Narrative:

We were on radar vectors to intercept the 10 DME arc from lny VOR and cleared for the ILS runway 3 approach once established on the localizer course inbound (033 degrees on ilny 111.1). We were also advised to maintain 3000 ft until established. The captain briefed the approach and tuned and idented the navaids. We were in and out of IMC as we started to turn on the DME arc. Moments after we were on the arc, the CDI needle came in and we started to head inbound and descend to 2600 ft (GS intercept altitude). Around 8 DME, center called for an immediate turn to 180 degrees and climb to 6000 ft. We responded that we had intercepted the localizer inbound and that's why we were inside the 10 DME arc. They insisted we now turn to 220 degrees and climb to 6000 ft for terrain clearance, so we complied even though both our instruments indicated we were on course. As for terrain clearance we were over the ocean and the airport elevation and surrounding area is approximately 1300 ft MSL (with 3100 ft hills to the north). After the start of this evasive maneuver center came back within +/-15 seconds and asked if we had the field in sight at our 9 O'clock position. We were at about 4200 ft and VMC and the captain did have the field so we were cleared for the visual. We had an uneventful landing but were very perplexed as to what had happened. Two other aircraft shot the same approach right after us and aside from a slight ILS GS 'hiccup' they had no problems. We returned to our hnl base and told maintenance -- they are investigating the avionics equipment but as far as I know found nothing wrong. On our return to hnl, center advised over the radio that we had given them 'a real heads up,' they said a similar remark to air dispatch but said no paperwork needed to be filed. The whole situation has bothered me because I don't know if it was an instrument problem, an over-reactive new controller or a pilot error that neither the captain or myself recognized. Furthermore, because I don't know what really happened I'm afraid it could happen again to me or someone else. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter could not provide any additional information on the incident, and denies any possibility of having inadvertently flown a 'back course' type approach on the VOR. In fact, she noted that she and her captain thought of that possibility immediately when provided the emergency vector by ATC, but a thorough check indicated that all instrument readings, frequencys, etc, were as they should have been. This was further verified visually.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR FLT PROVIDED 'EMER' TERRAIN-AVOIDANCE VECTORS BY ATC ON APCH TO LNY.

Narrative: WE WERE ON RADAR VECTORS TO INTERCEPT THE 10 DME ARC FROM LNY VOR AND CLRED FOR THE ILS RWY 3 APCH ONCE ESTABLISHED ON THE LOC COURSE INBOUND (033 DEGS ON ILNY 111.1). WE WERE ALSO ADVISED TO MAINTAIN 3000 FT UNTIL ESTABLISHED. THE CAPT BRIEFED THE APCH AND TUNED AND IDENTED THE NAVAIDS. WE WERE IN AND OUT OF IMC AS WE STARTED TO TURN ON THE DME ARC. MOMENTS AFTER WE WERE ON THE ARC, THE CDI NEEDLE CAME IN AND WE STARTED TO HEAD INBOUND AND DSND TO 2600 FT (GS INTERCEPT ALT). AROUND 8 DME, CTR CALLED FOR AN IMMEDIATE TURN TO 180 DEGS AND CLB TO 6000 FT. WE RESPONDED THAT WE HAD INTERCEPTED THE LOC INBOUND AND THAT'S WHY WE WERE INSIDE THE 10 DME ARC. THEY INSISTED WE NOW TURN TO 220 DEGS AND CLB TO 6000 FT FOR TERRAIN CLRNC, SO WE COMPLIED EVEN THOUGH BOTH OUR INSTS INDICATED WE WERE ON COURSE. AS FOR TERRAIN CLRNC WE WERE OVER THE OCEAN AND THE ARPT ELEVATION AND SURROUNDING AREA IS APPROX 1300 FT MSL (WITH 3100 FT HILLS TO THE N). AFTER THE START OF THIS EVASIVE MANEUVER CTR CAME BACK WITHIN +/-15 SECONDS AND ASKED IF WE HAD THE FIELD IN SIGHT AT OUR 9 O'CLOCK POS. WE WERE AT ABOUT 4200 FT AND VMC AND THE CAPT DID HAVE THE FIELD SO WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL. WE HAD AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG BUT WERE VERY PERPLEXED AS TO WHAT HAD HAPPENED. TWO OTHER ACFT SHOT THE SAME APCH RIGHT AFTER US AND ASIDE FROM A SLIGHT ILS GS 'HICCUP' THEY HAD NO PROBS. WE RETURNED TO OUR HNL BASE AND TOLD MAINT -- THEY ARE INVESTIGATING THE AVIONICS EQUIP BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW FOUND NOTHING WRONG. ON OUR RETURN TO HNL, CTR ADVISED OVER THE RADIO THAT WE HAD GIVEN THEM 'A REAL HEADS UP,' THEY SAID A SIMILAR REMARK TO AIR DISPATCH BUT SAID NO PAPERWORK NEEDED TO BE FILED. THE WHOLE SIT HAS BOTHERED ME BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS AN INST PROB, AN OVER-REACTIVE NEW CTLR OR A PLT ERROR THAT NEITHER THE CAPT OR MYSELF RECOGNIZED. FURTHERMORE, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED I'M AFRAID IT COULD HAPPEN AGAIN TO ME OR SOMEONE ELSE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR COULD NOT PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INFO ON THE INCIDENT, AND DENIES ANY POSSIBILITY OF HAVING INADVERTENTLY FLOWN A 'BACK COURSE' TYPE APCH ON THE VOR. IN FACT, SHE NOTED THAT SHE AND HER CAPT THOUGHT OF THAT POSSIBILITY IMMEDIATELY WHEN PROVIDED THE EMER VECTOR BY ATC, BUT A THOROUGH CHK INDICATED THAT ALL INST READINGS, FREQS, ETC, WERE AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN. THIS WAS FURTHER VERIFIED VISUALLY.

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.