|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : tpa.airport|
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||controller : approach|
|Qualification||controller : radar|
|Experience||controller radar : 25|
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : anomaly accepted|
|ATC Facility||computer equipment : tpa.tracon|
procedure or policy : tpa.tracon
Many of the satellite airports that we control at tampa approach facility have added RNAV (GPS) approachs. However; the scratch pad information associated with this type of approach is the same as a GPS approach. For instance; when an aircraft request at lakeland an RNAV (GPS) 9 approach with the published miss; I would type in the data block GP9. The same information would be typed in the data block if the aircraft was requesting a GPS 9 with a published miss (GP9). The problem is that the receiving tower controller does not differentiate between the approachs and does not know what missed the aircraft is really going to do. You see; the missed approach for a GPS is a turning left turn to plumy. Whereas the RNAV missed approach is runway heading for 5 mi then a turn and climb towards plumy. This is a dangerous situation as it does not reflect what the aircraft will be doing after the approach and thus could put him; other aircraft; and the controllers in an unsafe situation. The FAA needs to correct the problem by eliminating the VOR/GPS approach and/or change the scratch pad information to depict a proper RNAV (GPS) approach. My supervisor has been informed about this for over 2 weeks and to date our procedure staff has yet to be informed about the unsafe situation .
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: TPA CTLR VOICED CONCERN REGARDING SCRATCH PAD INFO ACCURACY WITH REGARD TO GPS AND RNAV INFO AND MAP PROCS.
Narrative: MANY OF THE SATELLITE ARPTS THAT WE CTL AT TAMPA APCH FACILITY HAVE ADDED RNAV (GPS) APCHS. HOWEVER; THE SCRATCH PAD INFO ASSOCIATED WITH THIS TYPE OF APCH IS THE SAME AS A GPS APCH. FOR INSTANCE; WHEN AN ACFT REQUEST AT LAKELAND AN RNAV (GPS) 9 APCH WITH THE PUBLISHED MISS; I WOULD TYPE IN THE DATA BLOCK GP9. THE SAME INFO WOULD BE TYPED IN THE DATA BLOCK IF THE ACFT WAS REQUESTING A GPS 9 WITH A PUBLISHED MISS (GP9). THE PROB IS THAT THE RECEIVING TWR CTLR DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BTWN THE APCHS AND DOES NOT KNOW WHAT MISSED THE ACFT IS REALLY GOING TO DO. YOU SEE; THE MISSED APCH FOR A GPS IS A TURNING L TURN TO PLUMY. WHEREAS THE RNAV MISSED APCH IS RWY HDG FOR 5 MI THEN A TURN AND CLB TOWARDS PLUMY. THIS IS A DANGEROUS SITUATION AS IT DOES NOT REFLECT WHAT THE ACFT WILL BE DOING AFTER THE APCH AND THUS COULD PUT HIM; OTHER ACFT; AND THE CTLRS IN AN UNSAFE SIT. THE FAA NEEDS TO CORRECT THE PROB BY ELIMINATING THE VOR/GPS APCH AND/OR CHANGE THE SCRATCH PAD INFO TO DEPICT A PROPER RNAV (GPS) APCH. MY SUPVR HAS BEEN INFORMED ABOUT THIS FOR OVER 2 WKS AND TO DATE OUR PROC STAFF HAS YET TO BE INFORMED ABOUT THE UNSAFE SITUATION .
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.