 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A center controller reported they cleared a corporate jet aircraft for an approach to an airport that only authorized air taxi operations.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1751010 |
| Time | |
| Date | 202007 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | TJIG.Airport |
| State Reference | FO |
| 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 | Visual Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Approach Enroute |
| Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
| Experience | Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 7.0 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Aircraft X was cleared for a visual approach when there was a restriction to land only scheduled air taxi aircraft into the airport. No general aviation aircraft allowed. The pilot cancelled their IFR clearance and landed at the airport without further incident. Because the NOTAM doesn't specify that the airport or runway is closed controllers do not put an X in the map display depicting a runway closure since the airport is only with a restriction on who can land such as air taxis only.even if the information was displayed on the ids; this information was visible in another page that is not actively being used when we are controlling traffic. And since it is not required to display an X showing the airport closed it is very easy to forget these limitations. We should not allow airports to place ambiguous restrictions that place the pilots or controllers wondering who should land or not at an airport and this responsibility should not be placed on the air traffic controller but rather on the pilots responsibility to be familiar with notams regarding airport restrictions. In the future; I will use memory joggers such as writing down on a strip the information to have it always visible and avoid any misunderstandings in the future.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A Center Controller reported they cleared a corporate jet aircraft for an approach to an airport that only authorized Air Taxi operations.
Narrative: Aircraft X was cleared for a visual approach When there was a restriction to land only scheduled Air Taxi aircraft into the airport. No General Aviation aircraft allowed. The pilot cancelled their IFR clearance and landed at the airport without further incident. Because the NOTAM doesn't specify that the airport or runway is closed Controllers do not put an X In the map display depicting a runway closure since the airport is only with a restriction on who can land such as air taxis only.Even if the information was displayed on the IDS; this information was visible in another page that is not actively being used when we are controlling traffic. And since it is not required to display an X showing the airport closed it is very easy to forget these limitations. We should not allow airports to place ambiguous restrictions that place the pilots or controllers wondering who should land or not at an airport and this responsibility should not be placed on the air traffic controller but rather on the pilots responsibility to be familiar with NOTAMs regarding airport restrictions. In the future; I will use memory joggers such as writing down on a strip the information to have it always visible and avoid any misunderstandings in the future.
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.