37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 356318 |
Time | |
Date | 199612 |
Day | Tue |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : tus airport : e14 |
State Reference | AZ |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | landing other |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 6735 flight time type : 420 |
ASRS Report | 356318 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 110 flight time total : 7500 flight time type : 110 |
ASRS Report | 356577 |
Events | |
Anomaly | incursion : landing without clearance non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far other anomaly other other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | faa : investigated |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Our flight plan had us ferrying an aircraft from louisville to mzj to return to its lessor. This was the first time into mzj for any of the crew and were unfamiliar with the area, environment and airport. We personally did not have commercial charts but were provided a facsimile by our company of the runway performance, landing performance, area chart and airport diagram. I briefed the approach prior to top of descent. I wanted to be in landing confign, flaps 25 degrees 15-20 mi out due to the fact it was night, first time there, high terrain in area, and an uncontrolled VFR the airport. We decided to go to the tucson VOR and track outbound on the 308 degree radial for 32 DME since this was the only means to navigation to mzj. Descending approximately through 20000 ft we were handed over to tucson approach who gave us direct to the VOR, then direct mzj. Crossing the VOR at 10000 ft flaps 10 degrees, speed 180 KTS we proceeded to track out the 308 degree radial. At 8 DME I configured the aircraft for landing with flaps 25 degrees (flaps 30 degrees close in). At 10 DME we saw the runway lights and it was indeed runway 30, so I started my descent. I was mainly concentrating on a 700-800 FPM rate which would put me at the point of landing on the runway I desired. The flight engineer was helping me monitor the instruments while the captain was observing our terrain and mountainous clearance while on the lookout for VFR aircraft. Since we were approximately 20 mi from mzj and no traffic observed inbound or at the airport, we canceled IFR with tucson approach, went VFR and switched over to the unicom frequency (we had been monitoring for about 5 mins) an uneventful approach and landing was made. However, towards the end of our rollout we realized that the airport ground environment was not right and upon further discussion we realized we had landed at the wrong airport. We had landed at E14 which is 5 mi east of mzj. We could not turn around on the runway and could not tell if the taxiway was wide enough to exit so we shut down our engines at the end of runway 30. The captain was trying to establish contact with someone on HF frequency to relay a message to our company in ny. I contacted tucson approach and informed them of our situation, and they notamed runway 30/12 closed. Unable to contact anyone on HF, someone was at E14 who gave the captain a ride to a telephone, and contacted ny. 2 ground handlers were sent from mzj. The crew and ground handlers walked and measured the txwys and determined that it was possible to exit the runway and use the taxiway to position the aircraft to the hold short area for runway 30. This was done without problem or incident. Takeoff and landing data, and airport information on E14 was faxed to us. We started the engines, taxied onto runway 30, took off E14 then landed at mzj without further incident. There were numerous factors leading up to this that alone would not have resulted in this wrong landing, but together created this situation. But there was only one item that was never said or noted to us that would have prevented this. Nothing was made known to us that there was an airport 5 mi east of our destination. This airport had the same runway numbers, exactly lined up with mzj runway, same airport size and looked similar at night in slant visual acquireness, E14 had much brighter and better runway lighting, E14 could be seen from a much greater distance and both were uncontrolled VFR airports. If our company, ATC, but especially the commercial charts airport diagram would have brought this to our attention, this could have been completely avoided! This situation is an accident waiting to happen. I would like you to contact me at your convenience to discuss this situation.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: LANDED WRONG ARPT. NIGHT VFR. 2 ARPTS WITHIN 9 MI OF EACH OTHER AND ON THE SAME RADIAL FROM TUS. FLC SAW RWY LIGHTS WITH SAME ORIENTATION OF THE RWY AS EXPECTING AT DEST AND LANDED. THEN REALIZED IT WAS THE WRONG ARPT.
Narrative: OUR FLT PLAN HAD US FERRYING AN ACFT FROM LOUISVILLE TO MZJ TO RETURN TO ITS LESSOR. THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME INTO MZJ FOR ANY OF THE CREW AND WERE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, ENVIRONMENT AND ARPT. WE PERSONALLY DID NOT HAVE COMMERCIAL CHARTS BUT WERE PROVIDED A FAX BY OUR COMPANY OF THE RWY PERFORMANCE, LNDG PERFORMANCE, AREA CHART AND ARPT DIAGRAM. I BRIEFED THE APCH PRIOR TO TOP OF DSCNT. I WANTED TO BE IN LNDG CONFIGN, FLAPS 25 DEGS 15-20 MI OUT DUE TO THE FACT IT WAS NIGHT, FIRST TIME THERE, HIGH TERRAIN IN AREA, AND AN UNCTLED VFR THE ARPT. WE DECIDED TO GO TO THE TUCSON VOR AND TRACK OUTBOUND ON THE 308 DEG RADIAL FOR 32 DME SINCE THIS WAS THE ONLY MEANS TO NAV TO MZJ. DSNDING APPROX THROUGH 20000 FT WE WERE HANDED OVER TO TUCSON APCH WHO GAVE US DIRECT TO THE VOR, THEN DIRECT MZJ. XING THE VOR AT 10000 FT FLAPS 10 DEGS, SPD 180 KTS WE PROCEEDED TO TRACK OUT THE 308 DEG RADIAL. AT 8 DME I CONFIGURED THE ACFT FOR LNDG WITH FLAPS 25 DEGS (FLAPS 30 DEGS CLOSE IN). AT 10 DME WE SAW THE RWY LIGHTS AND IT WAS INDEED RWY 30, SO I STARTED MY DSCNT. I WAS MAINLY CONCENTRATING ON A 700-800 FPM RATE WHICH WOULD PUT ME AT THE POINT OF LNDG ON THE RWY I DESIRED. THE FE WAS HELPING ME MONITOR THE INSTS WHILE THE CAPT WAS OBSERVING OUR TERRAIN AND MOUNTAINOUS CLRNC WHILE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR VFR ACFT. SINCE WE WERE APPROX 20 MI FROM MZJ AND NO TFC OBSERVED INBOUND OR AT THE ARPT, WE CANCELED IFR WITH TUCSON APCH, WENT VFR AND SWITCHED OVER TO THE UNICOM FREQ (WE HAD BEEN MONITORING FOR ABOUT 5 MINS) AN UNEVENTFUL APCH AND LNDG WAS MADE. HOWEVER, TOWARDS THE END OF OUR ROLLOUT WE REALIZED THAT THE ARPT GND ENVIRONMENT WAS NOT RIGHT AND UPON FURTHER DISCUSSION WE REALIZED WE HAD LANDED AT THE WRONG ARPT. WE HAD LANDED AT E14 WHICH IS 5 MI E OF MZJ. WE COULD NOT TURN AROUND ON THE RWY AND COULD NOT TELL IF THE TXWY WAS WIDE ENOUGH TO EXIT SO WE SHUT DOWN OUR ENGS AT THE END OF RWY 30. THE CAPT WAS TRYING TO ESTABLISH CONTACT WITH SOMEONE ON HF FREQ TO RELAY A MESSAGE TO OUR COMPANY IN NY. I CONTACTED TUCSON APCH AND INFORMED THEM OF OUR SIT, AND THEY NOTAMED RWY 30/12 CLOSED. UNABLE TO CONTACT ANYONE ON HF, SOMEONE WAS AT E14 WHO GAVE THE CAPT A RIDE TO A TELEPHONE, AND CONTACTED NY. 2 GND HANDLERS WERE SENT FROM MZJ. THE CREW AND GND HANDLERS WALKED AND MEASURED THE TXWYS AND DETERMINED THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO EXIT THE RWY AND USE THE TXWY TO POS THE ACFT TO THE HOLD SHORT AREA FOR RWY 30. THIS WAS DONE WITHOUT PROB OR INCIDENT. TKOF AND LNDG DATA, AND ARPT INFO ON E14 WAS FAXED TO US. WE STARTED THE ENGS, TAXIED ONTO RWY 30, TOOK OFF E14 THEN LANDED AT MZJ WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. THERE WERE NUMEROUS FACTORS LEADING UP TO THIS THAT ALONE WOULD NOT HAVE RESULTED IN THIS WRONG LNDG, BUT TOGETHER CREATED THIS SIT. BUT THERE WAS ONLY ONE ITEM THAT WAS NEVER SAID OR NOTED TO US THAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS. NOTHING WAS MADE KNOWN TO US THAT THERE WAS AN ARPT 5 MI E OF OUR DEST. THIS ARPT HAD THE SAME RWY NUMBERS, EXACTLY LINED UP WITH MZJ RWY, SAME ARPT SIZE AND LOOKED SIMILAR AT NIGHT IN SLANT VISUAL ACQUIRENESS, E14 HAD MUCH BRIGHTER AND BETTER RWY LIGHTING, E14 COULD BE SEEN FROM A MUCH GREATER DISTANCE AND BOTH WERE UNCTLED VFR ARPTS. IF OUR COMPANY, ATC, BUT ESPECIALLY THE COMMERCIAL CHARTS ARPT DIAGRAM WOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS TO OUR ATTN, THIS COULD HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY AVOIDED! THIS SIT IS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONTACT ME AT YOUR CONVENIENCE TO DISCUSS THIS SIT.
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.