Narrative:

Reported WX at san was 1000 ft broken, however, upon descent to minimums (600 ft), runway was not in sight. We executed a missed approach. The missed approach altitude was 2500 ft MSL, however, the captain climbed and leveled at approximately 3400 ft. I told him a number of times to descend back to 2500 ft, however, he was very busy and was late to respond. We were finally able to get in touch with approach, (after numerous tries, they were swamped!) and were cleared to 5000 ft. We then diverted to ont. This was our 2ND missed approach. The 1ST was on runway 27 due to 50 KT windshear (no one made it in for 2 hours). Upon reflection on the event a few items were evident: we were not expecting a missed approach because of the reported WX (we never saw the runway, WX was not correct). We were not working well as a team (the captain is very intimidating). I am relatively new to the aircraft and this was my first missed approach in the aircraft (was extremely busy in my first 2 man aircraft!). WX was 'dogmeat!' callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter was flying an MD80 and the flight crew made 2 approachs to runway 27 in WX that was reported to be well above the minimums. However, the actual WX was much worse and both approachs ended in gars. During this activity he said that he and other flcs in the area complained of the WX report discrepancies. The controllers later told the captain that no aircraft made a successful approach over a 2 hour period. Yet the WX reports remained fairly good. The reporter said that the WX service, in this case, was of third world quality. He said that he also had difficulty working with the captain during this episode. He said that the captain does not believe in CRM, in practice. They did discuss the 2 approachs afterwards, but there was not much change in his operation.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR FLC MAKES 2 APCHS, IN WX RPTED TO BE WELL ABOVE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED, THAT ENDED IN GARS WITH A DIVERSION AFTER THE LAST GAR. THE CAPT WAS ALLEGEDLY TOLD LATER THAT NO ACFT MADE A SUCCESSFUL APCH FOR OVER 2 HRS YET THE RPTED WX WAS WELL ABOVE MINIMUMS. MD80.

Narrative: RPTED WX AT SAN WAS 1000 FT BROKEN, HOWEVER, UPON DSCNT TO MINIMUMS (600 FT), RWY WAS NOT IN SIGHT. WE EXECUTED A MISSED APCH. THE MISSED APCH ALT WAS 2500 FT MSL, HOWEVER, THE CAPT CLBED AND LEVELED AT APPROX 3400 FT. I TOLD HIM A NUMBER OF TIMES TO DSND BACK TO 2500 FT, HOWEVER, HE WAS VERY BUSY AND WAS LATE TO RESPOND. WE WERE FINALLY ABLE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH APCH, (AFTER NUMEROUS TRIES, THEY WERE SWAMPED!) AND WERE CLRED TO 5000 FT. WE THEN DIVERTED TO ONT. THIS WAS OUR 2ND MISSED APCH. THE 1ST WAS ON RWY 27 DUE TO 50 KT WINDSHEAR (NO ONE MADE IT IN FOR 2 HRS). UPON REFLECTION ON THE EVENT A FEW ITEMS WERE EVIDENT: WE WERE NOT EXPECTING A MISSED APCH BECAUSE OF THE RPTED WX (WE NEVER SAW THE RWY, WX WAS NOT CORRECT). WE WERE NOT WORKING WELL AS A TEAM (THE CAPT IS VERY INTIMIDATING). I AM RELATIVELY NEW TO THE ACFT AND THIS WAS MY FIRST MISSED APCH IN THE ACFT (WAS EXTREMELY BUSY IN MY FIRST 2 MAN ACFT!). WX WAS 'DOGMEAT!' CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR WAS FLYING AN MD80 AND THE FLC MADE 2 APCHS TO RWY 27 IN WX THAT WAS RPTED TO BE WELL ABOVE THE MINIMUMS. HOWEVER, THE ACTUAL WX WAS MUCH WORSE AND BOTH APCHS ENDED IN GARS. DURING THIS ACTIVITY HE SAID THAT HE AND OTHER FLCS IN THE AREA COMPLAINED OF THE WX RPT DISCREPANCIES. THE CTLRS LATER TOLD THE CAPT THAT NO ACFT MADE A SUCCESSFUL APCH OVER A 2 HR PERIOD. YET THE WX RPTS REMAINED FAIRLY GOOD. THE RPTR SAID THAT THE WX SVC, IN THIS CASE, WAS OF THIRD WORLD QUALITY. HE SAID THAT HE ALSO HAD DIFFICULTY WORKING WITH THE CAPT DURING THIS EPISODE. HE SAID THAT THE CAPT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN CRM, IN PRACTICE. THEY DID DISCUSS THE 2 APCHS AFTERWARDS, BUT THERE WAS NOT MUCH CHANGE IN HIS OP.

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.