Narrative:

Location: bur, ca. Having flown into bur last week for the first time, I feel a report is appropriate. I am very concerned about the minimum level of crew qualifications required for our operation into bur. Neither my first officer nor myself had ever been there. The color pictorials in operations manual are of minimal value. Another pilot warned me of the likelihood of GPWS warnings south of lynxx intersection. By the way, that warning is not even on the air carrier pages. Landing on runway 8 at night, flaps 40 degrees, 'medium' setting on the autobrakes, firm touchdown just beyond the 1000 ft marker, immediate 1.60 EPR reverse thrust. I had to revert to maximum manual braking to be able to stop prior to the other end, and the runway was not even wet. Taking off on runway 15, maximum weight, flaps 17 degrees, at 15 KTS prior to V1, I was facing the end of the runway, realizing that stopping would be difficult on remainder of the runway. Likewise, right off the end of the runway, there are tall trees and a high rise building requiring an immediate right turn at 100 ft, whether on 1 or 2 engines. We always, in our air carrier, operate with the highest possible safety margins as possible. I feel that bur is an exception to that policy. I feel bur is a marginal operation at best. With that in mind, I suggest the flight crew requirements be raised to either requiring a check airman on first entry to bur, like mex, or that both pilots have at least 75 hours in aircraft, as flight manual part 1 requires for certain airports. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter was concerned for crews that did not have his experience level in the MD80. He said that the air carrier qualifies the flcs by studying the colored pictorials in their operations manual. These are provided for 'hit' cities with problematic airports that fit into 1 of 3 categories. (Dca, san, bur, etc, are CAT I.) all 3 categories have the photos. CAT ii requires the flight crew to each have at least 75 hours in type aircraft. CAT III (mexico city, jackson hole, etc) require a check airman be with the PIC for first entry. The reporter wants the air carrier to place bur into at least CAT ii. The reporter did not get a GPWS at the ridge area south of lynxx because he saw the ridge coming and reduced his descent rate to under 500 FPM. Descent to 4000 ft at normal rate gets it. Automatic brake setting is at PIC's discretion and is set for medium for runways less than 7000 ft and good or better braking. This was inadequate for runway 8 at bur which has 4800 ft usable after touchdown. (So flight crew used it as it had an ILS approach and the PIC didn't want to approach a wrong airport at night.) both pilots had 2400 hours in type. Another air carrier asked for a visual to runway 15 which was longer. On takeoff during rotation, the aircraft had passed the 1000 ft remaining marker. The aircraft was within 100-200 pounds of maximum gross weight for a balanced runway concept. This was about the same weight required for the second segment climb restr due to obstacles. The reporter is concerned that the air carrier is not going to respond to his concerns regarding the need to upgrade this airport to a CAT ii type. (The air carrier did say, via e-mail, that they have the report.) he feels that an accident is waiting to happen for a low time crew and more likely when it is wet, as there are rubber concentrations on the runway.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MD80 PIC RPTS OF AN ACR MGMNT POLICY THAT SHOULD BE ADJUSTED TO INCLUDE BURBANK ARPT AS A 'HIGH PROFILE' ARPT. RPT INCLUDES GPWS ALERTS, RWY LENGTH FOR LNDG AND TKOF AND ADDRESSES THE METHOD BY WHICH FLCS ARE QUALIFIED INTO BUR.

Narrative: LOCATION: BUR, CA. HAVING FLOWN INTO BUR LAST WK FOR THE FIRST TIME, I FEEL A RPT IS APPROPRIATE. I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE MINIMUM LEVEL OF CREW QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED FOR OUR OP INTO BUR. NEITHER MY FO NOR MYSELF HAD EVER BEEN THERE. THE COLOR PICTORIALS IN OPS MANUAL ARE OF MINIMAL VALUE. ANOTHER PLT WARNED ME OF THE LIKELIHOOD OF GPWS WARNINGS S OF LYNXX INTXN. BY THE WAY, THAT WARNING IS NOT EVEN ON THE ACR PAGES. LNDG ON RWY 8 AT NIGHT, FLAPS 40 DEGS, 'MEDIUM' SETTING ON THE AUTOBRAKES, FIRM TOUCHDOWN JUST BEYOND THE 1000 FT MARKER, IMMEDIATE 1.60 EPR REVERSE THRUST. I HAD TO REVERT TO MAX MANUAL BRAKING TO BE ABLE TO STOP PRIOR TO THE OTHER END, AND THE RWY WAS NOT EVEN WET. TAKING OFF ON RWY 15, MAX WT, FLAPS 17 DEGS, AT 15 KTS PRIOR TO V1, I WAS FACING THE END OF THE RWY, REALIZING THAT STOPPING WOULD BE DIFFICULT ON REMAINDER OF THE RWY. LIKEWISE, RIGHT OFF THE END OF THE RWY, THERE ARE TALL TREES AND A HIGH RISE BUILDING REQUIRING AN IMMEDIATE R TURN AT 100 FT, WHETHER ON 1 OR 2 ENGS. WE ALWAYS, IN OUR ACR, OPERATE WITH THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE SAFETY MARGINS AS POSSIBLE. I FEEL THAT BUR IS AN EXCEPTION TO THAT POLICY. I FEEL BUR IS A MARGINAL OP AT BEST. WITH THAT IN MIND, I SUGGEST THE FLC REQUIREMENTS BE RAISED TO EITHER REQUIRING A CHK AIRMAN ON FIRST ENTRY TO BUR, LIKE MEX, OR THAT BOTH PLTS HAVE AT LEAST 75 HRS IN ACFT, AS FLT MANUAL PART 1 REQUIRES FOR CERTAIN ARPTS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR WAS CONCERNED FOR CREWS THAT DID NOT HAVE HIS EXPERIENCE LEVEL IN THE MD80. HE SAID THAT THE ACR QUALIFIES THE FLCS BY STUDYING THE COLORED PICTORIALS IN THEIR OPS MANUAL. THESE ARE PROVIDED FOR 'HIT' CITIES WITH PROBLEMATIC ARPTS THAT FIT INTO 1 OF 3 CATEGORIES. (DCA, SAN, BUR, ETC, ARE CAT I.) ALL 3 CATEGORIES HAVE THE PHOTOS. CAT II REQUIRES THE FLC TO EACH HAVE AT LEAST 75 HRS IN TYPE ACFT. CAT III (MEXICO CITY, JACKSON HOLE, ETC) REQUIRE A CHK AIRMAN BE WITH THE PIC FOR FIRST ENTRY. THE RPTR WANTS THE ACR TO PLACE BUR INTO AT LEAST CAT II. THE RPTR DID NOT GET A GPWS AT THE RIDGE AREA S OF LYNXX BECAUSE HE SAW THE RIDGE COMING AND REDUCED HIS DSCNT RATE TO UNDER 500 FPM. DSCNT TO 4000 FT AT NORMAL RATE GETS IT. AUTO BRAKE SETTING IS AT PIC'S DISCRETION AND IS SET FOR MEDIUM FOR RWYS LESS THAN 7000 FT AND GOOD OR BETTER BRAKING. THIS WAS INADEQUATE FOR RWY 8 AT BUR WHICH HAS 4800 FT USABLE AFTER TOUCHDOWN. (SO FLC USED IT AS IT HAD AN ILS APCH AND THE PIC DIDN'T WANT TO APCH A WRONG ARPT AT NIGHT.) BOTH PLTS HAD 2400 HRS IN TYPE. ANOTHER ACR ASKED FOR A VISUAL TO RWY 15 WHICH WAS LONGER. ON TKOF DURING ROTATION, THE ACFT HAD PASSED THE 1000 FT REMAINING MARKER. THE ACFT WAS WITHIN 100-200 LBS OF MAX GROSS WT FOR A BALANCED RWY CONCEPT. THIS WAS ABOUT THE SAME WT REQUIRED FOR THE SECOND SEGMENT CLB RESTR DUE TO OBSTACLES. THE RPTR IS CONCERNED THAT THE ACR IS NOT GOING TO RESPOND TO HIS CONCERNS REGARDING THE NEED TO UPGRADE THIS ARPT TO A CAT II TYPE. (THE ACR DID SAY, VIA E-MAIL, THAT THEY HAVE THE RPT.) HE FEELS THAT AN ACCIDENT IS WAITING TO HAPPEN FOR A LOW TIME CREW AND MORE LIKELY WHEN IT IS WET, AS THERE ARE RUBBER CONCENTRATIONS ON THE RWY.

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.