37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1142904 |
Time | |
Date | 201401 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Bonanza 35 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Instructor Local |
Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types |
Narrative:
Approach control transferred control/communications on a BE35 to the tower - local control on an ILS approach to runway 32R; but the aircraft was almost 1/2 mile left of course; not established on the published approach. The airport was IFR at the time with 2 miles visibility; overcast ceilings at two thousand six hundred; wind 350 at 25; gusts 30; snow squalls; blowing snow; and low level windshear advisories. The TRACON 'vectored' the aircraft for the runway 32R approach twice; but each time the pilot was 1/4 mile left of the extended centerline for runway 32L; or 1/2 mile left of the extended centerline for runway 32R! After further discussion with the pilot; it was determined that the pilot had selected the incorrect localizer frequency. The TRACON controller should have noted that the aircraft was extremely left of course. The TRACON controller should also have realized that this pilot was in distress and was encountering extremely challenging flight conditions and stepped in to provide the pilot with additional services. The TRACON controller should have taken actions to assist the pilot in determining what localizer frequency was being used. If a pilot states that he/she is having problems navigating; help the pilot; especially in hazardous IMC conditions. Tell the pilot the purpose of the 'breakout' and ask if additional assistance was needed for another approach. The TRACON controller should not have shipped an IFR aircraft to tower that was so blatantly off course. The excuse that the pilot had reported 'established' does not absolve the TRACON controller of his/her responsibilities to the pilot. It should not take a tower controller; who does not hold a radar ticket; to determine that this was an imminent situation that required prompt action; and that the aircraft was never correctly established on the published approach.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Tower Controller described an unsafe situation when IFR traffic on final was transferred to the Tower significantly off course in IFR conditions; the reporter listing a number of TRACON shortfalls in this event.
Narrative: Approach Control transferred control/communications on a BE35 to the Tower - Local Control on an ILS approach to Runway 32R; but the aircraft was almost 1/2 mile left of course; not established on the published approach. The airport was IFR at the time with 2 miles visibility; overcast ceilings at two thousand six hundred; wind 350 at 25; gusts 30; snow squalls; blowing snow; and low level windshear advisories. The TRACON 'vectored' the aircraft for the Runway 32R approach twice; but each time the pilot was 1/4 mile left of the extended centerline for Runway 32L; or 1/2 mile left of the extended centerline for Runway 32R! After further discussion with the pilot; it was determined that the pilot had selected the incorrect localizer frequency. The TRACON Controller should have noted that the aircraft was extremely left of course. The TRACON Controller should also have realized that this pilot was in distress and was encountering extremely challenging flight conditions and stepped in to provide the pilot with additional services. The TRACON Controller should have taken actions to assist the pilot in determining what localizer frequency was being used. If a pilot states that he/she is having problems navigating; help the pilot; especially in hazardous IMC conditions. Tell the pilot the purpose of the 'breakout' and ask if additional assistance was needed for another approach. The TRACON Controller should not have shipped an IFR aircraft to Tower that was so blatantly off course. The excuse that the pilot had reported 'established' does not absolve the TRACON Controller of his/her responsibilities to the pilot. It should not take a Tower Controller; who does not hold a RADAR ticket; to determine that this was an imminent situation that required prompt action; and that the aircraft was never correctly established on the published approach.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.