Narrative:

The following is a report of a situation that occurred jan/xa/99. This event will start when our lear 35A was on an IFR flight from rogers, ar (rog) to provo, ut (pvu). Our IFR flight was cleared direct to start the flight and en route with ZDV, we were reclred as followed. Present position direct myton (mtu) direct fairfield (ffu) direct provo (pvu). We proceeded direct to myton at FL310. Passing myton and proceeding to fairfield, we started our descent from FL310 down to 14000 ft. We were talking to ZLC at this time. As we approached fairfield, I was navigating from the FMS and the copilot was on the fairfield VOR. We were about 15 mi from fairfield when I asked the copilot to ask center what they wanted us to do after provo. At that moment, center said fast and quick 'contact approach' and gave us the frequency. I told the copilot that 'he forgot us.' the FMS at this time starts its turn to provo in order to remain within the cleared route. The turn was around 150-160 degrees back behind us. During the turn, I noticed we were northwest of provo, 8.6 mi on the FMS. The copilot contacted approach and approach said make an immediate right turn to 250 degrees. We started the turn right away. After the turn was made, approach said we had traffic at 12 O'clock same altitude. This was the reason for the turn. They asked us to call them on the ground. They also said we turned 20 mi before fairfield. We were vectored to the VOR approach into provo and landed. Once on the ground I contacted approach control at the number given. The approach control said we turned 20 mi before fairfield and that there was a separation problem. He said he was pulling the information for investigation and it will be pilot deviation. He wanted me to call him back for ruling. After an hour passed, I called him back. The ruling by him was we turned 14 mi early and it was pilot deviation error. Well, that is what happened and I believe the controllers are trying to blame the crew for their mistake. 1) late handoff from center to approach control. 2) the FMS will lead the turn to keep us on the route assigned by ATC and not past it. 3) the copilot was on raw data from the voras our backup because we didn't know what they were going to do with us after reaching fairfield. 4) if we turned 20 mi early we would not even have passed provo yet. 5) after we started the turn and 1/2 way through the turn we were 8.6 mi from provo 122 degrees inbound. Supplemental information from acn 425556: while flying on a routine trip from rogers, ar, to provo, ut, we were issued the following clearance from ZLC: 'lear 35, you are cleared to provo via myton, fairfield, direct, descend and maintain 14000 ft.' we programmed the FMS and I set up both vors to monitor our progress. Everything proceeded normally until crossing fairfield. During the approximately 160 degree turn, I switched both vors to provo VOR. I remarked to the captain that we were real close to provo and center hadn't given us further clearance so I would call salt lake and ask them what they wanted us to do. I did and they told us to contact approach control, which I did. Upon contacting approach, they gave us an immediate turn and descent evidently to avoid another aircraft. After completing the turn, approach gave us a phone number to call after landing, which the PIC did. The controller said we turned 20 mi early and the PIC said that wasn't possible. We were then told that they would 'run the tapes' and told us to call back in about 1 hour. During this call, we were told we'd turned 14 mi early and that they might follow this up. I feel like the center handed us off late and have no idea how anything could indicate we turned so early. Had we been relying on only 1 navigation source (FMS or VOR), I might not disagree so strongly. The reason I am so certain of our position is that as I said earlier, I switched both vors to provo during the turn -- upon rollout, both pointers showed a bearing of 130 degrees to provo at 8.6 DME which necessitated an immediate call to center. My concerns are as follows: 1) salt lake evidently can't see over the mountain range and either got distraction or forgot us until I called, thus handing us over late. 2) how is provo approach's radar calibrated? And how couldboth our navigation system be wrong? From my perspective, approach is going after the crew to cover a control/approach control mistake. If you look on a map and measure the distance between fuu-pvu, it's about 12 mi -- either an FMS and 2 independent vors are wrong or approach control has a radar problem. Finally, I am still baffled by the fact the aircraft system and approach control radar could differ so greatly.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A LEARJET 35 ENRTE FROM ROG TO PVU FAILED TO FLY THE RTE AS CLRED BY ATC.

Narrative: THE FOLLOWING IS A RPT OF A SIT THAT OCCURRED JAN/XA/99. THIS EVENT WILL START WHEN OUR LEAR 35A WAS ON AN IFR FLT FROM ROGERS, AR (ROG) TO PROVO, UT (PVU). OUR IFR FLT WAS CLRED DIRECT TO START THE FLT AND ENRTE WITH ZDV, WE WERE RECLRED AS FOLLOWED. PRESENT POS DIRECT MYTON (MTU) DIRECT FAIRFIELD (FFU) DIRECT PROVO (PVU). WE PROCEEDED DIRECT TO MYTON AT FL310. PASSING MYTON AND PROCEEDING TO FAIRFIELD, WE STARTED OUR DSCNT FROM FL310 DOWN TO 14000 FT. WE WERE TALKING TO ZLC AT THIS TIME. AS WE APCHED FAIRFIELD, I WAS NAVING FROM THE FMS AND THE COPLT WAS ON THE FAIRFIELD VOR. WE WERE ABOUT 15 MI FROM FAIRFIELD WHEN I ASKED THE COPLT TO ASK CTR WHAT THEY WANTED US TO DO AFTER PROVO. AT THAT MOMENT, CTR SAID FAST AND QUICK 'CONTACT APCH' AND GAVE US THE FREQ. I TOLD THE COPLT THAT 'HE FORGOT US.' THE FMS AT THIS TIME STARTS ITS TURN TO PROVO IN ORDER TO REMAIN WITHIN THE CLRED RTE. THE TURN WAS AROUND 150-160 DEGS BACK BEHIND US. DURING THE TURN, I NOTICED WE WERE NW OF PROVO, 8.6 MI ON THE FMS. THE COPLT CONTACTED APCH AND APCH SAID MAKE AN IMMEDIATE R TURN TO 250 DEGS. WE STARTED THE TURN RIGHT AWAY. AFTER THE TURN WAS MADE, APCH SAID WE HAD TFC AT 12 O'CLOCK SAME ALT. THIS WAS THE REASON FOR THE TURN. THEY ASKED US TO CALL THEM ON THE GND. THEY ALSO SAID WE TURNED 20 MI BEFORE FAIRFIELD. WE WERE VECTORED TO THE VOR APCH INTO PROVO AND LANDED. ONCE ON THE GND I CONTACTED APCH CTL AT THE NUMBER GIVEN. THE APCH CTL SAID WE TURNED 20 MI BEFORE FAIRFIELD AND THAT THERE WAS A SEPARATION PROB. HE SAID HE WAS PULLING THE INFO FOR INVESTIGATION AND IT WILL BE PLTDEV. HE WANTED ME TO CALL HIM BACK FOR RULING. AFTER AN HR PASSED, I CALLED HIM BACK. THE RULING BY HIM WAS WE TURNED 14 MI EARLY AND IT WAS PLTDEV ERROR. WELL, THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED AND I BELIEVE THE CTLRS ARE TRYING TO BLAME THE CREW FOR THEIR MISTAKE. 1) LATE HDOF FROM CTR TO APCH CTL. 2) THE FMS WILL LEAD THE TURN TO KEEP US ON THE RTE ASSIGNED BY ATC AND NOT PAST IT. 3) THE COPLT WAS ON RAW DATA FROM THE VORAS OUR BACKUP BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO WITH US AFTER REACHING FAIRFIELD. 4) IF WE TURNED 20 MI EARLY WE WOULD NOT EVEN HAVE PASSED PROVO YET. 5) AFTER WE STARTED THE TURN AND 1/2 WAY THROUGH THE TURN WE WERE 8.6 MI FROM PROVO 122 DEGS INBOUND. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 425556: WHILE FLYING ON A ROUTINE TRIP FROM ROGERS, AR, TO PROVO, UT, WE WERE ISSUED THE FOLLOWING CLRNC FROM ZLC: 'LEAR 35, YOU ARE CLRED TO PROVO VIA MYTON, FAIRFIELD, DIRECT, DSND AND MAINTAIN 14000 FT.' WE PROGRAMMED THE FMS AND I SET UP BOTH VORS TO MONITOR OUR PROGRESS. EVERYTHING PROCEEDED NORMALLY UNTIL XING FAIRFIELD. DURING THE APPROX 160 DEG TURN, I SWITCHED BOTH VORS TO PROVO VOR. I REMARKED TO THE CAPT THAT WE WERE REAL CLOSE TO PROVO AND CTR HADN'T GIVEN US FURTHER CLRNC SO I WOULD CALL SALT LAKE AND ASK THEM WHAT THEY WANTED US TO DO. I DID AND THEY TOLD US TO CONTACT APCH CTL, WHICH I DID. UPON CONTACTING APCH, THEY GAVE US AN IMMEDIATE TURN AND DSCNT EVIDENTLY TO AVOID ANOTHER ACFT. AFTER COMPLETING THE TURN, APCH GAVE US A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL AFTER LNDG, WHICH THE PIC DID. THE CTLR SAID WE TURNED 20 MI EARLY AND THE PIC SAID THAT WASN'T POSSIBLE. WE WERE THEN TOLD THAT THEY WOULD 'RUN THE TAPES' AND TOLD US TO CALL BACK IN ABOUT 1 HR. DURING THIS CALL, WE WERE TOLD WE'D TURNED 14 MI EARLY AND THAT THEY MIGHT FOLLOW THIS UP. I FEEL LIKE THE CTR HANDED US OFF LATE AND HAVE NO IDEA HOW ANYTHING COULD INDICATE WE TURNED SO EARLY. HAD WE BEEN RELYING ON ONLY 1 NAV SOURCE (FMS OR VOR), I MIGHT NOT DISAGREE SO STRONGLY. THE REASON I AM SO CERTAIN OF OUR POS IS THAT AS I SAID EARLIER, I SWITCHED BOTH VORS TO PROVO DURING THE TURN -- UPON ROLLOUT, BOTH POINTERS SHOWED A BEARING OF 130 DEGS TO PROVO AT 8.6 DME WHICH NECESSITATED AN IMMEDIATE CALL TO CTR. MY CONCERNS ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1) SALT LAKE EVIDENTLY CAN'T SEE OVER THE MOUNTAIN RANGE AND EITHER GOT DISTR OR FORGOT US UNTIL I CALLED, THUS HANDING US OVER LATE. 2) HOW IS PROVO APCH'S RADAR CALIBRATED? AND HOW COULDBOTH OUR NAV SYS BE WRONG? FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, APCH IS GOING AFTER THE CREW TO COVER A CTL/APCH CTL MISTAKE. IF YOU LOOK ON A MAP AND MEASURE THE DISTANCE BTWN FUU-PVU, IT'S ABOUT 12 MI -- EITHER AN FMS AND 2 INDEPENDENT VORS ARE WRONG OR APCH CTL HAS A RADAR PROB. FINALLY, I AM STILL BAFFLED BY THE FACT THE ACFT SYS AND APCH CTL RADAR COULD DIFFER SO GREATLY.

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.