37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 522043 |
Time | |
Date | 200108 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : crq.airport |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : sea.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Dash 8-200 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 135 |
Flight Phase | ground : takeoff roll |
Route In Use | departure other |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp pilot : cfi |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 4000 flight time type : 2000 |
ASRS Report | 522043 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 1700 flight time type : 500 |
ASRS Report | 522852 |
Events | |
Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance Weather |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Narrative:
ATCT was not yet open so we monitored AWOS which was reporting 1/4 SM visibility. We briefed for a reduced visibility takeoff per standard company procedures. We then started and taxied to runway 24 for departure. Reduced visibility taxi procedures were followed as outlined in our company manual. After reaching the run-up area we completed all required checklist items. At this time the tower opened and reported tower visibility as 1/16 SM in fog. We looked down the runway and, based on runway lighting and marking, determined we had at least 1600 ft and 1/4 SM visibility. We received our clearance to phoenix and notified the tower we were ready for takeoff. Tower cleared us for takeoff and then provided an RVR report. We were on the runway, again verified we had at least 1/4 SM RVV, and departed. Subsequently it was determined that the reported RVR may have been below allowable takeoff minimums of 1600 ft RVR. Neither my first officer nor myself can recall with certainty what the reported RVR value was at departure. If it in fact does turn out that we inadvertently departed below minimums, it is my belief that we did so as a result of disregarding tower visibility. Tower visibility is non controling whereas RVR is. We had heard ASOS and tower reported visibility and we failed to catch the significance of a sudden and unexpected RVR report. We may have been so occupied with verifying that we had 1/4 RVV that we subconsciously discounted the last min report as non controling as well. Avoidance of this same situation requires close attention to all information so fixation does not become a factor.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: DHC8 FLC TOOK OFF BELOW FAA APPROVED WX MINIMUM FOR THEIR COMPANY.
Narrative: ATCT WAS NOT YET OPEN SO WE MONITORED AWOS WHICH WAS RPTING 1/4 SM VISIBILITY. WE BRIEFED FOR A REDUCED VISIBILITY TKOF PER STANDARD COMPANY PROCS. WE THEN STARTED AND TAXIED TO RWY 24 FOR DEP. REDUCED VISIBILITY TAXI PROCS WERE FOLLOWED AS OUTLINED IN OUR COMPANY MANUAL. AFTER REACHING THE RUN-UP AREA WE COMPLETED ALL REQUIRED CHKLIST ITEMS. AT THIS TIME THE TWR OPENED AND RPTED TWR VISIBILITY AS 1/16 SM IN FOG. WE LOOKED DOWN THE RWY AND, BASED ON RWY LIGHTING AND MARKING, DETERMINED WE HAD AT LEAST 1600 FT AND 1/4 SM VISIBILITY. WE RECEIVED OUR CLRNC TO PHOENIX AND NOTIFIED THE TWR WE WERE READY FOR TKOF. TWR CLRED US FOR TKOF AND THEN PROVIDED AN RVR RPT. WE WERE ON THE RWY, AGAIN VERIFIED WE HAD AT LEAST 1/4 SM RVV, AND DEPARTED. SUBSEQUENTLY IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE RPTED RVR MAY HAVE BEEN BELOW ALLOWABLE TKOF MINIMUMS OF 1600 FT RVR. NEITHER MY FO NOR MYSELF CAN RECALL WITH CERTAINTY WHAT THE RPTED RVR VALUE WAS AT DEP. IF IT IN FACT DOES TURN OUT THAT WE INADVERTENTLY DEPARTED BELOW MINIMUMS, IT IS MY BELIEF THAT WE DID SO AS A RESULT OF DISREGARDING TWR VISIBILITY. TWR VISIBILITY IS NON CTLING WHEREAS RVR IS. WE HAD HEARD ASOS AND TWR RPTED VISIBILITY AND WE FAILED TO CATCH THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED RVR RPT. WE MAY HAVE BEEN SO OCCUPIED WITH VERIFYING THAT WE HAD 1/4 RVV THAT WE SUBCONSCIOUSLY DISCOUNTED THE LAST MIN RPT AS NON CTLING AS WELL. AVOIDANCE OF THIS SAME SIT REQUIRES CLOSE ATTN TO ALL INFO SO FIXATION DOES NOT BECOME A FACTOR.
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.