37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 387580 |
Time | |
Date | 199712 |
Day | Thu |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : ykm |
State Reference | WA |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 1095 msl bound upper : 6000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : ykm tower : ykm |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Beech 1900 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | Other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach landing : missed approach landing other |
Route In Use | enroute other |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : cfi |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 210 flight time total : 2300 flight time type : 600 |
ASRS Report | 387580 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Weather |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
The captain and I were scheduled to fly from pdx to ykm at XA00 on dec/xa/97. We watched the WX in ykm rapidly deteriorating. Under part 121, we needed 1/2 mi or 2400 ft RVR to shoot the approach. When we departed pdx, the ATIS in ykm was reporting 3/4 mi visibility. We had no passenger on board, so our dispatcher told us we could be 'redispatched' in the air so as to operate under part 91 if the WX went below 1/2 mi or 2400 ft RVR. About 40 mi south of ykm, I got the new ATIS which was reporting 1/4 mi visibility. We contacted our dispatcher and he 'redispatched' us part 91. We shot the approach once, went missed approach, and shot it successfully the second time. After considering the legality of this situation, I contacted one of our more senior dispatchers who said this was not a legal action. The way this could have been prevented is for pilots to be more aware of dispatchers' authority/authorized and to be more willing to question actions by dispatch.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B1900D ACFT DISPATCHED TO ARPT WHICH WENT BELOW MINIMUMS FOR PART 121. DISPATCHER TOLD FLC THEY COULD BE REDISPATCHED UNDER PART 91 AND COMMENCE AN APCH. FLC DID LAND AFTER 2 APCHS. RPTR FO'S FLT MGR SAID THE OP WAS ILLEGAL.
Narrative: THE CAPT AND I WERE SCHEDULED TO FLY FROM PDX TO YKM AT XA00 ON DEC/XA/97. WE WATCHED THE WX IN YKM RAPIDLY DETERIORATING. UNDER PART 121, WE NEEDED 1/2 MI OR 2400 FT RVR TO SHOOT THE APCH. WHEN WE DEPARTED PDX, THE ATIS IN YKM WAS RPTING 3/4 MI VISIBILITY. WE HAD NO PAX ON BOARD, SO OUR DISPATCHER TOLD US WE COULD BE 'REDISPATCHED' IN THE AIR SO AS TO OPERATE UNDER PART 91 IF THE WX WENT BELOW 1/2 MI OR 2400 FT RVR. ABOUT 40 MI S OF YKM, I GOT THE NEW ATIS WHICH WAS RPTING 1/4 MI VISIBILITY. WE CONTACTED OUR DISPATCHER AND HE 'REDISPATCHED' US PART 91. WE SHOT THE APCH ONCE, WENT MISSED APCH, AND SHOT IT SUCCESSFULLY THE SECOND TIME. AFTER CONSIDERING THE LEGALITY OF THIS SIT, I CONTACTED ONE OF OUR MORE SENIOR DISPATCHERS WHO SAID THIS WAS NOT A LEGAL ACTION. THE WAY THIS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IS FOR PLTS TO BE MORE AWARE OF DISPATCHERS' AUTH AND TO BE MORE WILLING TO QUESTION ACTIONS BY DISPATCH.
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.