Narrative:

My student and I had decided to conduct an IFR training flight from lwm and practice flying the ILS 5 approach into lwm. The WX briefs that I had received forecast ceilings 700 ft and visibility at 10 mi. This was also the exact condition of the departing airport, lwm. My student also received a very similar briefing. Originally I filed an IFR flight plan with bridgeport FSS with a routing of lwm to psm, and then back to lwm with an alternate of mht. The nearest VFR was at fitchburg, ma. They (fitchburg) were at the time of our departure 2000 ft and visibility better than 5 mi. We also left with full fuel. Upon receiving our clearance, the controller advised of convective activity (possible, not forecast) possibly at psm, so I worked things out so that we (my student and I) would stay local and flying 2-3 instrument approachs. All instruments, including navigation and communication, appeared to be working properly as we checked them before departing. Upon entering the clouds at approximately 900 ft, static began to sound over the radios. It gradually became louder to where I was not able to hear the approach controller well, but could still make out instructions. I then noticed that we were not able to receive any reliable navigation signal including a VOR, ndm, or localizer. I reported our failure and also reported that we were having trouble hearing ATC instructions. Bos approach gave us various instructions which all were followed, and we were vectored to hanscom, bedford airport. They were reporting 900 ft and 2 mi. It was then I noticed a sizable break in the clouds and the airport we were being vectored to was under it and it was in obvious plain view. We were able to descend safely to the airport which we reported clearly in sight, where we landed without incident. We parked the airplane and drove back to lawrence, ma. Upon inspection of the aircraft, we theorized that a possible static buildup on the airframe had occurred. If this static buildup was strong enough, it would be very possible that it could render the navigation equipment useless, and communications could also be useless. In our case, we had no reliable navigation after entering IMC, and limited communication ability. Corrective action was taken and is as follows: the aircraft was inspected (avionics were inspected), all of the grounds were inspected, all antennae were inspected, all radios and navigation instruments were inspected, and static wicks were installed. No emergency on our part was declared and all ATC instructions were followed strictly. Approach mentioned that they could hear us well, and of course we thanked them for their help, and lwm tower and bed tower for their contributions as well.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: INSTRUCTOR WITH INST STUDENT ON PRACTICE IFR FLT ENTERS IMC AND HAS STATIC ON RADIOS MAKING COM DIFFICULT. THEY HAVE FAILURE OF NAV EQUIP. RADAR VECTORS GIVEN TO VFR AREA FOR DIVERT.

Narrative: MY STUDENT AND I HAD DECIDED TO CONDUCT AN IFR TRAINING FLT FROM LWM AND PRACTICE FLYING THE ILS 5 APCH INTO LWM. THE WX BRIEFS THAT I HAD RECEIVED FORECAST CEILINGS 700 FT AND VISIBILITY AT 10 MI. THIS WAS ALSO THE EXACT CONDITION OF THE DEPARTING ARPT, LWM. MY STUDENT ALSO RECEIVED A VERY SIMILAR BRIEFING. ORIGINALLY I FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN WITH BRIDGEPORT FSS WITH A ROUTING OF LWM TO PSM, AND THEN BACK TO LWM WITH AN ALTERNATE OF MHT. THE NEAREST VFR WAS AT FITCHBURG, MA. THEY (FITCHBURG) WERE AT THE TIME OF OUR DEP 2000 FT AND VISIBILITY BETTER THAN 5 MI. WE ALSO LEFT WITH FULL FUEL. UPON RECEIVING OUR CLRNC, THE CTLR ADVISED OF CONVECTIVE ACTIVITY (POSSIBLE, NOT FORECAST) POSSIBLY AT PSM, SO I WORKED THINGS OUT SO THAT WE (MY STUDENT AND I) WOULD STAY LCL AND FLYING 2-3 INST APCHS. ALL INSTS, INCLUDING NAV AND COM, APPEARED TO BE WORKING PROPERLY AS WE CHKED THEM BEFORE DEPARTING. UPON ENTERING THE CLOUDS AT APPROX 900 FT, STATIC BEGAN TO SOUND OVER THE RADIOS. IT GRADUALLY BECAME LOUDER TO WHERE I WAS NOT ABLE TO HEAR THE APCH CTLR WELL, BUT COULD STILL MAKE OUT INSTRUCTIONS. I THEN NOTICED THAT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO RECEIVE ANY RELIABLE NAV SIGNAL INCLUDING A VOR, NDM, OR LOC. I RPTED OUR FAILURE AND ALSO RPTED THAT WE WERE HAVING TROUBLE HEARING ATC INSTRUCTIONS. BOS APCH GAVE US VARIOUS INSTRUCTIONS WHICH ALL WERE FOLLOWED, AND WE WERE VECTORED TO HANSCOM, BEDFORD ARPT. THEY WERE RPTING 900 FT AND 2 MI. IT WAS THEN I NOTICED A SIZABLE BREAK IN THE CLOUDS AND THE ARPT WE WERE BEING VECTORED TO WAS UNDER IT AND IT WAS IN OBVIOUS PLAIN VIEW. WE WERE ABLE TO DSND SAFELY TO THE ARPT WHICH WE RPTED CLRLY IN SIGHT, WHERE WE LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. WE PARKED THE AIRPLANE AND DROVE BACK TO LAWRENCE, MA. UPON INSPECTION OF THE ACFT, WE THEORIZED THAT A POSSIBLE STATIC BUILDUP ON THE AIRFRAME HAD OCCURRED. IF THIS STATIC BUILDUP WAS STRONG ENOUGH, IT WOULD BE VERY POSSIBLE THAT IT COULD RENDER THE NAV EQUIP USELESS, AND COMS COULD ALSO BE USELESS. IN OUR CASE, WE HAD NO RELIABLE NAV AFTER ENTERING IMC, AND LIMITED COM ABILITY. CORRECTIVE ACTION WAS TAKEN AND IS AS FOLLOWS: THE ACFT WAS INSPECTED (AVIONICS WERE INSPECTED), ALL OF THE GNDS WERE INSPECTED, ALL ANTENNAE WERE INSPECTED, ALL RADIOS AND NAV INSTS WERE INSPECTED, AND STATIC WICKS WERE INSTALLED. NO EMER ON OUR PART WAS DECLARED AND ALL ATC INSTRUCTIONS WERE FOLLOWED STRICTLY. APCH MENTIONED THAT THEY COULD HEAR US WELL, AND OF COURSE WE THANKED THEM FOR THEIR HELP, AND LWM TWR AND BED TWR FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS AS WELL.

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.