37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1670887 |
Time | |
Date | 201908 |
Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Medium Large Transport |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
Route In Use | Visual Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
On a company scheduled airport familiarization/line check; I was the pilot flying on an approach into ZZZ. It was a VFR day; and the ILS/localizer approach to runway xx was out of service. Winds were out of the north; and aircraft were landing runway xy. Approaching from the south; we anticipated being cleared for a visual approach; as we had no authorized instrument approach to runway xy. Crossing over the VOR; the check airman was communicating with center; who asked us if we had the airport in sight. We told them we did; and I believed they cleared us for the approach to runway xy; followed with instructions to contact [the] FSS. I disconnected the autopilot and began maneuvering the aircraft under visual conditions to land on runway xy. Once we switched frequencies to the FSS; they instructed us to climb to 6;000 ft. And contact center. Without an assigned course; I turned toward the airport; and overflew it climbing to 6;000 ft.; roughly on a course of 290 degrees. We contacted center; who told us they had been expecting us to cross a particular fix on the RNAV approach to runway xy; and when we did not; they contacted the FSS with climb instructions. We then communicated with center; who again asked us if we had the airport in sight. We told them we did; and we were then cleared for the visual approach to runway xy. Again we were instructed to contact the FSS; who provided traffic advisories; and we made a normal visual approach and landing.lack of clear communication of our expectations and intentions with center. I believe we misunderstood the approach clearance as a visual approach clearance; when it is possible it was that it was an RNAV approach clearance instead. Contributing factors are lack of airport and approach familiarization; unclear communication; lack of authorized approach resources to runway xy. In this case; canceling IFR would have been the simple solution; as we were under visual conditions; with the airport in sight. I think when we were asked by center if we had the airport in sight that may have provided a misinterpreted cue that we were being cleared for a visual approach; when it may be possible that we were not. Better familiarization with airport procedures and ATC protocols for this airport would help. Furthermore; as we have an RNAV approach for runway xy available in the FMS; gaining authorization for the approach and being supplied with approach plates to the approach would be of great help.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air Carrier Captain reported miscommunication with ATC which resulted in a missed approach.
Narrative: On a company scheduled airport familiarization/line check; I was the Pilot Flying on an approach into ZZZ. It was a VFR day; and the ILS/localizer approach to Runway XX was out of service. Winds were out of the north; and aircraft were landing Runway XY. Approaching from the south; we anticipated being cleared for a visual approach; as we had no authorized instrument approach to Runway XY. Crossing over the VOR; the Check Airman was communicating with Center; who asked us if we had the airport in sight. We told them we did; and I believed they cleared us for the approach to Runway XY; followed with instructions to contact [the] FSS. I disconnected the autopilot and began maneuvering the aircraft under visual conditions to land on Runway XY. Once we switched frequencies to the FSS; they instructed us to climb to 6;000 ft. and contact Center. Without an assigned course; I turned toward the airport; and overflew it climbing to 6;000 ft.; roughly on a course of 290 degrees. We contacted Center; who told us they had been expecting us to cross a particular fix on the RNAV Approach to Runway XY; and when we did not; they contacted the FSS with climb instructions. We then communicated with Center; who again asked us if we had the airport in sight. We told them we did; and we were then cleared for the visual approach to Runway XY. Again we were instructed to contact the FSS; who provided traffic advisories; and we made a normal visual approach and landing.Lack of clear communication of our expectations and intentions with Center. I believe we misunderstood the approach clearance as a visual approach clearance; when it is possible it was that it was an RNAV approach clearance instead. Contributing factors are lack of airport and approach familiarization; unclear communication; lack of authorized approach resources to Runway XY. In this case; canceling IFR would have been the simple solution; as we were under visual conditions; with the airport in sight. I think when we were asked by Center if we had the airport in sight that may have provided a misinterpreted cue that we were being cleared for a visual approach; when it may be possible that we were not. Better familiarization with airport procedures and ATC protocols for this airport would help. Furthermore; as we have an RNAV approach for Runway XY available in the FMS; gaining authorization for the approach and being supplied with approach plates to the approach would be of great help.
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.