 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier captain questions NOTAM stating GS unusable below 440 feet but no NOTAM indicating a change to DH. Reporter elects to use 440 feet as DH and lands .
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 856336 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200910 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ILM.Airport |
| State Reference | NC |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Light Transport Low Wing 2 Turbojet Eng |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Final Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Other / Unknown |
Narrative:
We were told to expect the ILS runway 6 at ilm. During my approach briefing; I briefed the operational impact of an fdc NOTAM (fdc 9/4483). Something bothered me about the NOTAM. It stated that the glideslope was unusable below 440 ft MSL. However; there was no change to the minimums for the approach; specifically; the decision altitude remained at 228 ft MSL which was 200 ft hat. My question is this: if the glideslope is unusable below 440 ft MSL; what do we follow for vertical guidance between 440 ft and 228 ft (the legal decision altitude). I personally believe this was an oversight and that there should be a NOTAM issued to change the decision altitude. On this particular approach; I elected to use 440 ft MSL as our personal decision altitude due to the NOTAM. We broke out around 600 ft and landed without incident. At the gate; I asked ground control about the NOTAM. He confirmed the NOTAM was active and that there was no NOTAM reflecting a change to the minimums. Another issue here is that the minimums for this approach may affect the use of this airport as an alternate airport. Maybe I'm thinking too much; but I think there was an oversight when the NOTAM was issued.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air Carrier Captain questions NOTAM stating GS unusable below 440 feet but no NOTAM indicating a change to DH. Reporter elects to use 440 feet as DH and lands .
Narrative: We were told to expect the ILS Runway 6 at ILM. During my approach briefing; I briefed the operational impact of an FDC NOTAM (FDC 9/4483). Something bothered me about the NOTAM. It stated that the glideslope was unusable below 440 FT MSL. However; there was no change to the minimums for the approach; specifically; the decision altitude remained at 228 FT MSL which was 200 FT HAT. My question is this: If the glideslope is unusable below 440 FT MSL; what do we follow for vertical guidance between 440 FT and 228 FT (the LEGAL Decision Altitude). I personally believe this was an oversight and that there should be a NOTAM issued to change the Decision Altitude. On this particular approach; I elected to use 440 FT MSL as our personal Decision Altitude due to the NOTAM. We broke out around 600 FT and landed without incident. At the gate; I asked ground control about the NOTAM. He confirmed the NOTAM was active and that there was no NOTAM reflecting a change to the minimums. Another issue here is that the minimums for this approach may affect the use of this airport as an alternate airport. Maybe I'm thinking too much; but I think there was an oversight when the NOTAM was issued.
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.