 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A-320 crew had an near midair collision with a helicopter while on three quarter mi short final approach to runway 22L at ewr. The ATCT local controller apparently approved helicopter operation in conflict with the landing A-320. The A-320 landed below far reserve fuel.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 586090 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200306 |
| Day | Wed |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : ewr.airport |
| State Reference | NJ |
| Altitude | msl single value : 900 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tower : ewr.tower tower : lgav.tower |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | A320 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach landing : go around |
| Route In Use | approach : visual |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tower : ewr.tower |
| Make Model Name | Helicopter |
| Flight Phase | cruise : level |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 130 flight time total : 5600 flight time type : 360 |
| ASRS Report | 586090 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : airborne critical non adherence : far non adherence : required legal separation non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance flight crew : executed go around flight crew : landed as precaution flight crew : took evasive action other |
| Miss Distance | vertical : 400 |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Company Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance |
| Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Operational Error |
Narrative:
Due to an RA on short final we elected to go around. After aircraft was stabalized and reconfigured, we were vectored back to ewr, for second approach. Advised approach controller we were getting concerned about fuel state and couldn't take any delays. Second approach successful and we landed with less than far fuel reserves. Some factors that I feel contributed to the situation were: 1) full rerte from phx to ewr with excessive deviations to south of course due to severe WX in midwest states. Therefore, more contingency fuel should have been carried. Even though dispatch legally recalculated fuel burn and reserves for dispatch. This is even more critical when operating to such high volume airports, such as the new york area. 2) even with monitored en route fuel trend, we should have been able to land with excess fuel and allowing us to return to our original course when clear of WX would have benefitted the situation. But ATC wouldn't allow it. Unnecessary flight away from destination. 3) such tight helicopter operations on final approach, contributing to RA and subsequent go around. If this hadn't happened, this wouldn't be a concern. All factors above could have contributed, but anyone of them removed could have prevented.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A-320 CREW HAD AN NMAC WITH A HELI WHILE ON THREE QUARTER MI SHORT FINAL APCH TO RWY 22L AT EWR. THE ATCT LCL CTLR APPARENTLY APPROVED HELI OP IN CONFLICT WITH THE LNDG A-320. THE A-320 LANDED BELOW FAR RESERVE FUEL.
Narrative: DUE TO AN RA ON SHORT FINAL WE ELECTED TO GO AROUND. AFTER ACFT WAS STABALIZED AND RECONFIGURED, WE WERE VECTORED BACK TO EWR, FOR SECOND APCH. ADVISED APCH CTLR WE WERE GETTING CONCERNED ABOUT FUEL STATE AND COULDN'T TAKE ANY DELAYS. SECOND APCH SUCCESSFUL AND WE LANDED WITH LESS THAN FAR FUEL RESERVES. SOME FACTORS THAT I FEEL CONTRIBUTED TO THE SIT WERE: 1) FULL RERTE FROM PHX TO EWR WITH EXCESSIVE DEVS TO S OF COURSE DUE TO SEVERE WX IN MIDWEST STATES. THEREFORE, MORE CONTINGENCY FUEL SHOULD HAVE BEEN CARRIED. EVEN THOUGH DISPATCH LEGALLY RECALCULATED FUEL BURN AND RESERVES FOR DISPATCH. THIS IS EVEN MORE CRITICAL WHEN OPERATING TO SUCH HIGH VOLUME ARPTS, SUCH AS THE NEW YORK AREA. 2) EVEN WITH MONITORED ENRTE FUEL TREND, WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LAND WITH EXCESS FUEL AND ALLOWING US TO RETURN TO OUR ORIGINAL COURSE WHEN CLR OF WX WOULD HAVE BENEFITTED THE SIT. BUT ATC WOULDN'T ALLOW IT. UNNECESSARY FLT AWAY FROM DEST. 3) SUCH TIGHT HELI OPS ON FINAL APCH, CONTRIBUTING TO RA AND SUBSEQUENT GAR. IF THIS HADN'T HAPPENED, THIS WOULDN'T BE A CONCERN. ALL FACTORS ABOVE COULD HAVE CONTRIBUTED, BUT ANYONE OF THEM REMOVED COULD HAVE PREVENTED.
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.