37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 203344 |
Time | |
Date | 199202 |
Day | Thu |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : rwi |
State Reference | NC |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 1000 msl bound upper : 3000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zdc |
Operator | other |
Make Model Name | Military Transport |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | enroute : on vectors |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | government : military |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : military pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 75 flight time total : 2300 flight time type : 1600 |
ASRS Report | 203344 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : radar |
Qualification | controller : radar |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
I had some problems with terminology, steep intercept headings (center vectors) to the localizer at rwi, and with frequency changes for the airport from the center controller. We were IFR with washington center training to shoot multiple ILS approachs to runway 4 at rocky mount-wilson airport (rwi). We approached the airport from the tar river (tyi) area. Rwi doesn't have an approach radar, so washington center handles it. On the first approach, we had a problem with terminology and a steep vector to intercept. We were asked if we wanted to go to 'jambe or to belga for the full approach.' this is incorrect terminology because jambe is the IAF for the 'full' approach. Belga isn't an IAF. A better way to phrase this may have been to ask us if we wanted to go to jambe for the full approach or accept vectors to final. (Belga is not part of the approach unless you come from kinston). We took his vectors for what I thought would be to intercept the ILS final. What it ended up getting us was about a 120 degree intercept (300 degree vector) before clearing us for the approach. We actually hit the localizer pointed away from the field. On the second ILS, we never received a frequency change and were below radio reception (and close to the field) before we realized this. We then immediately executed our climb out instructions, checked in with center, and tried another ILS approach. (Another aircraft was in the airport vicinity, came up on center frequency as he climbed out, and mentioned how we hadn't made advisory calls). Also, we were given a 90 degree intercept heading (approximately 320 degrees) on this approach before being 'cleared for the approach.' on the third approach, I had to prompt the controller for a frequency change. He said the FSS at rwi was closed and tried to give me the raleigh FSS frequency for advisories. When I said I needed to switch to the advisory frequency for the field, he wanted me to go to unicom frequency. I said I was supposed to switch to the advisory frequency the 'CTAF,' and that I would do so. The intercept heading for the localizer was again 90 degrees (approximately 320 degrees). I called the supervisor at washington center and discussed the above immediately after the flight.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: POOR CTLR RADAR VECTOR TECHNIQUE NON COMPLIANCE WITH ATP 7110 PT 65F LOC INTERCEPT ANGLE.
Narrative: I HAD SOME PROBLEMS WITH TERMINOLOGY, STEEP INTERCEPT HDGS (CTR VECTORS) TO THE LOC AT RWI, AND WITH FREQ CHANGES FOR THE ARPT FROM THE CTR CTLR. WE WERE IFR WITH WASHINGTON CTR TRAINING TO SHOOT MULTIPLE ILS APCHS TO RWY 4 AT ROCKY MOUNT-WILSON ARPT (RWI). WE APCHED THE ARPT FROM THE TAR RIVER (TYI) AREA. RWI DOESN'T HAVE AN APCH RADAR, SO WASHINGTON CTR HANDLES IT. ON THE FIRST APCH, WE HAD A PROBLEM WITH TERMINOLOGY AND A STEEP VECTOR TO INTERCEPT. WE WERE ASKED IF WE WANTED TO GO TO 'JAMBE OR TO BELGA FOR THE FULL APCH.' THIS IS INCORRECT TERMINOLOGY BECAUSE JAMBE IS THE IAF FOR THE 'FULL' APCH. BELGA ISN'T AN IAF. A BETTER WAY TO PHRASE THIS MAY HAVE BEEN TO ASK US IF WE WANTED TO GO TO JAMBE FOR THE FULL APCH OR ACCEPT VECTORS TO FINAL. (BELGA IS NOT PART OF THE APCH UNLESS YOU COME FROM KINSTON). WE TOOK HIS VECTORS FOR WHAT I THOUGHT WOULD BE TO INTERCEPT THE ILS FINAL. WHAT IT ENDED UP GETTING US WAS ABOUT A 120 DEG INTERCEPT (300 DEG VECTOR) BEFORE CLRING US FOR THE APCH. WE ACTUALLY HIT THE LOC POINTED AWAY FROM THE FIELD. ON THE SECOND ILS, WE NEVER RECEIVED A FREQ CHANGE AND WERE BELOW RADIO RECEPTION (AND CLOSE TO THE FIELD) BEFORE WE REALIZED THIS. WE THEN IMMEDIATELY EXECUTED OUR CLB OUT INSTRUCTIONS, CHKED IN WITH CTR, AND TRIED ANOTHER ILS APCH. (ANOTHER ACFT WAS IN THE ARPT VICINITY, CAME UP ON CTR FREQ AS HE CLBED OUT, AND MENTIONED HOW WE HADN'T MADE ADVISORY CALLS). ALSO, WE WERE GIVEN A 90 DEG INTERCEPT HDG (APPROX 320 DEGS) ON THIS APCH BEFORE BEING 'CLRED FOR THE APCH.' ON THE THIRD APCH, I HAD TO PROMPT THE CTLR FOR A FREQ CHANGE. HE SAID THE FSS AT RWI WAS CLOSED AND TRIED TO GIVE ME THE RALEIGH FSS FREQ FOR ADVISORIES. WHEN I SAID I NEEDED TO SWITCH TO THE ADVISORY FREQ FOR THE FIELD, HE WANTED ME TO GO TO UNICOM FREQ. I SAID I WAS SUPPOSED TO SWITCH TO THE ADVISORY FREQ THE 'CTAF,' AND THAT I WOULD DO SO. THE INTERCEPT HDG FOR THE LOC WAS AGAIN 90 DEGS (APPROX 320 DEGS). I CALLED THE SUPVR AT WASHINGTON CTR AND DISCUSSED THE ABOVE IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE FLT.
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.