 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Flight crew of an airbus A320 failed to stop and hold as instructed by ground controller resulting in taxiing onto another intersecting runway. Controller then issued instructions to use the runway to taxi to the assigned runway. Flight crew believed that the difficulty in updating their FMS computer to the intersection takeoff caused them a distraction and overshot the assigned taxiway.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 422164 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199812 |
| Day | Thu |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : mke |
| State Reference | WI |
| Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | A320 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | Other |
| Flight Phase | ground other : taxi |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 148 flight time total : 10000 flight time type : 4300 |
| ASRS Report | 422164 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 210 flight time total : 5000 flight time type : 1080 |
| ASRS Report | 422165 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | incursion : runway non adherence : clearance other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
| Situations | |
| Airport | other physical facility |
Narrative:
We experienced a runway incursion at mke taxiing to runway 19R. Taxi instructions from gate xx were txwys B, M, east, and hold short of runway 19R at taxiway E1. Plan for an intersection departure from taxiway E1. Because of the intersection departure, our takeoff data had to be refigured. There was a discussion in the cockpit on the actual length of runway 19R from taxiway E1. When the takeoff data was recomputed, again there was a discussion in the cockpit on how to enter the takeoff shift into the performance page in the mcdu. Because of this distraction, we missed the sign for taxiway E1 and taxied on runway 25R. While we were still on taxiway east, we had been instructed by ground control to switch to tower frequency. As soon as we noticed that we were on runway 25R, we notified mke tower. We were then given clearance by tower to taxi onto runway 19R from runway 25R, and then we were cleared for takeoff. Contributing factors to this incident were the clearance for an intersection departure. No mention of this was made on ATIS, so we had already figured our takeoff data for runway 19R full length. There are extra computations needed for an intersection departure on the A320, so the FMS can properly update itself on the data processor. There is no runway distance listed on the commercial 10-9 page for runway 19R -- taxiway E1, so we had to consult our performance books. Ground offered no assistance with this when our clearance to runway 19R -- taxiway E1 was given. Also contributing is the helter skelter way txwys are labeled in mke. At most airports, feeder txwys are numbered in sequence down the runway. Not at mke. Txwys feeding onto runway 19R from north to south are taxiway F, E2, E1, K, M, south, R3, and R4. I had it in my mind that taxiway E1 was closer to the end of runway 19R, not taxiway E1, then taxiway E2, then taxiway F.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: FLC OF AN AIRBUS A320 FAILED TO STOP AND HOLD AS INSTRUCTED BY GND CTLR RESULTING IN TAXIING ONTO ANOTHER INTERSECTING RWY. CTLR THEN ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS TO USE THE RWY TO TAXI TO THE ASSIGNED RWY. FLC BELIEVED THAT THE DIFFICULTY IN UPDATING THEIR FMS COMPUTER TO THE INTXN TKOF CAUSED THEM A DISTR AND OVERSHOT THE ASSIGNED TXWY.
Narrative: WE EXPERIENCED A RWY INCURSION AT MKE TAXIING TO RWY 19R. TAXI INSTRUCTIONS FROM GATE XX WERE TXWYS B, M, E, AND HOLD SHORT OF RWY 19R AT TXWY E1. PLAN FOR AN INTXN DEP FROM TXWY E1. BECAUSE OF THE INTXN DEP, OUR TKOF DATA HAD TO BE REFIGURED. THERE WAS A DISCUSSION IN THE COCKPIT ON THE ACTUAL LENGTH OF RWY 19R FROM TXWY E1. WHEN THE TKOF DATA WAS RECOMPUTED, AGAIN THERE WAS A DISCUSSION IN THE COCKPIT ON HOW TO ENTER THE TKOF SHIFT INTO THE PERFORMANCE PAGE IN THE MCDU. BECAUSE OF THIS DISTR, WE MISSED THE SIGN FOR TXWY E1 AND TAXIED ON RWY 25R. WHILE WE WERE STILL ON TXWY E, WE HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED BY GND CTL TO SWITCH TO TWR FREQ. AS SOON AS WE NOTICED THAT WE WERE ON RWY 25R, WE NOTIFIED MKE TWR. WE WERE THEN GIVEN CLRNC BY TWR TO TAXI ONTO RWY 19R FROM RWY 25R, AND THEN WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THIS INCIDENT WERE THE CLRNC FOR AN INTXN DEP. NO MENTION OF THIS WAS MADE ON ATIS, SO WE HAD ALREADY FIGURED OUR TKOF DATA FOR RWY 19R FULL LENGTH. THERE ARE EXTRA COMPUTATIONS NEEDED FOR AN INTXN DEP ON THE A320, SO THE FMS CAN PROPERLY UPDATE ITSELF ON THE DATA PROCESSOR. THERE IS NO RWY DISTANCE LISTED ON THE COMMERCIAL 10-9 PAGE FOR RWY 19R -- TXWY E1, SO WE HAD TO CONSULT OUR PERFORMANCE BOOKS. GND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE WITH THIS WHEN OUR CLRNC TO RWY 19R -- TXWY E1 WAS GIVEN. ALSO CONTRIBUTING IS THE HELTER SKELTER WAY TXWYS ARE LABELED IN MKE. AT MOST ARPTS, FEEDER TXWYS ARE NUMBERED IN SEQUENCE DOWN THE RWY. NOT AT MKE. TXWYS FEEDING ONTO RWY 19R FROM N TO S ARE TXWY F, E2, E1, K, M, S, R3, AND R4. I HAD IT IN MY MIND THAT TXWY E1 WAS CLOSER TO THE END OF RWY 19R, NOT TXWY E1, THEN TXWY E2, THEN TXWY F.
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.