 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Aircraft was provided very poor radar vectors to the ILS final during IFR conditions. Reporter had to work very hard to salvage the approach.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 421091 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199811 |
| Day | Fri |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | atc facility : sbmw |
| State Reference | WI |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 2800 msl bound upper : 4000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Operator | general aviation : personal |
| Flight Phase | descent other |
| Route In Use | arrival other enroute : on vectors |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | Other |
| Function | flight crew : single pilot |
| Qualification | pilot : instrument |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 75 flight time total : 650 flight time type : 150 |
| ASRS Report | 421091 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | government : faa |
| Function | controller : radar |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other other : unspecified cockpit |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
ATC issued the clearance to descend, from 4000 ft to 2800 ft, too close to shebb NDB (LOM). I was only approximately 4 mi from shebb at this time, flying on a vector of 240 degrees. That vector was directed almost exactly towards shebb. The localizer had not been captured. ATC issued a vector of 210 degrees for the intercept, which I ignored. The ILS course is 216 degrees. This vector would have missed the ILS. Due to the vector angle being too close to the FAF and the altitude clearance being too late, my autoplt failed to capture the approach. I overrode the autoplt and flew the approach to minimums. The poor selection of vector angles, intercept point and altitude change point assigned by ATC, resulted in no time for my autoplt to capture the approach. This also resulted in no time for me to stabilize the plane for the approach. During the approach I didn't fly outside of the localizer or GS limits, however, due to the poor positioning prior to the FAF, what should have been a reasonable ILS approach to minimums (we saw the lights at 250 AGL) became a very difficult task! I erred by assuming ATC knew what they were doing. I should have called for abandonment of the approach and new vectors prior to the FAF.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACFT WAS PROVIDED VERY POOR RADAR VECTORS TO THE ILS FINAL DURING IFR CONDITIONS. RPTR HAD TO WORK VERY HARD TO SALVAGE THE APCH.
Narrative: ATC ISSUED THE CLRNC TO DSND, FROM 4000 FT TO 2800 FT, TOO CLOSE TO SHEBB NDB (LOM). I WAS ONLY APPROX 4 MI FROM SHEBB AT THIS TIME, FLYING ON A VECTOR OF 240 DEGS. THAT VECTOR WAS DIRECTED ALMOST EXACTLY TOWARDS SHEBB. THE LOC HAD NOT BEEN CAPTURED. ATC ISSUED A VECTOR OF 210 DEGS FOR THE INTERCEPT, WHICH I IGNORED. THE ILS COURSE IS 216 DEGS. THIS VECTOR WOULD HAVE MISSED THE ILS. DUE TO THE VECTOR ANGLE BEING TOO CLOSE TO THE FAF AND THE ALT CLRNC BEING TOO LATE, MY AUTOPLT FAILED TO CAPTURE THE APCH. I OVERRODE THE AUTOPLT AND FLEW THE APCH TO MINIMUMS. THE POOR SELECTION OF VECTOR ANGLES, INTERCEPT POINT AND ALT CHANGE POINT ASSIGNED BY ATC, RESULTED IN NO TIME FOR MY AUTOPLT TO CAPTURE THE APCH. THIS ALSO RESULTED IN NO TIME FOR ME TO STABILIZE THE PLANE FOR THE APCH. DURING THE APCH I DIDN'T FLY OUTSIDE OF THE LOC OR GS LIMITS, HOWEVER, DUE TO THE POOR POSITIONING PRIOR TO THE FAF, WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A REASONABLE ILS APCH TO MINIMUMS (WE SAW THE LIGHTS AT 250 AGL) BECAME A VERY DIFFICULT TASK! I ERRED BY ASSUMING ATC KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING. I SHOULD HAVE CALLED FOR ABANDONMENT OF THE APCH AND NEW VECTORS PRIOR TO THE FAF.
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.