37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 282205 |
Time | |
Date | 199409 |
Day | Sun |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : mia |
State Reference | FL |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 3000 msl bound upper : 3000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | Mixed |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : mia tower : isp |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | cruise other descent : approach |
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 : 210 flight time total : 13100 flight time type : 9800 |
ASRS Report | 282205 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather non adherence : published procedure non adherence : clearance non adherence other other anomaly other other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course other |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Situations | |
Navigational Aid | Unspecified |
Narrative:
We were inbound from grand cayman to mia. We had been deviating around cells since we had reached the southern tip of fl. Mia international was landing east, and a large cell was at the edge (southeast) of the airport, along with smaller rainshowers to the west. We were given an approach clearance for the ILS to runway 9R, and were given an intercept heading to intercept the localizer of about 60 degrees off of the localizer course, approximately 030 degrees. The first officer was flying the aircraft and I was concerned with a cell that had been on the field and at the time was located at the southeast boundary of the airport. I was operating the aircraft radar while localizer interception was taking place. I had set up my radios to identify gritt, the initial approach fix (mia VOR 183 degree radial). I had looked over at the first officer's radios and had seen the proper inbound course dialed in and a frequency of 110 something. He intercepted the localizer and I continued checking the location of the cell at the airport. Before we got to gritt, the approach controller told us to turn right 20 degrees and intercept the runway 9R localizer. It was at this time I realized that my first officer had tuned in 110.3 instead of 110.9, the localizer for runway 9R. We had initially been on the localizer for runway 9L. Fortunately, approachs were not being made on that runway at the time. The approach and landing were made uneventfully. I think a major contributing factor to this incident is the fact that both localizer frequencys for landing in the same direction start with 110. (110.9 for runway 9R and 110.3 for runway 9L). Interestingly enough, both localizer frequencys landing to the west start with 109. (109.5 for runway 27L and 109.1 for runway 27R). This is extremely unusual, and I don't recall another large airport with parallel runways having the same situation. While in my airline career I have seen the wrong localizer frequency dialed in, I think this situation in mia makes it much more easier to do it. The final approach segment in a 2 man airplane is quite busy, and while I do not excuse myself for not catching this error, I think this could easily happen again in mia. I am concerned that if it does happen again, safety could be severely compromised if simultaneous approachs were being conducted.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: APCH TO WRONG RWY INITIATED BY FLC. WRONG ILS FREQ SELECTED. MOST MAJOR ARPTS HAVE DIFFERENT FREQS IN THE FIRST 3 DIGITS. MIA AND SEVERAL OTHERS DON'T IN THEIR SELECTION FOR FREQS ON PARALLEL RWYS.
Narrative: WE WERE INBOUND FROM GRAND CAYMAN TO MIA. WE HAD BEEN DEVIATING AROUND CELLS SINCE WE HAD REACHED THE SOUTHERN TIP OF FL. MIA INTL WAS LNDG E, AND A LARGE CELL WAS AT THE EDGE (SE) OF THE ARPT, ALONG WITH SMALLER RAINSHOWERS TO THE W. WE WERE GIVEN AN APCH CLRNC FOR THE ILS TO RWY 9R, AND WERE GIVEN AN INTERCEPT HDG TO INTERCEPT THE LOC OF ABOUT 60 DEGS OFF OF THE LOC COURSE, APPROX 030 DEGS. THE FO WAS FLYING THE ACFT AND I WAS CONCERNED WITH A CELL THAT HAD BEEN ON THE FIELD AND AT THE TIME WAS LOCATED AT THE SE BOUNDARY OF THE ARPT. I WAS OPERATING THE ACFT RADAR WHILE LOC INTERCEPTION WAS TAKING PLACE. I HAD SET UP MY RADIOS TO IDENT GRITT, THE INITIAL APCH FIX (MIA VOR 183 DEG RADIAL). I HAD LOOKED OVER AT THE FO'S RADIOS AND HAD SEEN THE PROPER INBOUND COURSE DIALED IN AND A FREQ OF 110 SOMETHING. HE INTERCEPTED THE LOC AND I CONTINUED CHKING THE LOCATION OF THE CELL AT THE ARPT. BEFORE WE GOT TO GRITT, THE APCH CTLR TOLD US TO TURN R 20 DEGS AND INTERCEPT THE RWY 9R LOC. IT WAS AT THIS TIME I REALIZED THAT MY FO HAD TUNED IN 110.3 INSTEAD OF 110.9, THE LOC FOR RWY 9R. WE HAD INITIALLY BEEN ON THE LOC FOR RWY 9L. FORTUNATELY, APCHS WERE NOT BEING MADE ON THAT RWY AT THE TIME. THE APCH AND LNDG WERE MADE UNEVENTFULLY. I THINK A MAJOR CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THIS INCIDENT IS THE FACT THAT BOTH LOC FREQS FOR LNDG IN THE SAME DIRECTION START WITH 110. (110.9 FOR RWY 9R AND 110.3 FOR RWY 9L). INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, BOTH LOC FREQS LNDG TO THE W START WITH 109. (109.5 FOR RWY 27L AND 109.1 FOR RWY 27R). THIS IS EXTREMELY UNUSUAL, AND I DON'T RECALL ANOTHER LARGE ARPT WITH PARALLEL RWYS HAVING THE SAME SIT. WHILE IN MY AIRLINE CAREER I HAVE SEEN THE WRONG LOC FREQ DIALED IN, I THINK THIS SIT IN MIA MAKES IT MUCH MORE EASIER TO DO IT. THE FINAL APCH SEGMENT IN A 2 MAN AIRPLANE IS QUITE BUSY, AND WHILE I DO NOT EXCUSE MYSELF FOR NOT CATCHING THIS ERROR, I THINK THIS COULD EASILY HAPPEN AGAIN IN MIA. I AM CONCERNED THAT IF IT DOES HAPPEN AGAIN, SAFETY COULD BE SEVERELY COMPROMISED IF SIMULTANEOUS APCHS WERE BEING CONDUCTED.
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.