Narrative:

The aircraft was en route to ord. WX forecast was for low IFR ceilings and fog improving to MVFR with passing thunderstorms and high winds. About 40 mi before landing; airport was IFR with high winds: 280 degrees at 22 KTS gusting to 28 KTS; maximum wind 32. Arrs were using runway 14R and runway 22R. Conditions were maximum x-wind for the B747-400 aircraft and runway 14R was wet. The captain notified ZAU and later; closer in; that runway 22L was requested. Several requests were denied because that runway was a departure runway. With thunderstorms just east of the airport; aircraft made an ILS runway 14R approach with maximum crossing component and made a go around at about 400 ft AGL when wind component shifted slightly to tailwind on approach and experienced 20 KT increase in approach speed exceeding stabilized speed criteria. During the missed approach we again requested runway 22L for landing which was the only operational runway available for landing distances. We also declared a fuel advisory being 10 mins before having to divert to alternate. After several vectors; we made a normal landing on runway 22L. The captain was notified to call ARTCC on the telephone. After calling ATC; were questioned why we made a go around on runway 14R and then landed on runway 22L causing 2 or 3 aircraft to hold. It is ridiculous to request the required runway several times with center and approach control for operational purposes and then be put through the wringer to be able to land when limitations require that course of action. We are flying the largest aircraft that lands at ord and it is operationally not the same as an rj or MD80 which are most prevalently at ord. Not alone that this created a potential flight problem but wasted over 1500 gallons of fuel and put the passenger through a stressful condition. There is a chronic problem at ord with large aircraft -- especially the B747-400 that arrive from long distance foreign departure points with tired and fatigued crews; and marginal fuel reserves that can't take undue holding or missed approachs. The operational requirements of the B747-400 needing longer runways and other operational criteria need to be understood by ATC -- especially runway condition; larger traffic separation; and crosswind considerations; speed restrs; and fuel reserves. WX at the time of arrival was 26 broken 5 mi rw/-trw. TSE25 occasional light icing northeast/south clearance delivery dist northeast/south moving northeast wind 280 degrees 22 KTS gusting 28 KTS maximum 32 KTS.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B747-400 FLT CREW WAS INITIALLY DENIED LNDG ON RWY 22L AT ORD FOR OPERATIONAL PURPOSES AND ATTEMPTED APPROACH TO 14R BUT EXCEEDED STABILIZED SPEED CRITERIA ON APCH AFTER WIND SHIFT. MISSED APCH WAS ACCOMPLISHED FOLLOWED BY AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG ON 22L.

Narrative: THE ACFT WAS ENRTE TO ORD. WX FORECAST WAS FOR LOW IFR CEILINGS AND FOG IMPROVING TO MVFR WITH PASSING TSTMS AND HIGH WINDS. ABOUT 40 MI BEFORE LNDG; ARPT WAS IFR WITH HIGH WINDS: 280 DEGS AT 22 KTS GUSTING TO 28 KTS; MAX WIND 32. ARRS WERE USING RWY 14R AND RWY 22R. CONDITIONS WERE MAX X-WIND FOR THE B747-400 ACFT AND RWY 14R WAS WET. THE CAPT NOTIFIED ZAU AND LATER; CLOSER IN; THAT RWY 22L WAS REQUESTED. SEVERAL REQUESTS WERE DENIED BECAUSE THAT RWY WAS A DEP RWY. WITH TSTMS JUST E OF THE ARPT; ACFT MADE AN ILS RWY 14R APCH WITH MAX XING COMPONENT AND MADE A GAR AT ABOUT 400 FT AGL WHEN WIND COMPONENT SHIFTED SLIGHTLY TO TAILWIND ON APCH AND EXPERIENCED 20 KT INCREASE IN APCH SPD EXCEEDING STABILIZED SPD CRITERIA. DURING THE MISSED APCH WE AGAIN REQUESTED RWY 22L FOR LNDG WHICH WAS THE ONLY OPERATIONAL RWY AVAILABLE FOR LNDG DISTANCES. WE ALSO DECLARED A FUEL ADVISORY BEING 10 MINS BEFORE HAVING TO DIVERT TO ALTERNATE. AFTER SEVERAL VECTORS; WE MADE A NORMAL LNDG ON RWY 22L. THE CAPT WAS NOTIFIED TO CALL ARTCC ON THE TELEPHONE. AFTER CALLING ATC; WERE QUESTIONED WHY WE MADE A GAR ON RWY 14R AND THEN LANDED ON RWY 22L CAUSING 2 OR 3 ACFT TO HOLD. IT IS RIDICULOUS TO REQUEST THE REQUIRED RWY SEVERAL TIMES WITH CTR AND APCH CTL FOR OPERATIONAL PURPOSES AND THEN BE PUT THROUGH THE WRINGER TO BE ABLE TO LAND WHEN LIMITATIONS REQUIRE THAT COURSE OF ACTION. WE ARE FLYING THE LARGEST ACFT THAT LANDS AT ORD AND IT IS OPERATIONALLY NOT THE SAME AS AN RJ OR MD80 WHICH ARE MOST PREVALENTLY AT ORD. NOT ALONE THAT THIS CREATED A POTENTIAL FLT PROB BUT WASTED OVER 1500 GALLONS OF FUEL AND PUT THE PAX THROUGH A STRESSFUL CONDITION. THERE IS A CHRONIC PROB AT ORD WITH LARGE ACFT -- ESPECIALLY THE B747-400 THAT ARRIVE FROM LONG DISTANCE FOREIGN DEP POINTS WITH TIRED AND FATIGUED CREWS; AND MARGINAL FUEL RESERVES THAT CAN'T TAKE UNDUE HOLDING OR MISSED APCHS. THE OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE B747-400 NEEDING LONGER RWYS AND OTHER OPERATIONAL CRITERIA NEED TO BE UNDERSTOOD BY ATC -- ESPECIALLY RWY CONDITION; LARGER TFC SEPARATION; AND XWIND CONSIDERATIONS; SPD RESTRS; AND FUEL RESERVES. WX AT THE TIME OF ARR WAS 26 BROKEN 5 MI RW/-TRW. TSE25 OCCASIONAL LIGHT ICING NE/S CD DIST NE/S MOVING NE WIND 280 DEGS 22 KTS GUSTING 28 KTS MAX 32 KTS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.