|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : ccr|
|Altitude||agl bound lower : 0|
agl bound upper : 0
|Operator||general aviation : instructional|
|Make Model Name||Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172|
|Operating Under FAR Part||Part 91|
|Flight Phase||descent : approach|
|Function||instruction : instructor|
|Qualification||pilot : cfi|
pilot : instrument
pilot : commercial
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 80|
flight time total : 870
flight time type : 20
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
instruction : trainee
|Qualification||pilot : private|
|Anomaly||incursion : landing without clearance|
non adherence : far
non adherence : clearance
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : detected after the fact|
|Consequence||faa : reviewed incident with flight crew|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
Our first approach was the VOR runway 19R at concord. We executed the missed approach and proceeded to execute the NDB runway 19R at ccr. When handed off from travis approach to concord we advised concord tower that we were with him. Tower then asked 'how will this approach terminate' and to 'report the NDB.' the student said that we would like to do a touch- and-go and make a straight-out departure and that we were just coming upon the NDB. We continued the approach and saw the plane that tower had cleared for takeoff. We did not feel that there was any traffic conflict and that tower had given more than enough separation. We made a touch-and-go and on climb out tower had told us that we did not report the final approach fix and that we were not cleared for a touch-and-go. Contributing factors: because I was involved with showing the student (I had only flown with him once before) how to track and execute an NDB approach I was not fully paying attention to the communications. I had asked the student if we were cleared to land and he said 'yes.' I assumed that because the student reported 'coming up on the NDB' that no additional report at the final approach fix was needed. It was an early morning flight and there was hardly any other traffic. Because of this, I was not fully paying attention to the communications because I assumed that it would not be a problem for approach/tower to accommodate us. Correction actions: I should not have taken a new student's word on a clearance given. I should have checked with tower if I was not sure. I should not have become so caught up in the teaching aspect that I forgot to fly the aircraft and confirm all communications. I should not have assumed that tower understood that we were at the NDB when we said 'coming up on.' from now on, I will report over the final approach fix even if it is redundant.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: UNAUTH LNDG TOUCH-AND-GO WHILE TRAINING IN PROGRESS. PRACTICE INST APCH.
Narrative: OUR FIRST APCH WAS THE VOR RWY 19R AT CONCORD. WE EXECUTED THE MISSED APCH AND PROCEEDED TO EXECUTE THE NDB RWY 19R AT CCR. WHEN HANDED OFF FROM TRAVIS APCH TO CONCORD WE ADVISED CONCORD TWR THAT WE WERE WITH HIM. TWR THEN ASKED 'HOW WILL THIS APCH TERMINATE' AND TO 'RPT THE NDB.' THE STUDENT SAID THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO A TOUCH- AND-GO AND MAKE A STRAIGHT-OUT DEP AND THAT WE WERE JUST COMING UPON THE NDB. WE CONTINUED THE APCH AND SAW THE PLANE THAT TWR HAD CLRED FOR TKOF. WE DID NOT FEEL THAT THERE WAS ANY TFC CONFLICT AND THAT TWR HAD GIVEN MORE THAN ENOUGH SEPARATION. WE MADE A TOUCH-AND-GO AND ON CLBOUT TWR HAD TOLD US THAT WE DID NOT RPT THE FINAL APCH FIX AND THAT WE WERE NOT CLRED FOR A TOUCH-AND-GO. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: BECAUSE I WAS INVOLVED WITH SHOWING THE STUDENT (I HAD ONLY FLOWN WITH HIM ONCE BEFORE) HOW TO TRACK AND EXECUTE AN NDB APCH I WAS NOT FULLY PAYING ATTN TO THE COMS. I HAD ASKED THE STUDENT IF WE WERE CLRED TO LAND AND HE SAID 'YES.' I ASSUMED THAT BECAUSE THE STUDENT RPTED 'COMING UP ON THE NDB' THAT NO ADDITIONAL RPT AT THE FINAL APCH FIX WAS NEEDED. IT WAS AN EARLY MORNING FLT AND THERE WAS HARDLY ANY OTHER TFC. BECAUSE OF THIS, I WAS NOT FULLY PAYING ATTN TO THE COMS BECAUSE I ASSUMED THAT IT WOULD NOT BE A PROB FOR APCH/TWR TO ACCOMMODATE US. CORRECTION ACTIONS: I SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN A NEW STUDENT'S WORD ON A CLRNC GIVEN. I SHOULD HAVE CHKED WITH TWR IF I WAS NOT SURE. I SHOULD NOT HAVE BECOME SO CAUGHT UP IN THE TEACHING ASPECT THAT I FORGOT TO FLY THE ACFT AND CONFIRM ALL COMS. I SHOULD NOT HAVE ASSUMED THAT TWR UNDERSTOOD THAT WE WERE AT THE NDB WHEN WE SAID 'COMING UP ON.' FROM NOW ON, I WILL RPT OVER THE FINAL APCH FIX EVEN IF IT IS REDUNDANT.
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.