Narrative:

The student and I jointly obtained a preflight weather briefing to determine the viability of performing practice instrument approaches on this particular MVFR night. Weather reports indicated that maintaining VFR; outside of potential icing conditions; was possible. At the time; no icing; precipitation; or reduced visibility was reported by a weather station or aircraft below the overcast ceiling at 2;600 feet AGL. We filed IFR for 3;000 feet MSL (600 feet below the ceiling in this geographic location); and set off.three miles from the FAF on the first approach; I noticed snow when the strobe lights blinked. Immediately; I noted the outside air temperature; ensured all anti- and deicing measures were taken; and took a look at the wing. We were accumulating trace rime on the leading edge. At this point in time; we were about to begin descending on the approach; so I only provided a pilot report to the approach controller. No request was made for a lower altitude or vector out of the conditions. The snow was no longer falling a few hundred feet down the glide path; and the ice which had accumulated on the wings was gone prior to touchdown.a touch-and-go landing was performed and vectors received and accepted for an approach back into the home airport. Vectors for the approach brought us through the same icing conditions four miles prior to intercepting the final approach course. Trace-light rime ice was accumulating on the leading edge of the wings. ATC was notified; but unable to provide a lower vectoring altitude out of the icing conditions. The student and I discussed our options and decided to continue with the approach; by this time the most direct route to the nearest airport. Additionally; this approach contained a step-down altitude which would bring us below the icing conditions to an altitude still protected from obstacles on the ground (can't see them well at night). Icing conditions ceased by the time the step-down altitude was reached; and a full stop landing was performed without further incident.I believe the two major contributing factors to this occurrence are a lack of experience and get-home-itis. Neither the student nor I had ever been in icing conditions before. Prior to this flight; we never had the chance to make connections between what was learned in the classroom and how to apply it in the airplane. The decision to perform a touch-and-go instead of a full-stop was unnecessarily risky and dangerous. Due to the novelty of the situation; a landing brief did not take place; so the pilot flying performed what he believed was expected. A full-stop landing should have been completed to avoid the risk of departure with unseen contamination and assess the situation appropriately without excessive time pressures. Once airborne and receiving vectors; it seemed logical (though clearly it wasn't) to return to home base. Home is home; and feels synonymous with 'safe haven.' at this point; it was considerably safer to enter the pattern at the intermediate airport and land to evaluate the next course of action.in the future; several steps can be taken to avoid a recurrence. 1) continue obtaining thorough preflight weather briefings and use the information more effectively. 2) upon entering icing conditions; do not wait. Promptly take corrective action in the cockpit to combat the situation and exit the area safely with haste. 3) if returning to home base is a factor; stop at the first point of landing and/or reduce the workload upon exiting the adverse conditions. Take the time to determine the next course of action. 4) ask ATC for assistance; e.g. By requesting a new altitude; vector and/or approach. 5) do not hesitate to declare an urgent situation; and do so before things are beyond pilot control.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A flight instructor reported that he and an instrument student experienced icing conditions while practicing instrument approaches at night in what was expected to be only marginal VFR weather. The instructor later recognized that greater safety considerations should have been taken.

Narrative: The student and I jointly obtained a preflight weather briefing to determine the viability of performing practice instrument approaches on this particular MVFR night. Weather reports indicated that maintaining VFR; outside of potential icing conditions; was possible. At the time; no icing; precipitation; or reduced visibility was reported by a weather station or aircraft below the overcast ceiling at 2;600 feet AGL. We filed IFR for 3;000 feet MSL (600 feet below the ceiling in this geographic location); and set off.Three miles from the FAF on the first approach; I noticed snow when the strobe lights blinked. Immediately; I noted the outside air temperature; ensured all anti- and deicing measures were taken; and took a look at the wing. We were accumulating trace rime on the leading edge. At this point in time; we were about to begin descending on the approach; so I only provided a pilot report to the approach controller. No request was made for a lower altitude or vector out of the conditions. The snow was no longer falling a few hundred feet down the glide path; and the ice which had accumulated on the wings was gone prior to touchdown.A touch-and-go landing was performed and vectors received and accepted for an approach back into the home airport. Vectors for the approach brought us through the same icing conditions four miles prior to intercepting the final approach course. Trace-light rime ice was accumulating on the leading edge of the wings. ATC was notified; but unable to provide a lower vectoring altitude out of the icing conditions. The student and I discussed our options and decided to continue with the approach; by this time the most direct route to the nearest airport. Additionally; this approach contained a step-down altitude which would bring us below the icing conditions to an altitude still protected from obstacles on the ground (can't see them well at night). Icing conditions ceased by the time the step-down altitude was reached; and a full stop landing was performed without further incident.I believe the two major contributing factors to this occurrence are a lack of experience and get-home-itis. Neither the student nor I had ever been in icing conditions before. Prior to this flight; we never had the chance to make connections between what was learned in the classroom and how to apply it in the airplane. The decision to perform a touch-and-go instead of a full-stop was unnecessarily risky and dangerous. Due to the novelty of the situation; a landing brief did not take place; so the pilot flying performed what he believed was expected. A full-stop landing should have been completed to avoid the risk of departure with unseen contamination and assess the situation appropriately without excessive time pressures. Once airborne and receiving vectors; it seemed logical (though clearly it wasn't) to return to home base. Home is home; and feels synonymous with 'safe haven.' At this point; it was considerably safer to enter the pattern at the intermediate airport and land to evaluate the next course of action.In the future; several steps can be taken to avoid a recurrence. 1) Continue obtaining thorough preflight weather briefings and use the information more effectively. 2) Upon entering icing conditions; do not wait. Promptly take corrective action in the cockpit to combat the situation and exit the area safely with haste. 3) If returning to home base is a factor; stop at the first point of landing and/or reduce the workload upon exiting the adverse conditions. Take the time to determine the next course of action. 4) Ask ATC for assistance; e.g. by requesting a new altitude; vector and/or approach. 5) Do not hesitate to declare an urgent situation; and do so before things are beyond pilot control.

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.