Air carrier X non adherence to ATC clearance refused radar vector received TCASII RA had less than standard separation from air carrier Y. Evasive action taken. Pilot deviation.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	244137
Time
Date	199306
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : ioc
State Reference	CO
Altitude	msl bound lower : 11000 msl bound upper : 11000
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Dusk
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : den tower : abq
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 14600 flight time type : 9800
ASRS Report	244137
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 14000 flight time type : 5500
ASRS Report	244135
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : excursion from assigned altitude conflict : airborne less severe inflight encounter : weather non adherence : clearance non adherence : required legal separation other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance flight crew : took evasive action other
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Miss Distance	horizontal : 6000 vertical : 500
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Weather
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Air carrier X on descent/approach under radar vectors by den approach. We were given a turn to 020 degrees because of traffic. We were unable to comply due to severe WX (thunderstorm) on that heading. At the same time, we got a TCASII RA to descend. We did, and descended to 10500 ft (conflict was resolved). The controller (at same time) gave air carrier Y an immediate turn. We returned to 11000 ft. Controller was very upset that we did not comply with his vector. Any professional pilot knows that severe WX avoidance is more important than a sanitized approach. (So is avoiding traffic.) controllers should realize that it is not always possible to exactly comply with their instructions and should have an alternate plan (I think most do). This controller seemed not to ever understand our needs and our reaction. Supplemental information from acn 244135: den approach issued air carrier X a 020 degree heading. I responded unable account thunderstorm activity. I advised we could fly a 355 degree heading and den did not respond immediately, but issued air carrier Y a tight right turn. Shortly thereafter, TCASII issued an RA 'descend, descend.' we descended to 10500 ft until clear of conflict and returned to 11000 ft. Talked by phone with den TRACON about loss of separation and my reluctance to fly into thunderstorms.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC REFUSED RADAR VECTOR RECEIVED TCASII RA HAD LTSS FROM ACR Y. EVASIVE ACTION TAKEN. PLTDEV.

Narrative: ACR X ON DSCNT/APCH UNDER RADAR VECTORS BY DEN APCH. WE WERE GIVEN A TURN TO 020 DEGS BECAUSE OF TFC. WE WERE UNABLE TO COMPLY DUE TO SEVERE WX (TSTM) ON THAT HDG. AT THE SAME TIME, WE GOT A TCASII RA TO DSND. WE DID, AND DSNDED TO 10500 FT (CONFLICT WAS RESOLVED). THE CTLR (AT SAME TIME) GAVE ACR Y AN IMMEDIATE TURN. WE RETURNED TO 11000 FT. CTLR WAS VERY UPSET THAT WE DID NOT COMPLY WITH HIS VECTOR. ANY PROFESSIONAL PLT KNOWS THAT SEVERE WX AVOIDANCE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN A SANITIZED APCH. (SO IS AVOIDING TFC.) CTLRS SHOULD REALIZE THAT IT IS NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO EXACTLY COMPLY WITH THEIR INSTRUCTIONS AND SHOULD HAVE AN ALTERNATE PLAN (I THINK MOST DO). THIS CTLR SEEMED NOT TO EVER UNDERSTAND OUR NEEDS AND OUR REACTION. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM ACN 244135: DEN APCH ISSUED ACR X A 020 DEG HDG. I RESPONDED UNABLE ACCOUNT TSTM ACTIVITY. I ADVISED WE COULD FLY A 355 DEG HDG AND DEN DID NOT RESPOND IMMEDIATELY, BUT ISSUED ACR Y A TIGHT R TURN. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, TCASII ISSUED AN RA 'DSND, DSND.' WE DSNDED TO 10500 FT UNTIL CLR OF CONFLICT AND RETURNED TO 11000 FT. TALKED BY PHONE WITH DEN TRACON ABOUT LOSS OF SEPARATION AND MY RELUCTANCE TO FLY INTO TSTMS.

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.