 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A chartered jet PIC does not follow heading and altitude assignments as assigned by departure control at las, nv.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 436250 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199904 |
| Day | Fri |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : las.airport |
| State Reference | NV |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 15000 msl bound upper : 15500 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | Mixed |
| Weather Elements | Turbulence Rain |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : l30.tracon |
| Operator | common carrier : charter |
| Make Model Name | Medium Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 135 |
| Navigation In Use | other |
| Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude |
| Route In Use | departure : on vectors departure sid : n/s |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : charter |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : cfi pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 3500 flight time type : 100 |
| ASRS Report | 436250 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : charter |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | altitude deviation : overshoot non adherence : clearance other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance controller : issued advisory |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance Environmental Factor |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
Departed las with 1 passenger, WX was light rain, fair visibility. Passenger arrived early to airport, making for a slight rush in departure. Captain was PF. ATC issued a turn for traffic in the climb. Shortly after, they issued a new heading to reintercept the SID, then on course. The captain turned to the heading and almost immediately began turning back to the SID course, before I could reprogram the FMS for the intercept. I advised him of this and his response was 'that's what they wanted.' before I could question ATC they called and advised us to return to the assigned heading to intercept. As PNF, I bugged the new heading and began reprogramming the FMS to assure course intercept. ATC issued a further right turn to correct for the initial error. Moments later, ATC questioned our altitude. I responded with our assigned altitude, without first checking the altimeter, because I was still busy reprogramming the FMS. ATC questioned the altitude again so I switched xponders, thinking it was an encoder problem. After all this (which took maybe 20 seconds total) I finally looked up at the altimeter and realized the captain had flown (climbed) through the assigned altitude by at least 500 ft. He had never said anything to me about the bust, but instead let me 'cover him' without even knowing it. I won't be doing that again! I could have prevented my embarrassment by looking at the altimeter before responding or doing anything else. I believe the captain did not say anything because he had already made one error and did not want to admit to another. The automation was not at fault. I failed to read the instruments and the captain failed to follow ATC instructions. Both pilots had raw data displayed and available, as well as the FMS map mode showing. Had the captain (PF) paid attention to these, as well as the altitude alerter, the problem would not have occurred. In the future I will look before answering and pay more attention to the PF (especially this one).
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A CHARTERED JET PIC DOES NOT FOLLOW HDG AND ALT ASSIGNMENTS AS ASSIGNED BY DEP CTL AT LAS, NV.
Narrative: DEPARTED LAS WITH 1 PAX, WX WAS LIGHT RAIN, FAIR VISIBILITY. PAX ARRIVED EARLY TO ARPT, MAKING FOR A SLIGHT RUSH IN DEP. CAPT WAS PF. ATC ISSUED A TURN FOR TFC IN THE CLB. SHORTLY AFTER, THEY ISSUED A NEW HDG TO REINTERCEPT THE SID, THEN ON COURSE. THE CAPT TURNED TO THE HDG AND ALMOST IMMEDIATELY BEGAN TURNING BACK TO THE SID COURSE, BEFORE I COULD REPROGRAM THE FMS FOR THE INTERCEPT. I ADVISED HIM OF THIS AND HIS RESPONSE WAS 'THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED.' BEFORE I COULD QUESTION ATC THEY CALLED AND ADVISED US TO RETURN TO THE ASSIGNED HDG TO INTERCEPT. AS PNF, I BUGGED THE NEW HDG AND BEGAN REPROGRAMMING THE FMS TO ASSURE COURSE INTERCEPT. ATC ISSUED A FURTHER R TURN TO CORRECT FOR THE INITIAL ERROR. MOMENTS LATER, ATC QUESTIONED OUR ALT. I RESPONDED WITH OUR ASSIGNED ALT, WITHOUT FIRST CHKING THE ALTIMETER, BECAUSE I WAS STILL BUSY REPROGRAMMING THE FMS. ATC QUESTIONED THE ALT AGAIN SO I SWITCHED XPONDERS, THINKING IT WAS AN ENCODER PROB. AFTER ALL THIS (WHICH TOOK MAYBE 20 SECONDS TOTAL) I FINALLY LOOKED UP AT THE ALTIMETER AND REALIZED THE CAPT HAD FLOWN (CLBED) THROUGH THE ASSIGNED ALT BY AT LEAST 500 FT. HE HAD NEVER SAID ANYTHING TO ME ABOUT THE BUST, BUT INSTEAD LET ME 'COVER HIM' WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING IT. I WON'T BE DOING THAT AGAIN! I COULD HAVE PREVENTED MY EMBARRASSMENT BY LOOKING AT THE ALTIMETER BEFORE RESPONDING OR DOING ANYTHING ELSE. I BELIEVE THE CAPT DID NOT SAY ANYTHING BECAUSE HE HAD ALREADY MADE ONE ERROR AND DID NOT WANT TO ADMIT TO ANOTHER. THE AUTOMATION WAS NOT AT FAULT. I FAILED TO READ THE INSTS AND THE CAPT FAILED TO FOLLOW ATC INSTRUCTIONS. BOTH PLTS HAD RAW DATA DISPLAYED AND AVAILABLE, AS WELL AS THE FMS MAP MODE SHOWING. HAD THE CAPT (PF) PAID ATTN TO THESE, AS WELL AS THE ALT ALERTER, THE PROB WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED. IN THE FUTURE I WILL LOOK BEFORE ANSWERING AND PAY MORE ATTN TO THE PF (ESPECIALLY THIS ONE).
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.