Narrative:

ATIS information XA53Z wind 270 degrees at 9 KTS gusting to 18 KTS; temperature 10 degrees; altimeter 30.05; advertising landing runways 4L; 4R; 3L; and 3R closed. When my first officer ran the numbers; his comment was; 'looks like it has to be runway 3L for a 12 KT tailwind on runways 4L and 4R. Runway 3L tailwind was only 9 KTS.' at mizar intersection on the arrival; we switched over to approach control and informed the controller that we would need runway 3L for wind limitations. He immediately sounded angry and cleared us direct to salem to hold and he told us he would let us know when he would let us return. No efc was given. We started in the direction of salem and I did a quick analysis of our fuel state and I told the controller we did not have the gas to go to salem and hold indefinitely. He came back and asked me where I wanted to divert to. He was very short and; I felt; unprofessional. He informed me that both runways 4L and 3L are both 035 degrees. I told him I would have to talk to my dispatch; but I did not have the fuel to divert anywhere. We were then put on vectors but not told immediately what the vectors were for. After asking; we were told we were being vectored for 3L and asked to take down a phone number to call when on the ground. When on final for runway 3L and switched over to the tower; the tower controller called the winds; I believe; 310 degrees at 12 KTS gusting to 18 KTS. I called our manager ATC before I called the number we were given by approach control. He told me it would be ok to call the number. I called. He wanted to know why I refused runway 4L and I told him it gave us a 12 KT tailwind and our limitation is 10 KTS. He told me that runways 4L and 3L are 035 degrees and could not understand how we got a different tailwind component for the two runways. He also asked why I refused to hold or divert and I told him as it was with vectors straight-in to runway 3L we landed with 6.2 which leaves nothing to divert or hold with. He told me in 27 yrs he had never seen anything like this and was going to forward a package to my chief pilot. I called chief pilot and ran this incident by him. He ran the numbers and got the same 12 KT tailwind and 9 KT tailwind on runways 4L and 3L respectively on the computer in his office. At one time; all runways at dtw used to be 3's. When the new runway/runways were built; the west runways were changed to 4's and the east runways remained 3's. I can only surmise; but maybe something in the performance data was never updated; but this is only speculation. As far as ATC controller professionalism; I feel this particular controller sounded overloaded and completely stressed out and unprepared to deal with anything whatsoever outside of everything working perfectly for him.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-300 FLT CREW DETERMINED THAT LNDG DATA FOR THE ACFT WOULD ONLY ALLOW APCH AND LNDG ON ONE OF THE THREE RWYS IN USE; EVEN THOUGH ALL THREE RWYS WERE THE SAME MAGNETIC HDG.

Narrative: ATIS INFO XA53Z WIND 270 DEGS AT 9 KTS GUSTING TO 18 KTS; TEMP 10 DEGS; ALTIMETER 30.05; ADVERTISING LNDG RWYS 4L; 4R; 3L; AND 3R CLOSED. WHEN MY FO RAN THE NUMBERS; HIS COMMENT WAS; 'LOOKS LIKE IT HAS TO BE RWY 3L FOR A 12 KT TAILWIND ON RWYS 4L AND 4R. RWY 3L TAILWIND WAS ONLY 9 KTS.' AT MIZAR INTXN ON THE ARR; WE SWITCHED OVER TO APCH CTL AND INFORMED THE CTLR THAT WE WOULD NEED RWY 3L FOR WIND LIMITATIONS. HE IMMEDIATELY SOUNDED ANGRY AND CLRED US DIRECT TO SALEM TO HOLD AND HE TOLD US HE WOULD LET US KNOW WHEN HE WOULD LET US RETURN. NO EFC WAS GIVEN. WE STARTED IN THE DIRECTION OF SALEM AND I DID A QUICK ANALYSIS OF OUR FUEL STATE AND I TOLD THE CTLR WE DID NOT HAVE THE GAS TO GO TO SALEM AND HOLD INDEFINITELY. HE CAME BACK AND ASKED ME WHERE I WANTED TO DIVERT TO. HE WAS VERY SHORT AND; I FELT; UNPROFESSIONAL. HE INFORMED ME THAT BOTH RWYS 4L AND 3L ARE BOTH 035 DEGS. I TOLD HIM I WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO MY DISPATCH; BUT I DID NOT HAVE THE FUEL TO DIVERT ANYWHERE. WE WERE THEN PUT ON VECTORS BUT NOT TOLD IMMEDIATELY WHAT THE VECTORS WERE FOR. AFTER ASKING; WE WERE TOLD WE WERE BEING VECTORED FOR 3L AND ASKED TO TAKE DOWN A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL WHEN ON THE GND. WHEN ON FINAL FOR RWY 3L AND SWITCHED OVER TO THE TWR; THE TWR CTLR CALLED THE WINDS; I BELIEVE; 310 DEGS AT 12 KTS GUSTING TO 18 KTS. I CALLED OUR MGR ATC BEFORE I CALLED THE NUMBER WE WERE GIVEN BY APCH CTL. HE TOLD ME IT WOULD BE OK TO CALL THE NUMBER. I CALLED. HE WANTED TO KNOW WHY I REFUSED RWY 4L AND I TOLD HIM IT GAVE US A 12 KT TAILWIND AND OUR LIMITATION IS 10 KTS. HE TOLD ME THAT RWYS 4L AND 3L ARE 035 DEGS AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND HOW WE GOT A DIFFERENT TAILWIND COMPONENT FOR THE TWO RWYS. HE ALSO ASKED WHY I REFUSED TO HOLD OR DIVERT AND I TOLD HIM AS IT WAS WITH VECTORS STRAIGHT-IN TO RWY 3L WE LANDED WITH 6.2 WHICH LEAVES NOTHING TO DIVERT OR HOLD WITH. HE TOLD ME IN 27 YRS HE HAD NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS AND WAS GOING TO FORWARD A PACKAGE TO MY CHIEF PLT. I CALLED CHIEF PLT AND RAN THIS INCIDENT BY HIM. HE RAN THE NUMBERS AND GOT THE SAME 12 KT TAILWIND AND 9 KT TAILWIND ON RWYS 4L AND 3L RESPECTIVELY ON THE COMPUTER IN HIS OFFICE. AT ONE TIME; ALL RWYS AT DTW USED TO BE 3'S. WHEN THE NEW RWY/RWYS WERE BUILT; THE W RWYS WERE CHANGED TO 4'S AND THE E RWYS REMAINED 3'S. I CAN ONLY SURMISE; BUT MAYBE SOMETHING IN THE PERFORMANCE DATA WAS NEVER UPDATED; BUT THIS IS ONLY SPECULATION. AS FAR AS ATC CTLR PROFESSIONALISM; I FEEL THIS PARTICULAR CTLR SOUNDED OVERLOADED AND COMPLETELY STRESSED OUT AND UNPREPARED TO DEAL WITH ANYTHING WHATSOEVER OUTSIDE OF EVERYTHING WORKING PERFECTLY FOR HIM.

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.