37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 183275 |
Time | |
Date | 199106 |
Day | Sun |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : rhv |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | general aviation : instructional |
Make Model Name | Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear |
Flight Phase | landing other |
Flight Plan | None |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | Other |
Function | instruction : instructor |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : instrument |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 140 flight time total : 350 flight time type : 28 |
ASRS Report | 183275 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | Other |
Function | instruction : trainee |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
I, the flight instructor, was acting as a student pilot and the student, a CFI applicant, was teaching me. We were doing short field lndgs. 3 lndgs had been completed prior to this. I had stated that the runway began at the threshold and ended at the windsock (middle of the field). As we came into land, I stated that we were not going to make the runway (short field). I assumed at that point that he would go around. However, he continued to land. I said to go around but he continued to land. By this time, I felt it was too late to go around and decided to land the aircraft. As we touched down I told him to be easy on the brakes. He ended up locking up the brakes and the tires blew. At that moment we continued to slide down the runway and we stopped 20 ft off the end of the runway. When we touched down, 1000 ft of runway was still available to land on. According to the performance charts, that was enough runway available to stop the airplane. After speaking with the student it seems we had some miscom. He thought I meant the runway began at this windsock. Also, he thought that when I said to go around that I meant we would have to taxi back for another takeoff and not be able to do a touch and go. I assumed that the student would go around because we were landing so far down the runway. I should have taken control of the plane at the moment I said go around and he did not respond. Since the student is a commercial pilot, I assumed that he would have the experience and sense not to land on a runway if you're more than halfway down the runway. Also, the fact that he thought the runway began at the windsock (1/2 down the runway) does not make much sense. By doing that there is no room left for error. Common sense tells you that you should use the first half of the runway for the short field and have room for error. As a flight instructor, I have learned that you cannot assume anything about the students flying skills. A flight instructor should always be prepared for the worst scenario and be prepared to take corrective action.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: GA SMA LNDG OVERSHOOT RWY EXCURSION PRACTICING SHORT FIELD LNDGS AT RHV.
Narrative: I, THE FLT INSTRUCTOR, WAS ACTING AS A STUDENT PLT AND THE STUDENT, A CFI APPLICANT, WAS TEACHING ME. WE WERE DOING SHORT FIELD LNDGS. 3 LNDGS HAD BEEN COMPLETED PRIOR TO THIS. I HAD STATED THAT THE RWY BEGAN AT THE THRESHOLD AND ENDED AT THE WINDSOCK (MIDDLE OF THE FIELD). AS WE CAME INTO LAND, I STATED THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO MAKE THE RWY (SHORT FIELD). I ASSUMED AT THAT POINT THAT HE WOULD GAR. HOWEVER, HE CONTINUED TO LAND. I SAID TO GAR BUT HE CONTINUED TO LAND. BY THIS TIME, I FELT IT WAS TOO LATE TO GAR AND DECIDED TO LAND THE ACFT. AS WE TOUCHED DOWN I TOLD HIM TO BE EASY ON THE BRAKES. HE ENDED UP LOCKING UP THE BRAKES AND THE TIRES BLEW. AT THAT MOMENT WE CONTINUED TO SLIDE DOWN THE RWY AND WE STOPPED 20 FT OFF THE END OF THE RWY. WHEN WE TOUCHED DOWN, 1000 FT OF RWY WAS STILL AVAILABLE TO LAND ON. ACCORDING TO THE PERFORMANCE CHARTS, THAT WAS ENOUGH RWY AVAILABLE TO STOP THE AIRPLANE. AFTER SPEAKING WITH THE STUDENT IT SEEMS WE HAD SOME MISCOM. HE THOUGHT I MEANT THE RWY BEGAN AT THIS WINDSOCK. ALSO, HE THOUGHT THAT WHEN I SAID TO GAR THAT I MEANT WE WOULD HAVE TO TAXI BACK FOR ANOTHER TKOF AND NOT BE ABLE TO DO A TOUCH AND GO. I ASSUMED THAT THE STUDENT WOULD GAR BECAUSE WE WERE LNDG SO FAR DOWN THE RWY. I SHOULD HAVE TAKEN CTL OF THE PLANE AT THE MOMENT I SAID GAR AND HE DID NOT RESPOND. SINCE THE STUDENT IS A COMMERCIAL PLT, I ASSUMED THAT HE WOULD HAVE THE EXPERIENCE AND SENSE NOT TO LAND ON A RWY IF YOU'RE MORE THAN HALFWAY DOWN THE RWY. ALSO, THE FACT THAT HE THOUGHT THE RWY BEGAN AT THE WINDSOCK (1/2 DOWN THE RWY) DOES NOT MAKE MUCH SENSE. BY DOING THAT THERE IS NO ROOM L FOR ERROR. COMMON SENSE TELLS YOU THAT YOU SHOULD USE THE FIRST HALF OF THE RWY FOR THE SHORT FIELD AND HAVE ROOM FOR ERROR. AS A FLT INSTRUCTOR, I HAVE LEARNED THAT YOU CANNOT ASSUME ANYTHING ABOUT THE STUDENTS FLYING SKILLS. A FLT INSTRUCTOR SHOULD ALWAYS BE PREPARED FOR THE WORST SCENARIO AND BE PREPARED TO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION.
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.