 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier captain complains of close proximity aircraft during turn onto final at sea where both aircraft had been cleared for simultaneous, side-by-side visual approachs during an experiment with that procedure at sea.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 142689 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199004 |
| Day | Thu |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : sea |
| State Reference | WA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 5000 msl bound upper : 5000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : sea |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Route In Use | approach : visual |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Route In Use | approach : visual |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : cfi pilot : flight engineer |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 19000 flight time type : 4000 |
| ASRS Report | 142689 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : airborne less severe |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
| Consequence | Other |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 500 vertical : 0 |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
| Situations | |
| ATC Facility | procedure or policy : unspecified |
Narrative:
Seattle approach was conducting a new procedure for them. Parallel visibility approachs from the east and west to runways 16 left and right. We were vectored a left downwind (east of sea-tac) at 5000' and cleared for a visibility approach to runway 16L. The downwind vector was sufficiently close to the final approach path that a constant 25-30 degree angle of bank was required to complete the turn to final west/O overshooting the final approach path. We were not advised of any traffic until we were turning through a heading of about 200 degree. The call advised us that another large transport was approaching us from the west on a visibility to runway 16R and that they had us in sight. We had not observed any traffic approaching us but when we rolled out onto final there was the large transport 300' or 400' ahead of us and 200-300' right of us at our exact altitude. The other aircraft was in a 10 degree right bank so I think he must have been very close to us as we finished our turn. The runways at sea-tac are 1000' apart. I believe that our two aircraft were vectored head on and that we became invisible to each other as we completed the turns onto final. I don't believe that parallel visibility apches to runways that close together is a safe operation at any airport. There should always be longitudinal sep. More and more of the burden of ATC is being put on the pilots. Our workload has increased to the point where it is difficult to look out for VFR traffic and to monitor the operation of the aircraft. As a possible contributing factor to our situation at seattle was the fact that we were cleared for the visibility approach to follow a widebody transport making an approach to the right runway. The wind was 260 degree/04 and with the closeness of the runways, I elected to delay the turn onto final by 15 seconds for additional spacing. The approach controller might have expected us to start our turn immediately.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR CAPT COMPLAINS OF CLOSE PROX ACFT DURING TURN ONTO FINAL AT SEA WHERE BOTH ACFT HAD BEEN CLEARED FOR SIMULTANEOUS, SIDE-BY-SIDE VISUAL APCHS DURING AN EXPERIMENT WITH THAT PROC AT SEA.
Narrative: SEATTLE APCH WAS CONDUCTING A NEW PROC FOR THEM. PARALLEL VIS APCHS FROM THE E AND W TO RWYS 16 L AND R. WE WERE VECTORED A LEFT DOWNWIND (E OF SEA-TAC) AT 5000' AND CLRED FOR A VIS APCH TO RWY 16L. THE DOWNWIND VECTOR WAS SUFFICIENTLY CLOSE TO THE FINAL APCH PATH THAT A CONSTANT 25-30 DEG ANGLE OF BANK WAS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE TURN TO FINAL W/O OVERSHOOTING THE FINAL APCH PATH. WE WERE NOT ADVISED OF ANY TFC UNTIL WE WERE TURNING THROUGH A HDG OF ABOUT 200 DEG. THE CALL ADVISED US THAT ANOTHER LGT WAS APCHING US FROM THE W ON A VIS TO RWY 16R AND THAT THEY HAD US IN SIGHT. WE HAD NOT OBSERVED ANY TFC APCHING US BUT WHEN WE ROLLED OUT ONTO FINAL THERE WAS THE LGT 300' OR 400' AHEAD OF US AND 200-300' R OF US AT OUR EXACT ALT. THE OTHER ACFT WAS IN A 10 DEG R BANK SO I THINK HE MUST HAVE BEEN VERY CLOSE TO US AS WE FINISHED OUR TURN. THE RWYS AT SEA-TAC ARE 1000' APART. I BELIEVE THAT OUR TWO ACFT WERE VECTORED HEAD ON AND THAT WE BECAME INVISIBLE TO EACH OTHER AS WE COMPLETED THE TURNS ONTO FINAL. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT PARALLEL VIS APCHES TO RWYS THAT CLOSE TOGETHER IS A SAFE OPERATION AT ANY ARPT. THERE SHOULD ALWAYS BE LONGITUDINAL SEP. MORE AND MORE OF THE BURDEN OF ATC IS BEING PUT ON THE PLTS. OUR WORKLOAD HAS INCREASED TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS DIFFICULT TO LOOK OUT FOR VFR TFC AND TO MONITOR THE OPERATION OF THE ACFT. AS A POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO OUR SITUATION AT SEATTLE WAS THE FACT THAT WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VIS APCH TO FOLLOW A WDB MAKING AN APCH TO THE R RWY. THE WIND WAS 260 DEG/04 AND WITH THE CLOSENESS OF THE RWYS, I ELECTED TO DELAY THE TURN ONTO FINAL BY 15 SECS FOR ADDITIONAL SPACING. THE APCH CTLR MIGHT HAVE EXPECTED US TO START OUR TURN IMMEDIATELY.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.