 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A CL65 captain questioned whether the ATC issued clt panther 5 departure was legal because of their aircraft was VOR only.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1235158 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201501 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | CLT.Airport |
| State Reference | NC |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Regional Jet CL65 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Climb |
| Route In Use | SID BUCKL SEVEN |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Multiengine |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 160 Flight Crew Total 15590 Flight Crew Type 11230 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Clearance |
Narrative:
FMS/GPS inop; our dispatcher filed IFR using buckl 7 departure buckl; cae; direct cre; direct to destination. Clearance delivery gave us panther 5; cae direct cre instead; then asked us if [we] were RNAV eqpt and we stated that we were not; that we were only VOR eqpt. After a short silence he told us to expect radar vectors to cae; radar vectors to cre.I shortly afterwards reviewed our notams that stated cae VOR was out of service and that panther 5 is north/a unless RNAV eqpt. During taxing the ground controller asked us if we had the NOTAM about cae VOR and we told we were to be given radar vectors. Never heard any more about this during the rest of our flight (or afterwards). I assumed our clearance was legal since we had been cleared using the panther 5 departure and were given radar vectors through the whole departure; and that ATC authorized the flight plan and gave us the clearance. After further thinking I am now in doubt if ATC had authorization to issue the panther 5 to start with and if we should had refused it.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A CL65 Captain questioned whether the ATC issued CLT Panther 5 Departure was legal because of their aircraft was VOR only.
Narrative: FMS/GPS inop; our dispatcher filed IFR using BUCKL 7 DEP BUCKL; CAE; direct CRE; direct to destination. Clearance delivery gave us Panther 5; CAE direct CRE instead; then asked us if [we] were RNAV EQPT and we stated that we were not; that we were only VOR EQPT. After a short silence he told us to expect radar vectors to CAE; radar vectors to CRE.I shortly afterwards reviewed our NOTAMs that stated CAE VOR was out of service and that Panther 5 is N/A unless RNAV EQPT. During taxing the ground controller asked us if we had the NOTAM about CAE VOR and we told we were to be given radar vectors. Never heard any more about this during the rest of our flight (or afterwards). I assumed our clearance was legal since we had been cleared using the Panther 5 DEP and were given radar vectors through the whole departure; and that ATC authorized the flight plan and gave us the clearance. After further thinking I am now in doubt if ATC had authorization to issue the Panther 5 to start with and if we should had refused it.
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.