 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A VFR small transport inbound for a practice approach encountered a near miss with an small aircraft.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 117116 |
| Time | |
| Date | 198907 |
| Day | Mon |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | atc facility : jot |
| State Reference | IL |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 2500 msl bound upper : 2500 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : ord |
| Operator | common carrier : air taxi |
| Make Model Name | Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Flight Plan | VFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Operator | general aviation : personal |
| Make Model Name | Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear |
| Flight Phase | cruise other |
| Flight Plan | None |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air taxi |
| Function | flight crew : single pilot |
| Qualification | pilot : instrument |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 3800 |
| ASRS Report | 117116 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | Other |
| Function | flight crew : single pilot |
| Qualification | pilot : private |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : nmac non adherence : far other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 25 vertical : 0 |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Narrative:
I was flight training a line pilot for a 135 certificate holder. Our flight was in radar contact with chicago approach control for VFR advisories while conducting practice approachs to the aurora municipal airport in sugar grove, il. We had just finished holding at the jot VOR at 2500' and were inbound to the VOR on the 150 degree right. As I was explaining the procedure for station passage to the pilot, a blue and white small aircraft appeared at my 3 O'clock position at the same altitude, wbound at a range of approximately 100'. There was no time to react and the aircraft passed off our tail, somehow west/O hitting us. I simply closed my eyes because I was sure we would collide. After the aircraft passed by us I immediately asked chicago approach if they saw the aircraft on radar, and informed them that we had missed hitting him by 25'. The response from the controller was, 'I will take your word for it.' after landing I contacted the chicago GADO office. They said there was nothing they could do about it. I then called chicago approach tower for an explanation. Their only response was, 'you were VFR. It's not our responsibility.' the supervisor felt that the other aircraft was not visible to the controller. My question: what would their excuses have been if we had collided. Why does someone have to die before we change and upgrade the existing system?
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A VFR SMT INBOUND FOR A PRACTICE APCH ENCOUNTERED A NEAR MISS WITH AN SMA.
Narrative: I WAS FLT TRNING A LINE PLT FOR A 135 CERTIFICATE HOLDER. OUR FLT WAS IN RADAR CONTACT WITH CHICAGO APCH CTL FOR VFR ADVISORIES WHILE CONDUCTING PRACTICE APCHS TO THE AURORA MUNICIPAL ARPT IN SUGAR GROVE, IL. WE HAD JUST FINISHED HOLDING AT THE JOT VOR AT 2500' AND WERE INBND TO THE VOR ON THE 150 DEG R. AS I WAS EXPLAINING THE PROC FOR STATION PASSAGE TO THE PLT, A BLUE AND WHITE SMA APPEARED AT MY 3 O'CLOCK POS AT THE SAME ALT, WBOUND AT A RANGE OF APPROX 100'. THERE WAS NO TIME TO REACT AND THE ACFT PASSED OFF OUR TAIL, SOMEHOW W/O HITTING US. I SIMPLY CLOSED MY EYES BECAUSE I WAS SURE WE WOULD COLLIDE. AFTER THE ACFT PASSED BY US I IMMEDIATELY ASKED CHICAGO APCH IF THEY SAW THE ACFT ON RADAR, AND INFORMED THEM THAT WE HAD MISSED HITTING HIM BY 25'. THE RESPONSE FROM THE CTLR WAS, 'I WILL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT.' AFTER LNDG I CONTACTED THE CHICAGO GADO OFFICE. THEY SAID THERE WAS NOTHING THEY COULD DO ABOUT IT. I THEN CALLED CHICAGO APCH TWR FOR AN EXPLANATION. THEIR ONLY RESPONSE WAS, 'YOU WERE VFR. IT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.' THE SUPVR FELT THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS NOT VISIBLE TO THE CTLR. MY QUESTION: WHAT WOULD THEIR EXCUSES HAVE BEEN IF WE HAD COLLIDED. WHY DOES SOMEONE HAVE TO DIE BEFORE WE CHANGE AND UPGRADE THE EXISTING SYS?
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.