 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A B737-700 flight crew flying the river visual approach to dca at night in high winds and gusty conditions over-corrected for the winds as they approached the turn to final and triggered egpws obstacle warnings. They corrected and landed safely but questioned their failure to go-around during a post landing debrief.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1219347 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201411 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | DCA.Airport |
| State Reference | DC |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B737-700 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Route In Use | Visual Approach STAR River Visual 19 |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | First Officer Pilot Not Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 126 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT |
Narrative:
At night; during very windy conditions; we were cleared for the river visual 19 into dca. The approach was uneventful until we were crossing one of the last bridges and making one of our last turns. The captain was the pilot flying and made significant crosswind corrections in order to stay over the river and not get blown into prohibited airspace. During the last phase of the approach; he made too much of a crosswind correction and drifted towards the right side of the river; where there are a cluster of buildings. I felt at that time that we were slightly too low and not over the river. I spoke up and said 'we are too low' approximately at the same time the GPWS alerted us 'caution obstacle'. The captain immediately made a flight path correction; the caution went away. Both of us were very focused on getting the runway in sight and making the necessary turns. It was busy; windy and at night. It crossed my mind that we should have done a go-around. I couldn't remember if it was mandatory at night; or what and/or statements were in the QRH. Everything happened very fast and I felt that due to the intensity of the approach; the busy ATC conditions; and the windy conditions; that neither of us had time to think. We landed uneventfully and after getting to the gate; discussed the event. One of the items mentioned was that a go-around at that point was unnerving. It is a complicated go-around in that airspace under those conditions; at that point. Nevertheless; both of us agreed that we deviated from SOP and were required to go around. We looked it up in the QRH and that confirmed that we had made an error on that approach.follow SOP. We could have also briefed what we would do in the event of a go-around at any point on the approach.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A B737-700 flight crew flying the River Visual approach to DCA at night in high winds and gusty conditions over-corrected for the winds as they approached the turn to final and triggered EGPWS obstacle warnings. They corrected and landed safely but questioned their failure to go-around during a post landing debrief.
Narrative: At night; during very windy conditions; we were cleared for the RIVER Visual 19 into DCA. The approach was uneventful until we were crossing one of the last bridges and making one of our last turns. The Captain was the pilot flying and made significant crosswind corrections in order to stay over the river and not get blown into prohibited airspace. During the last phase of the approach; he made too much of a crosswind correction and drifted towards the right side of the river; where there are a cluster of buildings. I felt at that time that we were slightly too low and not over the river. I spoke up and said 'we are too low' approximately at the same time the GPWS alerted us 'caution obstacle'. The Captain immediately made a flight path correction; the caution went away. Both of us were very focused on getting the runway in sight and making the necessary turns. It was busy; windy and at night. It crossed my mind that we should have done a go-around. I couldn't remember if it was mandatory at night; or what and/or statements were in the QRH. Everything happened very fast and I felt that due to the intensity of the approach; the busy ATC conditions; and the windy conditions; that neither of us had time to think. We landed uneventfully and after getting to the gate; discussed the event. One of the items mentioned was that a go-around at that point was unnerving. It is a complicated go-around in that airspace under those conditions; at that point. Nevertheless; both of us agreed that we deviated from SOP and were required to go around. We looked it up in the QRH and that confirmed that we had made an error on that approach.Follow SOP. We could have also briefed what we would do in the event of a go-around at any point on the approach.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.