Narrative:

The bna VORTAC has been NOTAM'ed OTS for over a month and will be until sometime in jan or feb of 1993. The FAA has revised all high and low altitude airways and missed approach procedures predicated upon the use of the bna VORTAC. However, the most often used procedures, the stars into bna, have not been revised, per our manuals. These arrs, the graham 2, the hehaw 2, the geetr 1, and the volus 2, all are predicated upon pilot navigation using the bna VORTAC prior to entering nashville TRACON airspace. My company has stated that memphis center has asked that all our flts into bna remain filed the same, using the arrs as part of the filed route. The problem is, how can you fly and accept a clearance 'as filed' when your filed flight plan has a NAVAID NOTAM'ed OTS? When I ask ATC controllers for a clearance limit, they act as if I'm throwing a wrench into the works. I've spoken to our dispatch, chief pilots, even nashville TRACON, and without exception, no one is willing to push for the necessary changes to these stars. All pass the buck! I feel continued illegal clrncs to our aircraft 'as filed' with no specific clearance limit or even stating 'radar vectors after hinch mountain' or something like this by ATC, places both controllers and pilots assuming a lot about who is going to do what during a radio failure or radar outage. IFR clrncs and procedures should be specific with proper clearance limits that can be idented by both pilot and controller. I feel the potential for serious loss of separation standards could occur if these sloppy clrncs continue in use.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CAPT OF ACR LTT ACFT RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPROPRIATE INST ARR CHARTS (STAR) BE CHANGED TO REFLECT THE TEMPORARY OUTAGE OF A NAVAID.

Narrative: THE BNA VORTAC HAS BEEN NOTAM'ED OTS FOR OVER A MONTH AND WILL BE UNTIL SOMETIME IN JAN OR FEB OF 1993. THE FAA HAS REVISED ALL HIGH AND LOW ALT AIRWAYS AND MISSED APCH PROCS PREDICATED UPON THE USE OF THE BNA VORTAC. HOWEVER, THE MOST OFTEN USED PROCS, THE STARS INTO BNA, HAVE NOT BEEN REVISED, PER OUR MANUALS. THESE ARRS, THE GRAHAM 2, THE HEHAW 2, THE GEETR 1, AND THE VOLUS 2, ALL ARE PREDICATED UPON PLT NAV USING THE BNA VORTAC PRIOR TO ENTERING NASHVILLE TRACON AIRSPACE. MY COMPANY HAS STATED THAT MEMPHIS CTR HAS ASKED THAT ALL OUR FLTS INTO BNA REMAIN FILED THE SAME, USING THE ARRS AS PART OF THE FILED RTE. THE PROBLEM IS, HOW CAN YOU FLY AND ACCEPT A CLRNC 'AS FILED' WHEN YOUR FILED FLT PLAN HAS A NAVAID NOTAM'ED OTS? WHEN I ASK ATC CTLRS FOR A CLRNC LIMIT, THEY ACT AS IF I'M THROWING A WRENCH INTO THE WORKS. I'VE SPOKEN TO OUR DISPATCH, CHIEF PLTS, EVEN NASHVILLE TRACON, AND WITHOUT EXCEPTION, NO ONE IS WILLING TO PUSH FOR THE NECESSARY CHANGES TO THESE STARS. ALL PASS THE BUCK! I FEEL CONTINUED ILLEGAL CLRNCS TO OUR ACFT 'AS FILED' WITH NO SPECIFIC CLRNC LIMIT OR EVEN STATING 'RADAR VECTORS AFTER HINCH MOUNTAIN' OR SOMETHING LIKE THIS BY ATC, PLACES BOTH CTLRS AND PLTS ASSUMING A LOT ABOUT WHO IS GOING TO DO WHAT DURING A RADIO FAILURE OR RADAR OUTAGE. IFR CLRNCS AND PROCS SHOULD BE SPECIFIC WITH PROPER CLRNC LIMITS THAT CAN BE IDENTED BY BOTH PLT AND CTLR. I FEEL THE POTENTIAL FOR SERIOUS LOSS OF SEPARATION STANDARDS COULD OCCUR IF THESE SLOPPY CLRNCS CONTINUE IN USE.

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.