37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 600966 |
Time | |
Date | 200311 |
Day | Tue |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : a80.tracon |
State Reference | GA |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 3800 msl bound upper : 4500 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : a80.tracon |
Operator | general aviation : corporate |
Make Model Name | B737-200 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Navigation In Use | other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | approach : traffic pattern approach : visual arrival : on vectors |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 7000 flight time type : 2200 |
ASRS Report | 600966 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Events | |
Anomaly | altitude deviation : overshoot non adherence : clearance |
Independent Detector | atc equipment other atc equipment : radar other controllera |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance controller : issued advisory |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance Environmental Factor ATC Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Situations | |
ATC Facility | procedure or policy : a80.tracon |
Narrative:
We were with atl approach and on a left downwind for runway 8L. Atl always keeps you very high on downwind for visual approachs, after being told maximum forward speed up to that point. So you typically end up high and fast, and then they try and 'drop you in.' we were at 12000 ft and 250 KIAS on downwind (as assigned) within 5 NM from the airport. We got the usual clrncs. Approach control now needed us to descend fast and slow down -- something very difficult to do in a B737-200. I knew this was going to happen so I was somewhat prepared, but they were trying to turn us on a 5 mi final at approximately 5500 ft. I was very tired. We had waited over 5 hours for our passenger and what was supposed to be a short day, was now turning into an all-nighter. I told the first officer to relay to approach control that we were too tight into runway 8L. We were assigned a 120 degree heading and descend to 4500 ft, but also the controller complained that we needed to descend fast and slow down. We were at 200 KIAS and doing our best to slow and go down. I became frustrated and started talking on the radio and flying at the same time. A big mistake. I told the controller we were doing our best and to 'give us a break.' I was entirely focused on getting down and slowing down to make the runway and not get too close to the aircraft in front of us. I thought we were cleared for a visual and I descended through the 4500 ft we had been assigned. At around 3800 ft, the controller inquired about our altitude, wanting to know if we were at 4500 ft. I told the controller that I thought we were cleared for the visual. He said 'no,' but then cleared us for the visual approach to runway 8L. This deviation was caused by several factors: 1) my fatigue (part 91 has no flight/duty requirements), 2) my poor decision to try and fly the aircraft and talk on the radio, 3) trying to salvage a poor approach, 4) atl approach using this system of high altitude and airspeed into the pattern followed by massive altitude and airspeed reductions in order to be in position for landing. After being cleared for the visual, we were able to make a normal landing.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737-200 CAPT GETS INVOLVED WITH CHALLENGING A80 APCH OVER A SEQUENCING ISSUE AND OVERSHOOTS HIS ASSIGNED ALT.
Narrative: WE WERE WITH ATL APCH AND ON A L DOWNWIND FOR RWY 8L. ATL ALWAYS KEEPS YOU VERY HIGH ON DOWNWIND FOR VISUAL APCHS, AFTER BEING TOLD MAX FORWARD SPD UP TO THAT POINT. SO YOU TYPICALLY END UP HIGH AND FAST, AND THEN THEY TRY AND 'DROP YOU IN.' WE WERE AT 12000 FT AND 250 KIAS ON DOWNWIND (AS ASSIGNED) WITHIN 5 NM FROM THE ARPT. WE GOT THE USUAL CLRNCS. APCH CTL NOW NEEDED US TO DSND FAST AND SLOW DOWN -- SOMETHING VERY DIFFICULT TO DO IN A B737-200. I KNEW THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN SO I WAS SOMEWHAT PREPARED, BUT THEY WERE TRYING TO TURN US ON A 5 MI FINAL AT APPROX 5500 FT. I WAS VERY TIRED. WE HAD WAITED OVER 5 HRS FOR OUR PAX AND WHAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A SHORT DAY, WAS NOW TURNING INTO AN ALL-NIGHTER. I TOLD THE FO TO RELAY TO APCH CTL THAT WE WERE TOO TIGHT INTO RWY 8L. WE WERE ASSIGNED A 120 DEG HDG AND DSND TO 4500 FT, BUT ALSO THE CTLR COMPLAINED THAT WE NEEDED TO DSND FAST AND SLOW DOWN. WE WERE AT 200 KIAS AND DOING OUR BEST TO SLOW AND GO DOWN. I BECAME FRUSTRATED AND STARTED TALKING ON THE RADIO AND FLYING AT THE SAME TIME. A BIG MISTAKE. I TOLD THE CTLR WE WERE DOING OUR BEST AND TO 'GIVE US A BREAK.' I WAS ENTIRELY FOCUSED ON GETTING DOWN AND SLOWING DOWN TO MAKE THE RWY AND NOT GET TOO CLOSE TO THE ACFT IN FRONT OF US. I THOUGHT WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL AND I DSNDED THROUGH THE 4500 FT WE HAD BEEN ASSIGNED. AT AROUND 3800 FT, THE CTLR INQUIRED ABOUT OUR ALT, WANTING TO KNOW IF WE WERE AT 4500 FT. I TOLD THE CTLR THAT I THOUGHT WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL. HE SAID 'NO,' BUT THEN CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 8L. THIS DEV WAS CAUSED BY SEVERAL FACTORS: 1) MY FATIGUE (PART 91 HAS NO FLT/DUTY REQUIREMENTS), 2) MY POOR DECISION TO TRY AND FLY THE ACFT AND TALK ON THE RADIO, 3) TRYING TO SALVAGE A POOR APCH, 4) ATL APCH USING THIS SYS OF HIGH ALT AND AIRSPD INTO THE PATTERN FOLLOWED BY MASSIVE ALT AND AIRSPD REDUCTIONS IN ORDER TO BE IN POS FOR LNDG. AFTER BEING CLRED FOR THE VISUAL, WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE A NORMAL LNDG.
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.