37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 447915 |
Time | |
Date | 199907 |
Day | Sun |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : anc.airport |
State Reference | AK |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | other |
Flight Phase | cruise : level |
Route In Use | enroute : pacific |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : cfi pilot : flight engineer |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 6000 flight time type : 1000 |
ASRS Report | 447915 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Company Flight Crew Human Performance Airspace Structure Airport |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Narrative:
On a flight from kix to anc, dispatch issued a russian airfield as our ETOPS alternate. It is my opinion that this was unsafe for the following reasons: 1) we have not received proper training to operate in russian airspace and ATC procedures. Our company feels that a video tape and some literature is sufficient. As a minimum, 1 day of ground school with a simulator would be more appropriate. 2) the aircraft is not equipped with the appropriate altimeter with metric readout to provide accurate readings. 3) russian airfields with WX at published minimums for alternates is unsafe. The reason for this airfield is as an ETOPS alternate when something mechanical occurs (engine fire/failure, etc). I imagine diverting to these russian airfields under clear WX with the substantial ATC differences and the universal lack of crew experience in russian airspace would make a diversion very challenging. However, with WX at published minimums and with a major mechanical failure or fire, language problems, and ATC differences would make this without question dangerous and unsafe. 4) the accuracy and reliability of WX forecast and observations are unknown.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A B767 PLT QUESTIONS THE USE AND PRACTICALITY OF RUSSIAN ARPTS AS ETOPS ALTERNATES WITHOUT TRAINING.
Narrative: ON A FLT FROM KIX TO ANC, DISPATCH ISSUED A RUSSIAN AIRFIELD AS OUR ETOPS ALTERNATE. IT IS MY OPINION THAT THIS WAS UNSAFE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED PROPER TRAINING TO OPERATE IN RUSSIAN AIRSPACE AND ATC PROCS. OUR COMPANY FEELS THAT A VIDEO TAPE AND SOME LITERATURE IS SUFFICIENT. AS A MINIMUM, 1 DAY OF GND SCHOOL WITH A SIMULATOR WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE. 2) THE ACFT IS NOT EQUIPPED WITH THE APPROPRIATE ALTIMETER WITH METRIC READOUT TO PROVIDE ACCURATE READINGS. 3) RUSSIAN AIRFIELDS WITH WX AT PUBLISHED MINIMUMS FOR ALTERNATES IS UNSAFE. THE REASON FOR THIS AIRFIELD IS AS AN ETOPS ALTERNATE WHEN SOMETHING MECHANICAL OCCURS (ENG FIRE/FAILURE, ETC). I IMAGINE DIVERTING TO THESE RUSSIAN AIRFIELDS UNDER CLR WX WITH THE SUBSTANTIAL ATC DIFFERENCES AND THE UNIVERSAL LACK OF CREW EXPERIENCE IN RUSSIAN AIRSPACE WOULD MAKE A DIVERSION VERY CHALLENGING. HOWEVER, WITH WX AT PUBLISHED MINIMUMS AND WITH A MAJOR MECHANICAL FAILURE OR FIRE, LANGUAGE PROBS, AND ATC DIFFERENCES WOULD MAKE THIS WITHOUT QUESTION DANGEROUS AND UNSAFE. 4) THE ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY OF WX FORECAST AND OBSERVATIONS ARE UNKNOWN.
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.