Captain of an SF340 intercepted a high GS causing a go around since being above the actual GS level. Subsequently, he canceled IFR and accepted a visual approach which had to be adjusted due to WX.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	507530
Time
Date	200104
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mli.airport
State Reference	IL
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Weather Elements	Thunderstorm Rain
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : mli.tower tracon : mia.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	SF 340A
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around landing : missed approach
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : cfi pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 3460 flight time type : 2440
ASRS Report	507352
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : cfi pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 2000 flight time type : 800
ASRS Report	507530
Events
Anomaly	inflight encounter : weather non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : altimeter other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	flight crew : executed go around
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance Weather
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

We were vectored for the approach and were very high. By mistake, a higher GS was intercepted. Upon crossing the OM, the first officer noted the high difference in altitude at the same time the airport came in sight. We initiated a go around and began receiving vectors for another approach, when tower asked if we wanted the visual approach 'now.' after another poor decision, we decided to keep the airport in sight and do a visual approach. This resulted in a close-in approach to remain legal for a visual approach. Although we did legally shoot the visual approach it resulted in a non standard approach and landing. The landing was just fine, however, the problem resulted from a chain of poor decisions by myself as the captain on this flight. With thunderstorms in the area, we pushed a bad situation when we should have continued around for another full approach. With the rain and thunderstorms coming in the area, I made too quick of a decision to try and get the aircraft on the ground.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CAPT OF AN SF340 INTERCEPTED A HIGH GS CAUSING A GAR SINCE BEING ABOVE THE ACTUAL GS LEVEL. SUBSEQUENTLY, HE CANCELED IFR AND ACCEPTED A VISUAL APCH WHICH HAD TO BE ADJUSTED DUE TO WX.

Narrative: WE WERE VECTORED FOR THE APCH AND WERE VERY HIGH. BY MISTAKE, A HIGHER GS WAS INTERCEPTED. UPON XING THE OM, THE FO NOTED THE HIGH DIFFERENCE IN ALT AT THE SAME TIME THE ARPT CAME IN SIGHT. WE INITIATED A GAR AND BEGAN RECEIVING VECTORS FOR ANOTHER APCH, WHEN TWR ASKED IF WE WANTED THE VISUAL APCH 'NOW.' AFTER ANOTHER POOR DECISION, WE DECIDED TO KEEP THE ARPT IN SIGHT AND DO A VISUAL APCH. THIS RESULTED IN A CLOSE-IN APCH TO REMAIN LEGAL FOR A VISUAL APCH. ALTHOUGH WE DID LEGALLY SHOOT THE VISUAL APCH IT RESULTED IN A NON STANDARD APCH AND LNDG. THE LNDG WAS JUST FINE, HOWEVER, THE PROB RESULTED FROM A CHAIN OF POOR DECISIONS BY MYSELF AS THE CAPT ON THIS FLT. WITH TSTMS IN THE AREA, WE PUSHED A BAD SIT WHEN WE SHOULD HAVE CONTINUED AROUND FOR ANOTHER FULL APCH. WITH THE RAIN AND TSTMS COMING IN THE AREA, I MADE TOO QUICK OF A DECISION TO TRY AND GET THE ACFT ON THE GND.

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.