Narrative:

On approach to elm, I became concerned about a possibility of CFIT. We were approaching elm from the south at night. From flying into the airport on numerous times, I knew that there was a high terrain very close to the airport. We were cleared to proceed direct to the airport. When we acquired the field, we were cleared for a visual approach and told to contact the tower. I began to descend but stopped because I became concerned about the terrain. We had to make a turn away from the airport because we had not descended and were too high to make a normal approach. I am not sure how much clearance we had, but because it was dark, I became very uncomfortable. I believe that a safer vector would have been to proceed direct to the marker for runway 6 instead of direct to the airport.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DO328 FO'S RPT ON A NIGHT VISUAL APCH AND THE POSSIBILITY OF CFIT WHEN DSNDING NEAR 3000 FT DIRECT TO THE ARPT 3 NM S OF ELM, NY.

Narrative: ON APCH TO ELM, I BECAME CONCERNED ABOUT A POSSIBILITY OF CFIT. WE WERE APCHING ELM FROM THE S AT NIGHT. FROM FLYING INTO THE ARPT ON NUMEROUS TIMES, I KNEW THAT THERE WAS A HIGH TERRAIN VERY CLOSE TO THE ARPT. WE WERE CLRED TO PROCEED DIRECT TO THE ARPT. WHEN WE ACQUIRED THE FIELD, WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH AND TOLD TO CONTACT THE TWR. I BEGAN TO DSND BUT STOPPED BECAUSE I BECAME CONCERNED ABOUT THE TERRAIN. WE HAD TO MAKE A TURN AWAY FROM THE ARPT BECAUSE WE HAD NOT DSNDED AND WERE TOO HIGH TO MAKE A NORMAL APCH. I AM NOT SURE HOW MUCH CLRNC WE HAD, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS DARK, I BECAME VERY UNCOMFORTABLE. I BELIEVE THAT A SAFER VECTOR WOULD HAVE BEEN TO PROCEED DIRECT TO THE MARKER FOR RWY 6 INSTEAD OF DIRECT TO THE ARPT.

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.