 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A B727-200 cargo hauler is notified by ZME controller that they are 3 mi south of the 045 degree radial of mem, tn.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 465664 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200003 |
| Day | Wed |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | navaid : mem.vortac |
| State Reference | TN |
| Altitude | msl single value : 31000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | artcc : zme.artcc |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | B727-200 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | other vortac |
| Flight Phase | cruise : level |
| Route In Use | arrival : on vectors |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : flight engineer pilot : instrument pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 50 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 1100 |
| ASRS Report | 465664 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : less severe non adherence : clearance other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | atc equipment other atc equipment : radar other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued advisory |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew other |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance Aircraft |
| Primary Problem | Aircraft |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
At FL310 on a flight inbound to mem from the northeast, ZME gave us a vector off the STAR (arrival route) in the form of a heading in which to intercept the mem 045 degree radial (225 degree course) inbound to the VOR. Just as we were turning to intercept the course, ATC asked us to confirm that we were turning to join the radial (045 degrees). We acknowledged yes and were given a frequency change. A few mins after we had checked in with the next sector, the controller asked us if we had been given a heading to join the 045 degree radial. We responded that the previous controller had given us a heading but that now we were established on course (with our VOR navigation indicating instruments) tracking the centerline of the radial. We asked the controller if he showed us on course. The controller said he showed us 4 mi south of course. Again we told him that we were established on course tracking the centerline. After another frequency change, we noticed that the captain's (who was flying) VOR navigation needle was indicating centered and the first officer's was indicating slightly (less than 3 degrees) off course to the south (radial was to the north). We concluded that the first officer's VOR navigation instrument was a little more accurate than the captain's. The remainder of the flight was uneventful. What I believe caused this error to develop was not accurately xchking both navigation instruments for any deviations. Also flying off 1 VOR indication only and not trying to keep both VOR indications centered in your scan just in case one is not as accurate as the other one.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A B727-200 CARGO HAULER IS NOTIFIED BY ZME CTLR THAT THEY ARE 3 MI S OF THE 045 DEG RADIAL OF MEM, TN.
Narrative: AT FL310 ON A FLT INBOUND TO MEM FROM THE NE, ZME GAVE US A VECTOR OFF THE STAR (ARR RTE) IN THE FORM OF A HDG IN WHICH TO INTERCEPT THE MEM 045 DEG RADIAL (225 DEG COURSE) INBOUND TO THE VOR. JUST AS WE WERE TURNING TO INTERCEPT THE COURSE, ATC ASKED US TO CONFIRM THAT WE WERE TURNING TO JOIN THE RADIAL (045 DEGS). WE ACKNOWLEDGED YES AND WERE GIVEN A FREQ CHANGE. A FEW MINS AFTER WE HAD CHKED IN WITH THE NEXT SECTOR, THE CTLR ASKED US IF WE HAD BEEN GIVEN A HDG TO JOIN THE 045 DEG RADIAL. WE RESPONDED THAT THE PREVIOUS CTLR HAD GIVEN US A HDG BUT THAT NOW WE WERE ESTABLISHED ON COURSE (WITH OUR VOR NAV INDICATING INSTS) TRACKING THE CTRLINE OF THE RADIAL. WE ASKED THE CTLR IF HE SHOWED US ON COURSE. THE CTLR SAID HE SHOWED US 4 MI S OF COURSE. AGAIN WE TOLD HIM THAT WE WERE ESTABLISHED ON COURSE TRACKING THE CTRLINE. AFTER ANOTHER FREQ CHANGE, WE NOTICED THAT THE CAPT'S (WHO WAS FLYING) VOR NAV NEEDLE WAS INDICATING CTRED AND THE FO'S WAS INDICATING SLIGHTLY (LESS THAN 3 DEGS) OFF COURSE TO THE S (RADIAL WAS TO THE N). WE CONCLUDED THAT THE FO'S VOR NAV INST WAS A LITTLE MORE ACCURATE THAN THE CAPT'S. THE REMAINDER OF THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL. WHAT I BELIEVE CAUSED THIS ERROR TO DEVELOP WAS NOT ACCURATELY XCHKING BOTH NAV INSTS FOR ANY DEVS. ALSO FLYING OFF 1 VOR INDICATION ONLY AND NOT TRYING TO KEEP BOTH VOR INDICATIONS CTRED IN YOUR SCAN JUST IN CASE ONE IS NOT AS ACCURATE AS THE OTHER 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.