 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
An A300 air carrier aircraft preparing for approach to foreign airport flight crew cleared to intercept VOR radial inbound, but flight crew NOTAM showed the VOR OTS. When questioning approach controller about VOR status he would not commit, but an identify was received on the VOR and it appeared to be normal so flight crew used it. Later they realized that if the VOR was down they were in the vicinity of high hills and at night, so they should have been more diligent in getting the VOR status.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 384023 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199710 |
| Day | Sun |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : miq |
| State Reference | FO |
| Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 14000 |
| Environment | |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tower : miq |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | A300 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | Other Other |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach descent other |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| ASRS Report | 384023 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| ASRS Report | 384022 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
Cleared to intercept and track inbound a radial to miq VOR. We responded that our NOTAMS showed miq OTS. Again a similar clearance was given. The VOR tuned and idented, we continued in using the VOR and made an ILS to runway 9 which requires miq VOR. After uneventful approach and landing, I regret not pressing for confirmation more forcefully from tower on status of miq VOR. It was night and near hills and VOR may indeed have been OTS even though it was properly idented. Supplemental information from acn 384022: approach plate instructions dictated use of VOR radial. Miq approach would not commit when asked if VOR was operable. Received radar vectors to localizer. We painted the shoreline with radar and had a good identify on the beacon. Landing was uneventful. Paperwork for the trip out the next day indicated VOR in service (no NOTAMS or special message), but a different special message stated FMS aircraft did not require VOR for ILS runway 9. Besides legality concerns, a false localizer north of the ILS and mountainous terrain caused us to desire raw data verification of position.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN A300 ACR ACFT PREPARING FOR APCH TO FOREIGN ARPT FLC CLRED TO INTERCEPT VOR RADIAL INBOUND, BUT FLC NOTAM SHOWED THE VOR OTS. WHEN QUESTIONING APCH CTLR ABOUT VOR STATUS HE WOULD NOT COMMIT, BUT AN IDENT WAS RECEIVED ON THE VOR AND IT APPEARED TO BE NORMAL SO FLC USED IT. LATER THEY REALIZED THAT IF THE VOR WAS DOWN THEY WERE IN THE VICINITY OF HIGH HILLS AND AT NIGHT, SO THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE DILIGENT IN GETTING THE VOR STATUS.
Narrative: CLRED TO INTERCEPT AND TRACK INBOUND A RADIAL TO MIQ VOR. WE RESPONDED THAT OUR NOTAMS SHOWED MIQ OTS. AGAIN A SIMILAR CLRNC WAS GIVEN. THE VOR TUNED AND IDENTED, WE CONTINUED IN USING THE VOR AND MADE AN ILS TO RWY 9 WHICH REQUIRES MIQ VOR. AFTER UNEVENTFUL APCH AND LNDG, I REGRET NOT PRESSING FOR CONFIRMATION MORE FORCEFULLY FROM TWR ON STATUS OF MIQ VOR. IT WAS NIGHT AND NEAR HILLS AND VOR MAY INDEED HAVE BEEN OTS EVEN THOUGH IT WAS PROPERLY IDENTED. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 384022: APCH PLATE INSTRUCTIONS DICTATED USE OF VOR RADIAL. MIQ APCH WOULD NOT COMMIT WHEN ASKED IF VOR WAS OPERABLE. RECEIVED RADAR VECTORS TO LOC. WE PAINTED THE SHORELINE WITH RADAR AND HAD A GOOD IDENT ON THE BEACON. LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. PAPERWORK FOR THE TRIP OUT THE NEXT DAY INDICATED VOR IN SVC (NO NOTAMS OR SPECIAL MESSAGE), BUT A DIFFERENT SPECIAL MESSAGE STATED FMS ACFT DID NOT REQUIRE VOR FOR ILS RWY 9. BESIDES LEGALITY CONCERNS, A FALSE LOC N OF THE ILS AND MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN CAUSED US TO DESIRE RAW DATA VERIFICATION OF POS.
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.