Narrative:

I've noticed several areas where ATC makes decisions in iad that have the potential to adversely affect safety of flight. First; is the frequent request for south turns on final to squeeze traffic out in a gap that would otherwise be insufficient. The second is setting up the landing runways to the south; 19's and 12; despite a reported tailwind. I am not sure if ATC is trained on this; but they should know that most airlines have a stabilized approach concept by 1000 ft. Perhaps pilots are too accommodating for these requests for south turns; usually inside the FAF; but ATC should also be aware of the stabilized approach concept. We (pilots and ATC) should all have the same goal in mind to be stabilized by 1000 feet; and ATC should not request us to perform maneuvers that would be contrary to this concept. Often times; especially in iad; ATC is unrealistically trying to cram a departure in between two arrivals where there is not adequate space to do so. If there's space behind the arriving aircraft; they should delay the departure of the aircraft on the ground by a few minutes; instead of asking pilots to perform a maneuver that might cause the approach to become un-stabilized. There are also many days when the winds will be out of the north; but we are landing to the south with a tailwind. With runway construction in iad; this apparently gives them more runways. I don't believe that this is operating the airport with the highest level of safety in mind. Having a tailwind and being asked to keep your speed up to the marker can also result in a situation where ATC is putting crews in situations where their actions are encouraging approaches to be un-stabilized. Emphasis shouldn't be on moving as many aircraft as possible in a period of time. Rather it should be to move as many aircraft as possible as conditions dictate. If the wind is from the north; we should be landing to the north; even if they cannot accommodate the same volume of traffic. Even a small tailwind on the surface can often translate to a larger tailwind at even a few thousand feet. This practice seems counter-intuitive to training that pilots have received from day 1. Perhaps controllers should also be trained in this area.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier pilot voiced concern regarding ATC practices at IAD; specifically the frequent requests for 'S' turns on final for increased spacing and tailwind operations.

Narrative: I've noticed several areas where ATC makes decisions in IAD that have the potential to adversely affect safety of flight. First; is the frequent request for S turns on final to squeeze traffic out in a gap that would otherwise be insufficient. The second is setting up the landing runways to the south; 19's and 12; despite a reported tailwind. I am not sure if ATC is trained on this; but they should know that most airlines have a stabilized approach concept by 1000 ft. Perhaps pilots are too accommodating for these requests for S turns; usually inside the FAF; but ATC should also be aware of the stabilized approach concept. We (pilots and ATC) should all have the same goal in mind to be stabilized by 1000 feet; and ATC should not request us to perform maneuvers that would be contrary to this concept. Often times; especially in IAD; ATC is unrealistically trying to cram a departure in between two arrivals where there is not adequate space to do so. If there's space behind the arriving aircraft; they should delay the departure of the aircraft on the ground by a few minutes; instead of asking pilots to perform a maneuver that might cause the approach to become un-stabilized. There are also many days when the winds will be out of the north; but we are landing to the south with a tailwind. With runway construction in IAD; this apparently gives them more runways. I don't believe that this is operating the airport with the highest level of safety in mind. Having a tailwind and being asked to keep your speed up to the marker can also result in a situation where ATC is putting crews in situations where their actions are encouraging approaches to be un-stabilized. Emphasis shouldn't be on moving as many aircraft as possible in a period of time. Rather it should be to move as many aircraft as possible as conditions dictate. If the wind is from the north; we should be landing to the north; even if they cannot accommodate the same volume of traffic. Even a small tailwind on the surface can often translate to a larger tailwind at even a few thousand feet. This practice seems counter-intuitive to training that pilots have received from day 1. Perhaps controllers should also be trained in this area.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.