 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Reporter flight crew dramatically reduced airspeed on approach without advising ATC and compromised traffic spacing on the approach course.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 117078 |
| Time | |
| Date | 198907 |
| Day | Fri |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : sea |
| State Reference | WA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 6000 msl bound upper : 6000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : sea |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach descent other |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 4000 |
| ASRS Report | 117078 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | non adherence : far other anomaly |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance other |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
On approach to sea, we were kept at unusually high altitudes on ILS approach to runway 34. At facts 17.1 DME we were at 6000' vs 3000' for normal profile. In that we were kept high, I elected to configure aircraft and slow, so close to field and not in VMC conditions and well above glide slope approach control requested our airspeed. We slowed to 145 KTS, first officer told approach 125 KTS. Approach because upset and said to increase speed. We never received 'hard' airspeed assignment. I increased speed. I felt very uncomfortable so close to field above profile in IMC conditions. I realize there was congestion but putting aircraft outside of normal profile is not the answer. I did not intend to upset the approach controller spacing but if approach had communicated with us on the total situation instead of only assigned altitudes we could adapt better.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: REPORTER FLT CREW DRAMATICALLY REDUCED AIRSPEED ON APCH WITHOUT ADVISING ATC AND COMPROMISED TRAFFIC SPACING ON THE APCH COURSE.
Narrative: ON APCH TO SEA, WE WERE KEPT AT UNUSUALLY HIGH ALTS ON ILS APCH TO RWY 34. AT FACTS 17.1 DME WE WERE AT 6000' VS 3000' FOR NORMAL PROFILE. IN THAT WE WERE KEPT HIGH, I ELECTED TO CONFIGURE ACFT AND SLOW, SO CLOSE TO FIELD AND NOT IN VMC CONDITIONS AND WELL ABOVE GLIDE SLOPE APCH CTL REQUESTED OUR AIRSPEED. WE SLOWED TO 145 KTS, F/O TOLD APCH 125 KTS. APCH BECAUSE UPSET AND SAID TO INCREASE SPEED. WE NEVER RECEIVED 'HARD' AIRSPEED ASSIGNMENT. I INCREASED SPEED. I FELT VERY UNCOMFORTABLE SO CLOSE TO FIELD ABOVE PROFILE IN IMC CONDITIONS. I REALIZE THERE WAS CONGESTION BUT PUTTING ACFT OUTSIDE OF NORMAL PROFILE IS NOT THE ANSWER. I DID NOT INTEND TO UPSET THE APCH CTLR SPACING BUT IF APCH HAD COMMUNICATED WITH US ON THE TOTAL SITUATION INSTEAD OF ONLY ASSIGNED ALTS WE COULD ADAPT BETTER.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.