37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 835354 |
Time | |
Date | 200905 |
Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900) |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Not Flying Captain |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 45 Flight Crew Total 8200 Flight Crew Type 600 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Speed All Types |
Narrative:
We were given approach clearance to join on '240 heading; maintain 6;000 until zzzzz; cleared ILS xxl.' I read back clearance. Next transmission from approach was not completely heard; I heard '... Contact tower'. I read back tower frequency; and said 'say again on rest'. ATC: 'airspeed 160 KTS'. I read back '160 KTS'. The first officer joined approach; flew approximately 5 more miles and configured for approach with landing flaps; and slowed to 140 KTS. Tower cleared us to land; and pointed out traffic ahead was 4 miles away. Approximately 3 miles from the OM; the final monitor asked us our speed; to which I replied '140 KTS'. We were then asked what airspeed we were assigned to fly to the OM. Confused at the question; I asked what speed they wanted us at. We were instructed to speed up to 160 KTS to the OM; and we immediately complied. We were notified to call the tower on landing; due to a possible pilot deviation. I contacted a supervisor of the tower upon entering the terminal. He had already reviewed the ATC recordings; and determined that we were assigned 160KTS; but with no clearance limit. I asked him what the expectations were regarding that type of airspeed limit; and he agreed it was ambiguous; but normally the fix is attached when instructed. The ATC expectation was that we would hold the speed to the OM; and that if we desired to slow; to request that from a controller. He confirmed that no loss of aircraft separation occurred. Clarify ambiguous ATC instructions; we did not intentionally disregard ATC instructions; nor error in an unsafe way; which frustrates the situation. The big questions that surfaces is; 'should we be flying faster than SOP to the OM' on any approach?
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Assigned an airspeed of 160KTS after being cleared for an ILS approach; the flight crew of a CRJ is called to task by ATC for slowing to SOP approach speeds at the outer marker.
Narrative: We were given approach clearance to join on '240 heading; maintain 6;000 until ZZZZZ; cleared ILS XXL.' I read back clearance. Next transmission from approach was not completely heard; I heard '... contact tower'. I read back tower frequency; and said 'say again on rest'. ATC: 'Airspeed 160 KTS'. I read back '160 KTS'. The First Officer joined approach; flew approximately 5 more miles and configured for approach with landing flaps; and slowed to 140 KTS. Tower cleared us to land; and pointed out traffic ahead was 4 miles away. Approximately 3 miles from the OM; the Final Monitor asked us our speed; to which I replied '140 KTS'. We were then asked what airspeed we were assigned to fly to the OM. Confused at the question; I asked what speed they wanted us at. We were instructed to speed up to 160 KTS to the OM; and we immediately complied. We were notified to call the tower on landing; due to a possible pilot deviation. I contacted a Supervisor of the tower upon entering the terminal. He had already reviewed the ATC recordings; and determined that we were assigned 160KTS; but with no clearance limit. I asked him what the expectations were regarding that type of airspeed limit; and he agreed it was ambiguous; but normally the fix is attached when instructed. The ATC expectation was that we would hold the speed to the OM; and that if we desired to slow; to request that from a controller. He confirmed that no loss of aircraft separation occurred. Clarify ambiguous ATC instructions; we did not intentionally disregard ATC instructions; nor error in an unsafe way; which frustrates the situation. The big questions that surfaces is; 'should we be flying faster than SOP to the OM' on any approach?
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.