Mem controller voiced concern regarding tailwind takeoff operations; questioning management's decisi...

Attributes
ACN	763574
Time
Date	200711
Local Time Of Day	0001 To 0600
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mem.airport
State Reference	TN
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : zzz.tower
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : local
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller radar : 25 controller time certified in position1 : 10
ASRS Report	763574
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Supplementary
Problem Areas	FAA
Primary Problem	FAA
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : mem.tower

Narrative:

During the late night outbound we departed numerous aircraft (in excess of 40) on runways 18L; 18C; and 18R with winds between 340-360 degrees at 8-10 KTS. Our local SOP only allows for us to use up to a 7 KT tailwind component. The type aircraft involved were; but not limited to; a BE58; B727; dc/MD10; the A300 and 310 series and MD11 aircraft. Many aircraft were using more runway distance than normal to get airborne. Some appeared to be less than 1000 ft from the departure end of the runway at time of rotation. The supervisor was told several times but refused to change directions of operation. I believe this was because it would cost money in fuel to switch to a runway 36 operation and depart with a headwind. This is not the first time this has happened and is rapidly becoming the norm. Many supervisors at memphis ATCT are more concerned with using directions of operation with higher arrival/departure acceptance rates than with using runway configns more aligned with the wind. Eventually; this will cause an aircraft mishap.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MEM CTLR VOICED CONCERN REGARDING TAILWIND TKOF OPS; QUESTIONING MGMNT'S DECISION; I.E. USER COSTS/RWY ACCEPTANCE RATES VS. SAFETY.

Narrative: DURING THE LATE NIGHT OUTBOUND WE DEPARTED NUMEROUS ACFT (IN EXCESS OF 40) ON RWYS 18L; 18C; AND 18R WITH WINDS BTWN 340-360 DEGS AT 8-10 KTS. OUR LCL SOP ONLY ALLOWS FOR US TO USE UP TO A 7 KT TAILWIND COMPONENT. THE TYPE ACFT INVOLVED WERE; BUT NOT LIMITED TO; A BE58; B727; DC/MD10; THE A300 AND 310 SERIES AND MD11 ACFT. MANY ACFT WERE USING MORE RWY DISTANCE THAN NORMAL TO GET AIRBORNE. SOME APPEARED TO BE LESS THAN 1000 FT FROM THE DEP END OF THE RWY AT TIME OF ROTATION. THE SUPVR WAS TOLD SEVERAL TIMES BUT REFUSED TO CHANGE DIRECTIONS OF OP. I BELIEVE THIS WAS BECAUSE IT WOULD COST MONEY IN FUEL TO SWITCH TO A RWY 36 OP AND DEPART WITH A HEADWIND. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED AND IS RAPIDLY BECOMING THE NORM. MANY SUPVRS AT MEMPHIS ATCT ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH USING DIRECTIONS OF OP WITH HIGHER ARR/DEP ACCEPTANCE RATES THAN WITH USING RWY CONFIGNS MORE ALIGNED WITH THE WIND. EVENTUALLY; THIS WILL CAUSE AN ACFT MISHAP.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 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.

Mem controller voiced concern regarding tailwind takeoff operations; questioning management's decision; i.e. User costs/runway acceptance rates vs. Safety.