|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||airport : fsd|
|Altitude||agl bound lower : 0|
agl bound upper : 0
|Operator||common carrier : air carrier|
|Make Model Name||Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng|
|Flight Phase||ground other : taxi|
|Make Model Name||Fighter|
|Flight Phase||landing : go around|
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : captain|
oversight : pic
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 190|
flight time total : 16000
flight time type : 1250
|Function||flight crew : first officer|
|Qualification||pilot : commercial|
pilot : instrument
|Anomaly||incursion : runway|
non adherence : clearance
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||controller : issued new clearance|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
Flight rap-fsd-ord, landed at fsd on runway 21. During rollout, tower clrd to 'left turn on runway 9, left turn on northeast parallel, clrd to gate'. My interpretation at northeast parallel was the parallel on northeast portion of field (15-33 parallel). This was also the apparent logical routing to gate. (See attached field diagram.) national guard ramp south of 9-27 is generally not used for taxiing and 9-27 frequently is. It was not until we were eastbound on 9 and the tower frequency was taken over by a male voice (previous controller female) telling our aircraft to go around that we realized that what the controller had intended was 'turn left on runway 9, then turn left northeast bound on the runway-3-21 parallel'. The aircraft sent around was a military fgt making a low downwind pass to runway 9. The fact that he was on UHF and we could only hear 1/2 the conversation with him was possibly an additional factor in the misunderstanding. Had the controller used either of the words (bound, or runway 3-21) in the clearance, I feel the error would not have occurred. Standard nomenclature would seem to dictate including the runway numbers with the parallel txwys, when the airport has more than one. Giving the txwys alpha 'a,B,C' designations would be even better. Apparently, the fgt never represented a serious threat because of the timely go around.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: LGT TAXIED ON ACTIVE RWY CAUSING AN FGT TO GO AROUND.
Narrative: FLT RAP-FSD-ORD, LANDED AT FSD ON RWY 21. DURING ROLLOUT, TWR CLRD TO 'LEFT TURN ON RWY 9, LEFT TURN ON NE PARALLEL, CLRD TO GATE'. MY INTERPRETATION AT NE PARALLEL WAS THE PARALLEL ON NE PORTION OF FIELD (15-33 PARALLEL). THIS WAS ALSO THE APPARENT LOGICAL ROUTING TO GATE. (SEE ATTACHED FIELD DIAGRAM.) NATIONAL GUARD RAMP S OF 9-27 IS GENERALLY NOT USED FOR TAXIING AND 9-27 FREQUENTLY IS. IT WAS NOT UNTIL WE WERE EBND ON 9 AND THE TWR FREQ WAS TAKEN OVER BY A MALE VOICE (PREVIOUS CTLR FEMALE) TELLING OUR ACFT TO GO AROUND THAT WE REALIZED THAT WHAT THE CTLR HAD INTENDED WAS 'TURN LEFT ON RWY 9, THEN TURN LEFT NE BOUND ON THE RWY-3-21 PARALLEL'. THE ACFT SENT AROUND WAS A MIL FGT MAKING A LOW DOWNWIND PASS TO RWY 9. THE FACT THAT HE WAS ON UHF AND WE COULD ONLY HEAR 1/2 THE CONVERSATION WITH HIM WAS POSSIBLY AN ADDITIONAL FACTOR IN THE MISUNDERSTANDING. HAD THE CTLR USED EITHER OF THE WORDS (BOUND, OR RWY 3-21) IN THE CLRNC, I FEEL THE ERROR WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED. STANDARD NOMENCLATURE WOULD SEEM TO DICTATE INCLUDING THE RWY NUMBERS WITH THE PARALLEL TXWYS, WHEN THE ARPT HAS MORE THAN ONE. GIVING THE TXWYS ALPHA 'A,B,C' DESIGNATIONS WOULD BE EVEN BETTER. APPARENTLY, THE FGT NEVER REPRESENTED A SERIOUS THREAT BECAUSE OF THE TIMELY GO AROUND.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.