A300 CREW QUESTIONS LNDG IN EXTREME XWIND CONDITIONS WHEN A BETTER RWY IS AVAILABLE.

Narrative

ON ARR TO MEMPHIS; ATIS INDICATED THAT TFC WAS LNDG TO THE S. STRONG WX SYS WAS PRODUCING WINDS OUT OF THE WSW THAT APCHED; AND AT TIMES EXCEEDED THE LIMITS OF THE ACFT. ADVISED ATC THAT WITH CURRENT RPTED WINDS; WE'D BE ABLE TO ACCEPT A LNDG TO THE S; AND INQUIRED AS TO THE AVAILABILITY OF RWY 27. WAS TOLD IT WAS UNAVAILABLE. NEW; CURRENT WINDS WERE PROVIDED SUBSEQUENTLY THAT INDICATED CONDITIONS WERE WITHIN LIMITS FOR A LNDG ON RWY 18R; AND WE WERE VECTORED FOR THE ILS TO THAT RWY. WHILE ON THE APCH; TWR RPTED WINDS FAIRLY FREQUENTLY TO THE ARRIVING TFC. PERIODICALLY; THOSE RPTS INDICATED GUSTS THAT WERE OUT OF LIMITS. PERIODICALLY; THEY DID NOT. ELECTED TO CONTINUE WITH UNDERSTANDING THAT; ALTHOUGH CONDITIONS WERE SATISFACTORY AT THE TIME; CONDITIONS AT THE 'DA' WOULD BE THE DETERMINING FACTOR; AND THE CREW SHOULD BE PREPARED FOR A MISSED APCH. ULTIMATELY; WE LANDED SAFELY; WITH WINDS SEEMING LESS ONEROUS THAN RPTED. CONCLUSION THAT WARRANTED THIS RPT. THE ODDS WERE VERY GOOD THAT WE CONTINUED TO LAND AN ACFT IN A SIT WHERE WIND GUSTS WERE OUT OF LIMITS. THE DECISION TO CONTINUE WAS VERY STRONGLY INFLUENCED BY THE FACT THAT OTHER ACFT WERE LNDG; WITHOUT APPARENT DIFFICULTY. (ACFT THAT IMMEDIATELY LANDED PRIOR TO US WAS OF THE SAME TYPE; WITH THE SAME LIMITS.) ON DISCUSSION WITH OTHER CREWS; I'VE CONCLUDED THAT; A) MY OWN DECISION PROCESS CAN BE COMPROMISED MORE EASILY THAN I'M COMFORTABLE WITH; B) AT LEAST WITHIN THE POPULATION OF CREWS THAT I DEAL WITH ON A REGULAR BASIS; THERE IS A STRONG CULTURE OF GETTING TO THE DEST; DESPITE THE OVERALL CONDITIONS. A THIRD ITEM COMES TO MIND AS WELL. ULTIMATELY; THE WESTERLY RWY WAS UTILIZED WHEN CONDITIONS HAD DETERIORATED FURTHER. WHY WAS I EARLIER DENIED USE OF THAT RWY?