37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 912736 |
Time | |
Date | 201009 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Flight Plan | None |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Flying Single Pilot |
Qualification | Flight Crew Private |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 23 Flight Crew Total 140 Flight Crew Type 90 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types |
Narrative:
I was vectored to a visual approach to runway 35R; while parallel operations were being conducted on 35L and 35R. I had approached from the east; and was first vectored to 220; then gradually vectored to a heading of about 260; i.e. A right base to 35L. I was on the right base when approach cleared me to land number two behind a cherokee; and told me to contact the tower. I saw the cherokee just clearing the numbers; so reported it in sight and acknowledged the instruction to contact the tower. I then changed to the tower frequency and contacted tower. As I did so; I was beginning to make my turn to final. But rather than turning to line up with 35R; I was turning more slowly to line up with taxiway charlie east of 35L. Fortunately; the tower controller saw that I was passing the center line of 35R; and called out to me that a B737 was on parallel approach to 35L asking if I had that traffic in sight. I looked left and saw the traffic and reported it in sight. At that moment; I recognized my error and began turning tighter back to runway 35R. The controller then called me out to the 737; saying there was a skyhawk to the B737's right that had apparently overshot runway 35R. The 737 reported me in sight. The controller then asked if I had runway 35R in sight. I replied that I did; and the controller confirmed that I was cleared to land on 35R. I then completed my landing on 35R without further incident. I don't really know exactly how I became confused. I had identified runway 35R while on approach; as I clearly saw the cherokee landing on 35R and reported him in sight. It was when I looked up after changing the radio from approach to tower that I visually cued in on the wrong concrete while beginning my turn to final. I believe the main factors contributing to my error were the following: first; it was my first time into a class C airport. While I had thoroughly studied and prepared for the trip; and believed I knew what to expect; I had some anxiety about getting things right. Second; after the approach controller began to give me vectors; I realized that I had not corrected my dg to the compass for some time; and my dg had drifted. So while trying to follow vectors; I was also trying to figure out how to adjust for the dg being off. I was concerned that I may not be flying the vectors very precisely. Finally; while I had all the correct frequencies in the radio; I was instructed to change from approach to tower just as I needed to begin my turn to final. Again; being concerned about getting everything right; I probably spent a little longer than usual confirming that I was setting to the correct communications radio and that it had the correct frequency in the active. I think I just got a little overwhelmed. I was so concerned about not making an error on the little things that I lost sight of the big picture. The main factor in this incident was my lack of experience and failure to insure I had the right concrete in sight. I do note the aim says that when conducting parallel operations on runways separated by at least 2;500 but no more then 4;300 ft; approach vectors will be given at an angle not greater then 30 degrees from final; absent radar; visual or vertical separation. I think runway 35L and 35R are substantially more then 4;300 ft apart; and I am sure we had both visual and radar separation; so the aim is not directly applicable. But I do think that being vectored in at something substantially less than the 90 degrees that I was vectored in on may have made my overshoot less likely.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A low time C172 flew into a Class C airport for the first time and lined up on taxiway adjacent to one of the parallel runways as a B737 was also beginning its approach. The low time pilot was confused and lack of experience was the major factor.
Narrative: I was vectored to a visual approach to Runway 35R; while parallel operations were being conducted on 35L and 35R. I had approached from the east; and was first vectored to 220; then gradually vectored to a heading of about 260; i.e. a right base to 35L. I was on the right base when Approach cleared me to land number two behind a Cherokee; and told me to contact the Tower. I saw the Cherokee just clearing the numbers; so reported it in sight and acknowledged the instruction to contact the Tower. I then changed to the Tower frequency and contacted Tower. As I did so; I was beginning to make my turn to final. But rather than turning to line up with 35R; I was turning more slowly to line up with taxiway Charlie east of 35L. Fortunately; the Tower Controller saw that I was passing the center line of 35R; and called out to me that a B737 was on parallel approach to 35L asking if I had that traffic in sight. I looked left and saw the traffic and reported it in sight. At that moment; I recognized my error and began turning tighter back to Runway 35R. The Controller then called me out to the 737; saying there was a Skyhawk to the B737's right that had apparently overshot Runway 35R. The 737 reported me in sight. The Controller then asked if I had Runway 35R in sight. I replied that I did; and the Controller confirmed that I was cleared to land on 35R. I then completed my landing on 35R without further incident. I don't really know exactly how I became confused. I had identified Runway 35R while on approach; as I clearly saw the Cherokee landing on 35R and reported him in sight. It was when I looked up after changing the radio from Approach to Tower that I visually cued in on the wrong concrete while beginning my turn to final. I believe the main factors contributing to my error were the following: First; it was my first time into a Class C airport. While I had thoroughly studied and prepared for the trip; and believed I knew what to expect; I had some anxiety about getting things right. Second; after the Approach Controller began to give me vectors; I realized that I had not corrected my DG to the compass for some time; and my DG had drifted. So while trying to follow vectors; I was also trying to figure out how to adjust for the DG being off. I was concerned that I may not be flying the vectors very precisely. Finally; while I had all the correct frequencies in the radio; I was instructed to change from Approach to Tower just as I needed to begin my turn to final. Again; being concerned about getting everything right; I probably spent a little longer than usual confirming that I was setting to the correct communications radio and that it had the correct frequency in the active. I think I just got a little overwhelmed. I was so concerned about not making an error on the little things that I lost sight of the big picture. The main factor in this incident was my lack of experience and failure to insure I had the right concrete in sight. I do note the AIM says that when conducting parallel operations on runways separated by at least 2;500 but no more then 4;300 FT; approach vectors will be given at an angle not greater then 30 degrees from final; absent radar; visual or vertical separation. I think Runway 35L and 35R are substantially more then 4;300 FT apart; and I am sure we had both visual and radar separation; so the AIM is not directly applicable. But I do think that being vectored in at something substantially less than the 90 degrees that I was vectored in on may have made my overshoot less likely.
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.