37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1604811 |
Time | |
Date | 201812 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | MDW.Airport |
State Reference | IL |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Small Transport Low Wing 2 Turboprop Eng |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | Descent |
Route In Use | STAR FISSK4 |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Flying Single Pilot |
Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Flight Instructor |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 10 Flight Crew Total 6200 Flight Crew Type 140 |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types |
Narrative:
While coming in to mdw they were using R22L. The ATIS said using RNAV Y runway 22L. Runway 22L (Y) requires rnp; therefore; I was not able to load the approach into my FMS. I asked approach about the issue and was told I would have to ask chicago approach when handed off. I then loaded the RNAV 22R. This caused the transition landing runway 22L to disappear. I then needed to reload another approach. All while being given altitude changes and airspeed assignments. By the time I reloaded the approach of RNAV Z 22L I was passed halie. I realized I was off course to the left and started a turn to the right to rejoin the transition. I was then vectored off the STAR and then given direct to a fix on the STAR. The rest of the arrival and approach was uneventful. I was eventually cleared for the RNAV Z 22L. I was not notified by ATC that they had a problem with me. The jet in front of me was having the same issue and also the controller and was told to ask chicago approach. I would say I was very busy at that moment and was having a time trying to keep up with the last minute programming and ATC instructions and lack of guidance. Things to do differently: I studied my approach plates the night before and knew I could not accept RNAV Y 22L. I should have loaded RNAV Z 22L instead of 22R. I figured I could ask for 22R; but eventually figured out RNAV Z worked for the arrival. ATC or ATIS needs to say RNAV Z 22L for us aircraft that cannot load RNAV Y 22L. The approach controller even cleared me for the Y approach and I had to correct him and he re-cleared me for the Z approach. There was way too much last minute programming. I like to have my approaches loaded much earlier. Also; I do not go into very busy bravo airports very often. I fly lots of sids and stars; but this was too chaotic rather than the STAR simplifying things like they typically do. Next time I go into mdw or any other airports with rnp required approaches I will load the alternate approach to the same runway.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Small Transport pilot reported high workload resulted in a track deviation on approach into MDW following multiple late changes to his clearance.
Narrative: While coming in to MDW they were using R22L. The ATIS said using RNAV Y Runway 22L. Runway 22L (Y) requires RNP; therefore; I was not able to load the approach into my FMS. I asked Approach about the issue and was told I would have to ask Chicago Approach when handed off. I then loaded the RNAV 22R. This caused the transition landing Runway 22L to disappear. I then needed to reload another approach. All while being given altitude changes and airspeed assignments. By the time I reloaded the approach of RNAV Z 22L I was passed HALIE. I realized I was off course to the left and started a turn to the right to rejoin the transition. I was then vectored off the STAR and then given direct to a fix on the STAR. The rest of the arrival and approach was uneventful. I was eventually cleared for the RNAV Z 22L. I was not notified by ATC that they had a problem with me. The jet in front of me was having the same issue and also the Controller and was told to ask Chicago Approach. I would say I was very busy at that moment and was having a time trying to keep up with the last minute programming and ATC instructions and lack of guidance. Things to do differently: I studied my approach plates the night before and knew I could not accept RNAV Y 22L. I should have loaded RNAV Z 22L instead of 22R. I figured I could ask for 22R; but eventually figured out RNAV Z worked for the arrival. ATC or ATIS needs to say RNAV Z 22L for us aircraft that cannot load RNAV Y 22L. The Approach Controller even cleared me for the Y Approach and I had to correct him and he re-cleared me for the Z approach. There was way too much last minute programming. I like to have my approaches loaded much earlier. Also; I do not go into very busy bravo airports very often. I fly lots of SIDS and STARS; but this was too chaotic rather than the STAR simplifying things like they typically do. Next time I go into MDW or any other airports with RNP required approaches I will load the alternate approach to the same runway.
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.