Narrative:

A disturbing event happened to me on sep/fri/05 while on approach to fyv. The WX was IMC and the ATIS was reporting use of the lda 34 approach. I reviewed the approach and set my EFIS with the preset function so when I was on the final vector and cleared for the approach I could xfer the settings and arm the autoplt. The lda 34 approach appears to have been set up to keep pilots clear of terrain and towers to the ese of the airport. After being vectored around for the final approach course and cleared for the lda 34 approach by approach control; I xferred the information for my EFIS from GPS to localizer and armed the autoplt accordingly. While the aircraft was banking to intercept the course; all indications to me reflected a back course approach to the east of the course line shown on GPS and mfd displays and the autoplt tried to capture just that. I immediately disengaged the autoplt and leveled the aircraft. Believing that I had set the equipment incorrectly; I hand flew the approach using GPS information down the course of 349 degrees until breaking out at 1000 ft. I was in a position at that time that corresponded with the approach chart and about 5 degrees offset from the runway. I made a normal final approach and landing with no incident. I was extremely confused though. My ego told me I must have made a mistake and needed to find out what it was. I believe that was the first lda approach I had ever made and wondered whether it was supposed to be a back course. After extensive research and reviewing all the charts I could find; I found something strange. I was scheduled into flight school the following week and asked the instructors there what I had done wrong. No one could explain to me why I was getting back course information on my equipment and why it was trying to take me off course to the east into potential trouble. The simulator could not replicate it even when we tried it from different directions. I had noticed that the frequency for the lda 34 and localizer 16 at fyv were the same and thought maybe company or feds had made an error on the charts but the idents were different. No one had ever seen 1 localizer with 2 different idents before. To cut a long story short; I couldn't get an answer out of anyone at flight school or locally. It was causing a lot of confusion; so I called down to the control tower at fyv. There is where the answer lay and the reason for this submittal. The tower controller I spoke to on the phone listened to my story and immediately explained what he believed had happened. Apparently there is a manual switch in the tower that turns the localizer from one direction to another. He believes that the tower staff on the day had not turned the localizer from localizer 16 to lda 34. He said it was not uncommon and apologized for the confusion! It seems crazy to me that in this day and age that the safety of an aircraft flying an approach at high speed in IMC is relying on people to physically flick the switch to ensure the approach is set correctly. There should at the least be a reminder on the approach charts for pilots to ask the tower if they have set their equipment up appropriately. Best case scenario is to remove the possibility of human error by making it automatic or removing one of the approachs and replacing it with something more appropriate and safe. The danger is that the back course for the localizer 16 is not the same as the front course of the lda 34. The localizer 16 back course completely defeats the purpose of the lda which is to keep us clear of obstacles on the southeast of the field. I hope that one day I do not read about an accident because a pilot got confused and flew the gauges instead of discontinuing. Now I know what to look for -- it is not a huge deal; but in IMC single pilot at 160 KTS; that is the last place we need confusion; as you well know.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE90 ON LDA DME APCH TO FYV EXPERIENCED DIFFICULTY RECEIVING LOC AND DISCOVERED LATER THAT THE LIKELY CAUSE WAS AN ATC FAILURE TO SWITCH LOCS.

Narrative: A DISTURBING EVENT HAPPENED TO ME ON SEP/FRI/05 WHILE ON APCH TO FYV. THE WX WAS IMC AND THE ATIS WAS RPTING USE OF THE LDA 34 APCH. I REVIEWED THE APCH AND SET MY EFIS WITH THE PRESET FUNCTION SO WHEN I WAS ON THE FINAL VECTOR AND CLRED FOR THE APCH I COULD XFER THE SETTINGS AND ARM THE AUTOPLT. THE LDA 34 APCH APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN SET UP TO KEEP PLTS CLR OF TERRAIN AND TWRS TO THE ESE OF THE ARPT. AFTER BEING VECTORED AROUND FOR THE FINAL APCH COURSE AND CLRED FOR THE LDA 34 APCH BY APCH CTL; I XFERRED THE INFO FOR MY EFIS FROM GPS TO LOC AND ARMED THE AUTOPLT ACCORDINGLY. WHILE THE ACFT WAS BANKING TO INTERCEPT THE COURSE; ALL INDICATIONS TO ME REFLECTED A BACK COURSE APCH TO THE E OF THE COURSE LINE SHOWN ON GPS AND MFD DISPLAYS AND THE AUTOPLT TRIED TO CAPTURE JUST THAT. I IMMEDIATELY DISENGAGED THE AUTOPLT AND LEVELED THE ACFT. BELIEVING THAT I HAD SET THE EQUIP INCORRECTLY; I HAND FLEW THE APCH USING GPS INFO DOWN THE COURSE OF 349 DEGS UNTIL BREAKING OUT AT 1000 FT. I WAS IN A POS AT THAT TIME THAT CORRESPONDED WITH THE APCH CHART AND ABOUT 5 DEGS OFFSET FROM THE RWY. I MADE A NORMAL FINAL APCH AND LNDG WITH NO INCIDENT. I WAS EXTREMELY CONFUSED THOUGH. MY EGO TOLD ME I MUST HAVE MADE A MISTAKE AND NEEDED TO FIND OUT WHAT IT WAS. I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE FIRST LDA APCH I HAD EVER MADE AND WONDERED WHETHER IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A BACK COURSE. AFTER EXTENSIVE RESEARCH AND REVIEWING ALL THE CHARTS I COULD FIND; I FOUND SOMETHING STRANGE. I WAS SCHEDULED INTO FLT SCHOOL THE FOLLOWING WK AND ASKED THE INSTRUCTORS THERE WHAT I HAD DONE WRONG. NO ONE COULD EXPLAIN TO ME WHY I WAS GETTING BACK COURSE INFO ON MY EQUIP AND WHY IT WAS TRYING TO TAKE ME OFF COURSE TO THE E INTO POTENTIAL TROUBLE. THE SIMULATOR COULD NOT REPLICATE IT EVEN WHEN WE TRIED IT FROM DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. I HAD NOTICED THAT THE FREQ FOR THE LDA 34 AND LOC 16 AT FYV WERE THE SAME AND THOUGHT MAYBE COMPANY OR FEDS HAD MADE AN ERROR ON THE CHARTS BUT THE IDENTS WERE DIFFERENT. NO ONE HAD EVER SEEN 1 LOC WITH 2 DIFFERENT IDENTS BEFORE. TO CUT A LONG STORY SHORT; I COULDN'T GET AN ANSWER OUT OF ANYONE AT FLT SCHOOL OR LOCALLY. IT WAS CAUSING A LOT OF CONFUSION; SO I CALLED DOWN TO THE CTL TWR AT FYV. THERE IS WHERE THE ANSWER LAY AND THE REASON FOR THIS SUBMITTAL. THE TWR CTLR I SPOKE TO ON THE PHONE LISTENED TO MY STORY AND IMMEDIATELY EXPLAINED WHAT HE BELIEVED HAD HAPPENED. APPARENTLY THERE IS A MANUAL SWITCH IN THE TWR THAT TURNS THE LOC FROM ONE DIRECTION TO ANOTHER. HE BELIEVES THAT THE TWR STAFF ON THE DAY HAD NOT TURNED THE LOC FROM LOC 16 TO LDA 34. HE SAID IT WAS NOT UNCOMMON AND APOLOGIZED FOR THE CONFUSION! IT SEEMS CRAZY TO ME THAT IN THIS DAY AND AGE THAT THE SAFETY OF AN ACFT FLYING AN APCH AT HIGH SPD IN IMC IS RELYING ON PEOPLE TO PHYSICALLY FLICK THE SWITCH TO ENSURE THE APCH IS SET CORRECTLY. THERE SHOULD AT THE LEAST BE A REMINDER ON THE APCH CHARTS FOR PLTS TO ASK THE TWR IF THEY HAVE SET THEIR EQUIP UP APPROPRIATELY. BEST CASE SCENARIO IS TO REMOVE THE POSSIBILITY OF HUMAN ERROR BY MAKING IT AUTOMATIC OR REMOVING ONE OF THE APCHS AND REPLACING IT WITH SOMETHING MORE APPROPRIATE AND SAFE. THE DANGER IS THAT THE BACK COURSE FOR THE LOC 16 IS NOT THE SAME AS THE FRONT COURSE OF THE LDA 34. THE LOC 16 BACK COURSE COMPLETELY DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF THE LDA WHICH IS TO KEEP US CLR OF OBSTACLES ON THE SE OF THE FIELD. I HOPE THAT ONE DAY I DO NOT READ ABOUT AN ACCIDENT BECAUSE A PLT GOT CONFUSED AND FLEW THE GAUGES INSTEAD OF DISCONTINUING. NOW I KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR -- IT IS NOT A HUGE DEAL; BUT IN IMC SINGLE PLT AT 160 KTS; THAT IS THE LAST PLACE WE NEED CONFUSION; AS YOU WELL KNOW.

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.