37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 487270 |
Time | |
Date | 200009 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : cmh.airport |
State Reference | OH |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 msl bound upper : 3000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : cmh.tower |
Operator | general aviation : instructional |
Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Navigation In Use | other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach landing : roll |
Route In Use | approach : traffic pattern |
Flight Plan | VFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : cmh.tower |
Operator | general aviation : instructional |
Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Navigation In Use | other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach landing : roll |
Route In Use | approach : traffic pattern |
Flight Plan | VFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | other |
Function | flight crew : single pilot |
Qualification | pilot : private |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 40 flight time total : 115 flight time type : 40 |
ASRS Report | 487270 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | other |
Function | flight crew : single pilot |
Qualification | pilot : private |
Experience | flight time total : 90 |
Events | |
Anomaly | airspace violation : entry incursion : runway non adherence : clearance non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | none taken : insufficient time |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Both cessna 172's were combined on one VFR flight plan with aircraft #1 handling the radios. Columbus approach instructed both cessnas to proceed inbound for runway 28L. The cessnas were approaching from the north. Approach also instructed the flight to contact tower. Columbus tower told the first cessna to begin a downwind for runway 28L. The first cessna was on the north side of the airport, paralleling runway 28R as instructed by ATC. The second cessna was 3 mi behind and lost sight of the first cessna, as well as the point where the first cessna turned downwind. The second cessna did not turn downwind but cut across both runways for a left downwind for runway 28L. At this time cessna #1 called ATC and asked whether it was cleared for runway 28L. ATC responded, 'no, and we'll call your base.' cessna #1 understood this to mean that it was landing on runway 28R. When the second cessna cut across the airfield, ATC questioned the first cessna, still on downwind, as to their flight's intentions, as well as clearing it for landing on runway 28L. The first cessna repeated back the clearance for runway 28L, but in the confusion and misunderstanding about clearance for runway 28L did an approach for runway 28R and landed. The second cessna, also confused, flew left downwind for runway 28L and landed on runway 28L. Upon landing columbus tower informed the first cessna of the incorrect runway it landed on and instructed the pilot to give tower a call. Tower also offered the same request for the second cessna. The pilot of the first cessna called tower and was informed of the errors made. Tower ensured the pilot that no action was going to be taken and this was just a learning experience. Because the first cessna was responsible for the flight plan the second cessna pilot did not call tower.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: TWO LOW TIME PLTS FLYING TOGETHER IN TWO SEPARATE ACFT ARRIVE AT COLUMBUS, OH. ONE LANDS ON THE INCORRECT RWY, THE OTHER OVERFLIES THE ARPT WITHOUT CLRNC.
Narrative: BOTH CESSNA 172'S WERE COMBINED ON ONE VFR FLT PLAN WITH ACFT #1 HANDLING THE RADIOS. COLUMBUS APCH INSTRUCTED BOTH CESSNAS TO PROCEED INBOUND FOR RWY 28L. THE CESSNAS WERE APCHING FROM THE N. APCH ALSO INSTRUCTED THE FLT TO CONTACT TWR. COLUMBUS TWR TOLD THE FIRST CESSNA TO BEGIN A DOWNWIND FOR RWY 28L. THE FIRST CESSNA WAS ON THE N SIDE OF THE ARPT, PARALLELING RWY 28R AS INSTRUCTED BY ATC. THE SECOND CESSNA WAS 3 MI BEHIND AND LOST SIGHT OF THE FIRST CESSNA, AS WELL AS THE POINT WHERE THE FIRST CESSNA TURNED DOWNWIND. THE SECOND CESSNA DID NOT TURN DOWNWIND BUT CUT ACROSS BOTH RWYS FOR A L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 28L. AT THIS TIME CESSNA #1 CALLED ATC AND ASKED WHETHER IT WAS CLRED FOR RWY 28L. ATC RESPONDED, 'NO, AND WE'LL CALL YOUR BASE.' CESSNA #1 UNDERSTOOD THIS TO MEAN THAT IT WAS LNDG ON RWY 28R. WHEN THE SECOND CESSNA CUT ACROSS THE AIRFIELD, ATC QUESTIONED THE FIRST CESSNA, STILL ON DOWNWIND, AS TO THEIR FLT'S INTENTIONS, AS WELL AS CLRING IT FOR LNDG ON RWY 28L. THE FIRST CESSNA REPEATED BACK THE CLRNC FOR RWY 28L, BUT IN THE CONFUSION AND MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT CLRNC FOR RWY 28L DID AN APCH FOR RWY 28R AND LANDED. THE SECOND CESSNA, ALSO CONFUSED, FLEW L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 28L AND LANDED ON RWY 28L. UPON LNDG COLUMBUS TWR INFORMED THE FIRST CESSNA OF THE INCORRECT RWY IT LANDED ON AND INSTRUCTED THE PLT TO GIVE TWR A CALL. TWR ALSO OFFERED THE SAME REQUEST FOR THE SECOND CESSNA. THE PLT OF THE FIRST CESSNA CALLED TWR AND WAS INFORMED OF THE ERRORS MADE. TWR ENSURED THE PLT THAT NO ACTION WAS GOING TO BE TAKEN AND THIS WAS JUST A LEARNING EXPERIENCE. BECAUSE THE FIRST CESSNA WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FLT PLAN THE SECOND CESSNA PLT DID NOT CALL TWR.
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.