 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A flight crew of a C208 caravan attempts a visual separation climb but gets too close to a level air carrier BA3200 and overflies that aircraft by 100-300 ft 10 mi west of smf, ca.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 478638 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200007 |
| Day | Tue |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : sme.airport |
| State Reference | CA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 3500 msl bound upper : 4100 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : mcc.tracon |
| Operator | general aviation : personal |
| Make Model Name | Caravan 1 208A |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Navigation In Use | other |
| Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude |
| Route In Use | departure : vfr |
| Flight Plan | None |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : mcc.tracon |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Jetstream 32 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 119 |
| Flight Phase | descent : intermediate altitude |
| Route In Use | arrival : on vectors |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | other |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 1600 flight time type : 20 |
| ASRS Report | 478638 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | other |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : nmac non adherence : far non adherence : clearance other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | aircraft equipment : tcas other flight crewa other flight crewb |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : insufficient time |
| Consequence | Other |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 300 vertical : 100 |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
While departing smf, VFR to the west, we were receiving radar advisories from sacramento departure control. During our climb, we were instructed to remain at or below 3500 ft for an arriving commuter crossing at 4000 ft and to report the traffic in sight. We leveled at 3500 ft and subsequently advised ATC that we had the commuter in sight. We were then instructed to maintain visual separation and climb at our discretion. The commuter appeared to be descending and moving to our rear and we determined that a climb would result in us being well above and ahead of him. As we got closer, we realized that the commuter was still at about 4000 ft and that there was not going to be as much separation as we initially thought, so I increased our rate of climb. As the commuter passed below us, I noted our altitude climbing through 4500 ft. It was then that the pilot of the commuter stated that he had us in sight, that he had to 'deviate slightly' from his altitude, and that his TCASII showed only 100 ft of separation. From my visual observation, I believe that at the closest, the commuter passed about 400-500 ft below and 400-500 ft behind us. While I do not believe there was ever any serious collision hazard, I do not think that there was as much separation as any of us would have liked. I feel that ATC should have either held us at 3500 ft until past the commuter, or descended the commuter when we were given permission to climb. I also feel that the crew of the commuter should have had us in sight earlier than they did, and that they made a slight course adjustment that diminished lateral separation. A significant contributing factor was my erroneous initial impression that the commuter was in a descent. Even from the 3500 ft altitude and a distance of about 3 mi, we appeared to be looking at the top of the commuter aircraft, a perspective that remained until our passing. Had I realized that the commuter was in level flight, I would have initiated the climb more aggressively. I have learned the importance of maintaining visual contact with potentially conflicting traffic -- that even when it appears that the potential is minimal, it does not take much for the situation to change rapidly.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A FLC OF A C208 CARAVAN ATTEMPTS A VISUAL SEPARATION CLB BUT GETS TOO CLOSE TO A LEVEL ACR BA3200 AND OVERFLIES THAT ACFT BY 100-300 FT 10 MI W OF SMF, CA.
Narrative: WHILE DEPARTING SMF, VFR TO THE W, WE WERE RECEIVING RADAR ADVISORIES FROM SACRAMENTO DEP CTL. DURING OUR CLB, WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO REMAIN AT OR BELOW 3500 FT FOR AN ARRIVING COMMUTER XING AT 4000 FT AND TO RPT THE TFC IN SIGHT. WE LEVELED AT 3500 FT AND SUBSEQUENTLY ADVISED ATC THAT WE HAD THE COMMUTER IN SIGHT. WE WERE THEN INSTRUCTED TO MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION AND CLB AT OUR DISCRETION. THE COMMUTER APPEARED TO BE DSNDING AND MOVING TO OUR REAR AND WE DETERMINED THAT A CLB WOULD RESULT IN US BEING WELL ABOVE AND AHEAD OF HIM. AS WE GOT CLOSER, WE REALIZED THAT THE COMMUTER WAS STILL AT ABOUT 4000 FT AND THAT THERE WAS NOT GOING TO BE AS MUCH SEPARATION AS WE INITIALLY THOUGHT, SO I INCREASED OUR RATE OF CLB. AS THE COMMUTER PASSED BELOW US, I NOTED OUR ALT CLBING THROUGH 4500 FT. IT WAS THEN THAT THE PLT OF THE COMMUTER STATED THAT HE HAD US IN SIGHT, THAT HE HAD TO 'DEVIATE SLIGHTLY' FROM HIS ALT, AND THAT HIS TCASII SHOWED ONLY 100 FT OF SEPARATION. FROM MY VISUAL OBSERVATION, I BELIEVE THAT AT THE CLOSEST, THE COMMUTER PASSED ABOUT 400-500 FT BELOW AND 400-500 FT BEHIND US. WHILE I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE WAS EVER ANY SERIOUS COLLISION HAZARD, I DO NOT THINK THAT THERE WAS AS MUCH SEPARATION AS ANY OF US WOULD HAVE LIKED. I FEEL THAT ATC SHOULD HAVE EITHER HELD US AT 3500 FT UNTIL PAST THE COMMUTER, OR DSNDED THE COMMUTER WHEN WE WERE GIVEN PERMISSION TO CLB. I ALSO FEEL THAT THE CREW OF THE COMMUTER SHOULD HAVE HAD US IN SIGHT EARLIER THAN THEY DID, AND THAT THEY MADE A SLIGHT COURSE ADJUSTMENT THAT DIMINISHED LATERAL SEPARATION. A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS MY ERRONEOUS INITIAL IMPRESSION THAT THE COMMUTER WAS IN A DSCNT. EVEN FROM THE 3500 FT ALT AND A DISTANCE OF ABOUT 3 MI, WE APPEARED TO BE LOOKING AT THE TOP OF THE COMMUTER ACFT, A PERSPECTIVE THAT REMAINED UNTIL OUR PASSING. HAD I REALIZED THAT THE COMMUTER WAS IN LEVEL FLT, I WOULD HAVE INITIATED THE CLB MORE AGGRESSIVELY. I HAVE LEARNED THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING VISUAL CONTACT WITH POTENTIALLY CONFLICTING TFC -- THAT EVEN WHEN IT APPEARS THAT THE POTENTIAL IS MINIMAL, IT DOES NOT TAKE MUCH FOR THE SIT TO CHANGE RAPIDLY.
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.