CAPT OF A B727 COMPLAINS THAT HE HAD TO LAND WITH A TAILWIND DUE TO TWR CTLR NOT CHANGING LNDG RWY INTO THE WIND.

Narrative

ARRIVING IAD; WIND 200 DEGS AT 8 KTS; 6 MI. RA; CUMULO NIMBUS IN AREA. RWY WET. LNDG RWY 1L/R. ACFT WT 15200 LBS. MAX ALLOWABLE TAILWIND PER PERFORMANCE MANUAL WAS 9 KTS. A 1 KT MARGIN DEEMED UNACCEPTABLE DUE TO CONVECTIVE ACTIVITY IN AREA. ADVISED APCH. OPERATIONALLY REQUIRED RWY 19L/R OR RWY 12 DUE TO EXCESSIVE TAILWIND. REQUEST REPEATEDLY DENIED. WE WERE TOLD 30 ACFT WAITING FOR TKOF. FOUND OUT LATER THAT ACTUAL NUMBER WAS MORE LIKE 2. FORCED TO HOLD AT CSN TO REDUCE WT (3000 LBS) AND HOPE WINDS WOULD SUBSIDE. SPOKE TO ATC SUPVR AFTER LNDG. HE STATED THAT N OP WAS DUE TO FORECAST WIND 360 DEGS AT 10 KTS. THIS FORECAST HAD BEEN INACCURATE ALL AFTERNOON BUT IAD CONTINUED TO LAND N. HE SHOWED LITTLE UNDERSTANDING OF INCREASED DEMANDS OF TAILWIND ON TRANSPORT ACFT. HE WAS NOT AT ALL INTERESTED IN THE PHYSICS INVOLVED UNDER THOSE CONDITIONS. ONLY INTERESTED IN WHAT WAS MOST EXPEDIENT FOR ATC WITHOUT ANY REGARD TO DECREASED SAFETY COULD NOT EXPLAIN WHY NUMBER OF DEPARTING ACFT HAD BEEN SO GROSSLY EXAGGERATED TO US. TO FORCE ACFT TO LAND WITH TAILWIND BASED ON A FORECAST THAT HAD BEEN LONG PROVEN TO BE FLAWED DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. IT IS RIDICULOUS TO FORCE ACFT RIGHT TO PERFORMANCE LIMITS OF ACFT BECAUSE ATC DOES NOT WANT TO BE BURDENED WITH CHANGING LNDG DIRECTION. FOLLOW-UP OF WX OBSERVATIONS FOR DAY SHOW THAT THOSE 360 DEG/10 KT WINDS NEVER DID MATERIALIZE. I AM VERY DISTURBED BY THE INDIFFERENCE DISPLAYED BY OUR PHONE CONVERSATION. ALSO; VERY DISTURBED BY THE FACT THAT CONFRONTED WITH THE FACT THAT WE HAD DEEMED OURSELVES TO OPERATIONALLY REQUIRE ANOTHER LNDG OPTION; ATC WAS TOO ENTRENCHED IN THEIR WORLD TO UNDERSTAND THE OPERATIONAL NEEDS OF OURS.