 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A B737-700 flight crew turns for a wrong runway approach during a planned circling approach to runway 22L after passing the FAF runway 4R at mdw, il.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 537864 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200202 |
| Day | Sat |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : mdw.airport |
| State Reference | IL |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 2100 msl bound upper : 3000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : c90.tracon |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | B737-700 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | ils localizer & glide slope : 4r other |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Route In Use | approach : circling |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 253 flight time total : 4018 flight time type : 610 |
| ASRS Report | 537864 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 23000 flight time type : 8000 |
| ASRS Report | 537514 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | non adherence : clearance non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance controller : issued advisory flight crew : executed missed approach other |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew other Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Weather Airport ATC Human Performance Airspace Structure Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Inter Facility Coordination Failure |
Narrative:
On last leg of last day of 3-DAY trip, I was PF. All operations were normal until arrival at mdw. The initial ATIS called for gusty winds from the sse, and directed ILS runway 31C circle to land runway 22L. When the captain (PNF) checked in with ord approach, we were advised of a new ATIS which told us to expect vectors to ILS runway 4R circle to land. No change in winds were provided, nor was a change to the landing runway mentioned. The PNF readback acknowledged 'vector to ILS runway 4R, circle to land runway 22L.' ord approach offered no correction to this reading. In the cockpit, we discussed the unusual routing, then reprogrammed the FMS and rebriefed how we planned to execute the circling maneuver. The ILS runway 4R was flown normally, and we were handed off to tower at the OM. Tower cleared us to circle, but still did not mention a change in landing runway. At about 2-3 NM from the field, we started to maneuver east for a left downwind to runway 22L. Shortly thereafter, tower directed us to maneuver west for a right downwind (again no runway mentioned). We reversed our turn and maneuvered for a right downwind to runway 22L. Tower then asked us if we had enough room to turn final for runway 13C. This was the first mention we can recall of runway 13C being the active runway. We responded that we had been maneuvering for runway 22L and could not land on runway 13C from our current position. Our clearance was then canceled, and we were revectored to the ILS runway 4R circle to land runway 13R. This was flown normally, after ATIS was fully obtained and opc data computed. ATC communications and readback acknowledgements appear to be the root issue with this incident. While we may have missed it, both the PF and PNF never heard a change to the landing runway. Further, approach did not correct our readback expressing intent to circle to runway 22. Lastly, mdw tower did not specify the landing runway in its xmissions. Recommendation: re-emphasize ATC issue complete clrncs, and their need to confirm air crew readbacks are correct. In our cockpit, we should have remonitored ATIS when advised it had changed. Further, we should have queried both approach and tower regarding their nonstandard routing clrncs for our expected landing runway. Supplemental information from acn 537574: after being based at mdw for the past 8 yrs, this is the first time I've had a complete breakdown in communication with approach and tower. Approach knew I had ATIS information, but didn't pass on the change in landing runway like they usually do with winds and altimeter setting. Checking on with tower, he told us to circle and landing clearance shortly. We were VMC and in the past, I've been given a vector to a left downwind for runway 22L, so I thought this is what they had in mind. All of us failed to communicate with each other for whatever reasons and luckily it merely turned into an embarrassing situation, but one we quickly recovered from without any danger to aircraft safety.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A B737-700 FLC TURNS FOR A WRONG RWY APCH DURING A PLANNED CIRCLING APCH TO RWY 22L AFTER PASSING THE FAF RWY 4R AT MDW, IL.
Narrative: ON LAST LEG OF LAST DAY OF 3-DAY TRIP, I WAS PF. ALL OPS WERE NORMAL UNTIL ARR AT MDW. THE INITIAL ATIS CALLED FOR GUSTY WINDS FROM THE SSE, AND DIRECTED ILS RWY 31C CIRCLE TO LAND RWY 22L. WHEN THE CAPT (PNF) CHKED IN WITH ORD APCH, WE WERE ADVISED OF A NEW ATIS WHICH TOLD US TO EXPECT VECTORS TO ILS RWY 4R CIRCLE TO LAND. NO CHANGE IN WINDS WERE PROVIDED, NOR WAS A CHANGE TO THE LNDG RWY MENTIONED. THE PNF READBACK ACKNOWLEDGED 'VECTOR TO ILS RWY 4R, CIRCLE TO LAND RWY 22L.' ORD APCH OFFERED NO CORRECTION TO THIS READING. IN THE COCKPIT, WE DISCUSSED THE UNUSUAL ROUTING, THEN REPROGRAMMED THE FMS AND REBRIEFED HOW WE PLANNED TO EXECUTE THE CIRCLING MANEUVER. THE ILS RWY 4R WAS FLOWN NORMALLY, AND WE WERE HANDED OFF TO TWR AT THE OM. TWR CLRED US TO CIRCLE, BUT STILL DID NOT MENTION A CHANGE IN LNDG RWY. AT ABOUT 2-3 NM FROM THE FIELD, WE STARTED TO MANEUVER E FOR A L DOWNWIND TO RWY 22L. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, TWR DIRECTED US TO MANEUVER W FOR A R DOWNWIND (AGAIN NO RWY MENTIONED). WE REVERSED OUR TURN AND MANEUVERED FOR A R DOWNWIND TO RWY 22L. TWR THEN ASKED US IF WE HAD ENOUGH ROOM TO TURN FINAL FOR RWY 13C. THIS WAS THE FIRST MENTION WE CAN RECALL OF RWY 13C BEING THE ACTIVE RWY. WE RESPONDED THAT WE HAD BEEN MANEUVERING FOR RWY 22L AND COULD NOT LAND ON RWY 13C FROM OUR CURRENT POS. OUR CLRNC WAS THEN CANCELED, AND WE WERE REVECTORED TO THE ILS RWY 4R CIRCLE TO LAND RWY 13R. THIS WAS FLOWN NORMALLY, AFTER ATIS WAS FULLY OBTAINED AND OPC DATA COMPUTED. ATC COMS AND READBACK ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS APPEAR TO BE THE ROOT ISSUE WITH THIS INCIDENT. WHILE WE MAY HAVE MISSED IT, BOTH THE PF AND PNF NEVER HEARD A CHANGE TO THE LNDG RWY. FURTHER, APCH DID NOT CORRECT OUR READBACK EXPRESSING INTENT TO CIRCLE TO RWY 22. LASTLY, MDW TWR DID NOT SPECIFY THE LNDG RWY IN ITS XMISSIONS. RECOMMENDATION: RE-EMPHASIZE ATC ISSUE COMPLETE CLRNCS, AND THEIR NEED TO CONFIRM AIR CREW READBACKS ARE CORRECT. IN OUR COCKPIT, WE SHOULD HAVE REMONITORED ATIS WHEN ADVISED IT HAD CHANGED. FURTHER, WE SHOULD HAVE QUERIED BOTH APCH AND TWR REGARDING THEIR NONSTANDARD ROUTING CLRNCS FOR OUR EXPECTED LNDG RWY. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 537574: AFTER BEING BASED AT MDW FOR THE PAST 8 YRS, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HAD A COMPLETE BREAKDOWN IN COM WITH APCH AND TWR. APCH KNEW I HAD ATIS INFO, BUT DIDN'T PASS ON THE CHANGE IN LNDG RWY LIKE THEY USUALLY DO WITH WINDS AND ALTIMETER SETTING. CHKING ON WITH TWR, HE TOLD US TO CIRCLE AND LNDG CLRNC SHORTLY. WE WERE VMC AND IN THE PAST, I'VE BEEN GIVEN A VECTOR TO A L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 22L, SO I THOUGHT THIS IS WHAT THEY HAD IN MIND. ALL OF US FAILED TO COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER FOR WHATEVER REASONS AND LUCKILY IT MERELY TURNED INTO AN EMBARRASSING SIT, BUT ONE WE QUICKLY RECOVERED FROM WITHOUT ANY DANGER TO ACFT SAFETY.
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.