37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 125103 |
Time | |
Date | 198910 |
Day | Thu |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : stc |
State Reference | MN |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 2100 msl bound upper : 2100 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : stc |
Operator | other |
Make Model Name | Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng |
Flight Phase | landing other |
Route In Use | approach : straight in |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Operator | general aviation : personal |
Make Model Name | Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear |
Flight Phase | landing other |
Flight Plan | None |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | government other |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 3500 flight time type : 1000 |
ASRS Report | 125103 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | government other |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : instrument |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance flight crew : took evasive action other |
Consequence | Other |
Miss Distance | horizontal : 0 vertical : 200 |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
During a flight from eveleth, mn, to stc, our aircraft came within an estimated 200' of another aircraft while attempting to land at stc. We were flying an small transport and there were numerous single-engine aircraft in the landing pattern at stc. Stc is normally an uncontrolled airport; however, a temporary control tower was in place because of the university's regional flying competition. Approximately 15 NM northeast of stc we cancelled our IFR clearance and contacted the stc ATC tower for landing instructions. The WX was VFR with winds southwest at 20 KTS. Tower advised us to report at 5 NM straight-in for runway 23. Due to heavy frequency congestion, we contacted them again at 4NM and were given a landing sequence. We were following our assigned traffic and at 2 NM, before we visually acquired the traffic, we flew within an estimated 200' over the top of a single-engine small aircraft, which was turning base to final. We executed a go around and broke out of the pattern for another try. When we passed over the small aircraft we were configured for landing and 120 KTS. Once we broke out of the pattern for runway 23, we were asked by tower to set up on downwind for runway 31. We were offered runway 31 for landing to hold short of runway 23, but declined due to the winds. On the second attempt we were given our sequence for landing runway 23, but another single-engine small aircraft turned onto final out of assigned landing sequence and in front of us. We were advised to continue if able, which we did, but due to the differential in approach speeds were unable to achieve adequate spacing behind the small aircraft and initiated a go around at approximately 1/2 mi final. On the third attempt, we were assigned a new landing sequence and made a normal approach and landing. I think the close encounter we had at 2 NM on final could have been avoided if everyone had been listening and following directions.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACFT MAKING STRAIGHT IN APCH CAME IN CLOSE PROX TO AN SMA TURNING FINAL.
Narrative: DURING A FLT FROM EVELETH, MN, TO STC, OUR ACFT CAME WITHIN AN ESTIMATED 200' OF ANOTHER ACFT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO LAND AT STC. WE WERE FLYING AN SMT AND THERE WERE NUMEROUS SINGLE-ENG ACFT IN THE LANDING PATTERN AT STC. STC IS NORMALLY AN UNCONTROLLED ARPT; HOWEVER, A TEMPORARY CTL TWR WAS IN PLACE BECAUSE OF THE UNIVERSITY'S REGIONAL FLYING COMPETITION. APPROX 15 NM NE OF STC WE CANCELLED OUR IFR CLRNC AND CONTACTED THE STC ATC TWR FOR LNDG INSTRUCTIONS. THE WX WAS VFR WITH WINDS SW AT 20 KTS. TWR ADVISED US TO RPT AT 5 NM STRAIGHT-IN FOR RWY 23. DUE TO HEAVY FREQ CONGESTION, WE CONTACTED THEM AGAIN AT 4NM AND WERE GIVEN A LNDG SEQUENCE. WE WERE FOLLOWING OUR ASSIGNED TFC AND AT 2 NM, BEFORE WE VISUALLY ACQUIRED THE TFC, WE FLEW WITHIN AN ESTIMATED 200' OVER THE TOP OF A SINGLE-ENG SMA, WHICH WAS TURNING BASE TO FINAL. WE EXECUTED A GAR AND BROKE OUT OF THE PATTERN FOR ANOTHER TRY. WHEN WE PASSED OVER THE SMA WE WERE CONFIGURED FOR LNDG AND 120 KTS. ONCE WE BROKE OUT OF THE PATTERN FOR RWY 23, WE WERE ASKED BY TWR TO SET UP ON DOWNWIND FOR RWY 31. WE WERE OFFERED RWY 31 FOR LNDG TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 23, BUT DECLINED DUE TO THE WINDS. ON THE SECOND ATTEMPT WE WERE GIVEN OUR SEQUENCE FOR LNDG RWY 23, BUT ANOTHER SINGLE-ENG SMA TURNED ONTO FINAL OUT OF ASSIGNED LNDG SEQUENCE AND IN FRONT OF US. WE WERE ADVISED TO CONTINUE IF ABLE, WHICH WE DID, BUT DUE TO THE DIFFERENTIAL IN APCH SPDS WERE UNABLE TO ACHIEVE ADEQUATE SPACING BEHIND THE SMA AND INITIATED A GAR AT APPROX 1/2 MI FINAL. ON THE THIRD ATTEMPT, WE WERE ASSIGNED A NEW LNDG SEQUENCE AND MADE A NORMAL APCH AND LNDG. I THINK THE CLOSE ENCOUNTER WE HAD AT 2 NM ON FINAL COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF EVERYONE HAD BEEN LISTENING AND FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS.
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.