37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 90936 |
Time | |
Date | 198807 |
Day | Tue |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : puw |
State Reference | WA |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 1500 agl bound upper : 1500 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zse |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Route In Use | approach : circling approach : contact |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 90 flight time total : 4500 |
ASRS Report | 90936 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 1700 flight time type : 110 |
ASRS Report | 90842 |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : far |
Independent Detector | other other : unspecified |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | faa : investigated Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
There is some question about starting the approach to puw west/O the latest WX from the puw reporting facility (in this case it is our own company). I had a hard copy printout with the latest issued at the time of departure from spokane. On contacting puw operations (company) inbound my new first officer only received a wind and altimeter reading. He did not request visibility and ceilings. I also failed to question. I was also anticipating a contact approach as I was below the clouds in light rain conditions with good ground contact. With an FAA route check airman onboard and observing, an instrument approach was started into puw. The approach (VOR runway 5), approved by sea ATC, was changed to a contact approach passing the VOR outbnd to aid in an ontime arrival. Unicom frequency was being monitored and on leaving ATC frequency company remote aircraft watch radio was again selected. A straight in landing to runway 5 had been briefed, but a circling left hand pattern to runway 23 was also discussed 3 mi out. Company remote reported a light single engine aircraft passing north to south over the field and entering a left downwind for runway 23. With the runway just coming into view, the approach to runway 5 was stopped in favor of a left downwind to runway 23. Remaining at about 4000' (1500' AGL) and on a wide downwind, company radio reported the small aircraft on a close in pattern. I saw the aircraft on a short final as we turned base for a normal landing (part 91 operations do not require a remote radio, but we operate both part 91 and 121 operations into puw and station personnel work hard at providing it for all company aircraft.) the flight departed puw with the FAA still onboard. The FAA observer spoke to me (and not me first officer) on leaving the aircraft in lewiston about starting an approach west/O the latest WX. I saw no written report nor signed anything. I did receive a phone call from my chief pilot as it appears some sort of (for your interest only) report was forwarded to the chief ffa officer overseeing our operations. I was not concerned with starting the approach and felt I had sufficient information. The FAA may have not, but still allowed the approach to continue and to depart for the next destination. I was asked by my chief pilot to submit this NASA report.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR LTT MADE CONTACT APCH INTO PUW WITHOUT REQUESTING LATEST WX FROM COMPANY AT PUW. ACI OBSERVING.
Narrative: THERE IS SOME QUESTION ABOUT STARTING THE APCH TO PUW W/O THE LATEST WX FROM THE PUW RPTING FAC (IN THIS CASE IT IS OUR OWN COMPANY). I HAD A HARD COPY PRINTOUT WITH THE LATEST ISSUED AT THE TIME OF DEP FROM SPOKANE. ON CONTACTING PUW OPS (COMPANY) INBND MY NEW F/O ONLY RECEIVED A WIND AND ALTIMETER READING. HE DID NOT REQUEST VIS AND CEILINGS. I ALSO FAILED TO QUESTION. I WAS ALSO ANTICIPATING A CONTACT APCH AS I WAS BELOW THE CLOUDS IN LIGHT RAIN CONDITIONS WITH GOOD GND CONTACT. WITH AN FAA ROUTE CHK AIRMAN ONBOARD AND OBSERVING, AN INSTRUMENT APCH WAS STARTED INTO PUW. THE APCH (VOR RWY 5), APPROVED BY SEA ATC, WAS CHANGED TO A CONTACT APCH PASSING THE VOR OUTBND TO AID IN AN ONTIME ARR. UNICOM FREQ WAS BEING MONITORED AND ON LEAVING ATC FREQ COMPANY REMOTE ACFT WATCH RADIO WAS AGAIN SELECTED. A STRAIGHT IN LNDG TO RWY 5 HAD BEEN BRIEFED, BUT A CIRCLING LEFT HAND PATTERN TO RWY 23 WAS ALSO DISCUSSED 3 MI OUT. COMPANY REMOTE RPTED A LIGHT SINGLE ENG ACFT PASSING N TO S OVER THE FIELD AND ENTERING A LEFT DOWNWIND FOR RWY 23. WITH THE RWY JUST COMING INTO VIEW, THE APCH TO RWY 5 WAS STOPPED IN FAVOR OF A LEFT DOWNWIND TO RWY 23. REMAINING AT ABOUT 4000' (1500' AGL) AND ON A WIDE DOWNWIND, COMPANY RADIO RPTED THE SMA ON A CLOSE IN PATTERN. I SAW THE ACFT ON A SHORT FINAL AS WE TURNED BASE FOR A NORMAL LNDG (PART 91 OPS DO NOT REQUIRE A REMOTE RADIO, BUT WE OPERATE BOTH PART 91 AND 121 OPS INTO PUW AND STATION PERSONNEL WORK HARD AT PROVIDING IT FOR ALL COMPANY ACFT.) THE FLT DEPARTED PUW WITH THE FAA STILL ONBOARD. THE FAA OBSERVER SPOKE TO ME (AND NOT ME F/O) ON LEAVING THE ACFT IN LEWISTON ABOUT STARTING AN APCH W/O THE LATEST WX. I SAW NO WRITTEN RPT NOR SIGNED ANYTHING. I DID RECEIVE A PHONE CALL FROM MY CHIEF PLT AS IT APPEARS SOME SORT OF (FOR YOUR INTEREST ONLY) RPT WAS FORWARDED TO THE CHIEF FFA OFFICER OVERSEEING OUR OPS. I WAS NOT CONCERNED WITH STARTING THE APCH AND FELT I HAD SUFFICIENT INFO. THE FAA MAY HAVE NOT, BUT STILL ALLOWED THE APCH TO CONTINUE AND TO DEPART FOR THE NEXT DEST. I WAS ASKED BY MY CHIEF PLT TO SUBMIT THIS NASA RPT.
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.