 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
An MD80 PIC complains of the lack of navigation reliability when using smo VOR for the VOR DME ILS-2 runway 5R approach during lowered visibility or for night operations into MMMX, first officer.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 622325 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200307 |
| Day | Mon |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | navaid : smo.vor |
| Altitude | msl single value : 9200 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | Mixed |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : mmmx.tracon |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | ils localizer & glide slope : 5r other vortac |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach descent : intermediate altitude |
| Route In Use | approach : instrument precision |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 16000 flight time type : 2000 |
| ASRS Report | 622325 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : less severe inflight encounter : weather other anomaly other other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Weather Navigational Facility Flight Crew Human Performance Aircraft |
| Primary Problem | Navigational Facility |
| Situations | |
| Navigational Aid | SMO.VOR |
Narrative:
Mateo VOR at mexico city, in my opinion, is unsuitable for navigation. I can find no NOTAMS to this effect, but any one who has flown an MD80 with 'slant alpha' equipment in the past 6 months would probably state the same. Mateo VOR is essential to fly the VOR DME ILS-2, runway 5R approach. On this particular night, the conditions were marginal VFR at best. We conducted the approach because it was the only option given by mex approach and both of us have been into mexico city many times and are well familiar with the terrain and the problems associated with the approach. We were also getting good 'peeks' of the terrain below us. We shot the approach with no incident. But what I am afraid of, is the potential for a future incident if we continue making this approach with this type of aircraft. This VOR needs fixing, or we need to develop an alternate approach procedure or stop flying/alpha aircraft into mexico city.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN MD80 PIC COMPLAINS OF THE LACK OF NAV RELIABILITY WHEN USING SMO VOR FOR THE VOR DME ILS-2 RWY 5R APCH DURING LOWERED VISIBILITY OR FOR NIGHT OPS INTO MMMX, FO.
Narrative: MATEO VOR AT MEXICO CITY, IN MY OPINION, IS UNSUITABLE FOR NAV. I CAN FIND NO NOTAMS TO THIS EFFECT, BUT ANY ONE WHO HAS FLOWN AN MD80 WITH 'SLANT ALPHA' EQUIP IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS WOULD PROBABLY STATE THE SAME. MATEO VOR IS ESSENTIAL TO FLY THE VOR DME ILS-2, RWY 5R APCH. ON THIS PARTICULAR NIGHT, THE CONDITIONS WERE MARGINAL VFR AT BEST. WE CONDUCTED THE APCH BECAUSE IT WAS THE ONLY OPTION GIVEN BY MEX APCH AND BOTH OF US HAVE BEEN INTO MEXICO CITY MANY TIMES AND ARE WELL FAMILIAR WITH THE TERRAIN AND THE PROBS ASSOCIATED WITH THE APCH. WE WERE ALSO GETTING GOOD 'PEEKS' OF THE TERRAIN BELOW US. WE SHOT THE APCH WITH NO INCIDENT. BUT WHAT I AM AFRAID OF, IS THE POTENTIAL FOR A FUTURE INCIDENT IF WE CONTINUE MAKING THIS APCH WITH THIS TYPE OF ACFT. THIS VOR NEEDS FIXING, OR WE NEED TO DEVELOP AN ALTERNATE APCH PROC OR STOP FLYING/ALPHA ACFT INTO MEXICO CITY.
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.