37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 493061 |
Time | |
Date | 200011 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : ont.airport |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : ont.tower tower : gyr.tower |
Operator | general aviation : instructional |
Make Model Name | Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | approach : traffic pattern approach : straight in |
Flight Plan | VFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : ont.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Brasilia EMB-120 All Series |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 119 |
Navigation In Use | ils localizer & glide slope : 8 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | approach : instrument precision |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | other |
Function | instruction : instructor |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : multi engine pilot : cfi |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 1090 flight time type : 1090 |
ASRS Report | 493061 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | other |
Function | instruction : trainee |
Qualification | pilot : student |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : clearance other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other controllera other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : insufficient time |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
I was doing a night cross country with a private pilot student from sna direct bur direct ont to sna. On our way to ont, socal handed us off to ont tower and we were told to make l-hand traffic for runway 26L and that a brasilia was on final for runway 8, opposite direction. I was not worried because we saw the traffic landing on the left runway as we were entering on a 45 degree. I commented to my student how tired I was and looking forward to ending the flight soon. We then continued to landing with no unusual happenings. (So I thought.) we then taxied for departure for 1 turn in the pattern. We departed the runway and made right closed traffic. On short final, I called up the tower for our landing clearance to confirm the runway. They responded that we were cleared to land on runway 8L, but we were lined up on runway 8R! I told this to ont tower and was given clearance to land on runway 8R. We then landed and then taxied for departure to sna. We then departed ont and landed at sna with no further occurrences. After landing at sna, I debriefed my student on what had happened at ont. Turned out that on initial contact with ont tower, we were told to make left traffic for runway 8L, but we made right traffic for runway 8R. My student noticed this, but did not question our actions and ont tower never said a thing. We ended up landing on runway 8R instead of runway 8L (opposite direction of the brasilia). Ont tower still said nothing. When I asked my student why he didn't say anything, he said he thought I knew what I was doing. Factors leading up to this runway incursion were fatigue (mine as the instructor), and complacency (mine, my student's and ont tower's). If I had gotten more rest, or if my student or ont tower had said something, this could have been avoided. From now on, I will make sure I get enough rest before night flts and have told my students that if something is wrong or seems wrong, to speak up. After all, none of us are perfect.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: INSTRUCTOR FLIES WRONG TFC PATTERN, NOT CHALLENGED OVERTLY BY ONT LCL CTLR, BUT RECOGNIZED BY STUDENT.
Narrative: I WAS DOING A NIGHT XCOUNTRY WITH A PVT PLT STUDENT FROM SNA DIRECT BUR DIRECT ONT TO SNA. ON OUR WAY TO ONT, SOCAL HANDED US OFF TO ONT TWR AND WE WERE TOLD TO MAKE L-HAND TFC FOR RWY 26L AND THAT A BRASILIA WAS ON FINAL FOR RWY 8, OPPOSITE DIRECTION. I WAS NOT WORRIED BECAUSE WE SAW THE TFC LNDG ON THE L RWY AS WE WERE ENTERING ON A 45 DEG. I COMMENTED TO MY STUDENT HOW TIRED I WAS AND LOOKING FORWARD TO ENDING THE FLT SOON. WE THEN CONTINUED TO LNDG WITH NO UNUSUAL HAPPENINGS. (SO I THOUGHT.) WE THEN TAXIED FOR DEP FOR 1 TURN IN THE PATTERN. WE DEPARTED THE RWY AND MADE R CLOSED TFC. ON SHORT FINAL, I CALLED UP THE TWR FOR OUR LNDG CLRNC TO CONFIRM THE RWY. THEY RESPONDED THAT WE WERE CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 8L, BUT WE WERE LINED UP ON RWY 8R! I TOLD THIS TO ONT TWR AND WAS GIVEN CLRNC TO LAND ON RWY 8R. WE THEN LANDED AND THEN TAXIED FOR DEP TO SNA. WE THEN DEPARTED ONT AND LANDED AT SNA WITH NO FURTHER OCCURRENCES. AFTER LNDG AT SNA, I DEBRIEFED MY STUDENT ON WHAT HAD HAPPENED AT ONT. TURNED OUT THAT ON INITIAL CONTACT WITH ONT TWR, WE WERE TOLD TO MAKE L TFC FOR RWY 8L, BUT WE MADE R TFC FOR RWY 8R. MY STUDENT NOTICED THIS, BUT DID NOT QUESTION OUR ACTIONS AND ONT TWR NEVER SAID A THING. WE ENDED UP LNDG ON RWY 8R INSTEAD OF RWY 8L (OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE BRASILIA). ONT TWR STILL SAID NOTHING. WHEN I ASKED MY STUDENT WHY HE DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING, HE SAID HE THOUGHT I KNEW WHAT I WAS DOING. FACTORS LEADING UP TO THIS RWY INCURSION WERE FATIGUE (MINE AS THE INSTRUCTOR), AND COMPLACENCY (MINE, MY STUDENT'S AND ONT TWR'S). IF I HAD GOTTEN MORE REST, OR IF MY STUDENT OR ONT TWR HAD SAID SOMETHING, THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. FROM NOW ON, I WILL MAKE SURE I GET ENOUGH REST BEFORE NIGHT FLTS AND HAVE TOLD MY STUDENTS THAT IF SOMETHING IS WRONG OR SEEMS WRONG, TO SPEAK UP. AFTER ALL, NONE OF US ARE PERFECT.
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.