|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : wvi|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 680|
msl bound upper : 2000
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : mry|
|Operator||general aviation : instructional|
|Make Model Name||Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Retractable Gear|
|Flight Phase||descent : approach|
landing : missed approach
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : commercial|
pilot : instrument
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 39|
flight time total : 6670
flight time type : 190
|Function||observation : observer|
|Qualification||pilot : instrument|
pilot : commercial
|Anomaly||non adherence : clearance|
non adherence : published procedure
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||flight crew : returned to intended course or assigned course|
none taken : detected after the fact
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
While conducting simulated instrument practice, I was cleared for localizer runway 1 approach to wvi to 'maintain VFR.' my intention was to proceed to the mry IAF after executing the approach and the missed approach procedure at wvi. An alternative missed approach procedure with a modified climb out heading is normally issued if such intentions are known to mry approach control. I do not recall whether an alternative missed approach procedure was issued in this instance. During the descent it appeared that a scattered cloud layer might preclude maintaining VFR. Approach control was so advised and the VFR restriction was removed. I anticipated other aircraft in the VFR landing traffic pattern at wvi making left turns off of the downwind leg to runway 19, so I requested and got approval to turn left upon executing the missed approach procedure if we observed other aircraft in the pattern. I then switched to CTAF as had been advised. During the final approach segment no aircraft were observed in the landing traffic pattern. I initiated the published missed approach procedure which calls for a right climbing turn direct to sns VOR (about 120 degrees) and re-established communications with approach control. I was cleared to 2000' and upon leveling noted my D/G had precessed about 10-20 degrees. I was thus heading about 100 degrees. Mry approach control called that we appeared to be making a wide turn and asked if I were executing the published missed approach procedure or the watsonville departure, which is apparently a local procedure for aircraft departing wvi in IMC. (The procedure is not published in the western us SID.) I responded, 'the published missed approach.' approach control then advised we were in someone else's airspace so I deduced they had expected us to depart the wvi area on a more southerly heading. I now had a bearing on mry IAF and informed approach control I was coming further right to 190 degrees. I was under the hood but I don't think we got into any cloud or that the veteran (and appropriately-rated) safety pilot with me saw any other aircraft in our area throughout the approach or the missed approach procedure. This occurrence illustrates the potential for problems when conducting simulated instrument practice into a non tower airport. Published instrument procedures may conflict with local VFR traffic patterns, etc. Obviously, it's incumbent on pilots conducting such practice to be extremely vigilant and conscientious in broadcasting their positions and intentions in a way that will be understood by other non instrument rated pilots in the immediate area. In retrospect it appears that a misunderstanding and/or memory lapse on the part of approach control and/or myself with respect to the clrncs issued and acknowledged may have led to this occurrence. As for corrective action, all of us in the air control loop must continually strive to anticipate and avoid the communication ambiguities that can occur.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: REPORTER PLT DEVIATED FROM THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH ROUTING WHILE CONDUCTING PRACTICE INSTRUMENT APCH AND MAY HAVE ENTERED ADJACENT AIRSPACE WITHOUT CLRNC.
Narrative: WHILE CONDUCTING SIMULATED INSTRUMENT PRACTICE, I WAS CLRED FOR LOC RWY 1 APCH TO WVI TO 'MAINTAIN VFR.' MY INTENTION WAS TO PROCEED TO THE MRY IAF AFTER EXECUTING THE APCH AND THE MISSED APCH PROC AT WVI. AN ALTERNATIVE MISSED APCH PROC WITH A MODIFIED CLBOUT HDG IS NORMALLY ISSUED IF SUCH INTENTIONS ARE KNOWN TO MRY APCH CTL. I DO NOT RECALL WHETHER AN ALTERNATIVE MISSED APCH PROC WAS ISSUED IN THIS INSTANCE. DURING THE DSCNT IT APPEARED THAT A SCATTERED CLOUD LAYER MIGHT PRECLUDE MAINTAINING VFR. APCH CTL WAS SO ADVISED AND THE VFR RESTRICTION WAS REMOVED. I ANTICIPATED OTHER ACFT IN THE VFR LNDG TFC PATTERN AT WVI MAKING LEFT TURNS OFF OF THE DOWNWIND LEG TO RWY 19, SO I REQUESTED AND GOT APPROVAL TO TURN LEFT UPON EXECUTING THE MISSED APCH PROC IF WE OBSERVED OTHER ACFT IN THE PATTERN. I THEN SWITCHED TO CTAF AS HAD BEEN ADVISED. DURING THE FINAL APCH SEGMENT NO ACFT WERE OBSERVED IN THE LNDG TFC PATTERN. I INITIATED THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH PROC WHICH CALLS FOR A RIGHT CLBING TURN DIRECT TO SNS VOR (ABOUT 120 DEGS) AND RE-ESTABLISHED COMS WITH APCH CTL. I WAS CLRED TO 2000' AND UPON LEVELING NOTED MY D/G HAD PRECESSED ABOUT 10-20 DEGS. I WAS THUS HDG ABOUT 100 DEGS. MRY APCH CTL CALLED THAT WE APPEARED TO BE MAKING A WIDE TURN AND ASKED IF I WERE EXECUTING THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH PROC OR THE WATSONVILLE DEP, WHICH IS APPARENTLY A LCL PROC FOR ACFT DEPARTING WVI IN IMC. (THE PROC IS NOT PUBLISHED IN THE WESTERN U.S. SID.) I RESPONDED, 'THE PUBLISHED MISSED APCH.' APCH CTL THEN ADVISED WE WERE IN SOMEONE ELSE'S AIRSPACE SO I DEDUCED THEY HAD EXPECTED US TO DEPART THE WVI AREA ON A MORE SOUTHERLY HDG. I NOW HAD A BEARING ON MRY IAF AND INFORMED APCH CTL I WAS COMING FURTHER RIGHT TO 190 DEGS. I WAS UNDER THE HOOD BUT I DON'T THINK WE GOT INTO ANY CLOUD OR THAT THE VETERAN (AND APPROPRIATELY-RATED) SAFETY PLT WITH ME SAW ANY OTHER ACFT IN OUR AREA THROUGHOUT THE APCH OR THE MISSED APCH PROC. THIS OCCURRENCE ILLUSTRATES THE POTENTIAL FOR PROBS WHEN CONDUCTING SIMULATED INSTRUMENT PRACTICE INTO A NON TWR ARPT. PUBLISHED INSTRUMENT PROCS MAY CONFLICT WITH LCL VFR TFC PATTERNS, ETC. OBVIOUSLY, IT'S INCUMBENT ON PLTS CONDUCTING SUCH PRACTICE TO BE EXTREMELY VIGILANT AND CONSCIENTIOUS IN BROADCASTING THEIR POSITIONS AND INTENTIONS IN A WAY THAT WILL BE UNDERSTOOD BY OTHER NON INSTRUMENT RATED PLTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. IN RETROSPECT IT APPEARS THAT A MISUNDERSTANDING AND/OR MEMORY LAPSE ON THE PART OF APCH CTL AND/OR MYSELF WITH RESPECT TO THE CLRNCS ISSUED AND ACKNOWLEDGED MAY HAVE LED TO THIS OCCURRENCE. AS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION, ALL OF US IN THE AIR CTL LOOP MUST CONTINUALLY STRIVE TO ANTICIPATE AND AVOID THE COM AMBIGUITIES THAT CAN OCCUR.
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.