 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Close proximity commuter small transport GA-unk. Flight crew claims WX IMC, but GA aircraft was using VFR flight plan with mode C and not ATC control.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 94547 |
| Time | |
| Date | 198809 |
| Day | Sun |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : abe |
| State Reference | PA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 4000 msl bound upper : 4300 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : abe |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng |
| Flight Phase | cruise other |
| Route In Use | enroute : direct |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Make Model Name | Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer |
| Flight Phase | descent other |
| Flight Plan | VFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 276 flight time total : 2450 |
| ASRS Report | 94547 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 170 flight time total : 2600 flight time type : 400 |
| ASRS Report | 94549 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : airborne less severe inflight encounter : vfr in imc |
| Independent Detector | other controllera other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance other |
| Consequence | Other |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 2400 vertical : 200 |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
While en route to the allentown airport via direct abe VOR (northbound) were advised of traffic 12 O'clock, 4-6 mi, opposite direction VFR mode C indicated 4500'. Approach control was not working this aircraft. We told approach to keep us advised of traffic because we were IMC. Approach then advised traffic was at 12 O'clock descending through 4300'. Controller immediately gave us a turn to 060 degrees and after the turn (just as we were rolling out from the turn), controller informed us the traffic passed our 9 O'clock, 1/2 mi, 4200' and still descending we never saw the aircraft. What caused the problem is the fact that the other aircraft had a total disregard for the rules and regulations. No pilot in his right mind should be out flying VFR in IMC conditions. Things like that jeopardize the lives of those who do abide by the regulations. Somewhere in this pilot's training process, something went wrong. Apparently it wasn't stressed enough to him that you just don't fly VFR in IMC conditions. And, the sad part about it is, that this pilot will probably never know that he came to within 200' of a passenger carrying aircraft and put the lives of those in the aircraft, including his own, in jeopardy. I just hope one day he discovers the true meaning of what VFR really is before he hurts himself or hurts others.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: CLOSE PROX COMMUTER SMT GA-UNK. FLT CREW CLAIMS WX IMC, BUT GA ACFT WAS USING VFR FLT PLAN WITH MODE C AND NOT ATC CTL.
Narrative: WHILE ENRTE TO THE ALLENTOWN ARPT VIA DIRECT ABE VOR (NBND) WERE ADVISED OF TFC 12 O'CLOCK, 4-6 MI, OPPOSITE DIRECTION VFR MODE C INDICATED 4500'. APCH CTL WAS NOT WORKING THIS ACFT. WE TOLD APCH TO KEEP US ADVISED OF TFC BECAUSE WE WERE IMC. APCH THEN ADVISED TFC WAS AT 12 O'CLOCK DSNDING THROUGH 4300'. CTLR IMMEDIATELY GAVE US A TURN TO 060 DEGS AND AFTER THE TURN (JUST AS WE WERE ROLLING OUT FROM THE TURN), CTLR INFORMED US THE TFC PASSED OUR 9 O'CLOCK, 1/2 MI, 4200' AND STILL DSNDING WE NEVER SAW THE ACFT. WHAT CAUSED THE PROB IS THE FACT THAT THE OTHER ACFT HAD A TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE RULES AND REGS. NO PLT IN HIS RIGHT MIND SHOULD BE OUT FLYING VFR IN IMC CONDITIONS. THINGS LIKE THAT JEOPARDIZE THE LIVES OF THOSE WHO DO ABIDE BY THE REGS. SOMEWHERE IN THIS PLT'S TRNING PROCESS, SOMETHING WENT WRONG. APPARENTLY IT WASN'T STRESSED ENOUGH TO HIM THAT YOU JUST DON'T FLY VFR IN IMC CONDITIONS. AND, THE SAD PART ABOUT IT IS, THAT THIS PLT WILL PROBABLY NEVER KNOW THAT HE CAME TO WITHIN 200' OF A PAX CARRYING ACFT AND PUT THE LIVES OF THOSE IN THE ACFT, INCLUDING HIS OWN, IN JEOPARDY. I JUST HOPE ONE DAY HE DISCOVERS THE TRUE MEANING OF WHAT VFR REALLY IS BEFORE HE HURTS HIMSELF OR HURTS OTHERS.
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.