37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 402050 |
Time | |
Date | 199805 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : dfw |
State Reference | TX |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 2500 msl bound upper : 2500 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : dfw tower : phl |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B767-200 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | Other Other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach landing other |
Route In Use | arrival other enroute : on vectors |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 185 flight time total : 20505 flight time type : 265 |
ASRS Report | 402050 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other controllera other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | other |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
As we approached dfw airport from the south we were told we were to land on runway 35C. We were told to keep our speed up and given a vector that intercepted final inside the OM (we were in visual conditions). As we got close to the airport the first officer and tower made several radio calls back and forth about which runway we wanted, and should land on. The situation became very confused. I continued to fly toward runway 35C (the original runway we were told to land on). As we got close to the runway (35C), it became clear that yes indeed runway 35C was correct. We landed on runway 35C and after we got to the gate I called the tower supervisor to discuss the situation. We all agreed the ending was ok -- we landed on the correct runway. Note: personally, I do not like last min runway changes or even discussions about changing runways. Once an approach is planned, briefed, and the radios and instruments set up for a particular runway, then the approach and landing should be made to that runway unless there is a very, very important reason to change the runway. Unnecessary runway changes invite problems.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN ACR B767 FLC RECEIVED SEVERAL XMISSIONS ON FINAL APCH REGARDING A PROPOSED RWY CHANGE WHICH THE CAPT FOUND TO BE CONFUSING AND IRRITATING. THE ACFT WAS, IN THE FINAL DECISION, CLRED TO LAND ON THE ORIGINAL RWY.
Narrative: AS WE APCHED DFW ARPT FROM THE S WE WERE TOLD WE WERE TO LAND ON RWY 35C. WE WERE TOLD TO KEEP OUR SPD UP AND GIVEN A VECTOR THAT INTERCEPTED FINAL INSIDE THE OM (WE WERE IN VISUAL CONDITIONS). AS WE GOT CLOSE TO THE ARPT THE FO AND TWR MADE SEVERAL RADIO CALLS BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHICH RWY WE WANTED, AND SHOULD LAND ON. THE SIT BECAME VERY CONFUSED. I CONTINUED TO FLY TOWARD RWY 35C (THE ORIGINAL RWY WE WERE TOLD TO LAND ON). AS WE GOT CLOSE TO THE RWY (35C), IT BECAME CLR THAT YES INDEED RWY 35C WAS CORRECT. WE LANDED ON RWY 35C AND AFTER WE GOT TO THE GATE I CALLED THE TWR SUPVR TO DISCUSS THE SIT. WE ALL AGREED THE ENDING WAS OK -- WE LANDED ON THE CORRECT RWY. NOTE: PERSONALLY, I DO NOT LIKE LAST MIN RWY CHANGES OR EVEN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CHANGING RWYS. ONCE AN APCH IS PLANNED, BRIEFED, AND THE RADIOS AND INSTS SET UP FOR A PARTICULAR RWY, THEN THE APCH AND LNDG SHOULD BE MADE TO THAT RWY UNLESS THERE IS A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT REASON TO CHANGE THE RWY. UNNECESSARY RWY CHANGES INVITE PROBS.
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.