 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
B737-700 first officer reported a track deviation occurred on arrival into ric when a clearance was misunderstood.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1554955 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201806 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | RIC.Airport |
| State Reference | VA |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B737-700 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Descent |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | First Officer |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 585 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Track / Heading All Types |
Narrative:
Pilot monitoring called up ric weather; only metar available; so no runway information received. Pilot monitoring then left frequency when we were within range to get ATIS by VHF and copied down runway 02 when actually runway 20 was in use. We requested the RNAV rnp Y 02 and thought we were given that approach. Expectation bias possibly came into play for both the controller and us at that point; 02 versus 20. After crossing ducxs intersection (IAF for both runways) at 4000 ft MSL we turned on course for the approach to 02. The controller quickly spotted the turn and asked us about it. It was then that we all realized we should be turning toward 20. A vector was issued and we were cleared again for an RNAV Y 20. After discussing it between crew members it was stated the ATIS seemed to be scratchy with some difficulty to hear on VHF. Having to get ATIS by VHF makes it very difficult to back up the pilot monitoring by the pilot flying in this case. I am open to suggestion here.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737-700 First Officer reported a track deviation occurred on arrival into RIC when a clearance was misunderstood.
Narrative: Pilot Monitoring called up RIC weather; only METAR available; so no runway information received. Pilot Monitoring then left frequency when we were within range to get ATIS by VHF and copied down Runway 02 when actually Runway 20 was in use. We requested the RNAV RNP Y 02 and thought we were given that approach. Expectation bias possibly came into play for both the controller and us at that point; 02 versus 20. After crossing DUCXS intersection (IAF for both runways) at 4000 ft MSL we turned on course for the approach to 02. The controller quickly spotted the turn and asked us about it. It was then that we all realized we should be turning toward 20. A vector was issued and we were cleared again for an RNAV Y 20. After discussing it between crew members it was stated the ATIS seemed to be scratchy with some difficulty to hear on VHF. Having to get ATIS by VHF makes it very difficult to back up the Pilot Monitoring by the Pilot Flying in this case. I am open to suggestion here.
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.