37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 329660 |
Time | |
Date | 199603 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : stl |
State Reference | MO |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 11000 msl bound upper : 11000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zkc |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Jetstream 32 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 135 |
Flight Phase | cruise other |
Route In Use | departure sid : sid |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 3201 flight time type : 900 |
ASRS Report | 329660 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : clearance other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance other |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
At approximately XA30 (local time) air carrier flight XXX was asked by ZKC if we were flying an assigned heading. We then realized that we had flown approximately 30 NM beyond our transition turn. We also realized that we couldn't remember what exactly our clearance was. We were initially assigned the turbo 2 departure, pocket city transition from stl to evv. We were flying 155 degrees and had been assigned 150 degree heading at one point. We couldn't remember if we had been issued the standard 'heading 120 degrees to intercept the turbo 2 departure' and had stayed on approximately 150 degree heading approximately 30 NM beyond sport intersection. We are still not sure how the situation arose. We were made aware of the problem by ZKC and asked for and received direct to pxv. If indeed we had missed the clearance it was probably due to the captain trying to figure if a recent schedule change was legal (as our scheduling department has been known to overlook flight time and rest limitations) thus distracting me for approximately 20 mins. Also due in part to the first officer being fatigued. I believe this occurred because my first officer was fatigued (and was thus not concentrating as well as usual) and I was busy trying to figure out if I was legal to fly the additional time I was being scheduled for. It was finally decided by the third scheduler to look at this problem that I was correct and that the company was trying to schedule me illegally. It seems to me that more simplified/plain language rules would alleviate such circumstances and reduce our mental workload in the cockpit therefore improving the safety of flight.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: THE FLC WAS ASKED BY CTR IF THEY WERE FLYING AN ASSIGNED HDG. AT THIS TIME THE FLC REALIZED THEY HAD FLOWN 30 NM PAST THEIR TRANSITION TURN. IN FACT, THE PLTS COULD NOT REMEMBER WHAT THEY WERE ASSIGNED. THE FLC WERE ENGROSSED IN SCHEDULING LEGALITIES.
Narrative: AT APPROX XA30 (LCL TIME) ACR FLT XXX WAS ASKED BY ZKC IF WE WERE FLYING AN ASSIGNED HDG. WE THEN REALIZED THAT WE HAD FLOWN APPROX 30 NM BEYOND OUR TRANSITION TURN. WE ALSO REALIZED THAT WE COULDN'T REMEMBER WHAT EXACTLY OUR CLRNC WAS. WE WERE INITIALLY ASSIGNED THE TURBO 2 DEP, POCKET CITY TRANSITION FROM STL TO EVV. WE WERE FLYING 155 DEGS AND HAD BEEN ASSIGNED 150 DEG HDG AT ONE POINT. WE COULDN'T REMEMBER IF WE HAD BEEN ISSUED THE STANDARD 'HDG 120 DEGS TO INTERCEPT THE TURBO 2 DEP' AND HAD STAYED ON APPROX 150 DEG HDG APPROX 30 NM BEYOND SPORT INTXN. WE ARE STILL NOT SURE HOW THE SIT AROSE. WE WERE MADE AWARE OF THE PROB BY ZKC AND ASKED FOR AND RECEIVED DIRECT TO PXV. IF INDEED WE HAD MISSED THE CLRNC IT WAS PROBABLY DUE TO THE CAPT TRYING TO FIGURE IF A RECENT SCHEDULE CHANGE WAS LEGAL (AS OUR SCHEDULING DEPT HAS BEEN KNOWN TO OVERLOOK FLT TIME AND REST LIMITATIONS) THUS DISTRACTING ME FOR APPROX 20 MINS. ALSO DUE IN PART TO THE FO BEING FATIGUED. I BELIEVE THIS OCCURRED BECAUSE MY FO WAS FATIGUED (AND WAS THUS NOT CONCENTRATING AS WELL AS USUAL) AND I WAS BUSY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF I WAS LEGAL TO FLY THE ADDITIONAL TIME I WAS BEING SCHEDULED FOR. IT WAS FINALLY DECIDED BY THE THIRD SCHEDULER TO LOOK AT THIS PROB THAT I WAS CORRECT AND THAT THE COMPANY WAS TRYING TO SCHEDULE ME ILLEGALLY. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT MORE SIMPLIFIED/PLAIN LANGUAGE RULES WOULD ALLEVIATE SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AND REDUCE OUR MENTAL WORKLOAD IN THE COCKPIT THEREFORE IMPROVING THE SAFETY OF 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.