37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 541016 |
Time | |
Date | 200203 |
Day | Wed |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : cak.airport |
State Reference | ON |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : cak.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Regional Jet CL65, Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | ground : taxi landing : roll |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 10000 flight time type : 2500 |
ASRS Report | 541016 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 60 flight time total : 3500 flight time type : 60 |
ASRS Report | 541679 |
Events | |
Anomaly | incursion : runway non adherence : clearance non adherence : company policies non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued alert none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
We were rolling out after landing on runway 19 at cak. Tower controller told us to turn left and taxi to gate. We were at the intersection of runway 19 and runway 14. I turned off runway 19 onto runway 14, assuming this was ok with the tower instructions. This seemed the appropriate action since 2 other aircraft were on final to runway 19 and I thought it best to exit sooner than later. Unfortunately, the tower controller thought otherwise. When I turned onto runway 14, he made the statement that I was on a runway not a taxiway. I stated that I thought it was ok since it was not an active nor notamed closed and that his instructions allowed it. He stated that an aircraft is to exit onto the first available taxiway. I apologized and stated that I thought this was ok due to the clearance I had. We continued our taxi to the gate. I feel that in this ATC environment today that we are constantly pushed to exit the active as soon as possible. Spend as little time as possible on the active runway is the theme at most airports. I believe it would be very helpful and improve safety if an exit taxiway preference is given in the instructions. In this case, there is only 1 more alternative and that is the taxiway at the end of the runway. I fly into this airport frequently and it seems that all the other controllers want me to exit onto runway 14. I assumed it was SOP at this facility, but apparently not for this gentleman. It would seem simple enough to issue the clearance as 'exit at the end and taxi to the gate' if runway 14 is not an option. This runway was not in use at the time. I called ground after parking at the gate. There was another controller coming on duty and he informed me that the controller's shift (the controller that I wanted to talk to) had ended and he had left. The controller told me that normally they use runway 14 for exiting aircraft and was unsure why the previous controller did not. Perhaps this explains some of it, as the controller may have been tired at the end of his shift. This facility does combine ground, tower, and local radar at times. I remember that we were cleared to land on approach frequency. I would think that every facility has an SOP for its operations. Although the clearance was technically correct, we misunderstood it due to our familiarity with this airport and witnessing how traffic was handled by other controllers here. Vague, technically correct instructions are not the way to enhance safety and improve the efficiency of our airspace system. A crew does not need to waste time wondering if this is a test of the rule book. A clearance should leave no doubt as to what the controller needs or desires. Instructions that clearly convey the desired outcome to enhance safety and improve the performance of our airspace system. Supplemental information from acn 541679: the controller at that time called us back and asked us why did we taxi over runway 14/32, and we explained that we got out runway 19 on the first available exit which happens to be runway 14/32. We apologized and we told him that other previous times before we had been cleared that way to the gate.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: CL65 CREW HAD A RWY INCURSION AT CAK.
Narrative: WE WERE ROLLING OUT AFTER LNDG ON RWY 19 AT CAK. TWR CTLR TOLD US TO TURN L AND TAXI TO GATE. WE WERE AT THE INTXN OF RWY 19 AND RWY 14. I TURNED OFF RWY 19 ONTO RWY 14, ASSUMING THIS WAS OK WITH THE TWR INSTRUCTIONS. THIS SEEMED THE APPROPRIATE ACTION SINCE 2 OTHER ACFT WERE ON FINAL TO RWY 19 AND I THOUGHT IT BEST TO EXIT SOONER THAN LATER. UNFORTUNATELY, THE TWR CTLR THOUGHT OTHERWISE. WHEN I TURNED ONTO RWY 14, HE MADE THE STATEMENT THAT I WAS ON A RWY NOT A TXWY. I STATED THAT I THOUGHT IT WAS OK SINCE IT WAS NOT AN ACTIVE NOR NOTAMED CLOSED AND THAT HIS INSTRUCTIONS ALLOWED IT. HE STATED THAT AN ACFT IS TO EXIT ONTO THE FIRST AVAILABLE TXWY. I APOLOGIZED AND STATED THAT I THOUGHT THIS WAS OK DUE TO THE CLRNC I HAD. WE CONTINUED OUR TAXI TO THE GATE. I FEEL THAT IN THIS ATC ENVIRONMENT TODAY THAT WE ARE CONSTANTLY PUSHED TO EXIT THE ACTIVE ASAP. SPEND AS LITTLE TIME AS POSSIBLE ON THE ACTIVE RWY IS THE THEME AT MOST ARPTS. I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL AND IMPROVE SAFETY IF AN EXIT TXWY PREFERENCE IS GIVEN IN THE INSTRUCTIONS. IN THIS CASE, THERE IS ONLY 1 MORE ALTERNATIVE AND THAT IS THE TXWY AT THE END OF THE RWY. I FLY INTO THIS ARPT FREQUENTLY AND IT SEEMS THAT ALL THE OTHER CTLRS WANT ME TO EXIT ONTO RWY 14. I ASSUMED IT WAS SOP AT THIS FACILITY, BUT APPARENTLY NOT FOR THIS GENTLEMAN. IT WOULD SEEM SIMPLE ENOUGH TO ISSUE THE CLRNC AS 'EXIT AT THE END AND TAXI TO THE GATE' IF RWY 14 IS NOT AN OPTION. THIS RWY WAS NOT IN USE AT THE TIME. I CALLED GND AFTER PARKING AT THE GATE. THERE WAS ANOTHER CTLR COMING ON DUTY AND HE INFORMED ME THAT THE CTLR'S SHIFT (THE CTLR THAT I WANTED TO TALK TO) HAD ENDED AND HE HAD LEFT. THE CTLR TOLD ME THAT NORMALLY THEY USE RWY 14 FOR EXITING ACFT AND WAS UNSURE WHY THE PREVIOUS CTLR DID NOT. PERHAPS THIS EXPLAINS SOME OF IT, AS THE CTLR MAY HAVE BEEN TIRED AT THE END OF HIS SHIFT. THIS FACILITY DOES COMBINE GND, TWR, AND LCL RADAR AT TIMES. I REMEMBER THAT WE WERE CLRED TO LAND ON APCH FREQ. I WOULD THINK THAT EVERY FACILITY HAS AN SOP FOR ITS OPS. ALTHOUGH THE CLRNC WAS TECHNICALLY CORRECT, WE MISUNDERSTOOD IT DUE TO OUR FAMILIARITY WITH THIS ARPT AND WITNESSING HOW TFC WAS HANDLED BY OTHER CTLRS HERE. VAGUE, TECHNICALLY CORRECT INSTRUCTIONS ARE NOT THE WAY TO ENHANCE SAFETY AND IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF OUR AIRSPACE SYS. A CREW DOES NOT NEED TO WASTE TIME WONDERING IF THIS IS A TEST OF THE RULE BOOK. A CLRNC SHOULD LEAVE NO DOUBT AS TO WHAT THE CTLR NEEDS OR DESIRES. INSTRUCTIONS THAT CLRLY CONVEY THE DESIRED OUTCOME TO ENHANCE SAFETY AND IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF OUR AIRSPACE SYS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 541679: THE CTLR AT THAT TIME CALLED US BACK AND ASKED US WHY DID WE TAXI OVER RWY 14/32, AND WE EXPLAINED THAT WE GOT OUT RWY 19 ON THE FIRST AVAILABLE EXIT WHICH HAPPENS TO BE RWY 14/32. WE APOLOGIZED AND WE TOLD HIM THAT OTHER PREVIOUS TIMES BEFORE WE HAD BEEN CLRED THAT WAY TO THE GATE.
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.