Narrative:

The problem arose on a flight from jackson, ms, to little rock, ar. I am currently a 'high minimums' captain with less than 100 hours PIC in aircraft type. Therefore, in order to execute the flight and ILS runway 4R at lit, we had to have a terminal area forecast of 300 ft ceiling and 1 mi visibility. (This is also a minimum requirement to execute the approach.) the forecast indicated for a 500 ft ceiling and 2 mi visibility at our ETA. When we approached lit the WX had deteriorated to 3/8 mi visibility and 200 ft overcast ceiling. After receiving this WX report (metar) we found out the reported RVR was 3000 ft. I asked my first officer to request a hold at lit VOR where we held for approximately 10-15 mins. Our listed alternate was shv. The WX throughout the region was deteriorating and being that the taf was inaccurate at lit, I did not want to take the chance to fly to our alternate (shv) and run into the same problem. While holding for 10-15 mins, my first officer attempted to contact company on company frequency. After several attempts he was unable. Consequently, we had no input on what to do from company dispatch/flight control. I discussed the situation with my first officer and we both agreed that with the fuel we had remaining and deteriorating WX throughout the region, we decided to accept the ILS runway 4R with the RVR of 3500 ft and ceiling 200 ft. We executed the ILS runway 4R uneventfully and landed. The approach was a normal category I ILS with a minimum 2400 RVR (1/2 mi) requirement. I am unable to conclude specifically what could be done to prevent a future occurrence. A taf is just that, a forecast, and is never guaranteed. In regards to the inability to contact company flight control, that problem will be solved shortly when our airline will transition from 'part 135 to part 121' in which a commercial direct phone link will be required. This will prevent our flcs from being unable to contact company flight control. I feel the above steps we took were the safest course of action for the factors and conditions given.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CAPT OF AN LTT TURBOPROP MADE AN ILS INST APCH TO PUBLISHED IFR LNDG MINIMUMS WHICH WAS LOWER THAN HIS REQUIRED MINIMUMS DUE TO HIS PIC TOTAL TIME EXPERIENCE IN THE ACFT TYPE.

Narrative: THE PROB AROSE ON A FLT FROM JACKSON, MS, TO LITTLE ROCK, AR. I AM CURRENTLY A 'HIGH MINIMUMS' CAPT WITH LESS THAN 100 HRS PIC IN ACFT TYPE. THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO EXECUTE THE FLT AND ILS RWY 4R AT LIT, WE HAD TO HAVE A TERMINAL AREA FORECAST OF 300 FT CEILING AND 1 MI VISIBILITY. (THIS IS ALSO A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT TO EXECUTE THE APCH.) THE FORECAST INDICATED FOR A 500 FT CEILING AND 2 MI VISIBILITY AT OUR ETA. WHEN WE APCHED LIT THE WX HAD DETERIORATED TO 3/8 MI VISIBILITY AND 200 FT OVCST CEILING. AFTER RECEIVING THIS WX RPT (METAR) WE FOUND OUT THE RPTED RVR WAS 3000 FT. I ASKED MY FO TO REQUEST A HOLD AT LIT VOR WHERE WE HELD FOR APPROX 10-15 MINS. OUR LISTED ALTERNATE WAS SHV. THE WX THROUGHOUT THE REGION WAS DETERIORATING AND BEING THAT THE TAF WAS INACCURATE AT LIT, I DID NOT WANT TO TAKE THE CHANCE TO FLY TO OUR ALTERNATE (SHV) AND RUN INTO THE SAME PROB. WHILE HOLDING FOR 10-15 MINS, MY FO ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT COMPANY ON COMPANY FREQ. AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS HE WAS UNABLE. CONSEQUENTLY, WE HAD NO INPUT ON WHAT TO DO FROM COMPANY DISPATCH/FLT CTL. I DISCUSSED THE SIT WITH MY FO AND WE BOTH AGREED THAT WITH THE FUEL WE HAD REMAINING AND DETERIORATING WX THROUGHOUT THE REGION, WE DECIDED TO ACCEPT THE ILS RWY 4R WITH THE RVR OF 3500 FT AND CEILING 200 FT. WE EXECUTED THE ILS RWY 4R UNEVENTFULLY AND LANDED. THE APCH WAS A NORMAL CATEGORY I ILS WITH A MINIMUM 2400 RVR (1/2 MI) REQUIREMENT. I AM UNABLE TO CONCLUDE SPECIFICALLY WHAT COULD BE DONE TO PREVENT A FUTURE OCCURRENCE. A TAF IS JUST THAT, A FORECAST, AND IS NEVER GUARANTEED. IN REGARDS TO THE INABILITY TO CONTACT COMPANY FLT CTL, THAT PROB WILL BE SOLVED SHORTLY WHEN OUR AIRLINE WILL TRANSITION FROM 'PART 135 TO PART 121' IN WHICH A COMMERCIAL DIRECT PHONE LINK WILL BE REQUIRED. THIS WILL PREVENT OUR FLCS FROM BEING UNABLE TO CONTACT COMPANY FLT CTL. I FEEL THE ABOVE STEPS WE TOOK WERE THE SAFEST COURSE OF ACTION FOR THE FACTORS AND CONDITIONS GIVEN.

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.