 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier large transport reports controllers not stating which runway RVR report is for when giving RVR. Pilot did not have current approach plate so did not think runway had RVR.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 87840 |
| Time | |
| Date | 198805 |
| Day | Fri |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : pit |
| State Reference | PA |
| Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 1500 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : pit tower : pit |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
| Flight Phase | descent : approach landing other |
| Route In Use | approach : straight in |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 12000 flight time type : 7000 |
| ASRS Report | 87840 |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | controller : approach |
| Qualification | controller : radar |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | ATC Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Operational Deviation Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Visibility minimums for the 10R ILS are listed as 1/2 mile from initial contact with approach control they issued rvrs (ie visibility 1/2 mile RVR 5000). After final approach fix either approach or tower gave visibility, 1/4 2500 RVR, continued approach and landed. At gate. After clearing, runway tower was still reporting to following 1/4 2500 RVR. At gate I noted that my airport chart reflects that runway 10R has no RVR listed. (28L does have RVR). I found the providing of visibility RVR reports to be concerning. Either my chart is not up to date or the ATC was reporting rur for some other runway. If so the RVR couldn't be converted to visibility and RVR should have been advisory. My company check airman/manager advised that the RVR was controling but I think that it has to be installed for the landing runway. At no time was a runway number included with the rur reported. Next time I'll be sure to ask.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR LGT REPORTS CTLRS NOT STATING WHICH RWY RVR REPORT IS FOR WHEN GIVING RVR. PLT DID NOT HAVE CURRENT APCH PLATE SO DID NOT THINK RWY HAD RVR.
Narrative: VISIBILITY MINIMUMS FOR THE 10R ILS ARE LISTED AS 1/2 MILE FROM INITIAL CONTACT WITH APCH CTL THEY ISSUED RVRS (IE VIS 1/2 MILE RVR 5000). AFTER FINAL APCH FIX EITHER APCH OR TWR GAVE VIS, 1/4 2500 RVR, CONTINUED APCH AND LANDED. AT GATE. AFTER CLEARING, RWY TWR WAS STILL REPORTING TO FOLLOWING 1/4 2500 RVR. AT GATE I NOTED THAT MY ARPT CHART REFLECTS THAT RWY 10R HAS NO RVR LISTED. (28L DOES HAVE RVR). I FOUND THE PROVIDING OF VIS RVR REPORTS TO BE CONCERNING. EITHER MY CHART IS NOT UP TO DATE OR THE ATC WAS REPORTING RUR FOR SOME OTHER RWY. IF SO THE RVR COULDN'T BE CONVERTED TO VIS AND RVR SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADVISORY. MY COMPANY CHECK AIRMAN/MGR ADVISED THAT THE RVR WAS CTLING BUT I THINK THAT IT HAS TO BE INSTALLED FOR THE LNDG RWY. AT NO TIME WAS A RWY NUMBER INCLUDED WITH THE RUR REPORTED. NEXT TIME I'LL BE SURE TO ASK.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.