Narrative:

I felt that it was important to report this incident since it may relate to a future accident. The columbus ILS G/south was moved from the north side to the south side of runway 5. The old working G/south was replaced with an entirely new system that was supposedly designed for requirements found at csg. There is an upslope at the approach end of runway 5 which apparently is part of the problem but I was also troubled by the fact that after initial attempts to fltchk and certify the system with higher minimums, pilots reported the system as wavering and unusable. It is my personal belief that west/O major contractor support the problem will not be resolved. My concern is that since this is a brand new system (it is idented as an endfire system, I'm sorry I do not know who the mfr is) this 'bug' may be passed onto other new systems and this eccentricity may not be idented yet and if it were to occur under IFR conditions with an aircraft on the approach the outcome may be fatal. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information. Reporter said the problem started when the new G/south equipment was installed in 10/90, and relocated from the left side of the runway to the right side. A taxiway extension mandated the relocation. New equipment is called wilcox endfire. When equipment was first installed, flight check aircraft said it just met tolerance, however, pilots said it was unusable. Except for one day, approachs have been either ILS west/O the G/south, or a surveillance approach. Pilot reports say there is a dip in G/south the last 1/4 mi. Reporter suspects new location. Says there are about 6 or 7 of these new G/south in use today. One nearby airport has equipment, and rptedly it is working ok. Flight check on equipment is taking place today. Everyone seems to be aware of problem, but can't correct it. No ucr filed. No aircraft incidents reported.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CTLR REPORTER STATES THAT NEW GLIDE SLOPE ONLY WORKED ONE DAY BEFORE BEING NOT USABLE.

Narrative: I FELT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO RPT THIS INCIDENT SINCE IT MAY RELATE TO A FUTURE ACCIDENT. THE COLUMBUS ILS G/S WAS MOVED FROM THE N SIDE TO THE S SIDE OF RWY 5. THE OLD WORKING G/S WAS REPLACED WITH AN ENTIRELY NEW SYS THAT WAS SUPPOSEDLY DESIGNED FOR REQUIREMENTS FOUND AT CSG. THERE IS AN UPSLOPE AT THE APCH END OF RWY 5 WHICH APPARENTLY IS PART OF THE PROB BUT I WAS ALSO TROUBLED BY THE FACT THAT AFTER INITIAL ATTEMPTS TO FLTCHK AND CERTIFY THE SYS WITH HIGHER MINIMUMS, PLTS RPTED THE SYS AS WAVERING AND UNUSABLE. IT IS MY PERSONAL BELIEF THAT W/O MAJOR CONTRACTOR SUPPORT THE PROB WILL NOT BE RESOLVED. MY CONCERN IS THAT SINCE THIS IS A BRAND NEW SYS (IT IS IDENTED AS AN ENDFIRE SYS, I'M SORRY I DO NOT KNOW WHO THE MFR IS) THIS 'BUG' MAY BE PASSED ONTO OTHER NEW SYSTEMS AND THIS ECCENTRICITY MAY NOT BE IDENTED YET AND IF IT WERE TO OCCUR UNDER IFR CONDITIONS WITH AN ACFT ON THE APCH THE OUTCOME MAY BE FATAL. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO. RPTR SAID THE PROB STARTED WHEN THE NEW G/S EQUIP WAS INSTALLED IN 10/90, AND RELOCATED FROM THE L SIDE OF THE RWY TO THE R SIDE. A TXWY EXTENSION MANDATED THE RELOCATION. NEW EQUIP IS CALLED WILCOX ENDFIRE. WHEN EQUIP WAS FIRST INSTALLED, FLT CHK ACFT SAID IT JUST MET TOLERANCE, HOWEVER, PLTS SAID IT WAS UNUSABLE. EXCEPT FOR ONE DAY, APCHS HAVE BEEN EITHER ILS W/O THE G/S, OR A SURVEILLANCE APCH. PLT RPTS SAY THERE IS A DIP IN G/S THE LAST 1/4 MI. RPTR SUSPECTS NEW LOCATION. SAYS THERE ARE ABOUT 6 OR 7 OF THESE NEW G/S IN USE TODAY. ONE NEARBY ARPT HAS EQUIP, AND RPTEDLY IT IS WORKING OK. FLT CHK ON EQUIP IS TAKING PLACE TODAY. EVERYONE SEEMS TO BE AWARE OF PROB, BUT CAN'T CORRECT IT. NO UCR FILED. NO ACFT INCIDENTS RPTED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.