37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 456496 |
Time | |
Date | 199911 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : apn.airport |
State Reference | MI |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 119 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach landing : roll |
Route In Use | approach : instrument precision |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
ASRS Report | 456496 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : multi engine |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : published procedure |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Narrative:
On ILS approach, ILS 1 apn into alpena, we were switched from approach to final monitor and were cleared to land by final monitor. In the flare to landing over the runway, final monitor called us and told us to switch to tower. We already had our landing clearance, therefore we ignored the call, concentrated on the landing, and taxied off of runway 1 onto taxiway D. Before switching to tower, we advised final monitor that it was a very bad time to talk to pilots when in the flare to landing, no response. Exited runway and contacted tower as instructed. Upon calling tower, we received a response from tower telling us that we were lucky that taxiway D was open. Our response was that we received no NOTAMS on the current ATIS or in our company paperwork. Tower responded that we were not supposed to leave the runway until instructed by the tower. We very courteously and professionally questioned the controller saying we were supposed to exit the runway past the hold line and then contact tower or ground if instructed by tower. Tower then said that SOP's as dictated by far's were for an aircraft to remain on the runway until instructed by tower. We then were turned over to ground and taxied to gate. Upon another arrival into alpena later that day, we again were turned over to tower when in the flare to landing over the runway again. The aim addresses exiting the runway after landing. The only thing a pilot may expect upon hearing a controller upon landing is most likely to go around. This could cause confusion in the cockpit at a critical point. Nonetheless, being expected to operate with nonstandard procedures. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter said he was not aware that the tower and approach control at alpena is staffed with air national guard personnel. He also said he is still not comfortable receiving instructions from the final monitor to switch to tower while in his landing flare.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR PLT MAKING ILS APCH TO APN WAS CONCERNED THAT THE FINAL MONITOR CTLR INSTRUCTED HIM TO CONTACT TWR WHILE HE WAS IN HIS FLARE ABOUT TO TOUCH DOWN.
Narrative: ON ILS APCH, ILS 1 APN INTO ALPENA, WE WERE SWITCHED FROM APCH TO FINAL MONITOR AND WERE CLRED TO LAND BY FINAL MONITOR. IN THE FLARE TO LNDG OVER THE RWY, FINAL MONITOR CALLED US AND TOLD US TO SWITCH TO TWR. WE ALREADY HAD OUR LNDG CLRNC, THEREFORE WE IGNORED THE CALL, CONCENTRATED ON THE LNDG, AND TAXIED OFF OF RWY 1 ONTO TXWY D. BEFORE SWITCHING TO TWR, WE ADVISED FINAL MONITOR THAT IT WAS A VERY BAD TIME TO TALK TO PLTS WHEN IN THE FLARE TO LNDG, NO RESPONSE. EXITED RWY AND CONTACTED TWR AS INSTRUCTED. UPON CALLING TWR, WE RECEIVED A RESPONSE FROM TWR TELLING US THAT WE WERE LUCKY THAT TXWY D WAS OPEN. OUR RESPONSE WAS THAT WE RECEIVED NO NOTAMS ON THE CURRENT ATIS OR IN OUR COMPANY PAPERWORK. TWR RESPONDED THAT WE WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO LEAVE THE RWY UNTIL INSTRUCTED BY THE TWR. WE VERY COURTEOUSLY AND PROFESSIONALLY QUESTIONED THE CTLR SAYING WE WERE SUPPOSED TO EXIT THE RWY PAST THE HOLD LINE AND THEN CONTACT TWR OR GND IF INSTRUCTED BY TWR. TWR THEN SAID THAT SOP'S AS DICTATED BY FAR'S WERE FOR AN ACFT TO REMAIN ON THE RWY UNTIL INSTRUCTED BY TWR. WE THEN WERE TURNED OVER TO GND AND TAXIED TO GATE. UPON ANOTHER ARR INTO ALPENA LATER THAT DAY, WE AGAIN WERE TURNED OVER TO TWR WHEN IN THE FLARE TO LNDG OVER THE RWY AGAIN. THE AIM ADDRESSES EXITING THE RWY AFTER LNDG. THE ONLY THING A PLT MAY EXPECT UPON HEARING A CTLR UPON LNDG IS MOST LIKELY TO GAR. THIS COULD CAUSE CONFUSION IN THE COCKPIT AT A CRITICAL POINT. NONETHELESS, BEING EXPECTED TO OPERATE WITH NONSTANDARD PROCS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR SAID HE WAS NOT AWARE THAT THE TWR AND APCH CTL AT ALPENA IS STAFFED WITH AIR NATL GUARD PERSONNEL. HE ALSO SAID HE IS STILL NOT COMFORTABLE RECEIVING INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE FINAL MONITOR TO SWITCH TO TWR WHILE IN HIS LNDG FLARE.
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.