Narrative:

On jan/xa/01, a passenger far part 121 flight (aircraft 29000 pounds) was being vectored for a visual approach into pit runway 28R. The captain, (PNF) was in command assisted by the first officer (PF). Please note the first officer is an inexperienced pilot. The situation happened as followas: after being vectored over top the airport coming from the south to the north, approach control vectored us on a downwind. We were to expect a visual approach to runway 28R, simultaneous approachs were being conducted to the parallel runway 28L. Now, the approach controller gave us a vector heading for our base leg to the runway. During the turn, I saw our traffic to follow to the runway (a fokker F100). I asked the first officer if he had the traffic and the airport in sight. His response was 'yes, I have the traffic and runway in sight.' at this time I told ATC 'is our traffic a fokker at 12 O'clock position?' ATC responded 'affirmative, follow the fokker, cleared for the visual approach runway 28R.' during our turn toward the airport, the sun was very bright and just about to set making it very hard to see our traffic. At this time we were told to switch over to tower frequency (just as I was about to query ATC about the traffic). I checked on with the tower and then realized that the aircraft was not in the position it was supposed to be in. I then knew if I did not take control of the aircraft we would be in a disconcerting situation. I saw a traffic conflict with an air carrier Y md 80 (keep in mind as PNF I am maintaining outside vigilance for traffic and since the runway is on the right and I situation on the left, I cannot see the runway from my perspective). I then took control of the aircraft away from the first officer. During the evasive action maneuver, our turning radius increased and brought us close enough to the MD80 to give us an RA. During the maneuver, the tower was demanding to know what our intentions were. I was then the PF and the PNF, and the tower repeated 2 or 3 times the request of 'what is your intention' before I could maneuver the aircraft and talk on the radio. I was then switched back to approach control and reclred for the visual approach, and I executed a normal visual approach and landing. In summary, there were several things that led to this event: 1) the setting sun made if difficult to see after we turned into it. 2) a frequency change at a bad time. 3) an inexperienced first officer unsure of his position. 4) high traffic density, and traffic landing on parallel runway. I hope that this information is useful and will help prevent such sits in the future.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FO OF AN SF340 OVERSHOT FINAL DURING A VISUAL APCH TO THE R PARALLEL RWY RESULTING IN COMING IN CLOSE PROX TO ANOTHER ACFT FOR THE L PARALLEL. MEANTIME, THE CAPT TOOK OVER AND BROUGHT THE ACFT BACK TO FINAL AS THE APCH CTLR WAS ASKING THEIR INTENTIONS.

Narrative: ON JAN/XA/01, A PAX FAR PART 121 FLT (ACFT 29000 LBS) WAS BEING VECTORED FOR A VISUAL APCH INTO PIT RWY 28R. THE CAPT, (PNF) WAS IN COMMAND ASSISTED BY THE FO (PF). PLEASE NOTE THE FO IS AN INEXPERIENCED PLT. THE SIT HAPPENED AS FOLLOWAS: AFTER BEING VECTORED OVER TOP THE ARPT COMING FROM THE S TO THE N, APCH CTL VECTORED US ON A DOWNWIND. WE WERE TO EXPECT A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 28R, SIMULTANEOUS APCHS WERE BEING CONDUCTED TO THE PARALLEL RWY 28L. NOW, THE APCH CTLR GAVE US A VECTOR HDG FOR OUR BASE LEG TO THE RWY. DURING THE TURN, I SAW OUR TFC TO FOLLOW TO THE RWY (A FOKKER F100). I ASKED THE FO IF HE HAD THE TFC AND THE ARPT IN SIGHT. HIS RESPONSE WAS 'YES, I HAVE THE TFC AND RWY IN SIGHT.' AT THIS TIME I TOLD ATC 'IS OUR TFC A FOKKER AT 12 O'CLOCK POS?' ATC RESPONDED 'AFFIRMATIVE, FOLLOW THE FOKKER, CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH RWY 28R.' DURING OUR TURN TOWARD THE ARPT, THE SUN WAS VERY BRIGHT AND JUST ABOUT TO SET MAKING IT VERY HARD TO SEE OUR TFC. AT THIS TIME WE WERE TOLD TO SWITCH OVER TO TWR FREQ (JUST AS I WAS ABOUT TO QUERY ATC ABOUT THE TFC). I CHKED ON WITH THE TWR AND THEN REALIZED THAT THE ACFT WAS NOT IN THE POS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE IN. I THEN KNEW IF I DID NOT TAKE CTL OF THE ACFT WE WOULD BE IN A DISCONCERTING SIT. I SAW A TFC CONFLICT WITH AN ACR Y MD 80 (KEEP IN MIND AS PNF I AM MAINTAINING OUTSIDE VIGILANCE FOR TFC AND SINCE THE RWY IS ON THE R AND I SIT ON THE L, I CANNOT SEE THE RWY FROM MY PERSPECTIVE). I THEN TOOK CTL OF THE ACFT AWAY FROM THE FO. DURING THE EVASIVE ACTION MANEUVER, OUR TURNING RADIUS INCREASED AND BROUGHT US CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE MD80 TO GIVE US AN RA. DURING THE MANEUVER, THE TWR WAS DEMANDING TO KNOW WHAT OUR INTENTIONS WERE. I WAS THEN THE PF AND THE PNF, AND THE TWR REPEATED 2 OR 3 TIMES THE REQUEST OF 'WHAT IS YOUR INTENTION' BEFORE I COULD MANEUVER THE ACFT AND TALK ON THE RADIO. I WAS THEN SWITCHED BACK TO APCH CTL AND RECLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH, AND I EXECUTED A NORMAL VISUAL APCH AND LNDG. IN SUMMARY, THERE WERE SEVERAL THINGS THAT LED TO THIS EVENT: 1) THE SETTING SUN MADE IF DIFFICULT TO SEE AFTER WE TURNED INTO IT. 2) A FREQ CHANGE AT A BAD TIME. 3) AN INEXPERIENCED FO UNSURE OF HIS POS. 4) HIGH TFC DENSITY, AND TFC LNDG ON PARALLEL RWY. I HOPE THAT THIS INFO IS USEFUL AND WILL HELP PREVENT SUCH SITS IN THE FUTURE.

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.