37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1353530 |
Time | |
Date | 201605 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | LAX.Airport |
State Reference | CA |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
Flight Phase | Landing |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter |
Narrative:
On a visual approach backed up by the ILS 25L at lax; we encountered wake turbulence from the aircraft we were following at approximately 2000-2500 feet. I do not recall exactly what altitude. Immediately following the event we received three amber caution messages: windshear fail; aoa limit fail; and shaker anticipated. The first officer (first officer) had control of the aircraft and continued on the approach while I processed the alerts and formulated a decision. During this time we were handed off to tower and reducing speed so a lot was going on. The first officer continued to configure and as we set landing flaps in around 1800-1900 feet MSL; I made the decision to execute a go-around and called out the go-around to the first officer and advised tower. We flew an uneventful go-around and the first officer had the airplane and radios while I did the QRH procedures for each message displayed. The QRH guided us to land with slat/flaps full. We were vectored back for the visual 25L and landed uneventfully. During this time of trouble shooting; I communicated to the passengers and fas (flight attendants) the reason for the go-around. I chose to wait to contact company until on the ground due to the fact that the airplane was still airworthy and all procedures were complied with; but we were in a high workload and in sterile being vectored back for another approach. When we landed; the three caution messages cleared but two cyan crew advisory messages took their place; ads probe 4 fail and ads probe 2 fail. We taxied to the gate without incident and I contacted dispatch and maintenance control.I would have recommended the first officer to fly slightly above preceding aircraft's flight path above the glide path to help reduce the possibility of a wake turbulence encounter on a close in visual approach. Maintenance also mentioned that this issue was not uncommon. I also would call the go-around prior to a tower hand off.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: EMB-175 Captain reported experiencing several system anomalies after encountering wake turbulence on a visual approach to LAX.
Narrative: On a visual approach backed up by the ILS 25L at LAX; we encountered wake turbulence from the aircraft we were following at approximately 2000-2500 feet. I do not recall exactly what altitude. Immediately following the event we received three amber caution messages: WINDSHEAR FAIL; AOA LIMIT FAIL; and SHAKER ANTICIPATED. The FO (First Officer) had control of the aircraft and continued on the approach while I processed the alerts and formulated a decision. During this time we were handed off to tower and reducing speed so a lot was going on. The FO continued to configure and as we set landing flaps in around 1800-1900 feet MSL; I made the decision to execute a go-around and called out the go-around to the FO and advised tower. We flew an uneventful go-around and the FO had the airplane and radios while I did the QRH procedures for each message displayed. The QRH guided us to land with slat/flaps FULL. We were vectored back for the visual 25L and landed uneventfully. During this time of trouble shooting; I communicated to the passengers and FAs (Flight Attendants) the reason for the go-around. I chose to wait to contact company until on the ground due to the fact that the airplane was still airworthy and all procedures were complied with; but we were in a high workload and in sterile being vectored back for another approach. When we landed; the three caution messages cleared but two cyan crew advisory messages took their place; ADS PROBE 4 FAIL and ADS PROBE 2 FAIL. We taxied to the gate without incident and I contacted dispatch and maintenance control.I would have recommended the FO to fly slightly above preceding aircraft's flight path above the glide path to help reduce the possibility of a wake turbulence encounter on a close in visual approach. Maintenance also mentioned that this issue was not uncommon. I also would call the go-around prior to a tower hand off.
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.