 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
C206 pilot reported weather; turbulence; and component failure during approach that resulted in high workload; altitude and track deviations; and human factors errors.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1693783 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201910 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | S56.TRACON |
| State Reference | UT |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | Mixed |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Cessna Stationair/Turbo Stationair 6 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | Final Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Air/Ground Communication |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Single Pilot |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Private |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 30 Flight Crew Total 2100 Flight Crew Type 1900 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Track / Heading All Types Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence |
Narrative:
During the initial approach the controller stated is was moderate turbulence. After joining the approach at 11000; heavy turbulence was experienced. The aircraft was in a large area of sink. I applied full power but climb performance was extremely poor. The controller asked me and stated that I should climb back to 11000. I replied that the turbulence was very heavy and he stated remain at 10000; I stated it may improve past the mountain ridge line. He stated it would be moderate turbulence down to ground.whilst the approach was initiated the flight path on the approach was lower than published (at this time in VMC). The terrain on the approach to kslc is mountainous and whilst the controller stated it was moderate to the airlines landing; for sep (single engine piston) it would be classified a heavy.in addition I had experienced a faulty ptt (push to talk) switch on the pilots yoke. Therefore the hand held mic was being used. Making the situation worse. Flying with one hand on the yoke and one hand trying to control throttle and use it on the mic.the approach was continued as I was in VMC at this time and it was safer to continue rather than going missed into heavy turbulence which made me physically come out of the seat even though I was strapped in; hitting my head on the roof of the aircraft and all my equipment/ipad paper copy of the approach charts being through around the aircraft. In fact my cell phone screen was smashed.during the final stages of the approach the cross wind was blustery/high with rain. Again trying to fly the aircraft one handed; using a hand held mic and throttle controlthe controller cleared me to land on runway 35. During which I was trying to stabilize the aircraft which was extremely difficult. The controller asked me to ident during the approach to continue as I was having difficulties with ptt; throttle and trying to remain on the approach. Due to a extremely high human factors workload I asked the controller to turn up the runway lights. He stated that he did. In fact as the aircraft was already more aligned into the runway 32 due to the cross wind component and heavy turbulence. The controller stated that the runway in use was 35 then stated it appeared I was lined up on 32 and cleared me to land. After which the controller asked me to contact the tower.a number of human factor elements were in play and on reflection the approach should have not be flown and a diversion should have been initiated prior to the approach being flown. I am a professional aircrew member and understand the risks and issues created by this instance. I understand why human factors come into play so much on a situation like this. My capacity to fly the aircraft under weather conditions and trying to talk with ATC with a hand mic and un-serviceable ap (auto pilot) and hand fly the approach lead me to deviate from planned approach. Speaking with my colleagues has led me to re-evaluate the situation and learn from human factor mistakes.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: C206 pilot reported weather; turbulence; and component failure during approach that resulted in high workload; altitude and track deviations; and human factors errors.
Narrative: During the initial approach the controller stated is was moderate turbulence. After joining the approach at 11000; heavy turbulence was experienced. The aircraft was in a large area of sink. I applied full power but climb performance was extremely poor. The Controller asked me and stated that I should climb back to 11000. I replied that the turbulence was very heavy and he stated remain at 10000; I stated it may improve past the mountain ridge line. He stated it would be moderate turbulence down to ground.Whilst the approach was initiated the flight path on the approach was lower than published (At this time in VMC). The terrain on the approach to KSLC is mountainous and whilst the Controller stated it was moderate to the airlines landing; for SEP (Single Engine Piston) it would be classified a heavy.In addition I had experienced a faulty PTT (Push To Talk) switch on the Pilots Yoke. Therefore the hand held mic was being used. making the situation worse. Flying with one hand on the yoke and one hand trying to control throttle and use it on the mic.The approach was continued as I was in VMC at this time and it was safer to continue rather than going missed into heavy turbulence which made me physically come out of the seat even though I was strapped in; hitting my head on the roof of the aircraft and all my equipment/iPad paper copy of the approach charts being through around the aircraft. In fact my cell phone screen was smashed.During the final stages of the approach the cross wind was blustery/high with rain. Again trying to fly the aircraft one handed; using a hand held mic and throttle controlThe Controller cleared me to land on Runway 35. During which I was trying to stabilize the aircraft which was extremely difficult. The Controller asked me to ident during the approach to continue as I was having difficulties with PTT; throttle and trying to remain on the approach. Due to a extremely high human factors workload I asked the controller to turn up the runway lights. He stated that he did. In fact as the aircraft was already more aligned into the Runway 32 due to the cross wind component and heavy turbulence. The controller stated that the runway in use was 35 then stated it appeared I was lined up on 32 and cleared me to land. After which the controller asked me to contact the Tower.A number of human factor elements were in play and on reflection the approach should have not be flown and a diversion should have been initiated prior to the approach being flown. I am a professional aircrew member and understand the risks and issues created by this instance. I understand why human factors come into play so much on a situation like this. My capacity to fly the aircraft under weather conditions and trying to talk with ATC with a hand mic and un-Serviceable AP (Auto Pilot) and hand fly the approach lead me to deviate from planned approach. Speaking with my colleagues has led me to re-evaluate the situation and learn from human factor mistakes.
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.