37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1155617 |
Time | |
Date | 201403 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | D21.TRACON |
State Reference | MI |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700) |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
Route In Use | Visual Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200) |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Route In Use | Visual Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | TCAS Software |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Person 2 | |
Function | First Officer Pilot Flying |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude |
Narrative:
Approaching dtw from the northeast; we were vectored onto final for a visual approach to 22L. I had the autopilot controlling the aircraft and due to our distance from the airport (approx 20 miles) I elected to capture the localizer in white needles with a blue needle overlay. Both navigation sources showed the aircraft perfectly centered on the localizer. Shortly after we were established we noticed a company aircraft intercepting the approach to runway 22R. As the rj continued to roll onto its inbound course we received a TA followed by a descending RA. We complied with the RA; descending below the glideslope momentarily from an altitude of approximately 7;000 feet. The RA cleared and we continued level to re-intercept the glideslope. Shortly thereafter; as we both appeared to arrive back on glideslope; we received another TA. We maintained our assigned speed while it appeared the other aircraft slowed and the TA disappeared. The remainder of the visual approach was completed without incident.I believe this was the result of two aircraft being vectored onto close parallel visual approaches without being staggered enough vertically or horizontally and a minor misjudgment in planned separation by approach control. Staggering the inbound sequence a bit more would have avoided the RA.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Two CRJs inbound side by side in VMC to Runways 22L and R at DTW responded to TCAS RAs. The flight crews believed a contributing factor to have been ATC's willingness to minimize spacing so as to increase acceptance rates.
Narrative: Approaching DTW from the northeast; we were vectored onto final for a visual approach to 22L. I had the autopilot controlling the aircraft and due to our distance from the airport (approx 20 miles) I elected to capture the localizer in white needles with a blue needle overlay. Both NAV sources showed the aircraft perfectly centered on the localizer. Shortly after we were established we noticed a company aircraft intercepting the approach to Runway 22R. As the RJ continued to roll onto its inbound course we received a TA followed by a descending RA. We complied with the RA; descending below the glideslope momentarily from an altitude of approximately 7;000 feet. The RA cleared and we continued level to re-intercept the glideslope. Shortly thereafter; as we both appeared to arrive back on glideslope; we received another TA. We maintained our assigned speed while it appeared the other aircraft slowed and the TA disappeared. The remainder of the visual approach was completed without incident.I believe this was the result of two aircraft being vectored onto close parallel visual approaches without being staggered enough vertically or horizontally and a minor misjudgment in planned separation by Approach Control. Staggering the inbound sequence a bit more would have avoided the RA.
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.