Narrative:

Conditions at crq were forecast to be VFR at the expected arrival time of XD00 hrd local time. The flight proceeded according to the filed VFR flight plan. The WX was clear, visibility better than 40 mi with light to moderate turbulence. Average ground speed was 160 KTS. Contact with riverside radio, at about SC15 local time, indicated that conditions at crq were scattered clouds at 300' with an overcast layer about (I do not recall the level). Visibility was reported at 2 mi. Tuning the crq ATIS 30 mi out of crq revealed a deterioration in the WX to ceilings of 200' AGL and visibility at 3/4 mi. Airports east of crq (e.g., ramona) were verified to be VFR. Listening to crq tower and san diego approach control revealed that aircraft were landing and departing at crq. I decided to proceed and land IFR at crq. A call to san approach control on 127.3 provided vectors and clearance to crq. At the ekg NDB I was handed over to the crq tower (in VFR conditions). Up to this point the approach was uneventful. I was slightly above the G/south, but certainly within the circle on the ILS indicator. Horizontal control was satisfactory. The tower was called at the OM and clouds were entered at about 1000'. About this time the aircraft began drifting north and slight left rudder was required to remain on the glide path. The aircraft was slightly above the G/south. My concentration must have wandered, or perhaps I fixated on a particular INS. At the MM and still slightly above the glide path I was startled to see the aircraft was sufficiently north, so that the ILS needle had swung halfway through its travel. By that time I had reached the DH of 523' and idented the runway and its environment. The runway was on my left, but within easy reach. The landing was uneventful. Later in the evening and throughout the night, I reviewed the approach segment of the flight. I could not understand why I had not scanned the ILS in time to arrest the north drift. I was concerned. Looking for reasons I reviewed my proficiency and recent experience. I had received the INS rating in 6/90 and thought that I had been current. Certainly I had taken every opportunity to fly in an IFR environment. Examining my log book I discovered that indeed I had failed to meet the recency of experience requirement spelled out in far 61.57. In the past 6 months, since 9/90, I had logged 10 INS lndgs, but only the associated 3 hours of INS time incurred during the INS approachs. My last INS approach was on 12/90. I am convinced that had I practiced a # of INS approachs and logged a few hours of INS time prior to my flight, my scan would not have failed and the aircraft would have remained on course. This episode has taught me at least 2 things: 1) make sure I am proficient and meet the requirement of far 61.57, and 2) 61.57 is a minimum and has nothing to do with the real world. Every potential IFR flight should be preceded by a practice IFR flight in VFR conditions.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: UNSTABLE APCH TO MINIMUMS. ABLE TO LINE UP AND LAND OK.

Narrative: CONDITIONS AT CRQ WERE FORECAST TO BE VFR AT THE EXPECTED ARR TIME OF XD00 HRD LCL TIME. THE FLT PROCEEDED ACCORDING TO THE FILED VFR FLT PLAN. THE WX WAS CLR, VISIBILITY BETTER THAN 40 MI WITH LIGHT TO MODERATE TURB. AVERAGE GND SPD WAS 160 KTS. CONTACT WITH RIVERSIDE RADIO, AT ABOUT SC15 LCL TIME, INDICATED THAT CONDITIONS AT CRQ WERE SCATTERED CLOUDS AT 300' WITH AN OVCST LAYER ABOUT (I DO NOT RECALL THE LEVEL). VISIBILITY WAS RPTED AT 2 MI. TUNING THE CRQ ATIS 30 MI OUT OF CRQ REVEALED A DETERIORATION IN THE WX TO CEILINGS OF 200' AGL AND VISIBILITY AT 3/4 MI. ARPTS E OF CRQ (E.G., RAMONA) WERE VERIFIED TO BE VFR. LISTENING TO CRQ TWR AND SAN DIEGO APCH CTL REVEALED THAT ACFT WERE LNDG AND DEPARTING AT CRQ. I DECIDED TO PROCEED AND LAND IFR AT CRQ. A CALL TO SAN APCH CTL ON 127.3 PROVIDED VECTORS AND CLRNC TO CRQ. AT THE EKG NDB I WAS HANDED OVER TO THE CRQ TWR (IN VFR CONDITIONS). UP TO THIS POINT THE APCH WAS UNEVENTFUL. I WAS SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE G/S, BUT CERTAINLY WITHIN THE CIRCLE ON THE ILS INDICATOR. HORIZ CTL WAS SATISFACTORY. THE TWR WAS CALLED AT THE OM AND CLOUDS WERE ENTERED AT ABOUT 1000'. ABOUT THIS TIME THE ACFT BEGAN DRIFTING N AND SLIGHT LEFT RUDDER WAS REQUIRED TO REMAIN ON THE GLIDE PATH. THE ACFT WAS SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE G/S. MY CONCENTRATION MUST HAVE WANDERED, OR PERHAPS I FIXATED ON A PARTICULAR INS. AT THE MM AND STILL SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE GLIDE PATH I WAS STARTLED TO SEE THE ACFT WAS SUFFICIENTLY N, SO THAT THE ILS NEEDLE HAD SWUNG HALFWAY THROUGH ITS TRAVEL. BY THAT TIME I HAD REACHED THE DH OF 523' AND IDENTED THE RWY AND ITS ENVIRONMENT. THE RWY WAS ON MY LEFT, BUT WITHIN EASY REACH. THE LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. LATER IN THE EVENING AND THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT, I REVIEWED THE APCH SEGMENT OF THE FLT. I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND WHY I HAD NOT SCANNED THE ILS IN TIME TO ARREST THE N DRIFT. I WAS CONCERNED. LOOKING FOR REASONS I REVIEWED MY PROFICIENCY AND RECENT EXPERIENCE. I HAD RECEIVED THE INS RATING IN 6/90 AND THOUGHT THAT I HAD BEEN CURRENT. CERTAINLY I HAD TAKEN EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO FLY IN AN IFR ENVIRONMENT. EXAMINING MY LOG BOOK I DISCOVERED THAT INDEED I HAD FAILED TO MEET THE RECENCY OF EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENT SPELLED OUT IN FAR 61.57. IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS, SINCE 9/90, I HAD LOGGED 10 INS LNDGS, BUT ONLY THE ASSOCIATED 3 HRS OF INS TIME INCURRED DURING THE INS APCHS. MY LAST INS APCH WAS ON 12/90. I AM CONVINCED THAT HAD I PRACTICED A # OF INS APCHS AND LOGGED A FEW HRS OF INS TIME PRIOR TO MY FLT, MY SCAN WOULD NOT HAVE FAILED AND THE ACFT WOULD HAVE REMAINED ON COURSE. THIS EPISODE HAS TAUGHT ME AT LEAST 2 THINGS: 1) MAKE SURE I AM PROFICIENT AND MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF FAR 61.57, AND 2) 61.57 IS A MINIMUM AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REAL WORLD. EVERY POTENTIAL IFR FLT SHOULD BE PRECEDED BY A PRACTICE IFR FLT IN VFR CONDITIONS.

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.