 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Crj-200 captain reported he was dispatched to a destination that had no ground-based approach and no alternate in violation of SOP.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1379898 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201608 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | XNA.Airport |
| State Reference | AR |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200) |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Our flight was dispatched without a ground based approach and no alternate. The dispatcher contacted me after the fact to notify me of the situation.there was not a ground based approach available at the time of our arrival in xna. We thought that only the glide slope portion of the approach was NOTAM'd inoperative leaving us the localizer portion of the approach available. Also; we had the GPS approaches available. The conditions were day time VMC. As we arrived the approach controller vectored us onto the localizer approach until we got the runway in sight and asked for the visual approach. No flags were raised about the need for a ground based approach because of the visual conditions and options for other approaches at the airport.I didn't know that it was a requirement for us to have a ground based approach or an alternate listed if one is not available. After discussing this requirement with our dispatcher my first officer and I did find wording in our SOP eluding to this. I do not recall ever hearing about this requirement until now. I now check for an available ground based approach before each flight.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: CRJ-200 Captain reported he was dispatched to a destination that had no ground-based approach and no alternate in violation of SOP.
Narrative: Our flight was dispatched without a ground based approach and no alternate. The Dispatcher contacted me after the fact to notify me of the situation.There was not a ground based approach available at the time of our arrival in XNA. We thought that only the glide slope portion of the approach was NOTAM'd inoperative leaving us the localizer portion of the approach available. Also; we had the GPS approaches available. The conditions were day time VMC. As we arrived the approach controller vectored us onto the localizer approach until we got the runway in sight and asked for the visual approach. No flags were raised about the need for a ground based approach because of the visual conditions and options for other approaches at the airport.I didn't know that it was a requirement for us to have a ground based approach or an alternate listed if one is not available. After discussing this requirement with our Dispatcher my First Officer and I did find wording in our SOP eluding to this. I do not recall ever hearing about this requirement until now. I now check for an available ground based approach before each flight.
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.