37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 599468 |
Time | |
Date | 200311 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : mfe.airport |
State Reference | TX |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | general aviation : corporate |
Make Model Name | Learjet 35 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach landing : roll |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 6100 flight time type : 200 |
ASRS Report | 599468 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 160 flight time total : 6540 flight time type : 3040 |
ASRS Report | 599321 |
Events | |
Anomaly | cabin event : passenger misconduct incursion : landing without clearance inflight encounter : weather non adherence : clearance non adherence : far |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | faa : investigated other |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Environmental Factor Flight Crew Human Performance Weather Passenger Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Valley approach had vectored us to the localizer for the ILS runway 13 approach into miller international airport. The ATIS was reporting 400 ft overcast, visibility 5 mi. The approach proceeded normally. The approach checks and before landing checks had been accomplished and upon passing the marker, a descent was initiated. During this leg, the captain was flying the aircraft. As I recall, valley approach handed us off to mcallen tower well inside of the marker. As we were receiving the handoff, a passenger leaned forward in to the cabin and began 'tapping' me on the shoulder. I moved one side of my headset away from my ear to find out if a problem existed and reminded the passenger to remain seated as we were about to land. (Prior to the interruption and approach phase, the seat belt sign was on and cabin and passenger verified clear and ready for landing.) during the passenger interruption, the captain's attention was also momentarily diverted and he motioned for the passenger to remain seated. The passenger distraction occurred approximately 500-600 ft above minimums. After dealing with the passenger, our attention re-focused on the approach. In a matter of seconds, the runway became visible, a final check was completed, the runway was confirmed clear and we landed. After clearing the runway, we were unable to receive mcallen tower on frequency, so we switched to ground. Ground advised us, we had landed without a clearance, so the captain called the tower after unloading the passenger. The captain explained a passenger interruption had taken place during the moments we were switching frequencys. The tower explained he was trying to contact us without any reply. The captain apologized for us and said we would not let happen again. Beyond the passenger interruption, we could not explain how the handoff was missed. Another of our company aircraft had landed ahead of us and explained they had heard the tower trying to contact us without a reply. They also mentioned they had turned up the volume to better hear the control tower. The captain and I returned to the aircraft, discussed the event and tried contacting the tower and ground on our #1 communication. Both frequencys worked fine and without problems the remainder of the day. At no point during the approach did the aircraft deviate from the localizer or GS as our primary attention was on aircraft control. However, for a moment, both my thought process and routine, as well as the captain's, were distraction enough that neither of us realized we had not contacted the tower. In discussing the event with the captain, we realize that at such a critical point in the approach it may be necessary to ignore requests from passenger until the critical phase of flight is completed. We further reviewed these events with our company's chief pilot.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: DURING AN ILS APCH TO RWY 13 WITH A 400 FT CEILING, AN LJ35 FLT CREW LANDS WITHOUT LNDG CLRNC AT MFE, TX.
Narrative: VALLEY APCH HAD VECTORED US TO THE LOC FOR THE ILS RWY 13 APCH INTO MILLER INTL ARPT. THE ATIS WAS RPTING 400 FT OVCST, VISIBILITY 5 MI. THE APCH PROCEEDED NORMALLY. THE APCH CHKS AND BEFORE LNDG CHKS HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED AND UPON PASSING THE MARKER, A DSCNT WAS INITIATED. DURING THIS LEG, THE CAPT WAS FLYING THE ACFT. AS I RECALL, VALLEY APCH HANDED US OFF TO MCALLEN TWR WELL INSIDE OF THE MARKER. AS WE WERE RECEIVING THE HDOF, A PAX LEANED FORWARD IN TO THE CABIN AND BEGAN 'TAPPING' ME ON THE SHOULDER. I MOVED ONE SIDE OF MY HEADSET AWAY FROM MY EAR TO FIND OUT IF A PROB EXISTED AND REMINDED THE PAX TO REMAIN SEATED AS WE WERE ABOUT TO LAND. (PRIOR TO THE INTERRUPTION AND APCH PHASE, THE SEAT BELT SIGN WAS ON AND CABIN AND PAX VERIFIED CLR AND READY FOR LNDG.) DURING THE PAX INTERRUPTION, THE CAPT'S ATTN WAS ALSO MOMENTARILY DIVERTED AND HE MOTIONED FOR THE PAX TO REMAIN SEATED. THE PAX DISTR OCCURRED APPROX 500-600 FT ABOVE MINIMUMS. AFTER DEALING WITH THE PAX, OUR ATTN RE-FOCUSED ON THE APCH. IN A MATTER OF SECONDS, THE RWY BECAME VISIBLE, A FINAL CHK WAS COMPLETED, THE RWY WAS CONFIRMED CLR AND WE LANDED. AFTER CLRING THE RWY, WE WERE UNABLE TO RECEIVE MCALLEN TWR ON FREQ, SO WE SWITCHED TO GND. GND ADVISED US, WE HAD LANDED WITHOUT A CLRNC, SO THE CAPT CALLED THE TWR AFTER UNLOADING THE PAX. THE CAPT EXPLAINED A PAX INTERRUPTION HAD TAKEN PLACE DURING THE MOMENTS WE WERE SWITCHING FREQS. THE TWR EXPLAINED HE WAS TRYING TO CONTACT US WITHOUT ANY REPLY. THE CAPT APOLOGIZED FOR US AND SAID WE WOULD NOT LET HAPPEN AGAIN. BEYOND THE PAX INTERRUPTION, WE COULD NOT EXPLAIN HOW THE HDOF WAS MISSED. ANOTHER OF OUR COMPANY ACFT HAD LANDED AHEAD OF US AND EXPLAINED THEY HAD HEARD THE TWR TRYING TO CONTACT US WITHOUT A REPLY. THEY ALSO MENTIONED THEY HAD TURNED UP THE VOLUME TO BETTER HEAR THE CTL TWR. THE CAPT AND I RETURNED TO THE ACFT, DISCUSSED THE EVENT AND TRIED CONTACTING THE TWR AND GND ON OUR #1 COM. BOTH FREQS WORKED FINE AND WITHOUT PROBS THE REMAINDER OF THE DAY. AT NO POINT DURING THE APCH DID THE ACFT DEVIATE FROM THE LOC OR GS AS OUR PRIMARY ATTN WAS ON ACFT CTL. HOWEVER, FOR A MOMENT, BOTH MY THOUGHT PROCESS AND ROUTINE, AS WELL AS THE CAPT'S, WERE DISTR ENOUGH THAT NEITHER OF US REALIZED WE HAD NOT CONTACTED THE TWR. IN DISCUSSING THE EVENT WITH THE CAPT, WE REALIZE THAT AT SUCH A CRITICAL POINT IN THE APCH IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO IGNORE REQUESTS FROM PAX UNTIL THE CRITICAL PHASE OF FLT IS COMPLETED. WE FURTHER REVIEWED THESE EVENTS WITH OUR COMPANY'S CHIEF PLT.
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.