 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
BE9L instructor and student, on IFR approach to khky, are issued a missed approach instruction and are challenged by hky tower as flight crew proceeded to the missed approach at the airport.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 567990 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200212 |
| Day | Tue |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : hky.airport |
| State Reference | NC |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | artcc : ztl.artcc tower : hky.tower |
| Operator | general aviation : instructional |
| Make Model Name | King Air C90 E90 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Navigation In Use | ils localizer & glide slope : 24 |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | other |
| Function | instruction : instructor |
| Qualification | pilot : cfi pilot : multi engine pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 51 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 1000 |
| ASRS Report | 567990 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | other |
| Function | instruction : trainee |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | airspace violation : entry non adherence : published procedure |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance |
| Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
Narrative:
Conducting aircraft chkout training in king air 90. Instrument departure, en route, arrival phase with IFR clearance for a 'round robin' IFR flight with multiple approachs at several airports. Khky was first airport, and we had been cleared for the ILS runway 24 approach. I was in the right seat and instructing pilot in the left seat. The left seat pilot was PF, and I was handling communications to lighten the workload of the other pilot on this session. I was PIC and he, PF. He was not PIC, because his flight review had expired and I had not yet completed all of the required ground school to sign him off. When ZTL cleared us for the approach, we were advised that hickoy tower had traffic taking off and landing on runway 6, the runway favored for the wind, and that we might be asked by the tower to break off the approach. I understood and acknowledged that. Center handed us off to the tower, and I contacted the tower with our position. The tower advised us of the VFR traffic in the pattern, and of the active runway being runway 6. When asked our intentions, I requested a low approach followed by a published missed approach. I was told to report the OM. We encountered VMC well before the OM, but for training purposes, I did not report field in sight. When I reported the OM, the tower instructed us to execute the missed approach. The normal procedure is to abandon the descent, climb to approach altitude, and continue to the missed approach point before course change, and then follow the published procedure. The PF proceeded to fly in accordance with the standard published missed approach. The tower expected us, apparently, to abandon the approach in VMC, but said, 'missed approach' instead of 'break it off' or 'abandon.' we were thinking IFR procedure. I believe the tower issued an ambiguous instruction. VFR traffic was given priority over IFR traffic. The tower was discourteous on the air with us, and belligerently disregarded my attempt to briefly explain why we continued on the approach course.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: BE9L INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT, ON IFR APCH TO KHKY, ARE ISSUED A MISSED APCH INSTRUCTION AND ARE CHALLENGED BY HKY TWR AS FLC PROCEEDED TO THE MISSED APCH AT THE ARPT.
Narrative: CONDUCTING ACFT CHKOUT TRAINING IN KING AIR 90. INST DEP, ENRTE, ARR PHASE WITH IFR CLRNC FOR A 'ROUND ROBIN' IFR FLT WITH MULTIPLE APCHS AT SEVERAL ARPTS. KHKY WAS FIRST ARPT, AND WE HAD BEEN CLRED FOR THE ILS RWY 24 APCH. I WAS IN THE R SEAT AND INSTRUCTING PLT IN THE L SEAT. THE L SEAT PLT WAS PF, AND I WAS HANDLING COMS TO LIGHTEN THE WORKLOAD OF THE OTHER PLT ON THIS SESSION. I WAS PIC AND HE, PF. HE WAS NOT PIC, BECAUSE HIS FLT REVIEW HAD EXPIRED AND I HAD NOT YET COMPLETED ALL OF THE REQUIRED GND SCHOOL TO SIGN HIM OFF. WHEN ZTL CLRED US FOR THE APCH, WE WERE ADVISED THAT HICKOY TWR HAD TFC TAKING OFF AND LNDG ON RWY 6, THE RWY FAVORED FOR THE WIND, AND THAT WE MIGHT BE ASKED BY THE TWR TO BREAK OFF THE APCH. I UNDERSTOOD AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT. CTR HANDED US OFF TO THE TWR, AND I CONTACTED THE TWR WITH OUR POS. THE TWR ADVISED US OF THE VFR TFC IN THE PATTERN, AND OF THE ACTIVE RWY BEING RWY 6. WHEN ASKED OUR INTENTIONS, I REQUESTED A LOW APCH FOLLOWED BY A PUBLISHED MISSED APCH. I WAS TOLD TO RPT THE OM. WE ENCOUNTERED VMC WELL BEFORE THE OM, BUT FOR TRAINING PURPOSES, I DID NOT RPT FIELD IN SIGHT. WHEN I RPTED THE OM, THE TWR INSTRUCTED US TO EXECUTE THE MISSED APCH. THE NORMAL PROC IS TO ABANDON THE DSCNT, CLB TO APCH ALT, AND CONTINUE TO THE MISSED APCH POINT BEFORE COURSE CHANGE, AND THEN FOLLOW THE PUBLISHED PROC. THE PF PROCEEDED TO FLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARD PUBLISHED MISSED APCH. THE TWR EXPECTED US, APPARENTLY, TO ABANDON THE APCH IN VMC, BUT SAID, 'MISSED APCH' INSTEAD OF 'BREAK IT OFF' OR 'ABANDON.' WE WERE THINKING IFR PROC. I BELIEVE THE TWR ISSUED AN AMBIGUOUS INSTRUCTION. VFR TFC WAS GIVEN PRIORITY OVER IFR TFC. THE TWR WAS DISCOURTEOUS ON THE AIR WITH US, AND BELLIGERENTLY DISREGARDED MY ATTEMPT TO BRIEFLY EXPLAIN WHY WE CONTINUED ON THE APCH COURSE.
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.