A B757 PIC accepts another runway assignment for an ILS but fails to realize that the current RVR for runway 9L was too low, being in conflict with the newly established minimums via a NOTAM for that runway at mia, fl.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	583331
Time
Date	200305
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mia.airport
State Reference	FL
Altitude	agl single value : 200
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : mia.tracon tower : mia.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	ils localizer & glide slope : 9l other
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : instrument precision arrival : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
ASRS Report	583331
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : crossing restriction not met altitude deviation : overshoot inflight encounter : weather non adherence : published procedure non adherence : company policies other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : diverted to alternate none taken : detected after the fact
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance Chart Or Publication Weather
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

Location: ILS runway 9L approach. In terminal area for mia airport was switched from west to east just prior to our approach clearance. WX in area. We were VMC briefed for localizer runway 30 approach. Approach assigned vector for runway 12. Radar looked best for runway 9L. Declined runway 12, asked for runway 9L. Briefed and set up runway 9L. Reviewed F4's for runway 9L. Increased decision ht and noted missed approach point. But missed increased visibility requirement, even though I was looking for one. Visibility required (as per NOTAM) was 5000 ft, ATIS was 2 mi. Approach was commenced and missed due to RVR being +20. Diverted and landed in fll uneventfully. I didn't realize that I had accepted the approach below NOTAM minimums until briefing runway 9L on a subsequent trip. Task saturation, due to runway change, terminal WX, numerous F4/J6 notes without a standard format for minimums changes and fuel reserves contributed to my missing important approach information.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757 PIC ACCEPTS ANOTHER RWY ASSIGNMENT FOR AN ILS BUT FAILS TO REALIZE THAT THE CURRENT RVR FOR RWY 9L WAS TOO LOW, BEING IN CONFLICT WITH THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED MINIMUMS VIA A NOTAM FOR THAT RWY AT MIA, FL.

Narrative: LOCATION: ILS RWY 9L APCH. IN TERMINAL AREA FOR MIA ARPT WAS SWITCHED FROM W TO E JUST PRIOR TO OUR APCH CLRNC. WX IN AREA. WE WERE VMC BRIEFED FOR LOC RWY 30 APCH. APCH ASSIGNED VECTOR FOR RWY 12. RADAR LOOKED BEST FOR RWY 9L. DECLINED RWY 12, ASKED FOR RWY 9L. BRIEFED AND SET UP RWY 9L. REVIEWED F4'S FOR RWY 9L. INCREASED DECISION HT AND NOTED MISSED APCH POINT. BUT MISSED INCREASED VISIBILITY REQUIREMENT, EVEN THOUGH I WAS LOOKING FOR ONE. VISIBILITY REQUIRED (AS PER NOTAM) WAS 5000 FT, ATIS WAS 2 MI. APCH WAS COMMENCED AND MISSED DUE TO RVR BEING +20. DIVERTED AND LANDED IN FLL UNEVENTFULLY. I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I HAD ACCEPTED THE APCH BELOW NOTAM MINIMUMS UNTIL BRIEFING RWY 9L ON A SUBSEQUENT TRIP. TASK SATURATION, DUE TO RWY CHANGE, TERMINAL WX, NUMEROUS F4/J6 NOTES WITHOUT A STANDARD FORMAT FOR MINIMUMS CHANGES AND FUEL RESERVES CONTRIBUTED TO MY MISSING IMPORTANT APCH INFO.

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.