 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
While on base leg and final approach, medium large transport had to climb twice to resolve RA's. Traffic was never seen.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 171769 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199103 |
| Day | Sat |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : psp |
| State Reference | CA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 3000 msl bound upper : 4000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : psp |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng |
| Navigation In Use | Other |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Route In Use | approach : visual |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp pilot : instrument |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 193 flight time total : 10000 flight time type : 3000 |
| ASRS Report | 171769 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : commercial |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : airborne less severe |
| Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified |
| Resolutory Action | flight crew : took evasive action |
| Consequence | Other |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 700 vertical : 700 |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
At 4000' MSL we accepted a visibility approach to psp. We were on a right base to final, 170 KTS, flaps 15 degrees. Our aircraft has TCAS and was on below, 10 mi range, as required by our operating procedures. We got a TA and very shortly afterward an RA and voice to climb. We did, and when we got the clear of aircraft we resumed our descent and turn to final, at which time we got a level off voice command and an RA to climb (again) for yet another aircraft. We followed the command and resumed the approach and landing west/O further incident. We called the tower and gave them this report, and also that TCA reports would be filed. The first officer and I are both very experienced pilots, but neither saw these aircraft visually. I will be flying into psp all of 3/91, and frankly I do not feel it is a safe airport for commercial jets because of the many small aircraft's flying near the mountains west/O regard to their proximity to psp. The tower was extremely busy during our approach to the airport and could only give confirmation of aircraft conflicting with us after we questioned them. It is the norm to bring aircraft in high, then get rid of them for a visibility. I can see why they don't want the responsibility of radar advisories--there generally would be too many and control of other aircraft would be difficult.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: WHILE ON BASE LEG AND FINAL APCH, MLG HAD TO CLIMB TWICE TO RESOLVE RA'S. TRAFFIC WAS NEVER SEEN.
Narrative: AT 4000' MSL WE ACCEPTED A VIS APCH TO PSP. WE WERE ON A RIGHT BASE TO FINAL, 170 KTS, FLAPS 15 DEGS. OUR ACFT HAS TCAS AND WAS ON BELOW, 10 MI RANGE, AS REQUIRED BY OUR OPERATING PROCS. WE GOT A TA AND VERY SHORTLY AFTERWARD AN RA AND VOICE TO CLB. WE DID, AND WHEN WE GOT THE CLR OF ACFT WE RESUMED OUR DSNT AND TURN TO FINAL, AT WHICH TIME WE GOT A LEVEL OFF VOICE COMMAND AND AN RA TO CLB (AGAIN) FOR YET ANOTHER ACFT. WE FOLLOWED THE COMMAND AND RESUMED THE APCH AND LNDG W/O FURTHER INCIDENT. WE CALLED THE TWR AND GAVE THEM THIS RPT, AND ALSO THAT TCA RPTS WOULD BE FILED. THE F/O AND I ARE BOTH VERY EXPERIENCED PLTS, BUT NEITHER SAW THESE ACFT VISUALLY. I WILL BE FLYING INTO PSP ALL OF 3/91, AND FRANKLY I DO NOT FEEL IT IS A SAFE ARPT FOR COMMERCIAL JETS BECAUSE OF THE MANY SMA'S FLYING NEAR THE MOUNTAINS W/O REGARD TO THEIR PROX TO PSP. THE TWR WAS EXTREMELY BUSY DURING OUR APCH TO THE ARPT AND COULD ONLY GIVE CONFIRMATION OF ACFT CONFLICTING WITH US AFTER WE QUESTIONED THEM. IT IS THE NORM TO BRING ACFT IN HIGH, THEN GET RID OF THEM FOR A VIS. I CAN SEE WHY THEY DON'T WANT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF RADAR ADVISORIES--THERE GENERALLY WOULD BE TOO MANY AND CTL OF OTHER ACFT WOULD BE DIFFICULT.
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.