An S80 PIC report on a traffic spacing problem that was resolved with a go around called for by the approach controller at ord, il.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	526944
Time
Date	200110
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : ord.airport
State Reference	IL
Altitude	msl single value : 3000
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : c90.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-80 Super 80
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	ils localizer only : 22r other
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing : go around
Route In Use	approach : instrument precision
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tracon : c90.tracon
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : instrument precision
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
ASRS Report	526944
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe inflight encounter : weather non adherence : clearance non adherence : published procedure non adherence : required legal separation other anomaly other anomaly other
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment : tcas other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance controller : separated traffic flight crew : executed go around
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Airspace Structure Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Airspace Structure
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation other

Narrative:

Location: ILS runway 22R, approximately 8 NM from ord approach conducting an ILS runway 22R to ord. We were vectored in very close behind the aircraft ahead of us. Initially VMC, we descended into IMC. TCASII had the traffic at about 2 NM. We were instructed to maintain 180 KTS then 170 KTS. Our distance was not increasing so we slowed to 160 KTS then 150 KTS and by the time we hit the FAF we were doing 140 KTS. The radios were very busy as usual and we did not tell the approach controller of our speed. He queried us at about this time and we told him 140 KTS, at which point he directed our go around and said we should have told him our speed. At the time we were directed to go around, our distance did not appear to increase with the traffic ahead. Had I not felt punished by the controller for slowing down, the early wave-off was a prudent idea in light of the fact that a lower altitude wave-off in IMC was almost certain due to the close proximity of the aircraft ahead.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN S80 PIC RPT ON A TFC SPACING PROB THAT WAS RESOLVED WITH A GAR CALLED FOR BY THE APCH CTLR AT ORD, IL.

Narrative: LOCATION: ILS RWY 22R, APPROX 8 NM FROM ORD APCH CONDUCTING AN ILS RWY 22R TO ORD. WE WERE VECTORED IN VERY CLOSE BEHIND THE ACFT AHEAD OF US. INITIALLY VMC, WE DSNDED INTO IMC. TCASII HAD THE TFC AT ABOUT 2 NM. WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO MAINTAIN 180 KTS THEN 170 KTS. OUR DISTANCE WAS NOT INCREASING SO WE SLOWED TO 160 KTS THEN 150 KTS AND BY THE TIME WE HIT THE FAF WE WERE DOING 140 KTS. THE RADIOS WERE VERY BUSY AS USUAL AND WE DID NOT TELL THE APCH CTLR OF OUR SPD. HE QUERIED US AT ABOUT THIS TIME AND WE TOLD HIM 140 KTS, AT WHICH POINT HE DIRECTED OUR GAR AND SAID WE SHOULD HAVE TOLD HIM OUR SPD. AT THE TIME WE WERE DIRECTED TO GO AROUND, OUR DISTANCE DID NOT APPEAR TO INCREASE WITH THE TFC AHEAD. HAD I NOT FELT PUNISHED BY THE CTLR FOR SLOWING DOWN, THE EARLY WAVE-OFF WAS A PRUDENT IDEA IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT A LOWER ALT WAVE-OFF IN IMC WAS ALMOST CERTAIN DUE TO THE CLOSE PROX OF THE ACFT AHEAD.

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.