 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Wrong airport approach when a cpr hawker 800XP starts a visual approach to top airport, thinking initially that it was foe while on top tower frequency, thinking it was foe tower, 5 NM north of top, ks.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 561631 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200209 |
| Day | Thu |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : top.airport |
| State Reference | KS |
| Altitude | msl single value : 3000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | artcc : zau.artcc tower : foe.tower tower : top.tower |
| Operator | general aviation : corporate |
| Make Model Name | BAe 125 Series 800 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Navigation In Use | other |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Route In Use | approach : traffic pattern |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : corporate |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : atp pilot : cfi |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 144 flight time total : 6100 flight time type : 1546 |
| ASRS Report | 561631 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : corporate |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | airspace violation : entry non adherence : clearance non adherence : far other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other controllera other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued advisory flight crew : executed missed approach other |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew other |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Airspace Structure Company Environmental Factor Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance Airport |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
We departed msp on a repos flight to mdw. While en route, center controllers said our company wanted us to go to topeka, ks. As we were headed for topeka, I called the company on the flight phone and was told to go to forbes field (foe). I never confirmed the airport identify with controllers and just assumed that the company told the controllers the same thing they told me, foe. We were cleared to contact tower as well as being cleared for the visual approach to what I thought was forbes field, but what controllers thought was top airport. Once I turned base, I noticed that my FMS didn't agree with what I was seeing out the window. We then broke off the base leg to top airport and continued to foe, the whole time thinking that we were talking to foe tower. We were in fact talking to top tower. Top tower asked us our position. I stated base to final runway 31. The controller stated that we were lined up for the foe. I stated that we wanted to go to foe. He said he would need to coordinate with foe tower. I thought that was whom I was talking to. Top tower quickly coordinated with foe tower and we were cleared to land without further incident. The bottom line is, we were talking to one tower while in another tower's airspace. Controllers advised that because the way the airports are set up, there is frequent similar confusion. The problem arose when our destination was changed from mdw to foe. Contributing factors: 1) assumption that our dispatchers gave controllers the same airport identify as they gave us. 2) crew complacency in confirming the destination identify with ATC. 3) not reviewing diagrams of the surrounding area. 4) not confirming tower frequency with published charts during handoff. Corrective actions: 1) make it a company and personal policy to confirm airport idents with controllers when a destination change is given. 2) be more vigilant and assume nothing.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: WRONG ARPT APCH WHEN A CPR HAWKER 800XP STARTS A VISUAL APCH TO TOP ARPT, THINKING INITIALLY THAT IT WAS FOE WHILE ON TOP TWR FREQ, THINKING IT WAS FOE TWR, 5 NM N OF TOP, KS.
Narrative: WE DEPARTED MSP ON A REPOS FLT TO MDW. WHILE ENRTE, CTR CTLRS SAID OUR COMPANY WANTED US TO GO TO TOPEKA, KS. AS WE WERE HEADED FOR TOPEKA, I CALLED THE COMPANY ON THE FLT PHONE AND WAS TOLD TO GO TO FORBES FIELD (FOE). I NEVER CONFIRMED THE ARPT IDENT WITH CTLRS AND JUST ASSUMED THAT THE COMPANY TOLD THE CTLRS THE SAME THING THEY TOLD ME, FOE. WE WERE CLRED TO CONTACT TWR AS WELL AS BEING CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO WHAT I THOUGHT WAS FORBES FIELD, BUT WHAT CTLRS THOUGHT WAS TOP ARPT. ONCE I TURNED BASE, I NOTICED THAT MY FMS DIDN'T AGREE WITH WHAT I WAS SEEING OUT THE WINDOW. WE THEN BROKE OFF THE BASE LEG TO TOP ARPT AND CONTINUED TO FOE, THE WHOLE TIME THINKING THAT WE WERE TALKING TO FOE TWR. WE WERE IN FACT TALKING TO TOP TWR. TOP TWR ASKED US OUR POS. I STATED BASE TO FINAL RWY 31. THE CTLR STATED THAT WE WERE LINED UP FOR THE FOE. I STATED THAT WE WANTED TO GO TO FOE. HE SAID HE WOULD NEED TO COORDINATE WITH FOE TWR. I THOUGHT THAT WAS WHOM I WAS TALKING TO. TOP TWR QUICKLY COORDINATED WITH FOE TWR AND WE WERE CLRED TO LAND WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. THE BOTTOM LINE IS, WE WERE TALKING TO ONE TWR WHILE IN ANOTHER TWR'S AIRSPACE. CTLRS ADVISED THAT BECAUSE THE WAY THE ARPTS ARE SET UP, THERE IS FREQUENT SIMILAR CONFUSION. THE PROB AROSE WHEN OUR DEST WAS CHANGED FROM MDW TO FOE. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: 1) ASSUMPTION THAT OUR DISPATCHERS GAVE CTLRS THE SAME ARPT IDENT AS THEY GAVE US. 2) CREW COMPLACENCY IN CONFIRMING THE DEST IDENT WITH ATC. 3) NOT REVIEWING DIAGRAMS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. 4) NOT CONFIRMING TWR FREQ WITH PUBLISHED CHARTS DURING HDOF. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: 1) MAKE IT A COMPANY AND PERSONAL POLICY TO CONFIRM ARPT IDENTS WITH CTLRS WHEN A DEST CHANGE IS GIVEN. 2) BE MORE VIGILANT AND ASSUME NOTHING.
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.