Narrative:

Zan informed us we were approximately 10 mi south of our required track for the ILS DME 1 runway 11 approach ick transition to ktn airport. We immediately made a turn to the desired track and transition. At the same time we were in VFR flight conditions with the runway clearly in sight and asked center if it would be better for us to cancel IFR at this time. They replied 'no and maintain 7000 ft until on the localizer' and established there. We intercepted the localizer on a 360 degree heading and turned toward the airport and descended on the GS and landed. At no time during the approach after established on a right base were we not in contact with the runway and surrounding environment. I believe our mistake was a combination of several factors. 1) as a crew we had briefed the procedure about 30 mins prior to descent while in cruise flight with the assumption that we would use the ann transition since that is where we had been cleared to by vancouver center. 2) the clearance to the ick NDB came during a busy time during descent approximately 20 mi from ick beacon. 3) the approach chart for this procedure is very cluttered with notes and the ick transition kind of blends in and is not clear. I think a clrer, less cluttered approach chart would make this approach easier to understand and fly. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that they were given the ann DME arc clearance about 200 mi prior to ketchikan. When they were about 30 mi from the VOR they were told it was OTS and to use ick transition. This was very confusing and while they were trying to figure out the approach they apparently proceeded toward the DME arc. Ketchikan approach referred them back to zan who gave them the information of the course deviation. The aircraft was a lear 35 and was moving quite fast so there was not much time to figure things out. What they literally did was make a visual approach since they were by then on the ILS and supported the visual with that backup. Since ann and ick are almost co-located they felt the procedure used would be ok, but as the center controller said, if the VOR is inoperative so is the arc. Reporter feels the chart is quite cluttered and should be enlarged or cleaned up so the information is readily available rather than having to search for the information.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LEAR 35 FLC HAS APCH CHANGED WHEN WITHIN 30 MI OF THE ARPT DUE TO INOP NAVAIDS.

Narrative: ZAN INFORMED US WE WERE APPROX 10 MI S OF OUR REQUIRED TRACK FOR THE ILS DME 1 RWY 11 APCH ICK TRANSITION TO KTN ARPT. WE IMMEDIATELY MADE A TURN TO THE DESIRED TRACK AND TRANSITION. AT THE SAME TIME WE WERE IN VFR FLT CONDITIONS WITH THE RWY CLRLY IN SIGHT AND ASKED CTR IF IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR US TO CANCEL IFR AT THIS TIME. THEY REPLIED 'NO AND MAINTAIN 7000 FT UNTIL ON THE LOC' AND ESTABLISHED THERE. WE INTERCEPTED THE LOC ON A 360 DEG HDG AND TURNED TOWARD THE ARPT AND DSNDED ON THE GS AND LANDED. AT NO TIME DURING THE APCH AFTER ESTABLISHED ON A R BASE WERE WE NOT IN CONTACT WITH THE RWY AND SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT. I BELIEVE OUR MISTAKE WAS A COMBINATION OF SEVERAL FACTORS. 1) AS A CREW WE HAD BRIEFED THE PROC ABOUT 30 MINS PRIOR TO DSCNT WHILE IN CRUISE FLT WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE WOULD USE THE ANN TRANSITION SINCE THAT IS WHERE WE HAD BEEN CLRED TO BY VANCOUVER CTR. 2) THE CLRNC TO THE ICK NDB CAME DURING A BUSY TIME DURING DSCNT APPROX 20 MI FROM ICK BEACON. 3) THE APCH CHART FOR THIS PROC IS VERY CLUTTERED WITH NOTES AND THE ICK TRANSITION KIND OF BLENDS IN AND IS NOT CLR. I THINK A CLRER, LESS CLUTTERED APCH CHART WOULD MAKE THIS APCH EASIER TO UNDERSTAND AND FLY. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT THEY WERE GIVEN THE ANN DME ARC CLRNC ABOUT 200 MI PRIOR TO KETCHIKAN. WHEN THEY WERE ABOUT 30 MI FROM THE VOR THEY WERE TOLD IT WAS OTS AND TO USE ICK TRANSITION. THIS WAS VERY CONFUSING AND WHILE THEY WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE APCH THEY APPARENTLY PROCEEDED TOWARD THE DME ARC. KETCHIKAN APCH REFERRED THEM BACK TO ZAN WHO GAVE THEM THE INFO OF THE COURSE DEV. THE ACFT WAS A LEAR 35 AND WAS MOVING QUITE FAST SO THERE WAS NOT MUCH TIME TO FIGURE THINGS OUT. WHAT THEY LITERALLY DID WAS MAKE A VISUAL APCH SINCE THEY WERE BY THEN ON THE ILS AND SUPPORTED THE VISUAL WITH THAT BACKUP. SINCE ANN AND ICK ARE ALMOST CO-LOCATED THEY FELT THE PROC USED WOULD BE OK, BUT AS THE CTR CTLR SAID, IF THE VOR IS INOP SO IS THE ARC. RPTR FEELS THE CHART IS QUITE CLUTTERED AND SHOULD BE ENLARGED OR CLEANED UP SO THE INFO IS READILY AVAILABLE RATHER THAN HAVING TO SEARCH FOR THE INFO.

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.