37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 299081 |
Time | |
Date | 199503 |
Day | Sun |
Local Time Of Day | 0001 To 0600 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : flg |
State Reference | AZ |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 10700 msl bound upper : 10700 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zab |
Operator | general aviation : personal |
Make Model Name | King Air C90 E90 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : radar |
Qualification | controller : radar |
Experience | controller radar : 14 |
ASRS Report | 299081 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | Other |
Function | flight crew : single pilot |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : clearance non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other controllera other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Small transport X (be-90) was cleared by me for ILS/DME runway 21 approach to flg after holding for almost 50 min (to await the opening of flg after snow removal). Small transport X reached frisy and commenced the approach. He continued nwbound past the inbound radial and just as I was about to question small transport X, I noticed he had turned south. At that time, I asked the pilot his heading and he answered '170.' he then intercepted the localizer and proceeded inbound. The reason for this form is my concern over the possible unreliability of the flg ILS/DME approach. Over the last few weeks there have been a number of occurrences involving this approach that have caused great concern among the controllers in this specialty. Granted, some of these have been traced back to pilot error and instrument malfunction, but we cannot believe all of these incidents are attributable to those. There was also a be- 02 who was cleared for the ILS/DME and got a full needle deflection on the GS and subsequently a red flag, and, as I understand, ended up going back to phx to land. I believe there is a problem with the ILS approach at flg and something more involved than just a mere FAA flight check needs to be done there.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SMT X NON ADHERENCE TO APCH PROC FLEW THROUGH LOC. POSSIBLE UNRELIABLE LOC.
Narrative: SMT X (BE-90) WAS CLRED BY ME FOR ILS/DME RWY 21 APCH TO FLG AFTER HOLDING FOR ALMOST 50 MIN (TO AWAIT THE OPENING OF FLG AFTER SNOW REMOVAL). SMT X REACHED FRISY AND COMMENCED THE APCH. HE CONTINUED NWBOUND PAST THE INBOUND RADIAL AND JUST AS I WAS ABOUT TO QUESTION SMT X, I NOTICED HE HAD TURNED S. AT THAT TIME, I ASKED THE PLT HIS HDG AND HE ANSWERED '170.' HE THEN INTERCEPTED THE LOC AND PROCEEDED INBOUND. THE REASON FOR THIS FORM IS MY CONCERN OVER THE POSSIBLE UNRELIABILITY OF THE FLG ILS/DME APCH. OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF OCCURRENCES INVOLVING THIS APCH THAT HAVE CAUSED GREAT CONCERN AMONG THE CTLRS IN THIS SPECIALTY. GRANTED, SOME OF THESE HAVE BEEN TRACED BACK TO PLT ERROR AND INST MALFUNCTION, BUT WE CANNOT BELIEVE ALL OF THESE INCIDENTS ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THOSE. THERE WAS ALSO A BE- 02 WHO WAS CLRED FOR THE ILS/DME AND GOT A FULL NEEDLE DEFLECTION ON THE GS AND SUBSEQUENTLY A RED FLAG, AND, AS I UNDERSTAND, ENDED UP GOING BACK TO PHX TO LAND. I BELIEVE THERE IS A PROB WITH THE ILS APCH AT FLG AND SOMETHING MORE INVOLVED THAN JUST A MERE FAA FLT CHK NEEDS TO BE DONE THERE.
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.