 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A321 first officer reported multiple resolution advisories on approach to land which eventually resulted in a go-around.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1684539 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201909 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | DEN.Airport |
| State Reference | CO |
| Environment | |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | A321 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | First Officer Pilot Not Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Clearance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Night time. Pilot monitoring. Visual runway 16L denver. Cleared for visual runway 16L. ATC advised [other] flight on approach to parallel runway 'above and behind.' we reported aircraft in sight. Soon after I stated to captain they were overtaking and rapidly descending. Received a descending RA (resolution advisory) and complied. Resolution was resolved and a second descending RA shortly followed. Recovery initiated including slight left turn to provide distance from encroaching aircraft. Recovery was reported to ATC and we advised approach would be continued. Best option at the time because RA commanded descent and go around would have been opposite resolution and climbed into other aircraft. After second conflict was resolved we received a third RA which commanded a climb. Go-around was initiated at this time.occurred because [other] aircraft cleared for a visual on parallel runway 16L was approaching at much higher rate of speed and excessive descent rate. This was clearly caused by encroaching aircraft excessive rate of speed and descent into our flight path. Although ATC protocol was probably within all of their parameters they (procedures) clearly don't take into account one of the aircraft on the arrival flying in the manner the conflicting aircraft was operating. An adjustment needs to be made here I believe.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A321 First Officer reported multiple Resolution Advisories on approach to land which eventually resulted in a go-around.
Narrative: Night time. Pilot Monitoring. Visual Runway 16L Denver. Cleared for visual Runway 16L. ATC advised [other] flight on approach to parallel runway 'above and behind.' We reported aircraft in sight. Soon after I stated to Captain they were overtaking and rapidly descending. Received a descending RA (Resolution Advisory) and complied. Resolution was resolved and a second descending RA shortly followed. Recovery initiated including slight left turn to provide distance from encroaching aircraft. Recovery was reported to ATC and we advised approach would be continued. Best option at the time because RA commanded descent and go around would have been opposite resolution and climbed into other aircraft. After second conflict was resolved we received a third RA which commanded a climb. Go-around was initiated at this time.Occurred because [other] aircraft cleared for a visual on parallel Runway 16L was approaching at much higher rate of speed and excessive descent rate. This was clearly caused by encroaching aircraft excessive rate of speed and descent into our flight path. Although ATC protocol was probably within all of their parameters they (procedures) clearly don't take into account one of the aircraft on the arrival flying in the manner the conflicting aircraft was operating. An adjustment needs to be made here I believe.
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.