 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Approach controller intended to clear air carrier medium large transport for an IAP ILS approach to runway 23R at ind but instead issued clearance to 23L and then missed the flight crew readback.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 175772 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199104 |
| Day | Sat |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : ind |
| State Reference | IN |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 3000 msl bound upper : 3000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : ind |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach descent other |
| Route In Use | enroute : on vectors |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 20000 |
| ASRS Report | 175772 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | non adherence : clearance other anomaly other other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
| Air Traffic Incident | Operational Deviation Pilot Deviation other |
Narrative:
I believe approach cleared us to land on runway 23L. I read back 23L clearance and controller did not challenge this. His radar vectors overshot us badly which I told him. He gave us heading of 200 degree 'to reintercept.' shortly thereafter, controller asked if we had '23R ILS' dialed into which I replied we did not, we had 23L ILS which is what we thought we had been cleared for and which we had read back to him. He said 'that's ok, continue to 23L' which we did. I watch for these things very diligently and frequently challenge a controller if I think confusion exists/ but I felt no confusion until the controller questioned if I had the '23R ILS tuned in.' the controllers had worked very well with me on our entry into the area. There were a great number of WX cells to avoid and approach control was very helpful and easy to work with. I'm sure this WX contributed to the vectors which overshot us on final approach interception. It also probably contributed to the controllers confusion as they were working a number of aircraft at the time.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: APCH CTLR INTENDED TO CLEAR ACR MLG FOR AN IAP ILS APCH TO RWY 23R AT IND BUT INSTEAD ISSUED CLRNC TO 23L AND THEN MISSED THE FLT CREW READBACK.
Narrative: I BELIEVE APCH CLRED US TO LAND ON RWY 23L. I READ BACK 23L CLRNC AND CTLR DID NOT CHALLENGE THIS. HIS RADAR VECTORS OVERSHOT US BADLY WHICH I TOLD HIM. HE GAVE US HDG OF 200 DEG 'TO REINTERCEPT.' SHORTLY THEREAFTER, CTLR ASKED IF WE HAD '23R ILS' DIALED INTO WHICH I REPLIED WE DID NOT, WE HAD 23L ILS WHICH IS WHAT WE THOUGHT WE HAD BEEN CLRED FOR AND WHICH WE HAD READ BACK TO HIM. HE SAID 'THAT'S OK, CONTINUE TO 23L' WHICH WE DID. I WATCH FOR THESE THINGS VERY DILIGENTLY AND FREQUENTLY CHALLENGE A CTLR IF I THINK CONFUSION EXISTS/ BUT I FELT NO CONFUSION UNTIL THE CTLR QUESTIONED IF I HAD THE '23R ILS TUNED IN.' THE CTLRS HAD WORKED VERY WELL WITH ME ON OUR ENTRY INTO THE AREA. THERE WERE A GREAT NUMBER OF WX CELLS TO AVOID AND APCH CTL WAS VERY HELPFUL AND EASY TO WORK WITH. I'M SURE THIS WX CONTRIBUTED TO THE VECTORS WHICH OVERSHOT US ON FINAL APCH INTERCEPTION. IT ALSO PROBABLY CONTRIBUTED TO THE CTLRS CONFUSION AS THEY WERE WORKING A NUMBER OF ACFT AT THE TIME.
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.