37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 812791 |
Time | |
Date | 200811 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : zma.artcc |
State Reference | FL |
Altitude | msl bound lower : 6000 msl bound upper : 35000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zma.artcc |
Operator | general aviation : corporate |
Make Model Name | Gates Learjet Corp Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | descent : intermediate altitude |
Route In Use | arrival star : shifty one |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : cfi pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 75 flight time total : 5200 flight time type : 120 |
ASRS Report | 812791 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : radar |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : clearance non adherence : published procedure other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other controllera |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance |
Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance FAA |
Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
Narrative:
The captain filed an IFR flight plan using commercial web site to fmy. He also downloaded the weather and NOTAMS from the website. According to him; and from the documentation I saw from commercial web site; the NOTAMS showed no NOTAMS for fmy found. The flight plan route for this trip was ...hpw-tyi-crg-pie-direct. And we were initially given as filed. In route at FL400; washington center changed the routing to tay-pie-as filed. Then; south of tyi; jacksonville center changed the clearance to present position direct noway-bocap-inpin-lbv-direct. We were proceeding on this routing when miami center directed us to cross hepox at FL350. I responded that hepox was not on our route. The controller responded; 'go direct hepox; cross at FL350 and you are now cleared via the shfty one arrival to fmy.' we have an older FMS; a GNS-xls; installed in our aircraft and we had to work quickly to get the arrival loaded and load the crossing altitude for hepox; which we did and accomplished the crossing. We continued on the arrival as published until reaching moemo; where the arrival directed us to turn to a 220 degree heading; which we complied with. At about this time; we were handed off from miami center to southwest regional approach. The controller queried us; 'were you given the shfty one arrival?' I said; 'yes.' the controller said; 'turn left heading 190 degrees;' which we did. The controller came back onto the radio and said; 'were you able to fly the shfty one?' I said that we were. The captain and I then looked at the shfty one arrival and he pointed out that it was an rnv 1 arrival as shown on note 1. The captain called the controller and asked if there was a problem and he said that; there is a NOTAM out that changes the shfty one to fly from moemo to lbv; then on a 190 degree heading. The captain was given a phone number to call on the ground by the fmy tower controller. According to the captain; the approach controller on the phone said that miami center was supposed to have given us moemo-lbv-direct fmy and told approach that he had done that; so approach was very surprised when we flew the 220 degree heading after moemo. The captain explained that the NOTAM did not appear in the NOTAMS that he downloaded from commercial web site and that we were given the shfty one and flew it as depicted in our current govt charts. The approach controller told the captain that this is a frequent error and the problem with flying the arrival as depicted is that arriving traffic at 10000 ft MSL is flying right into oncoming traffic departing rsw at the same altitude; creating a risk of traffic conflict. There were many mistakes in this chain of events. 1) miami center should not have assigned us an arrival that we were not certified to fly. They knew this from the aircraft suffix on our ICAO; IFR flight plan and even told southwest regional approach that we had been cleared moemo-lbv-direct; which is not part of the arrival; to accommodate our equipment; when in fact we were cleared via the arrival. 2) we should not have accepted an arrival that our equipment was not certified to fly. We were in an rnv 2 aircraft and accepted an rnv 1 arrival. In our rush to make the crossing altitude at a waypoint that was not on our cleared route; we neglected to see the note that indicated that the shfty one is an rnv 1 arrival. Had we refused the arrival; we likely would have been cleared on the correct route for our aircraft. The next time I am given a crossing or waypoint not on the route; I will not be in a hurry to accept it and comply without reviewing the charts carefully. 3) in the future other sources for NOTAMS will be checked as commercial web site appears not to have accurate records. Even though the approach controller said that they had reissued the NOTAM ten days prior to our flight; it did not appear on commercial web site. The NOTAM does appear on the dins (department of defense NOTAM) webpage. 4) if this is a problem that has occurred frequently as the approach controller suggested; the arrival should be changed promptly in the govt charts and controllers could issue verbal instructions to overfly lbv and then a 190 degree heading instead of relying on the NOTAM system to correct this chart problem. 5) the controller also indicated that the recent changeover to ICAO flight plans seems to have created some confusion as to whether or not an aircraft is rnv 1 capable or not. If the center controller had asked us; are you able to fly the shfty one arrival?; that would have prompted me to look closer to see if it was an rnv 1.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN LR35 FLIGHT CREW DEVIATED FROM THE CLEARED SID BECAUSE THEY WERE UNAWARE OF A NOTAM AFFECTING THE SID ROUTING EVEN THOUGH THEY CHECKED THE NORMAL SOURCES.
Narrative: THE CAPTAIN FILED AN IFR FLIGHT PLAN USING COMMERCIAL WEB SITE TO FMY. HE ALSO DOWNLOADED THE WEATHER AND NOTAMS FROM THE WEBSITE. ACCORDING TO HIM; AND FROM THE DOCUMENTATION I SAW FROM COMMERCIAL WEB SITE; THE NOTAMS SHOWED NO NOTAMS FOR FMY FOUND. THE FLIGHT PLAN ROUTE FOR THIS TRIP WAS ...HPW-TYI-CRG-PIE-DIRECT. AND WE WERE INITIALLY GIVEN AS FILED. IN ROUTE AT FL400; WASHINGTON CENTER CHANGED THE ROUTING TO TAY-PIE-AS FILED. THEN; SOUTH OF TYI; JACKSONVILLE CENTER CHANGED THE CLEARANCE TO PRESENT POSITION DIRECT NOWAY-BOCAP-INPIN-LBV-DIRECT. WE WERE PROCEEDING ON THIS ROUTING WHEN MIAMI CENTER DIRECTED US TO CROSS HEPOX AT FL350. I RESPONDED THAT HEPOX WAS NOT ON OUR ROUTE. THE CONTROLLER RESPONDED; 'GO DIRECT HEPOX; CROSS AT FL350 AND YOU ARE NOW CLEARED VIA THE SHFTY ONE ARRIVAL TO FMY.' WE HAVE AN OLDER FMS; A GNS-XLS; INSTALLED IN OUR AIRCRAFT AND WE HAD TO WORK QUICKLY TO GET THE ARRIVAL LOADED AND LOAD THE CROSSING ALTITUDE FOR HEPOX; WHICH WE DID AND ACCOMPLISHED THE CROSSING. WE CONTINUED ON THE ARRIVAL AS PUBLISHED UNTIL REACHING MOEMO; WHERE THE ARRIVAL DIRECTED US TO TURN TO A 220 DEGREE HEADING; WHICH WE COMPLIED WITH. AT ABOUT THIS TIME; WE WERE HANDED OFF FROM MIAMI CENTER TO SOUTHWEST REGIONAL APPROACH. THE CONTROLLER QUERIED US; 'WERE YOU GIVEN THE SHFTY ONE ARRIVAL?' I SAID; 'YES.' THE CONTROLLER SAID; 'TURN LEFT HEADING 190 DEGREES;' WHICH WE DID. THE CONTROLLER CAME BACK ONTO THE RADIO AND SAID; 'WERE YOU ABLE TO FLY THE SHFTY ONE?' I SAID THAT WE WERE. THE CAPTAIN AND I THEN LOOKED AT THE SHFTY ONE ARRIVAL AND HE POINTED OUT THAT IT WAS AN RNV 1 ARRIVAL AS SHOWN ON NOTE 1. THE CAPTAIN CALLED THE CONTROLLER AND ASKED IF THERE WAS A PROBLEM AND HE SAID THAT; THERE IS A NOTAM OUT THAT CHANGES THE SHFTY ONE TO FLY FROM MOEMO TO LBV; THEN ON A 190 DEGREE HEADING. THE CAPTAIN WAS GIVEN A PHONE NUMBER TO CALL ON THE GROUND BY THE FMY TOWER CONTROLLER. ACCORDING TO THE CAPTAIN; THE APPROACH CONTROLLER ON THE PHONE SAID THAT MIAMI CENTER WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE GIVEN US MOEMO-LBV-DIRECT FMY AND TOLD APPROACH THAT HE HAD DONE THAT; SO APPROACH WAS VERY SURPRISED WHEN WE FLEW THE 220 DEGREE HEADING AFTER MOEMO. THE CAPTAIN EXPLAINED THAT THE NOTAM DID NOT APPEAR IN THE NOTAMS THAT HE DOWNLOADED FROM COMMERCIAL WEB SITE AND THAT WE WERE GIVEN THE SHFTY ONE AND FLEW IT AS DEPICTED IN OUR CURRENT GOVT CHARTS. THE APPROACH CONTROLLER TOLD THE CAPTAIN THAT THIS IS A FREQUENT ERROR AND THE PROBLEM WITH FLYING THE ARRIVAL AS DEPICTED IS THAT ARRIVING TRAFFIC AT 10000 FT MSL IS FLYING RIGHT INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC DEPARTING RSW AT THE SAME ALTITUDE; CREATING A RISK OF TRAFFIC CONFLICT. THERE WERE MANY MISTAKES IN THIS CHAIN OF EVENTS. 1) MIAMI CENTER SHOULD NOT HAVE ASSIGNED US AN ARRIVAL THAT WE WERE NOT CERTIFIED TO FLY. THEY KNEW THIS FROM THE AIRCRAFT SUFFIX ON OUR ICAO; IFR FLIGHT PLAN AND EVEN TOLD SW REGIONAL APPROACH THAT WE HAD BEEN CLEARED MOEMO-LBV-DIRECT; WHICH IS NOT PART OF THE ARRIVAL; TO ACCOMMODATE OUR EQUIPMENT; WHEN IN FACT WE WERE CLEARED VIA THE ARRIVAL. 2) WE SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED AN ARRIVAL THAT OUR EQUIPMENT WAS NOT CERTIFIED TO FLY. WE WERE IN AN RNV 2 AIRCRAFT AND ACCEPTED AN RNV 1 ARRIVAL. IN OUR RUSH TO MAKE THE CROSSING ALTITUDE AT A WAYPOINT THAT WAS NOT ON OUR CLEARED ROUTE; WE NEGLECTED TO SEE THE NOTE THAT INDICATED THAT THE SHFTY ONE IS AN RNV 1 ARRIVAL. HAD WE REFUSED THE ARRIVAL; WE LIKELY WOULD HAVE BEEN CLEARED ON THE CORRECT ROUTE FOR OUR AIRCRAFT. THE NEXT TIME I AM GIVEN A CROSSING OR WAYPOINT NOT ON THE ROUTE; I WILL NOT BE IN A HURRY TO ACCEPT IT AND COMPLY WITHOUT REVIEWING THE CHARTS CAREFULLY. 3) IN THE FUTURE OTHER SOURCES FOR NOTAMS WILL BE CHECKED AS COMMERCIAL WEB SITE APPEARS NOT TO HAVE ACCURATE RECORDS. EVEN THOUGH THE APPROACH CONTROLLER SAID THAT THEY HAD REISSUED THE NOTAM TEN DAYS PRIOR TO OUR FLIGHT; IT DID NOT APPEAR ON COMMERCIAL WEB SITE. THE NOTAM DOES APPEAR ON THE DINS (DEPT OF DEFENSE NOTAM) WEBPAGE. 4) IF THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT HAS OCCURRED FREQUENTLY AS THE APPROACH CONTROLLER SUGGESTED; THE ARRIVAL SHOULD BE CHANGED PROMPTLY IN THE GOVT CHARTS AND CONTROLLERS COULD ISSUE VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OVERFLY LBV AND THEN A 190 DEGREE HEADING INSTEAD OF RELYING ON THE NOTAM SYSTEM TO CORRECT THIS CHART PROBLEM. 5) THE CONTROLLER ALSO INDICATED THAT THE RECENT CHANGEOVER TO ICAO FLIGHT PLANS SEEMS TO HAVE CREATED SOME CONFUSION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT AN AIRCRAFT IS RNV 1 CAPABLE OR NOT. IF THE CENTER CONTROLLER HAD ASKED US; ARE YOU ABLE TO FLY THE SHFTY ONE ARRIVAL?; THAT WOULD HAVE PROMPTED ME TO LOOK CLOSER TO SEE IF IT WAS AN RNV 1.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.