37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 132265 |
Time | |
Date | 198912 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : psc |
State Reference | WA |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 300 msl bound upper : 800 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : psc tower : ord |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng |
Flight Phase | descent : approach descent other |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : cfi pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 140 flight time total : 2185 flight time type : 56 |
ASRS Report | 132265 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far non adherence other other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : became reoriented none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Captain was flying the aircraft. We were making the pasco wa VOR/DME runway 30 approach to pasco, wa. ZSE was providing vectors to final. 8-10 mi from corby intersection, ZSE advised that air carrier a and air carrier B had missed approach. Company frequency had informed us that one of our flts had previously missed the approach, but that another flight (an light transport) had gotten in. The light transport was not the last flight to shoot the approach, so there was no indication that the WX was improving from the last reported WX. The reported WX was 600 overcast, 1 mi, fog, and was approximately 45 mins old. Further along, but prior to intercepting final or being cleared for the approach, center advised us that one of our previous flts had gotten in by requesting a contact approach. The captain commented that that was real heads-sup thinking and that we may do the same thing. As an aside, the ILS 21R was notamed OTS, and MALSR for 21R inoperative because an aircraft had crashed on the ILS approach into the approach lights. Hence, we could not shoot the ILS into pasco. We got vectored to final, got established on the approach, contacted the tower, passed the FAF and descended to the intermediate MDA of 900' (prior to 3.0 DME). We then got the ground in sight. I believe at about 3.5 DME we requested from the tower, and were cleared for, a contact approach. We passed 3.0 DME and descended to 800' (the final MDA). At that point, I commented to the captain that at this altitude, a good vdp is 1.8 DME. We continued on the approach, ground in sight, but airport not in sight and we passed 1.8 DME. (At this pint, I should also mention that the captain has 3 yrs line experience and has been into pasco many, many times and is quite familiar with the terrain and landmarks around pasco. As we got various landmarks in sight that the captain had stated should come into view as we got closer to the airport, he started a small descent, and at approximately 1.0 DME (about 1/2 mi from threshold at about 20 degree angle to the threshold and pointed directly at the threshold) and 100' below MDA (approximately 300' hat) we got the runway in sight. He called full flaps and we landed with 2000-3000' of runway to spare (we only had 2 passenger at the time). As far as contact approachs go (exclusive of company operations specifications), this was legal. At all times, as best as I recall, subsequent to receiving contact approach clearance, we remained in visibility contact with the ground, had at least 1 mi visibility, and remained clear of clouds. We clearly violated our operations specifications, though. The operations specification says, among other things, no contact approachs unless lowest reported ceiling is above FAF altitude. The FAF altitude is 2100' MSL (1699' AGL). The reported ceiling was 600' AGL. This could have been prevented in either of 2 ways. The obvious one is know intimately the operations specifications. As a fresh first officer, but with lots of instructing experience,I know part 91 and the aim very well, but I could use much study in my company's flight operations manual (which contains the operations specifications). The other way to prevent this situation is to simply pull out the book and check the information. The book is required equipment for each crew member. It certainly would have taken less time than we had available to check the paragraph. (The captain even knew from memory the paragraph # that the phrase appears in.)
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR FLT DESCENDS TO LESS THAN MINIMUM ALT ON A CONTACT APCH AUTHORIZATION IN LESS VISIBILITY THAN REQUIRED.
Narrative: CAPT WAS FLYING THE ACFT. WE WERE MAKING THE PASCO WA VOR/DME RWY 30 APCH TO PASCO, WA. ZSE WAS PROVIDING VECTORS TO FINAL. 8-10 MI FROM CORBY INTXN, ZSE ADVISED THAT ACR A AND ACR B HAD MISSED APCH. COMPANY FREQ HAD INFORMED US THAT ONE OF OUR FLTS HAD PREVIOUSLY MISSED THE APCH, BUT THAT ANOTHER FLT (AN LTT) HAD GOTTEN IN. THE LTT WAS NOT THE LAST FLT TO SHOOT THE APCH, SO THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT THE WX WAS IMPROVING FROM THE LAST RPTED WX. THE RPTED WX WAS 600 OVCST, 1 MI, FOG, AND WAS APPROX 45 MINS OLD. FURTHER ALONG, BUT PRIOR TO INTERCEPTING FINAL OR BEING CLRED FOR THE APCH, CENTER ADVISED US THAT ONE OF OUR PREVIOUS FLTS HAD GOTTEN IN BY REQUESTING A CONTACT APCH. THE CAPT COMMENTED THAT THAT WAS REAL HEADS-SUP THINKING AND THAT WE MAY DO THE SAME THING. AS AN ASIDE, THE ILS 21R WAS NOTAMED OTS, AND MALSR FOR 21R INOP BECAUSE AN ACFT HAD CRASHED ON THE ILS APCH INTO THE APCH LIGHTS. HENCE, WE COULD NOT SHOOT THE ILS INTO PASCO. WE GOT VECTORED TO FINAL, GOT ESTABLISHED ON THE APCH, CONTACTED THE TWR, PASSED THE FAF AND DSNDED TO THE INTERMEDIATE MDA OF 900' (PRIOR TO 3.0 DME). WE THEN GOT THE GND IN SIGHT. I BELIEVE AT ABOUT 3.5 DME WE REQUESTED FROM THE TWR, AND WERE CLRED FOR, A CONTACT APCH. WE PASSED 3.0 DME AND DSNDED TO 800' (THE FINAL MDA). AT THAT POINT, I COMMENTED TO THE CAPT THAT AT THIS ALT, A GOOD VDP IS 1.8 DME. WE CONTINUED ON THE APCH, GND IN SIGHT, BUT ARPT NOT IN SIGHT AND WE PASSED 1.8 DME. (AT THIS PINT, I SHOULD ALSO MENTION THAT THE CAPT HAS 3 YRS LINE EXPERIENCE AND HAS BEEN INTO PASCO MANY, MANY TIMES AND IS QUITE FAMILIAR WITH THE TERRAIN AND LANDMARKS AROUND PASCO. AS WE GOT VARIOUS LANDMARKS IN SIGHT THAT THE CAPT HAD STATED SHOULD COME INTO VIEW AS WE GOT CLOSER TO THE ARPT, HE STARTED A SMALL DSCNT, AND AT APPROX 1.0 DME (ABOUT 1/2 MI FROM THRESHOLD AT ABOUT 20 DEG ANGLE TO THE THRESHOLD AND POINTED DIRECTLY AT THE THRESHOLD) AND 100' BELOW MDA (APPROX 300' HAT) WE GOT THE RWY IN SIGHT. HE CALLED FULL FLAPS AND WE LANDED WITH 2000-3000' OF RWY TO SPARE (WE ONLY HAD 2 PAX AT THE TIME). AS FAR AS CONTACT APCHS GO (EXCLUSIVE OF COMPANY OPS SPECS), THIS WAS LEGAL. AT ALL TIMES, AS BEST AS I RECALL, SUBSEQUENT TO RECEIVING CONTACT APCH CLRNC, WE REMAINED IN VIS CONTACT WITH THE GND, HAD AT LEAST 1 MI VISIBILITY, AND REMAINED CLR OF CLOUDS. WE CLEARLY VIOLATED OUR OPS SPECS, THOUGH. THE OPS SPEC SAYS, AMONG OTHER THINGS, NO CONTACT APCHS UNLESS LOWEST RPTED CEILING IS ABOVE FAF ALT. THE FAF ALT IS 2100' MSL (1699' AGL). THE RPTED CEILING WAS 600' AGL. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IN EITHER OF 2 WAYS. THE OBVIOUS ONE IS KNOW INTIMATELY THE OPS SPECS. AS A FRESH F/O, BUT WITH LOTS OF INSTRUCTING EXPERIENCE,I KNOW PART 91 AND THE AIM VERY WELL, BUT I COULD USE MUCH STUDY IN MY COMPANY'S FLT OPS MANUAL (WHICH CONTAINS THE OPS SPECS). THE OTHER WAY TO PREVENT THIS SITUATION IS TO SIMPLY PULL OUT THE BOOK AND CHK THE INFO. THE BOOK IS REQUIRED EQUIP FOR EACH CREW MEMBER. IT CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE TAKEN LESS TIME THAN WE HAD AVAILABLE TO CHK THE PARAGRAPH. (THE CAPT EVEN KNEW FROM MEMORY THE PARAGRAPH # THAT THE PHRASE APPEARS IN.)
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.