 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carriers landing phl; runway 27R with traffic landing runway 35; described minimal separation event; reporter questioned ATC spacing judgment.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 826237 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200903 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | PHL.Airport |
| State Reference | PA |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | A320 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Landing Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Regional Jet CL65 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | First Officer Pilot Not Flying |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 100 Flight Crew Total 12000 Flight Crew Type 7000 |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Conflict Airborne Conflict |
| Miss Distance | Horizontal 3000 |
Narrative:
The tower cleared us to land runway 27R with an rj landing runway 35 to cross behind us. I obtained visual with the rj about 1;000 ft AGL. He was co-altitude and stationary on the windscreen. I queried the tower about the spacing and was told it was ok. I maintained visual with the rj and the captain continued the approach. I considered calling for a go-around but felt the rj might also and determined the safest course of action was to continue. I informed the captain of the situation the entire way down. As we passed through the intersection of runway 35/27R; I observed the rj to be about 1 wingspan above the ground which would place him at or near the overrun for runway 35 and judged him to be about 3;000 ft laterally from us. There was no margin for error from any of us. I feel phl tower is placing aircraft in dangerous positions just to increase landing rates. 2 airplanes doing go-arounds at the same time would be a recipe for disaster.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carriers landing PHL; Runway 27R with traffic landing Runway 35; described minimal separation event; Reporter questioned ATC spacing judgment.
Narrative: The Tower cleared us to land Runway 27R with an RJ landing Runway 35 to cross behind us. I obtained visual with the RJ about 1;000 FT AGL. He was co-altitude and stationary on the windscreen. I queried the Tower about the spacing and was told it was OK. I maintained visual with the RJ and the Captain continued the approach. I considered calling for a go-around but felt the RJ might also and determined the safest course of action was to continue. I informed the Captain of the situation the entire way down. As we passed through the intersection of Runway 35/27R; I observed the RJ to be about 1 wingspan above the ground which would place him at or near the overrun for Runway 35 and judged him to be about 3;000 FT laterally from us. There was no margin for error from any of us. I feel PHL Tower is placing aircraft in dangerous positions just to increase landing rates. 2 airplanes doing go-arounds at the same time would be a recipe for disaster.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.