37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 512389 |
Time | |
Date | 200105 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : een.airport |
State Reference | NH |
Altitude | agl single value : 1000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zbw.artcc |
Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach ground : maintenance |
Route In Use | approach : traffic pattern |
Flight Plan | VFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | other |
Function | instruction : instructor |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : multi engine pilot : cfi |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 1200 flight time type : 160 |
ASRS Report | 512389 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | other |
Function | flight crew : single pilot instruction : trainee |
Qualification | pilot : student |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : became reoriented flight crew : returned to intended or assigned course |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
The student briefed me on current and forecasted WX condition in the northeast along our route of flight and at both airports. We determined that the flight could proceed VFR and attention turned to flight planning, especially his transition into the traffic pattern. The student was unaware of right traffic pattern symbol on the VFR chart for een and we proceeded to open the AFD and discuss which runways were right traffic. The current conditions favored runway 20 and we discussed how to transition into the pattern. On the actual flight, the student opened his VFR flight plan with bangor FSS and received flight following from manchester approach (124.9) and ZBW (123.75). Upon canceling flight following, the student gave a position report to een traffic and asked unicom for active runway -- runway 14. The student overflew the airport at 2500 ft AGL and maneuvered to enter downwind, but never said right or left. I reviewed the AFD and witnessed my student do the same, but till we entered right traffic for runway 14 -- not left. On downwind, I pointed out the ridge in front of us, and questioned the student how it will affect our traffic pattern. At that time, the student looked up in front instead of out the side and started a turn to base, continuing to final runway 14 at een. The premature turn to base prevented a normal approach to landing and after heavy prompting from the instructor, the student decided to go around. On climb out, I (as the instructor) continued to question the student on traffic patterns at een and asked which way he was going to turn for crosswind. The student responded by turning to the right and stated that he was going to make the same approach. At this point, the instructor added control inputs for a left turn and told the student to make left traffic. From the left downwind and base, the ridge that was relevant on right traffic was no factor, and the student was able to make a normal landing and land without incident. The student was repeating a lesson and was trying very hard to complete the lesson to satisfaction and continue training. The transition into right traffic for runway 20 was discussed at length because based on the current conditions, that was what he should expect. At the time of arrival, I believe the student had 'right traffic on the brain,' and continued right traffic. The fact that the student pulled out his AFD after I did was only to mimic my actions, and never reviewed the airport information. If the student did review the information, he did not retain any of the information. Upon returning to ash, instructor student reviewed far 91.126(B) in which all turns in a traffic pattern must be made to the left unless the airport displays via approved light signals on visual markings indicating right turns, in which all turns must be made to the right. Safety relating to opposing traffic converging on final was also discussed.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: C172 PLT TRAINEE WITH INSTRUCTOR MADE A R TFC PATTERN INSTEAD OF A L TFC PATTERN AT AN UNCTLED ARPT DUE TO THINKING THAT ALL RWYS WOULD BE RIGHT AFTER REVIEW OF THE AFD DURING PREFLT.
Narrative: THE STUDENT BRIEFED ME ON CURRENT AND FORECASTED WX CONDITION IN THE NE ALONG OUR RTE OF FLT AND AT BOTH ARPTS. WE DETERMINED THAT THE FLT COULD PROCEED VFR AND ATTN TURNED TO FLT PLANNING, ESPECIALLY HIS TRANSITION INTO THE TFC PATTERN. THE STUDENT WAS UNAWARE OF R TFC PATTERN SYMBOL ON THE VFR CHART FOR EEN AND WE PROCEEDED TO OPEN THE AFD AND DISCUSS WHICH RWYS WERE R TFC. THE CURRENT CONDITIONS FAVORED RWY 20 AND WE DISCUSSED HOW TO TRANSITION INTO THE PATTERN. ON THE ACTUAL FLT, THE STUDENT OPENED HIS VFR FLT PLAN WITH BANGOR FSS AND RECEIVED FLT FOLLOWING FROM MANCHESTER APCH (124.9) AND ZBW (123.75). UPON CANCELING FLT FOLLOWING, THE STUDENT GAVE A POS RPT TO EEN TFC AND ASKED UNICOM FOR ACTIVE RWY -- RWY 14. THE STUDENT OVERFLEW THE ARPT AT 2500 FT AGL AND MANEUVERED TO ENTER DOWNWIND, BUT NEVER SAID R OR L. I REVIEWED THE AFD AND WITNESSED MY STUDENT DO THE SAME, BUT TILL WE ENTERED R TFC FOR RWY 14 -- NOT L. ON DOWNWIND, I POINTED OUT THE RIDGE IN FRONT OF US, AND QUESTIONED THE STUDENT HOW IT WILL AFFECT OUR TFC PATTERN. AT THAT TIME, THE STUDENT LOOKED UP IN FRONT INSTEAD OF OUT THE SIDE AND STARTED A TURN TO BASE, CONTINUING TO FINAL RWY 14 AT EEN. THE PREMATURE TURN TO BASE PREVENTED A NORMAL APCH TO LNDG AND AFTER HVY PROMPTING FROM THE INSTRUCTOR, THE STUDENT DECIDED TO GO AROUND. ON CLBOUT, I (AS THE INSTRUCTOR) CONTINUED TO QUESTION THE STUDENT ON TFC PATTERNS AT EEN AND ASKED WHICH WAY HE WAS GOING TO TURN FOR XWIND. THE STUDENT RESPONDED BY TURNING TO THE R AND STATED THAT HE WAS GOING TO MAKE THE SAME APCH. AT THIS POINT, THE INSTRUCTOR ADDED CTL INPUTS FOR A L TURN AND TOLD THE STUDENT TO MAKE L TFC. FROM THE L DOWNWIND AND BASE, THE RIDGE THAT WAS RELEVANT ON R TFC WAS NO FACTOR, AND THE STUDENT WAS ABLE TO MAKE A NORMAL LNDG AND LAND WITHOUT INCIDENT. THE STUDENT WAS REPEATING A LESSON AND WAS TRYING VERY HARD TO COMPLETE THE LESSON TO SATISFACTION AND CONTINUE TRAINING. THE TRANSITION INTO R TFC FOR RWY 20 WAS DISCUSSED AT LENGTH BECAUSE BASED ON THE CURRENT CONDITIONS, THAT WAS WHAT HE SHOULD EXPECT. AT THE TIME OF ARR, I BELIEVE THE STUDENT HAD 'R TFC ON THE BRAIN,' AND CONTINUED R TFC. THE FACT THAT THE STUDENT PULLED OUT HIS AFD AFTER I DID WAS ONLY TO MIMIC MY ACTIONS, AND NEVER REVIEWED THE ARPT INFO. IF THE STUDENT DID REVIEW THE INFO, HE DID NOT RETAIN ANY OF THE INFO. UPON RETURNING TO ASH, INSTRUCTOR STUDENT REVIEWED FAR 91.126(B) IN WHICH ALL TURNS IN A TFC PATTERN MUST BE MADE TO THE L UNLESS THE ARPT DISPLAYS VIA APPROVED LIGHT SIGNALS ON VISUAL MARKINGS INDICATING R TURNS, IN WHICH ALL TURNS MUST BE MADE TO THE R. SAFETY RELATING TO OPPOSING TFC CONVERGING ON FINAL WAS ALSO DISCUSSED.
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.