Narrative:

This is not a report of a conflict. In fact, the controling agency never even questioned the situation. I would just like to point out an ATC procedure that often gets skipped or missed, and this is what occurred to our crew. We are a part 91 operator going into midway on a night where the approach visibility minimums were continually variable, above and below minimums. We decided to try the approach and see what the flight visibility was. We were given about 4 back-to-back instructions followed by the last clearance of 'cleared for the ILS runway 13C, contact tower at the FAF.' the approach went good considering the snow squall we were in, and we had the lights/runway at 1,.4 DME -- about 300-400 ft above minimums. To be considerate we decided to let them know where we had the airport, and we both reacted in the rush of procedures that occurs at the FAF that we never called the tower. We quickly dialed up the tower on a 1 mi final, gave them the report. Midway tower never questioned why we did not call them sooner, they just thanked us for the report. I am not putting the blame for this on ATC. We, the crew, were given an instruction and did not follow it. It was our error! But, after flying for one of the regionals out of ord and dfw and seeing many others have this happen to them, the procedure should be changed. In the terminal area, especially in hard IFR at night, the crews should not be given instructions that they are to follow out at a later time. Telling a crew to call the tower in 2 mins when you are beginning a descent, while making 4 confign changes, while running checklists and tracking altitudes is a bad idea. At such a busy time for the crew, ATC needs to tell us at the time we are to perform the task.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN LR35 FO OFFERS A SAFETY SUGGESTION REGARDING THE REQUIRED POS RPT OVER THE LOM TO THE TWR. CREW FAILED TO DO SO AT MDW, IL.

Narrative: THIS IS NOT A RPT OF A CONFLICT. IN FACT, THE CTLING AGENCY NEVER EVEN QUESTIONED THE SIT. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT AN ATC PROC THAT OFTEN GETS SKIPPED OR MISSED, AND THIS IS WHAT OCCURRED TO OUR CREW. WE ARE A PART 91 OPERATOR GOING INTO MIDWAY ON A NIGHT WHERE THE APCH VISIBILITY MINIMUMS WERE CONTINUALLY VARIABLE, ABOVE AND BELOW MINIMUMS. WE DECIDED TO TRY THE APCH AND SEE WHAT THE FLT VISIBILITY WAS. WE WERE GIVEN ABOUT 4 BACK-TO-BACK INSTRUCTIONS FOLLOWED BY THE LAST CLRNC OF 'CLRED FOR THE ILS RWY 13C, CONTACT TWR AT THE FAF.' THE APCH WENT GOOD CONSIDERING THE SNOW SQUALL WE WERE IN, AND WE HAD THE LIGHTS/RWY AT 1,.4 DME -- ABOUT 300-400 FT ABOVE MINIMUMS. TO BE CONSIDERATE WE DECIDED TO LET THEM KNOW WHERE WE HAD THE ARPT, AND WE BOTH REACTED IN THE RUSH OF PROCS THAT OCCURS AT THE FAF THAT WE NEVER CALLED THE TWR. WE QUICKLY DIALED UP THE TWR ON A 1 MI FINAL, GAVE THEM THE RPT. MIDWAY TWR NEVER QUESTIONED WHY WE DID NOT CALL THEM SOONER, THEY JUST THANKED US FOR THE RPT. I AM NOT PUTTING THE BLAME FOR THIS ON ATC. WE, THE CREW, WERE GIVEN AN INSTRUCTION AND DID NOT FOLLOW IT. IT WAS OUR ERROR! BUT, AFTER FLYING FOR ONE OF THE REGIONALS OUT OF ORD AND DFW AND SEEING MANY OTHERS HAVE THIS HAPPEN TO THEM, THE PROC SHOULD BE CHANGED. IN THE TERMINAL AREA, ESPECIALLY IN HARD IFR AT NIGHT, THE CREWS SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN INSTRUCTIONS THAT THEY ARE TO FOLLOW OUT AT A LATER TIME. TELLING A CREW TO CALL THE TWR IN 2 MINS WHEN YOU ARE BEGINNING A DSCNT, WHILE MAKING 4 CONFIGN CHANGES, WHILE RUNNING CHKLISTS AND TRACKING ALTS IS A BAD IDEA. AT SUCH A BUSY TIME FOR THE CREW, ATC NEEDS TO TELL US AT THE TIME WE ARE TO PERFORM THE TASK.

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.