 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
After departing yip a flight instructor and his instrument student were cleared direct to svm; 'cleared for the VOR a approach;' as requested. After departing svm; the IAF/FAF; on course for the VOR a approach to 1d2; canton-plymouth-mettetal airport ATC advised of a track deviation. Further inquiry determined the clearance had been for the VOR-a approach at yip; not the VOR-a to 1d2. Svm is the IAF for both procedures. The reporter did not recall if the airport name had been appended to either the clearance or his readback.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1222317 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201412 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | 1D2.Airport |
| State Reference | MI |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | Final Approach |
| Route In Use | Other VOR-A 1D2 |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Not Flying Instructor |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Flight Instructor Flight Crew Commercial |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 212 Flight Crew Total 1246 Flight Crew Type 1029 |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | Trainee |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Private |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 15 Flight Crew Total 150 Flight Crew Type 150 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Track / Heading All Types |
Narrative:
During an instrument training flight with a student; upon contact with detroit departure shortly after takeoff from yip; I requested to fly a VOR-a approach at plymouth-canton mettetal airport (1d2). We were then told to proceed direct to salem vortac (svm); the initial approach fix. Shortly thereafter we were cleared for a VOR-a approach; which my student and I believed to be the approach into mettetal. Upon crossing the vortac after the procedure turn; ATC asked us if we were established on the approach course and told us that we appeared to be passing through the approach course. I answered 'affirmative' and told him that we were inbound on the VOR-a to mettetal; at which point he told us we had instead been cleared for the VOR-a approach into yip; for which svm is also the initial approach fix. It is unclear to us whether the controller had specified at which airport we were cleared for the approach and we failed to acknowledge; or if the controller did not specify which airport we were cleared for the approach at. Being that I am not sure if the controller had specified the airport for which we were cleared for the approach; I cannot say definitively that I would have liked to see anything done differently to prevent this situation from having happened. It does not seem that on every circling approach that I fly; I am told specifically what airport that I am cleared for the approach at. I would like to hear that at the end of every approach clearance in the future to avoid confusion. Also; from now on I will always read back the airport I am cleared for an approach at; and I will teach my students to do the same.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: After departing YIP a flight instructor and his instrument student were cleared direct to SVM; 'cleared for the VOR A approach;' as requested. After departing SVM; the IAF/FAF; on course for the VOR A approach to 1D2; Canton-Plymouth-Mettetal airport ATC advised of a track deviation. Further inquiry determined the clearance had been for the VOR-A approach at YIP; not the VOR-A to 1D2. SVM is the IAF for both procedures. The reporter did not recall if the airport name had been appended to either the clearance or his readback.
Narrative: During an instrument training flight with a student; upon contact with Detroit Departure shortly after takeoff from YIP; I requested to fly a VOR-A approach at Plymouth-Canton Mettetal airport (1D2). We were then told to proceed direct to Salem Vortac (SVM); the initial approach fix. Shortly thereafter we were cleared for a VOR-A approach; which my student and I believed to be the approach into Mettetal. Upon crossing the Vortac after the procedure turn; ATC asked us if we were established on the approach course and told us that we appeared to be passing through the approach course. I answered 'affirmative' and told him that we were inbound on the VOR-A to Mettetal; at which point he told us we had instead been cleared for the VOR-A approach into YIP; for which SVM is also the initial approach fix. It is unclear to us whether the controller had specified at which airport we were cleared for the approach and we failed to acknowledge; or if the controller did not specify which airport we were cleared for the approach at. Being that I am not sure if the controller had specified the airport for which we were cleared for the approach; I cannot say definitively that I would have liked to see anything done differently to prevent this situation from having happened. It does not seem that on every circling approach that I fly; I am told specifically what airport that I am cleared for the approach at. I would like to hear that at the end of every approach clearance in the future to avoid confusion. Also; from now on I will always read back the airport I am cleared for an approach at; and I will teach my students to do the same.
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.