|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||airport : hou.airport|
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : i90.tracon|
|Operator||common carrier : air carrier|
|Make Model Name||EMB ERJ 135 ER&LR|
|Operating Under FAR Part||Part 121|
|Flight Phase||descent : approach|
landing : missed approach
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : captain|
oversight : pic
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : first officer|
|Anomaly||aircraft equipment problem : critical|
non adherence : published procedure
|Independent Detector||aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : eicas slat fail message|
other flight crewa
other flight crewb
other other : 5
|Resolutory Action||controller : issued new clearance|
flight crew : diverted to another airport
flight crew : executed go around
Flight Crew Human Performance
Slat failure. On approach to hou, when flaps 20 degrees was selected -- slat fail caution message was presented on EICAS. A missed approach was executed. Checklist were complied with. The problem was not solved with published checklist. Landing distance was calculated with chart from performance manual not the proper section of manual. This resulted in a landing runway requirement of 8000 ft. Hou runways were not sufficient for this operation. Dispatch was advised of the runway requirement calculated by the crew. They were questioned of this figure and asked if they agreed with the calculation. The dispatcher said that he wanted the flight to go to dfw. He calculated our fuel burn to be 2300 pounds. Actual burn was around 3000 pounds. During approach to dfw the controllers were advised that we were minimum fuel. Aircraft landed with approximately 2300 pounds of fuel. Well above 45 mins reserve. In hindsight, the landing length should have been calculated from the proper section of manual. Chief pilot and I have discussed this error. Had the dispatcher and maintenance control caught my error in length calculation, perhaps a landing at hou would have been accomplished. As it was, dispatch requested my diversion to dfw. Given fuel required to complete this flight, current and forecast WX conditions, the flight could be and was accomplished without further incident. I am aware of the proper landing length chart as it applies to this checklist. Again, no aircraft limitations or FARS were violated or ever in question. Dispatch/maintenance made the discussion to return to dfw.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: E135 CREW DIVERTED TO THE DEP ARPT AFTER THE DISPATCHER SYS OPS CTLR AND THE CREW ERRED IN THE REQUIRED LNDG RWY LENGTH, AFTER AN EICAS SLAT FAIL CAUTION MESSAGE.
Narrative: SLAT FAILURE. ON APCH TO HOU, WHEN FLAPS 20 DEGS WAS SELECTED -- SLAT FAIL CAUTION MESSAGE WAS PRESENTED ON EICAS. A MISSED APCH WAS EXECUTED. CHKLIST WERE COMPLIED WITH. THE PROB WAS NOT SOLVED WITH PUBLISHED CHKLIST. LNDG DISTANCE WAS CALCULATED WITH CHART FROM PERFORMANCE MANUAL NOT THE PROPER SECTION OF MANUAL. THIS RESULTED IN A LNDG RWY REQUIREMENT OF 8000 FT. HOU RWYS WERE NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THIS OP. DISPATCH WAS ADVISED OF THE RWY REQUIREMENT CALCULATED BY THE CREW. THEY WERE QUESTIONED OF THIS FIGURE AND ASKED IF THEY AGREED WITH THE CALCULATION. THE DISPATCHER SAID THAT HE WANTED THE FLT TO GO TO DFW. HE CALCULATED OUR FUEL BURN TO BE 2300 LBS. ACTUAL BURN WAS AROUND 3000 LBS. DURING APCH TO DFW THE CTLRS WERE ADVISED THAT WE WERE MINIMUM FUEL. ACFT LANDED WITH APPROX 2300 LBS OF FUEL. WELL ABOVE 45 MINS RESERVE. IN HINDSIGHT, THE LNDG LENGTH SHOULD HAVE BEEN CALCULATED FROM THE PROPER SECTION OF MANUAL. CHIEF PLT AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS ERROR. HAD THE DISPATCHER AND MAINT CTL CAUGHT MY ERROR IN LENGTH CALCULATION, PERHAPS A LNDG AT HOU WOULD HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. AS IT WAS, DISPATCH REQUESTED MY DIVERSION TO DFW. GIVEN FUEL REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THIS FLT, CURRENT AND FORECAST WX CONDITIONS, THE FLT COULD BE AND WAS ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. I AM AWARE OF THE PROPER LNDG LENGTH CHART AS IT APPLIES TO THIS CHKLIST. AGAIN, NO ACFT LIMITATIONS OR FARS WERE VIOLATED OR EVER IN QUESTION. DISPATCH/MAINT MADE THE DISCUSSION TO RETURN TO DFW.
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.