<< >> NASA ASRS Report 589725, August 2003

Captain of A300 questions the judgement of fellow airmen who chose to attempt approachs to mia during period of heavy rain and reported windshear.

Attributes
ACN	589725
Time
Date	200308
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	intersection : vapor
State Reference	FL
Altitude	msl single value : 6000
Environment
Weather Elements	Thunderstorm
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : mia.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A300
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach descent : intermediate altitude descent : holding
Route In Use	arrival : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
ASRS Report	589725
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	inflight encounter : weather non adherence : company policies
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance flight crew : diverted to another airport
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance Company Aircraft Weather
Primary Problem	Weather

Narrative:

We had asked for a holding pattern and refused to begin the approach into mia with the current WX. ATC asked if we would be willing to do radar vectors and we said yes. They kept us approximately 10 mi east of vapor on the runway 27R approach mia in a box pattern. We were clear and VFR and had approximately 30 mins to hold with mco our agreed upon altitude for mia. The WX at mia was 1 mi visibility, heavy rainstorms and thunderstorms at the field. We were getting reports of a 25 KT loss of airspeed on final and windshear advisories. Winds were rapidly changing directions. My question is why were air carrier X and air carrier Y aircraft still shooting approachs under these conditions and missing due to loss of airspeed? Mia was perfectly clear regarding the conditions at the field and aircraft kept heading in to miss. Some did land. What has happened to our professionalism? Fll opened up and was VFR when we landed and calm winds.

Related reports:

• Air carrier captain reported they refused to accept an aircr...
• A B777 first officer questions the PIC and the company as to...
• Maintenance technician reported questions and concerns relat...
• Flight crew questions takeoff when only one RVR reported.
• An air taxi pilot reported questions related to company sche...
• B737-800 maximum captain reported questions about the landin...

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.37000feet.com

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CAPT OF A300 QUESTIONS THE JUDGEMENT OF FELLOW AIRMEN WHO CHOSE TO ATTEMPT APCHS TO MIA DURING PERIOD OF HVY RAIN AND RPTED WINDSHEAR.

Narrative: WE HAD ASKED FOR A HOLDING PATTERN AND REFUSED TO BEGIN THE APCH INTO MIA WITH THE CURRENT WX. ATC ASKED IF WE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO RADAR VECTORS AND WE SAID YES. THEY KEPT US APPROX 10 MI E OF VAPOR ON THE RWY 27R APCH MIA IN A BOX PATTERN. WE WERE CLR AND VFR AND HAD APPROX 30 MINS TO HOLD WITH MCO OUR AGREED UPON ALT FOR MIA. THE WX AT MIA WAS 1 MI VISIBILITY, HVY RAINSTORMS AND TSTMS AT THE FIELD. WE WERE GETTING RPTS OF A 25 KT LOSS OF AIRSPD ON FINAL AND WINDSHEAR ADVISORIES. WINDS WERE RAPIDLY CHANGING DIRECTIONS. MY QUESTION IS WHY WERE ACR X AND ACR Y ACFT STILL SHOOTING APCHS UNDER THESE CONDITIONS AND MISSING DUE TO LOSS OF AIRSPD? MIA WAS PERFECTLY CLR REGARDING THE CONDITIONS AT THE FIELD AND ACFT KEPT HEADING IN TO MISS. SOME DID LAND. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR PROFESSIONALISM? FLL OPENED UP AND WAS VFR WHEN WE LANDED AND CALM WINDS.

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.