Flight crew of DC9-30 experiences navigation problems on both vors during cruise and into the landin...

Attributes
ACN	402556
Time
Date	199805
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : bwg
State Reference	KY
Altitude	msl bound lower : 1547 msl bound upper : 35000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zid tower : stl
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	DC-9 30
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise other descent : approach landing other
Route In Use	arrival star : star
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : cfi pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 15000 flight time type : 5000
ASRS Report	402556
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe other anomaly other
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : unable
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

We began to get anomalous indications from both vors and determined that both our equipment and the ground transmitters were in operable condition. I suspected ped (personal electronic device) interference and asked a flight attendant to do a ped survey of the cabin. She returned to say that while a computer on internal power and a small electronic game were in use, no tv's, radios, cell phones, pagers or devices with external power appeared to be in use. After landing, however, she informed me that a first class passenger had received a call to his pager while on base leg. She asked him to shut it off and he refused. We continued to suffer navigation indication anomalies through to landing. I strongly suspect a link between the pager operation and our navigation difficulties. I am outraged that a passenger would have refused to shut off a ped when asked and I am also concerned that other ped's (like pagers) should be added to the list of banned items and announcements made to this effect. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that he did not find out about the passenger until after the passenger had left the aircraft. The crew was not able to track him down to explain the seriousness of this navigation interference. Reporter did discuss this with his supervisor but has been on vacation since the incident and is not aware of any follow-up. The flight crew determined that there was no problem with their equipment. This is the third time reporter has had navigation interference from pagers and they have been different brands of pagers. He knows his information is not scientific but from his and other pilots' experience he believes that pagers should be included in the announcement that is made about using ped equipment on board the aircraft. In the future he will make a PA to the passenger if there is any navigation interference to shut off all electronic devices including pagers.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF DC9-30 EXPERIENCES NAV PROBS ON BOTH VORS DURING CRUISE AND INTO THE LNDG. PED SUSPECTED SINCE CREW DETERMINED THEIR EQUIP WAS OPERATING PROPERLY AS WAS THE GND BASED EQUIP.

Narrative: WE BEGAN TO GET ANOMALOUS INDICATIONS FROM BOTH VORS AND DETERMINED THAT BOTH OUR EQUIP AND THE GND XMITTERS WERE IN OPERABLE CONDITION. I SUSPECTED PED (PERSONAL ELECTRONIC DEVICE) INTERFERENCE AND ASKED A FLT ATTENDANT TO DO A PED SURVEY OF THE CABIN. SHE RETURNED TO SAY THAT WHILE A COMPUTER ON INTERNAL PWR AND A SMALL ELECTRONIC GAME WERE IN USE, NO TV'S, RADIOS, CELL PHONES, PAGERS OR DEVICES WITH EXTERNAL PWR APPEARED TO BE IN USE. AFTER LNDG, HOWEVER, SHE INFORMED ME THAT A FIRST CLASS PAX HAD RECEIVED A CALL TO HIS PAGER WHILE ON BASE LEG. SHE ASKED HIM TO SHUT IT OFF AND HE REFUSED. WE CONTINUED TO SUFFER NAV INDICATION ANOMALIES THROUGH TO LNDG. I STRONGLY SUSPECT A LINK BTWN THE PAGER OP AND OUR NAV DIFFICULTIES. I AM OUTRAGED THAT A PAX WOULD HAVE REFUSED TO SHUT OFF A PED WHEN ASKED AND I AM ALSO CONCERNED THAT OTHER PED'S (LIKE PAGERS) SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF BANNED ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS MADE TO THIS EFFECT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE DID NOT FIND OUT ABOUT THE PAX UNTIL AFTER THE PAX HAD LEFT THE ACFT. THE CREW WAS NOT ABLE TO TRACK HIM DOWN TO EXPLAIN THE SERIOUSNESS OF THIS NAV INTERFERENCE. RPTR DID DISCUSS THIS WITH HIS SUPVR BUT HAS BEEN ON VACATION SINCE THE INCIDENT AND IS NOT AWARE OF ANY FOLLOW-UP. THE FLC DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NO PROB WITH THEIR EQUIP. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME RPTR HAS HAD NAV INTERFERENCE FROM PAGERS AND THEY HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT BRANDS OF PAGERS. HE KNOWS HIS INFO IS NOT SCIENTIFIC BUT FROM HIS AND OTHER PLTS' EXPERIENCE HE BELIEVES THAT PAGERS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT IS MADE ABOUT USING PED EQUIP ON BOARD THE ACFT. IN THE FUTURE HE WILL MAKE A PA TO THE PAX IF THERE IS ANY NAV INTERFERENCE TO SHUT OFF ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES INCLUDING PAGERS.

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.

Flight crew of DC9-30 experiences navigation problems on both vors during cruise and into the landing. Ped suspected since crew determined their equipment was operating properly as was the ground based equipment.