Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)

1. Yikes. Hindsite. They should've noticed this sooner.

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Tue Jul 30, 2013, 01:33 AM

Jul 2013

If there are a substantial number of go-arounds / aborts and they are statistically significant compared to other airports, this should've been noticed in an audit.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

24 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

U.S. Regulators Order Foreign Airlines to Use Automatic Landing at San Francisco. [View all] elleng Jul 2013 OP

Yikes. Hindsite. They should've noticed this sooner. joshcryer Jul 2013 #1

The instrument-landing components were out of service. Socal31 Jul 2013 #2

False, ILS is still down. benh57 Jul 2013 #3

Part of the ILS is still down Major Nikon Jul 2013 #6

Would the "localizer" haved helped the pilot that crashed? joshcryer Jul 2013 #10

He was on a visual approach Major Nikon Jul 2013 #16

There is no automatic audit of such things Major Nikon Jul 2013 #7

It's clear that the go-arounds were significant though. joshcryer Jul 2013 #8

it wasn't weather related, that day had little wind and clear skies CreekDog Jul 2013 #19

Naw, talking about the trend. joshcryer Jul 2013 #21

well, if you had to rank the reasons based on what we know: CreekDog Jul 2013 #22

It sounds like they noticed a trend after they looked at the data. joshcryer Jul 2013 #23

why just foreign airlines? usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #4

I am in the flight training industry... awoke_in_2003 Jul 2013 #5

Fascinating. That makes sense. joshcryer Jul 2013 #9

Then why not everyone? usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #14

Truthfully... awoke_in_2003 Jul 2013 #17

They do both Major Nikon Jul 2013 #20

Generally discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2013 #18

That does seem logical (you learn something new every day on DU!). nt MADem Jul 2013 #24

Perhaps because they don't land at SFO that frequently? KamaAina Jul 2013 #11

What if they do? usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #12

Even JAL would only have three or four flights there a day KamaAina Jul 2013 #13

Sounds like a lot to me usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #15