37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1433833 |
Time | |
Date | 201703 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | LAS.Airport |
State Reference | NV |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | A321 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Climb |
Route In Use | SID COWBY 6 |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Climb |
Route In Use | SID COWBY 6 |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | First Officer Pilot Not Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine |
Experience | Flight Crew Total 7000 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met |
Narrative:
Captains leg; departed on runway 1R out of las. We climbed out on the cowboy 6 RNAV; and as we briefed at the gate; flaps 1 would remain extended in order to make the 13000 ft at or above crossing restriction at rioos. The captain maintained airspeed just above the hook in order to fly a maximum rate of climb for SID compliance. Somewhere between 8000 and 9000 ft we received a TA indicating that an aircraft was climbing from behind and below us; and in close proximity. ATC then assigned us a right turn to the south just as we received the TCAS RA and the corresponding display on the pfd. In order to comply with the RA; the captain raised the nose just enough to put the aircraft in the bottom of the green bar; and also simultaneously turned to the ATC assigned heading. Sometime during the event; the conflict aircraft (flight on the same departure) was also given altitude and heading instructions that may or may not have increased the conflict. I observed that the 737 was also turning to the south in order to avoid us. Whether or not he was responding to his own RA instructions; or ATC's instructions; I simply don't know. After the RA was resolved; ATC indicated that we should've notified him that we were flying a slower than normal airspeed in order to comply with the SID crossing at rioos. I informed the controller that the slow airspeed was for operational purposes to comply with the altitude restrictionin retrospect; this was clearly a restriction that only an A321 could make if it were something close to its empty operating weight. In my opinion; the constraints on this departure do not conform to the A321's capabilities; especially considering that this was a very cool day in march as opposed to a high; hot; heavy august scenario.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A321 First Officer reported an aircraft triggered a TCAS RA from behind and below on the LAS COWBY6 departure. ATC commented on the slow climb that the flight crew felt was required to meet the 13;000 ft crossing restriction.
Narrative: Captains leg; departed on runway 1R out of LAS. We climbed out on the Cowboy 6 RNAV; and as we briefed at the gate; flaps 1 would remain extended in order to make the 13000 ft at or above crossing restriction at RIOOS. The Captain maintained airspeed just above the hook in order to fly a maximum rate of climb for SID compliance. Somewhere between 8000 and 9000 ft we received a TA indicating that an aircraft was climbing from behind and below us; and in close proximity. ATC then assigned us a right turn to the south just as we received the TCAS RA and the corresponding display on the PFD. In order to comply with the RA; The Captain raised the nose just enough to put the aircraft in the bottom of the green bar; and also simultaneously turned to the ATC assigned heading. Sometime during the event; the conflict aircraft (flight on the same departure) was also given altitude and heading instructions that may or may not have increased the conflict. I observed that the 737 was also turning to the south in order to avoid us. Whether or not he was responding to his own RA instructions; or ATC's instructions; I simply don't know. After the RA was resolved; ATC indicated that we should've notified him that we were flying a slower than normal airspeed in order to comply with the SID crossing at RIOOS. I informed the controller that the slow airspeed was for operational purposes to comply with the altitude restrictionIn retrospect; this was clearly a restriction that only an A321 could make if it were something close to its empty operating weight. In my opinion; the constraints on this departure do not conform to the A321's capabilities; especially considering that this was a very cool day in March as opposed to a high; hot; heavy August scenario.
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.