Narrative:

I was returning from an air event in my experimental jet. The headwinds were stronger than forecast and I was flight planned for a higher flight level which impacted my fuel use. Upon receiving an amended clearance to a fix, further from the airport than what I filed, I complied but told the controller I was in a minimum fuel situation. He asked if I needed to divert. I replied that I would be ok to go to destination airport. I was turned over to approach controller, was given vectors and set up for the ILS to runway 28L. When I was turned over to the final approach controller, he told me they turned me in too tight and that I would be inside the marker and that was unacceptable to him. I said it would be all right and set the autoplt to intercept the localizer. The autoplt malfunctioned and the airplane flew through the localizer. He then gave me a vector back to the localizer. I set the autoplt to stand by and tried to turn the plane. The autoplt was still engaged, so I went through the disconnect procedure. By this time at 180 KTS, I was not going to be able to stabilize the approach. Before I could communicate the malfunction to the controller, he declared an emergency radar vector approach, saying I was obviously 'in trouble.' he told me to descend to 1500 ft AGL, gave me a heading to fly. I complied. I called the airport in sight. He told me to stay with him, and landed without any further problems. The events started with my minimum fuel. I could have diverted and not had the fuel concern. I also could have hand flown the approach not using the autoplt, then the malfunction would not have been a factor. The controller could have vectored me for another approach. I never declared an emergency. I was never 'in trouble' as the controller said. I was flying the plane, coping with the malfunction and would have flown the approach over. I believe that I even maintained altitude in spite of the malfunction. The controller was very upset during the whole event and perhaps was concerned about other aircraft. But had I been able to even tell him about the malfunction of to give me a vector to do the approach over, the situation could have been handled routinely.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LOW TIME PLT IN A JET HAD LOW FUEL ON APCH AT CMH.

Narrative: I WAS RETURNING FROM AN AIR EVENT IN MY EXPERIMENTAL JET. THE HEADWINDS WERE STRONGER THAN FORECAST AND I WAS FLT PLANNED FOR A HIGHER FLT LEVEL WHICH IMPACTED MY FUEL USE. UPON RECEIVING AN AMENDED CLRNC TO A FIX, FURTHER FROM THE ARPT THAN WHAT I FILED, I COMPLIED BUT TOLD THE CTLR I WAS IN A MINIMUM FUEL SIT. HE ASKED IF I NEEDED TO DIVERT. I REPLIED THAT I WOULD BE OK TO GO TO DEST ARPT. I WAS TURNED OVER TO APCH CTLR, WAS GIVEN VECTORS AND SET UP FOR THE ILS TO RWY 28L. WHEN I WAS TURNED OVER TO THE FINAL APCH CTLR, HE TOLD ME THEY TURNED ME IN TOO TIGHT AND THAT I WOULD BE INSIDE THE MARKER AND THAT WAS UNACCEPTABLE TO HIM. I SAID IT WOULD BE ALL RIGHT AND SET THE AUTOPLT TO INTERCEPT THE LOC. THE AUTOPLT MALFUNCTIONED AND THE AIRPLANE FLEW THROUGH THE LOC. HE THEN GAVE ME A VECTOR BACK TO THE LOC. I SET THE AUTOPLT TO STAND BY AND TRIED TO TURN THE PLANE. THE AUTOPLT WAS STILL ENGAGED, SO I WENT THROUGH THE DISCONNECT PROC. BY THIS TIME AT 180 KTS, I WAS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO STABILIZE THE APCH. BEFORE I COULD COMMUNICATE THE MALFUNCTION TO THE CTLR, HE DECLARED AN EMER RADAR VECTOR APCH, SAYING I WAS OBVIOUSLY 'IN TROUBLE.' HE TOLD ME TO DSND TO 1500 FT AGL, GAVE ME A HDG TO FLY. I COMPLIED. I CALLED THE ARPT IN SIGHT. HE TOLD ME TO STAY WITH HIM, AND LANDED WITHOUT ANY FURTHER PROBS. THE EVENTS STARTED WITH MY MINIMUM FUEL. I COULD HAVE DIVERTED AND NOT HAD THE FUEL CONCERN. I ALSO COULD HAVE HAND FLOWN THE APCH NOT USING THE AUTOPLT, THEN THE MALFUNCTION WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A FACTOR. THE CTLR COULD HAVE VECTORED ME FOR ANOTHER APCH. I NEVER DECLARED AN EMER. I WAS NEVER 'IN TROUBLE' AS THE CTLR SAID. I WAS FLYING THE PLANE, COPING WITH THE MALFUNCTION AND WOULD HAVE FLOWN THE APCH OVER. I BELIEVE THAT I EVEN MAINTAINED ALT IN SPITE OF THE MALFUNCTION. THE CTLR WAS VERY UPSET DURING THE WHOLE EVENT AND PERHAPS WAS CONCERNED ABOUT OTHER ACFT. BUT HAD I BEEN ABLE TO EVEN TELL HIM ABOUT THE MALFUNCTION OF TO GIVE ME A VECTOR TO DO THE APCH OVER, THE SIT COULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED ROUTINELY.

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.