|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : sfo|
|Altitude||agl bound lower : 0|
agl bound upper : 0
|Operator||general aviation : corporate|
|Make Model Name||Small Transport|
|Flight Phase||landing other|
|Function||flight crew : first officer|
|Qualification||pilot : cfi|
pilot : atp
pilot : instrument
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 90|
flight time total : 10000
flight time type : 300
|Function||flight crew : captain|
oversight : pic
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
|Anomaly||incursion : landing without clearance|
inflight encounter other
non adherence : far
non adherence : published procedure
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : anomaly accepted|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
Our part 91 corporate operation was shooting the ILS 28L at san francisco. Visibility was good except on the runway 28's. The captain was flying. I was copilot and running the radio. We had the approach lights and about the first 2000 ft of runway in sight. But tower was calling the RVR less than 2400 ft (2400 ft is required). As we approached the runway about 3 mi out, tower again gave us the RVR (+/- 1600 ft) and said runway 1 was available +6000 RVR and we could circle if we wanted. I told the captain that 28L was below RVR mins. He said he had the runway in sight and that took precedence over RVR values. I said that was not right and that we should use runway 1. We landed on 28L with no problems. Afterwards I discussed with the captain the rules regarding RVR visibilities when landing. His response was that if anyone wanted to violate us because of this, that due to conditions (runway in sight) they would have a fight on their hands. The problem: when the captain is wrong, how did you make him do the right thing. I have flown with this man many times. He is a good pilot but he is not into details (FARS). What have I learned? I am not afraid to speak up. But just making a suggestion when safety is at stake is not strong enough. In the future I will have to take a stand and insist. If you have any suggestions for a situation like this, please publish them in your bulletin. I am sure that this is a common pilot/copilot problem.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: CPR SMT LANDED AT SFO IN WX RPTED BELOW ARPT LNDG MINS.
Narrative: OUR PART 91 CORPORATE OP WAS SHOOTING THE ILS 28L AT SAN FRANCISCO. VISIBILITY WAS GOOD EXCEPT ON THE RWY 28'S. THE CAPT WAS FLYING. I WAS COPLT AND RUNNING THE RADIO. WE HAD THE APCH LIGHTS AND ABOUT THE FIRST 2000 FT OF RWY IN SIGHT. BUT TWR WAS CALLING THE RVR LESS THAN 2400 FT (2400 FT IS REQUIRED). AS WE APCHED THE RWY ABOUT 3 MI OUT, TWR AGAIN GAVE US THE RVR (+/- 1600 FT) AND SAID RWY 1 WAS AVAILABLE +6000 RVR AND WE COULD CIRCLE IF WE WANTED. I TOLD THE CAPT THAT 28L WAS BELOW RVR MINS. HE SAID HE HAD THE RWY IN SIGHT AND THAT TOOK PRECEDENCE OVER RVR VALUES. I SAID THAT WAS NOT RIGHT AND THAT WE SHOULD USE RWY 1. WE LANDED ON 28L WITH NO PROBLEMS. AFTERWARDS I DISCUSSED WITH THE CAPT THE RULES REGARDING RVR VISIBILITIES WHEN LNDG. HIS RESPONSE WAS THAT IF ANYONE WANTED TO VIOLATE US BECAUSE OF THIS, THAT DUE TO CONDITIONS (RWY IN SIGHT) THEY WOULD HAVE A FIGHT ON THEIR HANDS. THE PROBLEM: WHEN THE CAPT IS WRONG, HOW DID YOU MAKE HIM DO THE RIGHT THING. I HAVE FLOWN WITH THIS MAN MANY TIMES. HE IS A GOOD PLT BUT HE IS NOT INTO DETAILS (FARS). WHAT HAVE I LEARNED? I AM NOT AFRAID TO SPEAK UP. BUT JUST MAKING A SUGGESTION WHEN SAFETY IS AT STAKE IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH. IN THE FUTURE I WILL HAVE TO TAKE A STAND AND INSIST. IF YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR A SITUATION LIKE THIS, PLEASE PUBLISH THEM IN YOUR BULLETIN. I AM SURE THAT THIS IS A COMMON PLT/COPLT PROBLEM.
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.