Back to Squawk list
  • 26

The Biggest Plane To Ever Land At Chicago Midway May Surprise You

Submitted
Nestled in a neighborhood on the south west side of Chicago is Chicago Midway International Airport. This airport has been affectionately referred to as a ‘postage stamp’ due to its tiny footprint relative to most other airports in the United States. The airport features four runways at each corner of its one mile square. The longest runway tops out at less than 6,500 feet. While it is long enough for daily operations of single aisle airliners like the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320, it’s not really… (avgeekery.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


gpv2011
gpv2011 4
I was Director Airport Planning for American, based at our NYC headquarters at the time of the accident and part of the team that left immediately for St. Thomas. We flew to San Juan and transitioned to small aircraft able to land on the short runway with the crash scene off the far end. I had responsibility for the airport ground investigation and at some point, through interviews of various ground personnel, determined the on-airport ARFF (then CRF) equipment responded rapidly but were forced to take a circuitous off-airport route rather than directly follow the path of the aircraft. I recall learning the downtown Charlotte Amalie structural fire station crews arrived on scene well before the airport crash fire rescue crew could reach the burning aircraft. The four CV 240s came out of mothball storage in the Netherlands and were flown to Dothan, AL to be configured as the American Inter-Island fleet, each with forty-four first class seats, rudimentary cockpit instrumentation and communications, and markings closely resembling today's American Eagle aircraft. The operation was wet leased to Antilles Air Boats, owned and operated by Gen. Charles Blair (a USAF legend, married to Maureen O'Hara). Aircraft maintenance was managed and supervised by a retired American Airlines maintenance director. The 240s were equipped with JATO bottles aft in the event of an engine hiccup on TO at STT but were never used to my knowledge. We switched JFK - STT service to B707s to St. Croix (STX). At STX we constructed an expansion to the terminal apron to park 240s in a semi-circle where they would deplane and enplane STT passengers to and from the JFK bound 707 parked adjacent to the ramp extension. It was a smooth operation for several years, allowing construction of the STT runway extension to proceed rather quickly. Cabritaberg Hill, south of the original short runway threshold, was excavated to become the marine fill material for the runway extension. In the process, its removal eliminated the wind shear phenomenon that caused aircraft flotation at touchdown on the former runway. The flattened Hill site is now occupied by the new passenger terminal. Although the interim American Inter-Island operation was successful, the entire episode experienced tragedy, obviously in its beginning, but also sometime afterwards with the death of Charlie Blair in one of his Grumman Goose flying boats. That's another story, having to do with single engine flying on surface effect lift just above the water's surface. The STT 727-100 story has never left me, filled with tragedy and victory, it was the experience of a lifetime for a then still young airport engineer....
George P. Vittas, Bedford, TX, August 2, 2024
bahalana
Keith Brown 2
Wow, you go wayyy back, LOL. I'm 61, retired FAA. It's obvious you know what you're talking about. I spent the last few years of my career managing an airspace redesign in a major metro area, and the engineers and support staff were invaluable. I'm one of the few members of the team that actually enjoyed the SMS panels and the meetings with legal to draft the Environmental Assessment. But the ultimate goal is to keep those holes in the Swiss cheese slices from lining up. What I still marvel at is as a young airman I used to operate a Beech C-24 Sierra from a 30'x2000' strip in the Philippines, barely clearing a TV antenna on a local hotel off the departure end, in fact, I often had to side step it on really hot days. Cheers from CenTex, I know where Bedford is, my daughter lives in Haslet.
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 1
Indeed! A person after my own heart. Let's not forget that safety can "die by a thousand cuts" as well as one big one.
data4unme
Fred Christensen 3
St. Thomas USVI with runway lengths 4658' with a 300' hill at the east end back in the day was a big takeoff challenge for DC-3 and Convair CV-240. The Runway was extended years later to 7000' by taking down the hill on the East and filling in the Bay on the Westend to later accommodate 727 & 737 but would have to hop over to St Croix 40 miles south to top off fuel (Max load) before heading back to the main land.
Propwash122
Peter Fuller 3
American Airlines lost a 727-100 at St. Thomas in 1976, went off the end of that 4658’ runway. Unstabilized landing, tried to go around but ran out of room, 37 fatalities. American ceased jet service after that until the runway was extended.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_625
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
Having worked in KMDW back a number of years ago, I would have never guessed the 757 would be able to do it... but the video proves it... I would hate to be on landing roll out on a 757 and have a TR to fail on landing.... Could prove to be disastrously!
yr2012
matt jensen 7
The 757 can land there easi8ly but needs the whole strip to get out.
The C17 is more impressive - takeoff run at MTOW: 8,200 ft. Which is why I know that jet didn't have a full load on board. It it did it would be landing a GYY which has a much longer strip than MDW. For Midway - the takeoff run at 395,000 lb is 3,000 ft & landing distance is 3,500 ft
TheDawg1995
David Plummer 2
In clear weather operations, I wouldn't worry about it. But in any kind of storm, particularly winter storms, would have me much more concerned. The first fatality from Southwest Airlines operations happened with a 737-700 overran the runway in a heavy snow situation.
i5xswipe
i5xswipe 2
The B757-200 was purpose built to be a short-field monster. It has incredibly powerful engines, a huge wing, long landing gear, and has incredible stopping power with its trucked landing gear. It is way more capable on short runways, high altitude airports, or hot weather airports than any other airline. It still regularly flies into MDW with NBA Charters (Delta). Obviously that is a much lighter weight aircraft than a standard airline configuration.
Propwash122
Peter Fuller 2
I believe the rules for calculating required landing distance assume use of wheel brakes and spoilers, but not use of thrust reversers, so a landing requiring reverser use in order to stop on the runway would not be legal. I’d guess any 757 operations in and out of Midway aren’t at maximum landing or takeoff weights.
btweston
btweston 1
Don’t thrust reversers simply alleviate brake pressure with the autobrake system? I’m pretty sure that an airplane has to be certified to land without reversers. So if a reverser were to fail on landing it would be just like any other runway.
sparkie624
sparkie624 -1
NO! Actually the Thrust Reversers are the primary stopping power, not the brakes... That is why many airports have runway restrictions for a/c with Thrust Reversers deferred/Not Working.
i5xswipe
i5xswipe 4
This is wrong! The brakes are the primary means to stop any aircraft as Thrust reverse effectiveness sharply declines during the rollout and airspeed decreases. The Thrust reversers however do help to decrease the need for braking energy in the initial landing at the highest energy. Preventing the brakes from absorbing too much energy. To much energy, means a LOT of heat, they risk fuse plugs melting. What the poster above you said is true of the auto brake system. If you have AB2 set, the deceleration rate is relatively low. At touchdown and deployment of the reversers, the AB system will not apply brakes as the deceleration rate will match or exceed the deceleration of AB2. As the aircraft slows and the TR becomes less effective, the brakes will apply more pressure and take over the primary means of slowing and the TRs will be transitioned back to stowed. Landings are permitted with the Thrust reversers disabled, not the brakes. Performance impacts will occur and penalties though.
mikeosmers
Michael Osmers 1
5 swipe is correct
Zigarten
Grd Newell 1
One of my favourite flight simulator airports back in the days of dos
gpv2011
gpv2011 1
Thanks, Keith, hats off to you, also. Working for American before going out on my own as an airport planner / engineer gave me the understanding truly needed to take care of aviators' and ATC needs on the ground and in the approach airspace. These days, engineers are forced to apply standard criteria in FAA Part 150 Advisory Circulars which are primarily written to manage Airport Improvement Program grant allocations.
bahalana
Keith Brown 1
Yeah I surely understand the restrictions of regulations, and not to get political, but that needs to change. Durning my watch, we had the safest aviation record in history, and it was because of honesty and ability to report mistakes and everyone else to learn from them. I think that "safety culture" is going away now. Aviation is still statistically the safest form of transportation, but it's ultimately unforgivable of a single, ultimate, mistake. I'll be honest, all of my family is in driving distance now, and I'm not getting on an airliner again if I can help it! And I have several hundred thousands of miles banked with an airline, I'll probably buy an Apple Watch or something...
n5680k
n5680k 1
I opened this expecting to see the DC-8 named, though after pondering the recesses of my memory the A300 demo was recalled.
I will say I was quite young but my Dad took me to a MDW Open House around ‘71/72 and United brought in a DC-8 for display. I was too young to recall too much but that would have been in the turbojet days. I recall it flew right back to ORD and my Dad, a Naval Aviator at the time, waited around to marvel at the departue.
In the ‘90’s I’d ride my motorcycle to sit below the approaches and I guarantee the 757 had no troubles but the 727’s of ATA and NWA would struggle to clear the fences by 50 ft on a hot night. Much has changed but MDW is the kind of place that makes flying fun.

forkboy1965
forkboy1965 1
Living near both Wright-Patt and DAI, I see Globemasters pretty regularly. They punch a nice hole in the air.
bahalana
Keith Brown 1
I can't help myself. I grew up in Chicago. Did they deploy flares and chaff on the way in?? It is after all a combat zone.
mikeosmers
Michael Osmers 1
The 757-200 flew regularly to and from SNA, 5700’ runway, easily and consistently making the turnoff at E, probably less than 5000’ from threshold, as someone mentioned earlier, it’s a monster short field machine.
aurodoc
aurodoc 3
In the Winter American flew a 757 from the bay area to Vail/Eagle airport.
Both times I flew out of there the Captain warned everyone about the departure being quick and steep. Brakes on with takeoff power and the entire plane was shaking then off like a rocket. Pretty fun.
n101wb
Charles Baker 0
The 757 was easy to get in and out of MDW. The 727 was much more of a lead sled.

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss