37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 964235 |
Time | |
Date | 201107 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.TRACON |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | Mixed |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Globemaster (C-17) |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | Other Low Level |
Route In Use | Other IR-89 |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Commercial Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 150 Flight Crew Total 3200 Flight Crew Type 2800 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Airspace Violation All Types Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Flight of 4 C-17's were flying preplanned low level instrument route (ir). We were cleared routes and altitudes and continued to fly at the top of the block due to weather on the route and the fact that we were a 4 ship formation. At point east on the route we were able to descend to 500 AGL. Passing point K we were to contact approach. We climbed to 1;500 ft as we passed point K and attempted to contact approach. We were unsuccessful and talked to center on frequency. Center informed us that we were supposed to be at 5;000 ft passing point K and gave us an alternate frequency for approach. We talked to approach control; nothing more was said and we proceeded to north field to complete our training. Upon return to our home base we were told that approach control had contacted our home station to report the incident and would be filing a pilot deviation report. As we researched the event to see how we missed the altitude restriction we found that the in-flight guide we had been using for the low level had a discrepancy on the altitude at point K as well as some ambiguity with the ap/1B. In addition; limited time to review the products for the low level and the training mission due to this sortie being a part of an operational readiness exercise at our home base in preparation for the operational readiness inspection contributed to the oversight. Possible preventive measures should include an update to the in-flight guide to mirror the ap/1B as well as more definitive terms used in the ap/1B. In addition; the crews should have more time to complete a thorough route study before flying an unfamiliar low level. The mission planning cell could also provide a better route study for the pilots and include on the charts the altitude restrictions at each point to combat any confusion while flying the low level.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A flight of four C-17's training for an Operational Readiness Inspection flew a mission following an incorrect track altitude profile which caused them to fly through TRACON airspace at a low altitude.
Narrative: Flight of 4 C-17's were flying preplanned low level Instrument Route (IR). We were cleared routes and altitudes and continued to fly at the top of the block due to weather on the route and the fact that we were a 4 ship formation. At point E on the route we were able to descend to 500 AGL. Passing point K we were to contact Approach. We climbed to 1;500 FT as we passed point K and attempted to contact Approach. We were unsuccessful and talked to Center on frequency. Center informed us that we were supposed to be at 5;000 FT passing point K and gave us an alternate frequency for Approach. We talked to Approach Control; nothing more was said and we proceeded to North Field to complete our training. Upon return to our home base we were told that Approach Control had contacted our home station to report the incident and would be filing a Pilot Deviation Report. As we researched the event to see how we missed the altitude restriction we found that the in-flight guide we had been using for the low level had a discrepancy on the altitude at point K as well as some ambiguity with the AP/1B. In addition; limited time to review the products for the low level and the training mission due to this sortie being a part of an Operational Readiness Exercise at our home base in preparation for the Operational Readiness Inspection contributed to the oversight. Possible preventive measures should include an update to the in-flight guide to mirror the AP/1B as well as more definitive terms used in the AP/1B. In addition; the crews should have more time to complete a thorough route study before flying an unfamiliar low level. The Mission Planning Cell could also provide a better route study for the pilots and include on the charts the altitude restrictions at each point to combat any confusion while flying the low level.
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.