37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 448555 |
Time | |
Date | 199908 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : vny.airport |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 35 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : vny.tower |
Operator | general aviation : corporate |
Make Model Name | Citation X |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | climbout : initial climbout : takeoff ground : takeoff roll |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : vny.tower |
Operator | general aviation : personal |
Make Model Name | Yankee |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | landing : roll landing other |
Flight Plan | None |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 10600 flight time type : 360 |
ASRS Report | 448555 |
Person 2 | |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical airspace violation : entry conflict : nmac incursion : landing without clearance |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : took evasive action |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Miss Distance | horizontal : 75 vertical : 0 |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | ATC Human Performance Aircraft Flight Crew Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Our citation, aircraft X, was cleared for takeoff on runway 34L. We were advised of departing traffic on the parallel runway 34R. As we taxied into position, I (the PNF) completed the departure checks, which included the turning on of all aircraft lights to their full illumination. As we started the takeoff, the first officer (the PF) and I both observed the traffic in our 12 O'clock position. We both assumed it was the departing off of the parallel runway. As we approached decision speed it appeared that the traffic had drifted toward our departure path. Immediately after rotation, it became apparent that the traffic was not the departing aircraft, but another aircraft that was going to land on our departure runway. The PF simultaneously called for the landing gear to be raised as he initiated a hard bank to the left. This evasive action started at approximately 35 ft AGL with maximum takeoff thrust being developed on both engines. A bank angle of 45-50 degrees was used during the escape maneuver. When we were clear of the departure path, we resumed a normal climb profile in compliance with the control tower's instructions. At this time, I queried the tower as to the near miss. The local controller was as surprised as we were. We later learned that the conflicting traffic was NORDO and intended to land on the runway we had just departed. The fact that the other aircraft was NORDO and/or no transponder prevented our onboard TCASII from alerting us. I find no fault with the controllers at vny. In my opinion, had we rejected the takeoff, the other aircraft would have landed on top of us. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated they were in a citation 10 aircraft with no passenger and a very light load. He described the other aircraft as a low wing single engine type. He was later told by the tower supervisor the aircraft was an aa-5 grumman american. The tower also told him that the pilot of the other aircraft had departed from an airport east of burbank and had lost all electrical power en route to vny.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: FLC IN CITATION ENCOUNTERED A SMA ACFT LNDG ON THE SAME RWY THEY WERE DEPARTING AT VNY ARPT.
Narrative: OUR CITATION, ACFT X, WAS CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 34L. WE WERE ADVISED OF DEPARTING TFC ON THE PARALLEL RWY 34R. AS WE TAXIED INTO POS, I (THE PNF) COMPLETED THE DEP CHKS, WHICH INCLUDED THE TURNING ON OF ALL ACFT LIGHTS TO THEIR FULL ILLUMINATION. AS WE STARTED THE TKOF, THE FO (THE PF) AND I BOTH OBSERVED THE TFC IN OUR 12 O'CLOCK POS. WE BOTH ASSUMED IT WAS THE DEPARTING OFF OF THE PARALLEL RWY. AS WE APCHED DECISION SPD IT APPEARED THAT THE TFC HAD DRIFTED TOWARD OUR DEP PATH. IMMEDIATELY AFTER ROTATION, IT BECAME APPARENT THAT THE TFC WAS NOT THE DEPARTING ACFT, BUT ANOTHER ACFT THAT WAS GOING TO LAND ON OUR DEP RWY. THE PF SIMULTANEOUSLY CALLED FOR THE LNDG GEAR TO BE RAISED AS HE INITIATED A HARD BANK TO THE L. THIS EVASIVE ACTION STARTED AT APPROX 35 FT AGL WITH MAX TKOF THRUST BEING DEVELOPED ON BOTH ENGS. A BANK ANGLE OF 45-50 DEGS WAS USED DURING THE ESCAPE MANEUVER. WHEN WE WERE CLR OF THE DEP PATH, WE RESUMED A NORMAL CLB PROFILE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CTL TWR'S INSTRUCTIONS. AT THIS TIME, I QUERIED THE TWR AS TO THE NEAR MISS. THE LCL CTLR WAS AS SURPRISED AS WE WERE. WE LATER LEARNED THAT THE CONFLICTING TFC WAS NORDO AND INTENDED TO LAND ON THE RWY WE HAD JUST DEPARTED. THE FACT THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS NORDO AND/OR NO XPONDER PREVENTED OUR ONBOARD TCASII FROM ALERTING US. I FIND NO FAULT WITH THE CTLRS AT VNY. IN MY OPINION, HAD WE REJECTED THE TKOF, THE OTHER ACFT WOULD HAVE LANDED ON TOP OF US. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THEY WERE IN A CITATION 10 ACFT WITH NO PAX AND A VERY LIGHT LOAD. HE DESCRIBED THE OTHER ACFT AS A LOW WING SINGLE ENG TYPE. HE WAS LATER TOLD BY THE TWR SUPVR THE ACFT WAS AN AA-5 GRUMMAN AMERICAN. THE TWR ALSO TOLD HIM THAT THE PLT OF THE OTHER ACFT HAD DEPARTED FROM AN ARPT E OF BURBANK AND HAD LOST ALL ELECTRICAL PWR ENRTE TO VNY.
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.