37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 605813 |
Time | |
Date | 200401 |
Day | Thu |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : ewr.airport |
State Reference | NJ |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Weather Elements | Snow |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | MD-80 Super 80 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | ground : preflight |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
ASRS Report | 605813 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Events | |
Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather non adherence : far |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance Weather Environmental Factor ATC Human Performance Company |
Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
Situations | |
ATC Facility | procedure or policy : ewr.tower |
Airport | snow removal : ewr.airport |
Narrative:
At the time it was not snowing at newark but it had been snowing since the previous day. The ATIS stated 'departing runway 4L, runway 4L and runway 4R south 6000 ft have patches of snow up to 1/2 inch, remainder has cover of snow up to 1/2 inch.' we contacted dispatch to request contaminated runway takeoff data and also contacted ewr clearance delivery (ground was too busy) to request any update to the runway conditions. In the meantime, we could see numerous departures from our gate including other flts. Dispatch asked the captain to get a truck to check the runway and did not provide us with updated data. Clearance delivery told us the runway conditions report was 8 hours old and that he was contacting the FAA controllers to get updated data. We had stopped fueling to ensure we didn't have to download fuel and/or passenger for the new performance numbers which we never got. Since the report was 10 hours old and traffic was departing, we took the performance numbers data we had but used maximum power instead of flex for takeoff. Before we departed, new information came out on the ATIS and the same runway conditions were stated. Even if the report was 10 hours old, how come we were the first to request updated contaminated runway data?
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN MD80 FLT CREW IS CONCERNED THAT THE RWY CONTAMINATION RPT IS TOO OLD AND THEREFORE THE INFO IS INADEQUATE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES.
Narrative: AT THE TIME IT WAS NOT SNOWING AT NEWARK BUT IT HAD BEEN SNOWING SINCE THE PREVIOUS DAY. THE ATIS STATED 'DEPARTING RWY 4L, RWY 4L AND RWY 4R S 6000 FT HAVE PATCHES OF SNOW UP TO 1/2 INCH, REMAINDER HAS COVER OF SNOW UP TO 1/2 INCH.' WE CONTACTED DISPATCH TO REQUEST CONTAMINATED RWY TKOF DATA AND ALSO CONTACTED EWR CLRNC DELIVERY (GND WAS TOO BUSY) TO REQUEST ANY UPDATE TO THE RWY CONDITIONS. IN THE MEANTIME, WE COULD SEE NUMEROUS DEPS FROM OUR GATE INCLUDING OTHER FLTS. DISPATCH ASKED THE CAPT TO GET A TRUCK TO CHK THE RWY AND DID NOT PROVIDE US WITH UPDATED DATA. CLRNC DELIVERY TOLD US THE RWY CONDITIONS RPT WAS 8 HRS OLD AND THAT HE WAS CONTACTING THE FAA CTLRS TO GET UPDATED DATA. WE HAD STOPPED FUELING TO ENSURE WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DOWNLOAD FUEL AND/OR PAX FOR THE NEW PERFORMANCE NUMBERS WHICH WE NEVER GOT. SINCE THE RPT WAS 10 HRS OLD AND TFC WAS DEPARTING, WE TOOK THE PERFORMANCE NUMBERS DATA WE HAD BUT USED MAX PWR INSTEAD OF FLEX FOR TKOF. BEFORE WE DEPARTED, NEW INFO CAME OUT ON THE ATIS AND THE SAME RWY CONDITIONS WERE STATED. EVEN IF THE RPT WAS 10 HRS OLD, HOW COME WE WERE THE FIRST TO REQUEST UPDATED CONTAMINATED RWY DATA?
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.