37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 564856 |
Time | |
Date | 200210 |
Day | Thu |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : pie.airport |
State Reference | FL |
Altitude | msl single value : 1600 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : pie.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach landing : go around |
Route In Use | approach : visual |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : pie.tower |
Make Model Name | Small Aircraft |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Route In Use | approach : traffic pattern |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 210 flight time total : 12000 flight time type : 1000 |
ASRS Report | 567856 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Events | |
Anomaly | conflict : airborne critical non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : took evasive action flight crew : executed go around |
Miss Distance | vertical : 0 |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | ATC Human Performance |
Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
Narrative:
While on a visual approach (first mistake) using localizer back course runway 35R at kpie with first officer flying, tower advised us that light aircraft would be landing simultaneously on the parallel runway 35L. I acknowledged this information and shortly (very!) tower pointed out traffic for the parallel. Nearly simultaneously, TCASII generated a TA, followed briefly by a descend RA. I had my TCASII at a minimum 5 mi setting and the RA target appeared co-located on the display. The RA instructed 'descend,' which I found unusual that close to the ground. We frantically searched for the traffic and elected to go around. It seemed like there was no place to go for traffic that could not be seen and I feel that the first officer's straight ahead missed approach was probably as safe as any decision. Surprisingly enough, the tower controller sounded pissed off at us for going around instead of continuing to land. Not being able to see someone who should have been at approximately 10-11 O'clock position and well less than 1 mi. Myself, the first officer, and the jumpseater all agreed (later) that we all imagined the light aircraft had lined up for the wrong runway. The only other maneuver available may have been a right break, but the straight ahead 'go' worked. I told the controller we were 'responding to an RA' and then, 'on the go, responding to an RA.' the controller's response was (something like) 'I told you he was there...' either the controller didn't understand 'RA' or he hadn't learned the lesson taught by the B757 midair with the russian aircraft in europe recently. We lived to fly another day.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737 CREW HAD AN NMAC WITH A LIGHT ACFT AFTER THE TWR CTLR CLRED THE LIGHT ACFT TO LAND ON A PARALLEL RWY. THE B737 CREW WAS UNABLE TO ESTABLISH VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE LIGHT ACFT AHEAD, AT PIE.
Narrative: WHILE ON A VISUAL APCH (FIRST MISTAKE) USING LOC BC RWY 35R AT KPIE WITH FO FLYING, TWR ADVISED US THAT LIGHT ACFT WOULD BE LNDG SIMULTANEOUSLY ON THE PARALLEL RWY 35L. I ACKNOWLEDGED THIS INFO AND SHORTLY (VERY!) TWR POINTED OUT TFC FOR THE PARALLEL. NEARLY SIMULTANEOUSLY, TCASII GENERATED A TA, FOLLOWED BRIEFLY BY A DSND RA. I HAD MY TCASII AT A MINIMUM 5 MI SETTING AND THE RA TARGET APPEARED CO-LOCATED ON THE DISPLAY. THE RA INSTRUCTED 'DSND,' WHICH I FOUND UNUSUAL THAT CLOSE TO THE GND. WE FRANTICALLY SEARCHED FOR THE TFC AND ELECTED TO GO AROUND. IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS NO PLACE TO GO FOR TFC THAT COULD NOT BE SEEN AND I FEEL THAT THE FO'S STRAIGHT AHEAD MISSED APCH WAS PROBABLY AS SAFE AS ANY DECISION. SURPRISINGLY ENOUGH, THE TWR CTLR SOUNDED PISSED OFF AT US FOR GOING AROUND INSTEAD OF CONTINUING TO LAND. NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE SOMEONE WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN AT APPROX 10-11 O'CLOCK POS AND WELL LESS THAN 1 MI. MYSELF, THE FO, AND THE JUMPSEATER ALL AGREED (LATER) THAT WE ALL IMAGINED THE LIGHT ACFT HAD LINED UP FOR THE WRONG RWY. THE ONLY OTHER MANEUVER AVAILABLE MAY HAVE BEEN A R BREAK, BUT THE STRAIGHT AHEAD 'GO' WORKED. I TOLD THE CTLR WE WERE 'RESPONDING TO AN RA' AND THEN, 'ON THE GO, RESPONDING TO AN RA.' THE CTLR'S RESPONSE WAS (SOMETHING LIKE) 'I TOLD YOU HE WAS THERE...' EITHER THE CTLR DIDN'T UNDERSTAND 'RA' OR HE HADN'T LEARNED THE LESSON TAUGHT BY THE B757 MIDAIR WITH THE RUSSIAN ACFT IN EUROPE RECENTLY. WE LIVED TO FLY ANOTHER DAY.
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.