 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier X non adherence to ATC clearance speed control reduced speed was broken off approach and resequenced. Pilot deviation.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 201853 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199202 |
| Day | Sat |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | atc facility : atl |
| State Reference | GA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 5000 msl bound upper : 5000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : atl tower : tpa |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng |
| Flight Phase | cruise 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 : 60 flight time total : 12000 flight time type : 5000 |
| ASRS Report | 201853 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 7500 flight time type : 750 |
| ASRS Report | 201852 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | non adherence : clearance other anomaly |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance other |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Atl approach control vectored us (air carrier X) to runway 26R at atlanta behind another aircraft. Although we had the airport in sight and so reported, approach insisted several times that we report the previous traffic in sight. Since the preceding aircraft was low, overshooting the runway, near a scattered layer, and night visibility precluded our maintaining separation, I reported the airport in sight and not the traffic. Approach held us at 5000 ft until we were well above the GS. When we did have a positive visual on the traffic to follow, and so stated, and were cleared for a visual approach, we had to slow to landing speed (about 135 KTS) to obtain separation from preceding aircraft. An airspeed to hold was not issued by approach, however when asked we replied our airspeed was 135 KTS and approach broke us out of traffic and told us to climb to 5000 ft, heading 360. The problem as I see it was approach control vectored us too close to preceding traffic. With minimal separation from following aircraft and when we reported the airport in sight, he wouldn't clear us for a visual because we probably didn't have adequate separation and we hadn't reported the preceding aircraft in sight. Supplemental information from acn 201852. The aircraft ahead corrected to the centerline of runway 26R. I considered the closure rate excessive and slowed down. Had I not initiated this action I believe the aircraft ahead would have disappeared below the nose of our aircraft since he was at a lower altitude. We could not have maintained 170 KTS until the marker as is the normal case. We were broken out because of our speed selection and vectored around for a second approach. The controller misjudged the situation as can happen and leads up discretion by the airscreen once again avoided a deteriorating situation. I believe that it should be emphasized to all controllers again that with the congested radio traffic etc the pilots judgement is still the best at avoiding problems.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC SPD CTL REDUCED SPD WAS BROKEN OFF APCH AND RESEQUENCED. PLTDEV.
Narrative: ATL APCH CTL VECTORED US (ACR X) TO RWY 26R AT ATLANTA BEHIND ANOTHER ACFT. ALTHOUGH WE HAD THE ARPT IN SIGHT AND SO RPTED, APCH INSISTED SEVERAL TIMES THAT WE RPT THE PREVIOUS TFC IN SIGHT. SINCE THE PRECEDING ACFT WAS LOW, OVERSHOOTING THE RWY, NEAR A SCATTERED LAYER, AND NIGHT VISIBILITY PRECLUDED OUR MAINTAINING SEPARATION, I RPTED THE ARPT IN SIGHT AND NOT THE TFC. APCH HELD US AT 5000 FT UNTIL WE WERE WELL ABOVE THE GS. WHEN WE DID HAVE A POSITIVE VISUAL ON THE TFC TO FOLLOW, AND SO STATED, AND WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH, WE HAD TO SLOW TO LNDG SPD (ABOUT 135 KTS) TO OBTAIN SEPARATION FROM PRECEDING ACFT. AN AIRSPD TO HOLD WAS NOT ISSUED BY APCH, HOWEVER WHEN ASKED WE REPLIED OUR AIRSPD WAS 135 KTS AND APCH BROKE US OUT OF TFC AND TOLD US TO CLB TO 5000 FT, HDG 360. THE PROBLEM AS I SEE IT WAS APCH CTL VECTORED US TOO CLOSE TO PRECEDING TFC. WITH MINIMAL SEPARATION FROM FOLLOWING ACFT AND WHEN WE RPTED THE ARPT IN SIGHT, HE WOULDN'T CLR US FOR A VISUAL BECAUSE WE PROBABLY DIDN'T HAVE ADEQUATE SEPARATION AND WE HADN'T RPTED THE PRECEDING ACFT IN SIGHT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 201852. THE ACFT AHEAD CORRECTED TO THE CTRLINE OF RWY 26R. I CONSIDERED THE CLOSURE RATE EXCESSIVE AND SLOWED DOWN. HAD I NOT INITIATED THIS ACTION I BELIEVE THE ACFT AHEAD WOULD HAVE DISAPPEARED BELOW THE NOSE OF OUR ACFT SINCE HE WAS AT A LOWER ALT. WE COULD NOT HAVE MAINTAINED 170 KTS UNTIL THE MARKER AS IS THE NORMAL CASE. WE WERE BROKEN OUT BECAUSE OF OUR SPD SELECTION AND VECTORED AROUND FOR A SECOND APCH. THE CTLR MISJUDGED THE SITUATION AS CAN HAPPEN AND LEADS UP DISCRETION BY THE AIRSCREEN ONCE AGAIN AVOIDED A DETERIORATING SITUATION. I BELIEVE THAT IT SHOULD BE EMPHASIZED TO ALL CTLRS AGAIN THAT WITH THE CONGESTED RADIO TFC ETC THE PLTS JUDGEMENT IS STILL THE BEST AT AVOIDING PROBLEMS.
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.