believe this trend to be unhealthy.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD80. BECAUSE OF WX, HAD ALREADY HAD LIGHTNING STRIKE, CREW REFUSED A LAHSO TO RWY 14R AT ORD.

Narrative: WHILE ON FINAL APCH TO ORD, THE ACFT WAS STRUCK BY LIGHTNING. SUBSEQUENT MAINT INSPECTION FOUND NO DAMAGE. ON THE SAME APCH, I REFUSED A LAHSO CLRNC ON RWY 14R DUE TO A WET RWY AND TSTMS IN THE AREA. INITIALLY, THE TWR CTLR'S ATTITUDE WAS VERY ANTAGONISTIC, AS IF A BLASPHEMY HAD BEEN UTTERED. HE THEN ASKED US TO S-TURN AT ABOUT 500 FT AND TOLD US TO EXPECT LNDG CLRNC OVER THE NUMBERS. AT ABOUT 100 FT, WE WERE TOLD TO GO AROUND. IN GENERAL, I AM SEEING MORE AND MORE INCIDENTS WHERE CTLRS ARE ATTEMPTING TO PUSH CAPTS INTO DECISIONS THAT WOULD SHRINK THE MARGIN OF SAFETY IN A GIVEN SIT. I UNDERSTAND THE CTLR'S DESIRE TO 'MOVE AIRPLANES' AND THE PLT'S DESIRE TO EXHIBIT A 'CAN DO' ATTITUDE, BUT I BELIEVE THIS TREND TO BE UNHEALTHY.

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.