37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 652259 |
Time | |
Date | 200503 |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : srq.airport |
State Reference | FL |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : tpa.tracon tower : srq.tower tower : elp.tower |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | ils localizer & glide slope : 14 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | approach : instrument precision |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : multi engine pilot : flight engineer pilot : cfi pilot : instrument pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 220 flight time total : 15000 flight time type : 2000 |
ASRS Report | 652259 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : published procedure non adherence other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | FAA ATC Human Performance Airport Company |
Primary Problem | FAA |
Situations | |
Airport | procedure or policy : srq.airport |
Publication | FDC Notams |
Narrative:
We were dispatched to srq from atl. Srq had persistent WX of 200 ft overcast; 1/2 mi visibility. That is the minimum necessary for the ILS 14 approach. However; there has been an fdc NOTAM out for some time that raised the minimums to 1 mi visibility and changed the decision ht from 200 ft to 275 ft. Upon arrival; we queried tpa approach and srq tower about the NOTAM. Neither facility nor the respective supervisors were aware of any NOTAM. The srq local controller stated; 'it's 1/2 mi for you guys.' we checked NOTAMS in our commercial charts and found none for srq; so we elected to fly the approach. We broke out above decision ht and landed uneventfully; as did every other airline (including ours). Upon subsequent discussion with my dispatcher; that NOTAM has been in place; and people are working to have it removed. The srq airport manager is aware of the NOTAM; but no ATC controller is so aware. In this case; we should not have been dispatched to srq and once there; we probably should have diverted.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737 CREW LANDS AT CHARTED MINIMUMS ON ILS 14 APCH TO SRQ. CONFUSED BECAUSE A NOTAM RESTRICTING THE APCH TO HIGHER MINIMUMS APPEARED TO STILL BE IN EFFECT BUT WAS NOT RECOGNIZED AS ACTIVE BY AREA ATC.
Narrative: WE WERE DISPATCHED TO SRQ FROM ATL. SRQ HAD PERSISTENT WX OF 200 FT OVCST; 1/2 MI VISIBILITY. THAT IS THE MINIMUM NECESSARY FOR THE ILS 14 APCH. HOWEVER; THERE HAS BEEN AN FDC NOTAM OUT FOR SOME TIME THAT RAISED THE MINIMUMS TO 1 MI VISIBILITY AND CHANGED THE DECISION HT FROM 200 FT TO 275 FT. UPON ARR; WE QUERIED TPA APCH AND SRQ TWR ABOUT THE NOTAM. NEITHER FACILITY NOR THE RESPECTIVE SUPVRS WERE AWARE OF ANY NOTAM. THE SRQ LCL CTLR STATED; 'IT'S 1/2 MI FOR YOU GUYS.' WE CHKED NOTAMS IN OUR COMMERCIAL CHARTS AND FOUND NONE FOR SRQ; SO WE ELECTED TO FLY THE APCH. WE BROKE OUT ABOVE DECISION HT AND LANDED UNEVENTFULLY; AS DID EVERY OTHER AIRLINE (INCLUDING OURS). UPON SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION WITH MY DISPATCHER; THAT NOTAM HAS BEEN IN PLACE; AND PEOPLE ARE WORKING TO HAVE IT REMOVED. THE SRQ ARPT MGR IS AWARE OF THE NOTAM; BUT NO ATC CTLR IS SO AWARE. IN THIS CASE; WE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DISPATCHED TO SRQ AND ONCE THERE; WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE DIVERTED.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.