Narrative:

This report regards a known crosswind/tailwind on the VOR 13L approach at jfk airport. We were on a VOR 13L operation (arrive runway 13L; depart runway 13R; overflow arrs on VOR/DME runway 22L). The VOR 13L is one of the more challenging non-precision approachs in the united states that requires a turn from base to final at 500 ft 2 mi from the airport. Winds on the final approach course (asalt to cri to the turn final leg) at 3000 ft were 220 degrees at 57 KTS. Surface winds at jfk were 200 degrees at 15 KTS; and windshear was reported by all types at +/-10 KTS! So the aircraft on this challenging approach get a 57 KT tailwind; then a 15 KT crosswind when their turn into the airport. In fact; aircraft on the approach indicated up to a 220 KT ground speed; when they normally should have been indicating a 160 KT ground speed. We should have been on ILS runway 22L/22R; but that impacts departures and makes the FAA look bad. Instead; they chose to stay on an approach with unsafe winds to ease delays. Many pilots asked for runway 22L; and after much dissent by 'the desk' they were allowed to have it only if it was for wind. Only after much protest by management; the VOR/DME 22L approach was made available for anyone who 'requested' it. Unfortunately; the pilots only had the crosswind information on the surface from the ATIS; and not the 50 KT tailwind that existed at altitude. I am not surprised this was omitted from the ATIS; as it would have produced larger numbers of arrs to runway 22L; which causes delays for departures. Once again; we keep seeing clear cut cases of FAA management putting efficiency before safety. They want to show the airlines that they are easing delays at jfk; but with the ultimate price of safety. How many people's lives were put in danger tonight just to get a few extra departures off the airport per hour? I am sure when an airliner skids off the end of runway 13L because of a tailwind and kills everyone on board; then maybe -- just maybe -- someone will end the madness.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: N90 CTLR DESCRIBED TAILWIND LNDG EVENTS ALLEGING PROC WAS UNSAFE AND USED TO LIMIT DEP DELAYS.

Narrative: THIS RPT REGARDS A KNOWN XWIND/TAILWIND ON THE VOR 13L APCH AT JFK ARPT. WE WERE ON A VOR 13L OP (ARRIVE RWY 13L; DEPART RWY 13R; OVERFLOW ARRS ON VOR/DME RWY 22L). THE VOR 13L IS ONE OF THE MORE CHALLENGING NON-PRECISION APCHS IN THE UNITED STATES THAT REQUIRES A TURN FROM BASE TO FINAL AT 500 FT 2 MI FROM THE ARPT. WINDS ON THE FINAL APCH COURSE (ASALT TO CRI TO THE TURN FINAL LEG) AT 3000 FT WERE 220 DEGS AT 57 KTS. SURFACE WINDS AT JFK WERE 200 DEGS AT 15 KTS; AND WINDSHEAR WAS RPTED BY ALL TYPES AT +/-10 KTS! SO THE ACFT ON THIS CHALLENGING APCH GET A 57 KT TAILWIND; THEN A 15 KT XWIND WHEN THEIR TURN INTO THE ARPT. IN FACT; ACFT ON THE APCH INDICATED UP TO A 220 KT GND SPD; WHEN THEY NORMALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN INDICATING A 160 KT GND SPD. WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON ILS RWY 22L/22R; BUT THAT IMPACTS DEPS AND MAKES THE FAA LOOK BAD. INSTEAD; THEY CHOSE TO STAY ON AN APCH WITH UNSAFE WINDS TO EASE DELAYS. MANY PLTS ASKED FOR RWY 22L; AND AFTER MUCH DISSENT BY 'THE DESK' THEY WERE ALLOWED TO HAVE IT ONLY IF IT WAS FOR WIND. ONLY AFTER MUCH PROTEST BY MGMNT; THE VOR/DME 22L APCH WAS MADE AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE WHO 'REQUESTED' IT. UNFORTUNATELY; THE PLTS ONLY HAD THE XWIND INFO ON THE SURFACE FROM THE ATIS; AND NOT THE 50 KT TAILWIND THAT EXISTED AT ALT. I AM NOT SURPRISED THIS WAS OMITTED FROM THE ATIS; AS IT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED LARGER NUMBERS OF ARRS TO RWY 22L; WHICH CAUSES DELAYS FOR DEPS. ONCE AGAIN; WE KEEP SEEING CLEAR CUT CASES OF FAA MGMNT PUTTING EFFICIENCY BEFORE SAFETY. THEY WANT TO SHOW THE AIRLINES THAT THEY ARE EASING DELAYS AT JFK; BUT WITH THE ULTIMATE PRICE OF SAFETY. HOW MANY PEOPLE'S LIVES WERE PUT IN DANGER TONIGHT JUST TO GET A FEW EXTRA DEPS OFF THE ARPT PER HR? I AM SURE WHEN AN AIRLINER SKIDS OFF THE END OF RWY 13L BECAUSE OF A TAILWIND AND KILLS EVERYONE ON BOARD; THEN MAYBE -- JUST MAYBE -- SOMEONE WILL END THE MADNESS.

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.